Anyone performing Analog Summing?

[Fishy1500]

I was just wondering if any of you use an external unit to perform Analog Summing, and if so, does it really make a big improvement? Assuming you have a good A/D converter, is it worth having to re-route the summed analog signal back through your A/D converters again for recording? I haven't noticed anything wrong with the summing on Logic's Out 1-2 but then again, I haven't had an opportunity to compare.

I was browsing through the Dangerous Music website for a nice monitoring solution and bumped into the D-Box. It looks like a cool unit, including support for Analog Summing and was just wondering if it actually necessary. Is there any difference between the summing on the D-Box and the 2-Bus (aside from the 2-Bus being 16x2)?

Thanks!
Jason

[dokushoka]

You have to try it and see...

In my experience, summing boxes are so clean that they don't sound much different than digital and running them with a mic amp for make up gain generally causes more harm than good. Maybe some people like this, but coming from a console background, I just don't feel it.

In my opinion, if you want the analog sound, you may as well save your bones for an analog console (a GOOD one). By the time you get your summing box set up, you'll want more inserts, faders, sends, etc. Otherwise, just mix as best as you can in your DAW and get a good mixbuss compressor.

[Lessli]

I was also thinking about getting Shadow Hills Equinox or D-Box mentioned above, but just can't get beyond this: no matter how good the A/D & D/A converters are, I imagine that the sound would be somehow "touched" when it was recorded into DAW, and then "touched" again when it comes out from DAW into any outboard gear/summing box/console, and yet again "touched" when you send it back into DAW...That's 3 times of conversion being made! Man, aren't we gonna need some REALLY REALLY good converters!

I haven't got a chance to do that to my stuff yet, but just from the look of it I doubt that I'd want to go through the trouble. I'm most probably wrong, but could someone shed a light on this? I'd love to get more outboard gears (yeah me so slutty) but just need to have this one cleared! Thanks in advance!

[Fletcher]

I perform "analog summing" when ever I work... though there have been a couple of occassions where I've done full on "in the box" stuff... I wouldn't want to ever have to perform a steady diet of that... coming out into the analog domain, being able to do my dynamic range manipulation [compression/limiting] in the analog domain, and then my final summing in the analog domain gives me a far "deeper" and more 3 dimensional result than I've ever been able to achieve "in the box"... but as always, YMMV.

Peace.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by Fletcher

I perform "analog summing" when ever I work... though there have been a couple of occassions where I've done full on "in the box" stuff... I wouldn't want to ever have to perform a steady diet of that... coming out into the analog domain, being able to do my dynamic range manipulation [compression/limiting] in the analog domain, and then my final summing in the analog domain gives me a far "deeper" and more 3 dimensional result than I've ever been able to achieve "in the box"... but as always, YMMV.

Peace.

Agreed . Totally preferable and gives better sonics - just the issue of very few jobs allow this sort of time to do. Example - I'm currently mixing 160 cues for huge global mega product. Not doable with all the tweaks on anything other than ITB / full digital console. However, when i'm granted the luxury I much prefer the ol' consolarooney and failing that - my Fully....

[u b k]

Originally Posted by Lessli

That's 3 times of conversion being made! Man, aren't we gonna need some REALLY REALLY good converters!

i will (and do) take the extra a/d/a hit every time, in order to process with REALLY REALLY good compressors and summing, rather than forego the conversion and do it all with the computer.

525's on guitars and synths, fatso on bass, everything passing thru class a line inputs, trafo's on the 2mix... there is no contest. zero.


gregoire
del
ubk
.

[glissmeister]

It's not like tape. When the converters and clocking are good, the a/d/a degradation concerns are far outweighed by the benefits of quality analog OTB conditioning.

Thinking about it here, I don't think I've ever actually heard degradation a/d/a in a generational sense; its just conversion -- you're not making copies of a copy of a copy.

Maybe someone else has heard a downside to a/d/a cycling. I've been so pleased with the outcome from adding OTB analog conditioning, I never noticed it.

[dokushoka]

Maybe someone else has heard a downside to a/d/a cycling. I've been so pleased with the outcome from adding OTB analog conditioning, I never noticed it.

Exactly. I don't get why people have this notion that once the audio is captured its some pristine creature that can't bear to touch a D/A converter. Tape "degrades" sound so much more than even modern pro-sumer converters and yet no one thinks about that being some sort of major hurdle.

My ears DO NOT hear any big problems going back out through converters.

My ears DO hear a major improvement when mixing on an analog console. That's all I need to know.

[squeeks555]

http://vintageking.com/site/files/su...4Pa38Ta38Qc350

[wikaman]

I did a upgrade of my studio setup (as a good gear slut I am) and now own a shadow hill equinox for the last couple of month, and I am FREAKING HAPPY!!!

Basicaly my setup is HD3, 3 192 with added 8 analogue out. 16 inserts on 2 192 for the outboard and 24 to the equinox (still waiting for the termination d-sub).

I just did a A/B with a old track between direct from the DAW and "Summed" version.
The result was quite obvious, the 3d of the track was way better out of the summing and the bass response was smoother. Much more euphonic than the ITB version, even though I believe that great mix can be done ITB!!

The fact that I can choose with 3 different output "sound" is also a big plus for me because I work on many different style of music and each one can suite to the genre like a glove.

I think it is one of the best gear upgrade I have done in my studio because I can hear some "life" in my mix while keeping a digital control on it!! And the insert A/D/A isn't a issue for me as it was previously mentioned, the benefit of the OTB treatment make it worth it.

Get one, try it, hear it and you will be able to make an opinion for yourself!!

Mike

[Fishy1500]

doh... i was afraid of these results, the list of gear on my wishlist continues to grow larger and larger as I learn more!

What are some of your favouring analog summing units? Any recommendations?

[narcoman]

The only one of the summing boxes I touch is the Folcrom. I DO like many of the others, its just that some of hem are nearly consoles! I don't want inserts on a summing box - i'll use my console for that.... Of course i recognize the prohibitive cost of decent consoles for many and space issues, so just speaking for me.

[Lessli]

Hey thanks a lot for the response guys! Yay~ Equniox & Aurora here I come!

[Fishy1500]

incidentally, Wikaman, would you happen to have some short clips of something that is summed and something not?

[spektor]

Well i have to say im happy working in sonar with a spl mixdream by my side and a 2500 api on ins master insert great combination. I love the mixdream crean really no color the compressor adds color any color i want.


Spl 2 thubs up way up. It just feel like it smooths the digital harshness away.

[audiosuperheroes]

Neve8816 with Aurora16 works wonders for me. Add comp/lim and eq of your choice and you're flying!

[huarez]

For me it was a big improvement adding a Chandler mini mixer to my setup. But that´s just my taste.

[666666]

Originally Posted by Fletcher

...coming out into the analog domain, being able to do my dynamic range manipulation [compression/limiting] in the analog domain, and then my final summing in the analog domain gives me a far "deeper" and more 3 dimensional result than I've ever been able to achieve "in the box"...

I agree.

There has of course been a ridiculous amount of debate over ITB verses OTB etc... and I'm sure that some of the top-end ITB solutions can yield "excellent" results.

But, per my own first-hand experience, I still have not yet heard anything done fully ITB that truly made me happy. I can't put my finger on it, but when you do the bulk of processing in analog and summing in analog (with good gear of course), the end result has a character that to me simply cannot be matched via full ITB mixing. And it's noticeably superior, at least in a musical sense.

And forget about plug-ins and processors that are supposed to make digital sound like analog... some of that stuff may yield a localized "desired effect", but will in NO WAY take the place of actually working in analog.

If I couldn't mix in analog, I would simply not want to mix at all. I've tried it and I'm never happy... usually just leads to a certain degree of frustration. When mixing ITB, I'll tend to take a lot more time mixing because I guess I'm trying to achieve something that I just can't achieve ITB... there IS a sonic limitation there, and it's not fun when you finally encounter it after hours of mixing.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by 666666

I agree.

There has of course been a ridiculous amount of debate over ITB verses OTB etc... and I'm sure that some of the top-end ITB solutions can yield "excellent" results.

But, per my own first-hand experience, I still have not yet heard anything done fully ITB that truly made me happy. I can't put my finger on it, but when you do the bulk of processing in analog and summing in analog (with good gear of course), the end result has a character that to me simply cannot be matched via full ITB mixing. And it's noticeably superior, at least in a musical sense.

And forget about plug-ins and processors that are supposed to make digital sound like analog... some of that stuff may yield a localized "desired effect", but will in NO WAY take the place of actually working in analog.

If I couldn't mix in analog, I would simply not want to mix at all. I've tried it and I'm never happy... usually just leads to a certain degree of frustration. When mixing ITB, I'll tend to take a lot more time mixing because I guess I'm trying to achieve something that I just can't achieve ITB... there IS a sonic limitation there, and it's not fun when you finally encounter it after hours of mixing.

Totally agree with you - just that mixing OTB is no longer a do-able or cost effective thing in the modern market place. Mixing bands is SUCH a TINY part of the audio recording industry. The majority is film, TV, AD and game work - as well as religious recording and spoken word. All of that work is crazy to do analogue. You just wouldnt get the 100 plus cues per TV episode done in time! Rock n pop music mixers and mixes are just not the aim of the equipment sellers - and they never have been. The welite we/you may be, but that vast part of the industry we/you are not. And that, unfortunately , is something one must bear! The BEST sound quality and "mojo" does indeed come out of decent console conjoined to excellent engineer and great song/recordings but its irrelevent. It's not who SSL , Neve and the rest of the big boys are selling to if they want to make money. Me? I have to balance what I want to do (bands and cool orchestral gigs) with what generates 90% or my income (NOT bands and cool orchestral!)....... ah well.

[ulysses]

Originally Posted by dokushoka

In my experience, summing boxes are so clean that they don't sound much different than digital and running them with a mic amp for make up gain generally causes more harm than good.

I can think of one very good reason to run the output of your summing box into a mike preamp (for makeup gain). In this instance, it does much more good than harm. I regret that understanding of this concept has gotten distorted to the point where people think they need to run the line-level output of other summing devices (or their DAWs) into a mike preamp.

The trick, therefore, is to arrange for your analog summing solution to have exactly the amount of makeup gain and coloration that you need for the particular mix in question.

[dokushoka]

Originally Posted by ulysses

I can think of one very good reason to run the output of your summing box into a mike preamp (for makeup gain). In this instance, it does much more good than harm. I regret that understanding of this concept has gotten distorted to the point where people think they need to run the line-level output of other summing devices (or their DAWs) into a mike preamp.

The trick, therefore, is to arrange for your analog summing solution to have exactly the amount of makeup gain and coloration that you need for the particular mix in question.

My comment was regarding the effects, sonically, of using a mic amp for make up gain in a passive summing set up. In all the instances that I have used or heard the folcrom, I've preferred the summing in protools. This has been with a folcrom coupled with Neves, Wunders, APIs, etc. While there was certainly some "coloration" or whatever buzz word people use, I think the straight protools mixes tended to sound more open, even and had a consistently bigger low end.

Mixing on a GOOD analog console, still, in my world, is the best option for most genres of music.

[T_R_S]

I use the George Massenburg Summing Box...

[zak7]

Originally Posted by T_R_S

I use the George Massenburg Summing Box...

????

[GYang]

Originally Posted by T_R_S

I use the George Massenburg Summing Box...

High Res obviously

[kellyd]

Run your mixes thru a Tonelux rig and then tell me there is no difference.

[mahasandi]

I use a Tonelux to sum and I run my da outputs into outboard gear and 500 eq's
so I use the bypass on the hardware if i need so I leave everything ready for mixing
then those outputs sum into the Tonelux, my custom console.

I was never entirely satisfied with my ITB mixes. They improved when I went
out into a good 2bus comp ,and things really sound even better to me now
with outboard and summing.
Now iam satisfied , the sound I get allows me to accomplish what I want.
However you have to start your mixes over
if you are going to audition a summing mixer.

I can understand how people have gotten
used to automating everything.
But a recall sheet is working just fine. :)

Definetley try it out if you can. Thanks to
all the people on this site who ive come to respect
their opinions and knowledge I tried going back
to the way I started recording, and its the best
thing I could have done.

[Joe Porto]

Originally Posted by Jim Williams

From what I've read about it, the crosstalk will go up. Good for mono, not so good for stereo. Maybe one day I'll get a chance to test that and post the crosstalk specs. They are unknown as Paull Wolff admitted he never tested it.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

To set the record straight, I recall the conversation between Jim Williams and Paul regarding crosstalk. It was actually not about Tonelux, but about the API 8200A. The conversation came about when a single user complained about crosstalk in his 8200A. Mr. Williams recommended the 8200A owner should contact Paul about it (even though Paul hadn't been affiliated with API for over 3 years). Paul rightly came to his own defense.

Jim, you were made the fool in that thread. Still holding a grudge?

[ToneLux]

Originally Posted by Jim Williams

From what I've read about it, the crosstalk will go up. Good for mono, not so good for stereo. Maybe one day I'll get a chance to test that and post the crosstalk specs. They are unknown as Paull Wolff admitted he never tested it.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

Jim,

You have reached a new level of mornity. What the hell are you talking about? Maybe if you put some video opamps in it my stuff will sound better. God, if you only knew what you are talking about.

Lets count the number of hit songs recorded on both the 8200 and the Tonelux VS your audio downgraded stuff. Please, when you see the word Tonelux, just go to another post until you know something about it.

[GYang]

Originally Posted by ToneLux

Jim,

Lets count the number of hit songs recorded on both the 8200 and the Tonelux

No flame here, but out of pure curiosity any references or links to records done on Tonelux systems.

[mahasandi]

have you been to the tonelux website ? They list some folks
using it for stuff.
Roundbadge here posted some examples
of running thru a tonelux rig.
But the real question(I hope) is more like " what can I do with it?"
not enough time too much gear....