Metric Halo

[henryrobinett]

Originally Posted by audiovisceral

i don't understand. why do these sound so different? the mio dsp-based summing (iie. mixdown) is better than dp's?

i thought all digital/daw summing was more or less created equal....

But this isn't "equal." It's like having an analog console INSIDE the box! OK, so two boxes in one. OK, so it's not analog, but it can SOUND like analog in the box.

It feels ******** getting your head around this one. It's really a new way of doing and thinking things.

[ejmmbrady]

Hi there,

great thread, this looks really interesting. Im in the market for something like this and was set to get an ensemble until I heard about the 2d card. The thing is I have a duet (to use with logic) at the moment and I really like it but would like some more i/o to use some outboard I have. Would the duet and a 2882 work as aggregate devices?? I dont think the 2882 pre's would be sufficient for SOME of my purposes whereas if I can use the duet with it (at the same time) it would solve the problem (ie. low output ribbons on quiet sources, duet works OK for those),

Secondly, does the 2882 play nice as a front end to a 002R pro tools le rig?

Lastly, should I just go for an ensemble instead? I know what Im getting and I know I'll be happy with it sound wise, its just the 2882 with 2d card looks so flexible, if it were to work well with a duet than I could have he best of both worlds?? Im currently looking for some place where I can demo a 2882 but just wanted to know what you guys thought, Im sure there are others in the same boat.

Confused...

thanks in advance

[macleodgrant]

Originally Posted by ejmmbrady

Hi there,

great thread, this looks really interesting. Im in the market for something like this and was set to get an ensemble until I heard about the 2d card. The thing is I have a duet (to use with logic) at the moment and I really like it but would like some more i/o to use some outboard I have. Would the duet and a 2882 work as aggregate devices?? I dont think the 2882 pre's would be sufficient for SOME of my purposes whereas if I can use the duet with it (at the same time) it would solve the problem (ie. low output ribbons on quiet sources, duet works OK for those),

Secondly, does the 2882 play nice as a front end to a 002R pro tools le rig?

Lastly, should I just go for an ensemble instead? I know what Im getting and I know I'll be happy with it sound wise, its just the 2882 with 2d card looks so flexible, if it were to work well with a duet than I could have he best of both worlds?? Im currently looking for some place where I can demo a 2882 but just wanted to know what you guys thought, Im sure there are others in the same boat.

Confused...

thanks in advance

well once i get my 2882 i will better be able to help by answer your questions. i returned my Ensemble to either get the Aurora 8 or the 2882 + 2D card...i went with the 2882 however i will only get it next week. i preferred the DUET to the Ensemble (not just the hiss issue but the character too).

i think the DUET is an amazing device and will compare it with the 2882 when i get it like Aggregate devicing, quality, and weigh up the pros like summing, DSP, etc but i won't be testing the Pre's since i have high end stuff i use for that. i'd also likely only test the DA on each unit

i didn't order the 2882 for the Pre's

[KarmaPolice]

Hi everybody,

this is my first post here, but I´ve been around reading for quite a while.
I own a 2882 without DSP and the native Channel Strip plug in and I love both
products.
I hope no one gets angry at me but I made a simple comparison between Logic
summing and MIO summing. I used 8 stereo tracks, no plug ins, MIO faders
all unity. I imported both files into a new Logic Project and flipped the phase of one
of them. Absulute silence! There was definately no difference between those
files.
I just wanted to tell those people who consider buying this for the summing aspect.
BUT it´s a great interface, really...

Regards

[edwinhurwitz]

Originally Posted by ejmmbrady

Secondly, does the 2882 play nice as a front end to a 002R pro tools le rig?

Lastly, should I just go for an ensemble instead? I know what Im getting and I know I'll be happy with it sound wise, its just the 2882 with 2d card looks so flexible, if it were to work well with a duet than I could have he best of both worlds?? Im currently looking for some place where I can demo a 2882 but just wanted to know what you guys thought, Im sure there are others in the same boat.

Confused...

thanks in advance

I use my 2882 via lightpipe with a 002R all the time. Works great. If it weren't for that, I would have probably given up on PT LE quite some time ago. As much as I like editing and mixing in PT, listening to the 002R converters was really difficult.

Edwin

[SoundEng1]

Originally Posted by KarmaPolice

Hi everybody,

this is my first post here, but I´ve been around reading for quite a while.
I own a 2882 without DSP and the native Channel Strip plug in and I love both
products.
I hope no one gets angry at me but I made a simple comparison between Logic
summing and MIO summing. I used 8 stereo tracks, no plug ins, MIO faders
all unity. I imported both files into a new Logic Project and flipped the phase of one
of them. Absulute silence! There was definately no difference between those
files.
I just wanted to tell those people who consider buying this for the summing aspect.
BUT it´s a great interface, really...

Regards

Yes, but was a 2882 with the 2D card? or a stock 2882?

[edwinhurwitz]

Originally Posted by SoundEng1

Yes, but was a 2882 with the 2D card? or a stock 2882?

I don't see that it would make much difference for that test. Summing is a pretty trivial task for digital audio these days and it's been shown that all the major methods of summing result in pretty much the same output. Where I see the 2882 being a better way of summing is through using the character plug ins to gain the euphonic distortions of an analog console. So, this would mean a 2d 2882.

Edwin

[chadd]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

I don't know why the bass is louder in DP. Maybe I forgot something. This is not a blind test. I notice a difference in audibility of reverbs, and cymbals.

Thanks for taking the time to post the files. In addition to the higher level in the MIO file, the stereo image of the cymbals is reversed. Listen to the ride cymbal at around the 45 second mark. One file places it to the left, the other to the right. The piano seems to stay in the same position in both versions. Perhaps the differences in panning in the two mixes are resulting in phase combinations that affect bass levels?

[lllubi]

Originally Posted by edwinhurwitz

I don't see that it would make much difference for that test. Summing is a pretty trivial task for digital audio these days and it's been shown that all the major methods of summing result in pretty much the same output. Where I see the 2882 being a better way of summing is through using the character plug ins to gain the euphonic distortions of an analog console. So, this would mean a 2d 2882.

Edwin

1,0+1,0=2
0,9+1,1=2

how do people measure the influence of a clocking system on a summing test?
will a better clock show any results in a summing test than without it?

[henryrobinett]

Originally Posted by chadd

Thanks for taking the time to post the files. In addition to the higher level in the MIO file, the stereo image of the cymbals is reversed. Listen to the ride cymbal at around the 45 second mark. One file places it to the left, the other to the right. The piano seems to stay in the same position in both versions. Perhaps the differences in panning in the two mixes are resulting in phase combinations that affect bass levels?

Yes, that's a problem. The panning in DP is done by the MIXER in DP. The Panning in MIO is done in the MIO mixer. I didn't spend a lot of time lining them up. Sorry. The recording engineer had the overheads reversed to how I like them, so I forgot to make the right. Other wise I just eye ball the panning.

[henryrobinett]

Originally Posted by KarmaPolice

Hi everybody,

this is my first post here, but I´ve been around reading for quite a while.
I own a 2882 without DSP and the native Channel Strip plug in and I love both
products.
I hope no one gets angry at me but I made a simple comparison between Logic
summing and MIO summing. I used 8 stereo tracks, no plug ins, MIO faders
all unity. I imported both files into a new Logic Project and flipped the phase of one
of them. Absulute silence! There was definately no difference between those
files.
I just wanted to tell those people who consider buying this for the summing aspect.
BUT it´s a great interface, really...

Regards

I'm not sure that makes sense to how I was trying to do it. I don't even know how you can do an exact mix of both methods. One was a bounce to disk the other was "live" into the record panel. I'm not sure how I can get a definitive level matching. It would be like trying to compare an analog console mix to a ITB bounce. There are too many variables to be exact. Sorry, I must be dense, but I don't even know how you'd test that accurately. Plus they're two wildly different animals.

Math is math but you can never take the human being out of the equation. You'll screw up every time. Perception should not be invalidated because you have "math" that can prove something. A person knows what he perceives.

I don't know how many people proved to me 96k made no difference -- you couldn't HEAR it. Yeah, right. The question is "what do YOU HEAR?"

[Fredrik]

There was definetely a difference in those clips in favor of the MIO, I did not expect that.

Good job BTW Henry.


OT

Added controlsurface support of these things would also mean that you got yourself a nice sounding digital mixer.

[chadd]

I don't think those files demonstrate that the DP mixer sounds any better or worse than the MIO mixer. If anything, it shows that Henry's decision to reverse the panning on the overheads was a good one. That's most likely the reason that the reverb and highs sound better in the MIO mix, along with panning decisions and some overall gain. If there is a certain something, either sonic or psychological, about the MIO mixer workflow that inspires and excites Henry, then his MIO mixes are going to turn out better, and that makes it the best tool for the job.

Regarding lllubi's question about clocking, it's my understanding that clock jitter primarily affects AD/DA conversion. Since the MIO mixer keeps the audio in the digital realm, I don't think that jitter would affect the math differently in two digital mixers. Can anyone confirm this?

[henryrobinett]

Well that's not it. You can psychologize all day if you want. Those were the same mixes, except for having to fix that panning. I didn't remix a thing. It was DP feeding the MIO. I removed the plugs from MIO. MIO had more gain. Reversed pan on overheads. My mistake. That's it. I didn't get excited and do a different mix for either one.

[vipunen]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

My point is you DON'T have two faders. You eliminate the Logic Master fader. You can't have them both and do what I'm talking about, as far as I know.

I was not talking about master fader.
I was talking about track fader.

That's not the flow. It's more like:
Logic fader w/ Logic plugins --> MIO v5 Mixer (Console Connect) with or without MIO plugins -- MIO Master fader.

Look, you said it yourself. MIO plugins are after Logic-fader. so it's NOT pre-fader!
Your volume automation happens in "Logic"-fader. Its before MIO plugin, so plugin is NOT pre-fader.

Conclusion: volume automation has effect to the input of compressor plugin in MIO.

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

You seem to like the exclamation points. !!!!!!

If you're not talking about master fader, but just plain fader still . . .

You're head is all goofed around this thing. It's an easy thing to have happen.

Logic Plug -- Fader (not master fader) --> MIO Mixer Fader. The final fader is what you're concerned about. The final fader is it. Everything prior to that is pre fader. Logic is just a conduit now.

I'm not conserned of master fader. I'm conserned that volume automation in DAW fuks up the input level of MIO-compressor.
One more time: MIO-plugin is AFTER the fader that is automated, so ITS NOT PRE FADER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm not gonna try to explain this anymore

[vipunen]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

But this isn't "equal." It's like having an analog console INSIDE the box! OK, so two boxes in one. OK, so it's not analog, but it can SOUND like analog in the box.

So basically, it goes to 11?

(sorry, i go to sleep now)

[henryrobinett]

Originally Posted by vipunen

I'm not conserned of master fader. I'm conserned that volume automation in DAW fuks up the input level of MIO-compressor.
One more time: MIO-plugin is AFTER the fader that is automated, so ITS NOT PRE FADER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm not gonna try to explain this anymore

Whatever. I don't know how it can be anything other than pre fader. That's what pre fader is, but I'll just assume you're right on this one and give up, since you'll accept nothing less.

[mh_bj]

Originally Posted by vipunen

Conclusion: volume automation has effect to the input of compressor plugin in MIO.

Yes -- this is true. If you need to do volume automation on a track pre-compression in the MIO, then you would need to use an I/O plug so that the volume automation took place after the MIO plug. In this case, it may be easier to use one of your native plugs for compression, especially if you plan on doing the summing in the MIO Mixer.

It would definitely be nice to be able to automate the mixer and plugins on the HW directly from your host session...

[henryrobinett]

There you go! I WAS wrong.

[scrizly]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

Well that's not it. You can psychologize all day if you want. Those were the same mixes, except for having to fix that panning. I didn't remix a thing. It was DP feeding the MIO. I removed the plugs from MIO. MIO had more gain. Reversed pan on overheads. My mistake. That's it. I didn't get excited and do a different mix for either one.

I definitely hear a difference in the reverb tails and transients.. even on sections when there are no drums involved. I know you said it wasn't a scientific test... but I am curious if DP's faster-than-real-time bounce might have any affect on UAD plugs and/or Altiverb. Did you use the same MP3 encoder and dither for both files as well? Hmm my curiousity is piqued now so I guess I will have to rush home and do some tests.

Thanks for the audio btw... cool song and playing, which is what it's really all about!

[chadd]

Originally Posted by vipunen

volume automation has effect to the input of compressor plugin in MIO.

Similarly, if you fed a higher gain MIO mix to a UAD Limiter without changing the settings you used for a lower gain DP mix, the effect of the the limiter is going to be different.

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

Those were the same mixes.

If the levels are different (the MIO mix is louder) and the panning is different (radically in the case of the overheads), then can it plausibly be called the same mix? I know you made the caveat that it wasn't scientific, but my point is that there are too many other variables that can greatly affect the reverb, imaging and transients to claim that those differences are due to the MIO mixer.

Still, I'm sold on the 2d card. Mine is in the mail and I can't wait to try out the new mixer in my 2882.

BJ, can you think of a reason why the levels would be higher in the MIO mixer than in DP if all faders are set to zero and no plugins are being used? I would hope that if DP is sending a -18 dbFS signal to the MIO, that it would show up at -18 dbFS. Would differences in pan laws be enough to explain it?

[mh_bj]

I'd have to look at what was done to even venture a guess. Henry can send me the sessions and the MIO Console config and I can take a look...

[henryrobinett]

I sent the console to BJ

This is how the MIO Console and the DP mixers looked --

As far as I know THAT is why there was more gain. Everything was up at unity zero. Probably should have been down to -6db, but as it is it makes it about 6db louder than DP.

[henryrobinett]

There was also a limiter on each version. I noticed the MIO version has -0.3 threshold and a ceiling of -0.2. The MW Limiter is set at 0. So that's something. I doubt that it would account for TOO much, but there's something . . .

[henryrobinett]

Approximately both files playing at the same time. You can see the discrepancy in levels. BJ's the genius so he can tell me how stupid I am, which he kindly does a lot. I'm admittedly the redheaded stepchild of the MIO crowd -- but DP FEEDS MIO Mixer, so those levels are going to be "less than."

Once again, this wasn't scientific. I just removed the plugins from MIO and in the MIO case, and the DP case I removed the MIO Mixer. So DP is going to have a lot less volume.

[vipunen]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

There you go! I WAS wrong.

Once I thought it happened to me also, but I was mistaken...

[henryrobinett]

Ha! I used to use that that same line, until today.

[KarmaPolice]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

I'm not sure that makes sense to how I was trying to do it. I don't even know how you can do an exact mix of both methods. One was a bounce to disk the other was "live" into the record panel. I'm not sure how I can get a definitive level matching. It would be like trying to compare an analog console mix to a ITB bounce. There are too many variables to be exact. Sorry, I must be dense, but I don't even know how you'd test that accurately. Plus they're two wildly different animals.

Math is math but you can never take the human being out of the equation. You'll screw up every time. Perception should not be invalidated because you have "math" that can prove something. A person knows what he perceives.

I don't know how many people proved to me 96k made no difference -- you couldn't HEAR it. Yeah, right. The question is "what do YOU HEAR?"

I don´t get your point. What are the variables? It shouldnt make any difference,
if you route the mix back to logic (which can be done via the firewire returns)
or record it in the record panel or wherever.

96k sure makes a difference. Thats a fact. The question is if you can hear it and if
it´s worth the additional disc space and cpu load for you. An 80 bit "mixing engine" DOESN´T make any difference. I tried it.

@SoundEng1:
Its a 2882 without 2d and without +dsp but this "summing in the MIOs 80 bit mixer sounds better" thing came up long before the 2d card was announced

Peace!

[henryrobinett]

One was used to FEED the other. One was bounced to disk, the other was recorded into the Record Panel.

Listen, this was not even attempting to be a scientific test. I just wanted to give you guys an example of how it sounded, that's all. Not a null test thing. Not a scientific exact replica. I just removed MIO from one and put it in in another. I took out the plugs to make it some similar. It's not a null test example. I realized I left the Character in some channels. I was just trying to show how they sound.

Damn. Next time I won't.

[lllubi]

Originally Posted by KarmaPolice

I don´t get your point. What are the variables? It shouldnt make any difference,
if you route the mix back to logic (which can be done via the firewire returns)
or record it in the record panel or wherever.

96k sure makes a difference. Thats a fact. The question is if you can hear it and if
it´s worth the additional disc space and cpu load for you. An 80 bit "mixing engine" DOESN´T make any difference. I tried it.

@SoundEng1:
Its a 2882 without 2d and without +dsp but this "summing in the MIOs 80 bit mixer sounds better" thing came up long before the 2d card was announced

Peace!

so does it sound better than ?