Is my Apogee AD16x ruining my mixes?

[dick swifter]

Hi all. I was reading a thread regarding the API A2D vs Lavry and it really got me thinking.

I mix OTB. Just before I print my mix, I'm usually loving what I'm hearing and thinking, "Wow, my sh*t holds up!" (hence being ready to print!) So I print the mix into 2 channels of my Apogee AD16x back into my DAW. This sounds better to me than my other option; a Masterlink.

However, I still lose about 10% of what I was hearing from the multitrack playback! And I'm not a good enough mixer to afford that loss! This is perhaps the most frustrating aspect of my process. I really like the Apogee's for tracking and figured my problem must be elsewhere, but now I'm wondering if I need a specialized 2channel AD. Groan.....
Any thoughts? I try to make rock/pop records that strive to not sound definitive of the times. If that helps.

Thanks for your time


Mitch

[Roc Mixwell]

It depends.....I doubt its "ruining" the mixes, as that has more to do with you behind the wheel...no? I do understand your complaint though...it doesn't sound the same as your analog summing does....

I'd say you want to calibrate the converters analog input stage differently from where you have it now....which is probably set for optimal head room when tracking.

My advice would be to calibrate the stereo channels you're using to digitize the stereo mix, so as to offer LESS digital headroom and MORE analog input gain. This would be the lowest setting on the AD16x which would be -12 DBFS.

We have two channels [31-32] of AD/DA16x calibrated in this manor when we use the AD16x to print back to digital. The DA16x [31-32] is also calibrated in the same manor, and what I have found is that you DON'T need the same headroom/input stage for the stereo mix, that you would want during tracking. Give it a try...........

I would also investigate how your monitoring the return and the DA's calibration setting.

[leebridges]

Originally Posted by dick swifter

Hi all. I was reading a thread regarding the API A2D vs Lavry and it really got me thinking.

I mix OTB. Just before I print my mix, I'm usually loving what I'm hearing and thinking, "Wow, my sh*t holds up!" (hence being ready to print!) So I print the mix into 2 channels of my Apogee AD16x back into my DAW. This sounds better to me than my other option; a Masterlink.

However, I still lose about 10% of what I was hearing from the multitrack playback! And I'm not a good enough mixer to afford that loss! This is perhaps the most frustrating aspect of my process. I really like the Apogee's for tracking and figured my problem must be elsewhere, but now I'm wondering if I need a specialized 2channel AD. Groan.....
Any thoughts? I try to make rock/pop records that strive to not sound definitive of the times. If that helps.

Thanks for your time


Mitch

my rule is, always monitor through conversion. so, i run a live input in protools and listen to that while i mix...so, you're more likely to makeup for what you lose in the conversion process. yes, the converter will still be affecting the sound, but you'll be able to get around it for the most part...and it won't surprise you when you go to print. it'll be what you've been listening to the whole mix.

[dannygold]

Maybe you should mix ITB.

[dick swifter]

Thanks Adam, I will try that. One question? Why do you calibrate the DA as well?

Thanks again man.

Peace

Mitch

[dick swifter]

Originally Posted by leebridges

my rule is, always monitor through conversion. so, i run a live input in protools and listen to that while i mix...so, you're more likely to makeup for what you lose in the conversion process. yes, the converter will still be affecting the sound, but you'll be able to get around it for the most part...and it won't surprise you when you go to print. it'll be what you've been listening to the whole mix.

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks!

Peace

Mitch

[Roc Mixwell]

I would calibrate it because it needs to be a true representation of the voltage that is passing through the A/D converter.

Like another poster said above....the most crucial part here is monitoring the recorder's returns before you actually print the audio. You'll make choices and decisions based on what your hearing, so gain scaling the system is highly important in both AD and DA. Its all a part of the chain. You might also think about using this to your advantage with your multi-track DA [if it has that capability] so you can hit your analog equipment a certain way.

[jjblair]

If and when I mix in the box, I gout out through my DA16x and back in through the AD16x, only because I'm using outboard EQ and compression. If you are not doing that, there's no reason to go out and back in.

Make sure you do NOT use the 'soft limit' function, if you do this, however. I have found it sounds much better without it.

Are you using that perhaps?

Otherwise, if you are trying to record a stereo track and you don;t need to go through outboard gear, just make a stereo channel and use a bus input, and set al the other channels to that bus' output.

[Roc Mixwell]

Originally Posted by jjblair

If and when I mix in the box, I gout out through my DA16x and back in through the AD16x, only because I'm using outboard EQ and compression. If you are not doing that, there's no reason to go out and back in.

Make sure you do NOT use the 'soft limit' function, if you do this, however. I have found it sounds much better without it.

Are you using that perhaps?

Otherwise, if you are trying to record a stereo track and you don;t need to go through outboard gear, just make a stereo channel and use a bus input, and set al the other channels to that bus' output.

Why do all that work when you can monitor the stereo mix and bounce the stem as an interleaved file? Is there really any need to use an AUX buss to print a digital copy in real time?

[dick swifter]

Originally Posted by jjblair

If and when I mix in the box, I gout out through my DA16x and back in through the AD16x, only because I'm using outboard EQ and compression. If you are not doing that, there's no reason to go out and back in.

Make sure you do NOT use the 'soft limit' function, if you do this, however. I have found it sounds much better without it.

Are you using that perhaps?

Otherwise, if you are trying to record a stereo track and you don;t need to go through outboard gear, just make a stereo channel and use a bus input, and set al the other channels to that bus' output.

Yeah, I'm mixing out da box here using outboard on individual tracks as well the 2mix.
But the soft limit was engaged. I'll have to compare next time...... Thanks!

Peace

Mitch

[dick swifter]

Originally Posted by Roc Mixwell

I would calibrate it because it needs to be a true representation of the voltage that is passing through the A/D converter.

Like another poster said above....the most crucial part here is monitoring the recorder's returns before you actually print the audio. You'll make choices and decisions based on what your hearing, so gain scaling the system is highly important in both AD and DA. Its all a part of the chain. You might also think about using this to your advantage with your multi-track DA [if it has that capability] so you can hit your analog equipment a certain way.

[kellyd]

I hate soft limit but then I'm not a huge Apogee fan either. I doubt the X series is ruining your music but their coverters do have a sound. Some love it, some don't. Perhaps a different 2 ch AD would be worth looking into for your masters.

[NathanEldred]

Welcome to the world of PCM digital. Newsflash: it degrades the original analog signal. It doesn't matter what brand or how expensive, some just do it a little more, some a little less. I mix OTB. But I don't put the A/D/A on the main bus during mix...one because I hit the two track to tape first, and second because I know what the conversion will do to the audio. But in your case, if you are still getting your mix chops together, I would definitely suggest keeping the A/D and D/A (then to speakers) on your two bus throughout the whole process. The less surprises you have the better.

[Fletcher]

I always do the last 2-3 hours of a mix through the A/D-D/A so I can hear the changes it will make to my audio. This could be a hold over from the days when I ran tape as I would monitor my mixes off the repro head of the tape machine so I could hear what the tape was doing to the mix.

Until about 3-4-5 weeks ago when we got our iZ ADA I was mixing through Apogee AD and DA-16x's... now the mixes are printed through the iZ or sometimes a Burl or sometimes a JCF or sometimes a HEDD-192... depending on what's around and what sounds best for the song at hand.

Peace.

[tiny333]

are you saying that the iZ ADA sounds significantly better than the apogee?

and why when we mixed to dat did we not have this issue?

[dick swifter]

Originally Posted by kellyd

I hate soft limit but then I'm not a huge Apogee fan either. I doubt the X series is ruining your music but their coverters do have a sound. Some love it, some don't. Perhaps a different 2 ch AD would be worth looking into for your masters.

Fair enough, I haven't heard all the newer converters out now, but they serve my aesthetic pretty well for tracking and playback. I just want what I'm hearing from the multitrack in a tiny portable 2 track version...... Thanks!

Originally Posted by NathanEldred

Welcome to the world of PCM digital. Newsflash: it degrades the original analog signal. It doesn't matter what brand or how expensive, some just do it a little more, some a little less. I mix OTB. But I don't put the A/D/A on the main bus during mix...one because I hit the two track to tape first, and second because I know what the conversion will do to the audio. But in your case, if you are still getting your mix chops together, I would definitely suggest keeping the A/D and D/A (then to speakers) on your two bus throughout the whole process. The less surprises you have the better.

Thanks! From now on...

Originally Posted by Fletcher

I always do the last 2-3 hours of a mix through the A/D-D/A so I can hear the changes it will make to my audio. This could be a hold over from the days when I ran tape as I would monitor my mixes off the repro head of the tape machine so I could hear what the tape was doing to the mix.

Until about 3-4-5 weeks ago when we got our iZ ADA I was mixing through Apogee AD and DA-16x's... now the mixes are printed through the iZ or sometimes a Burl or sometimes a JCF or sometimes a HEDD-192... depending on what's around and what sounds best for the song at hand.

Peace.

Thanks. I need to start doing this earlier in the process. We used to use the little speaker on the Studer 2 track as a kinda mono Aurotone!
I haven't heard any of the converters you mentioned yet, but I heard great things about the Burl and I've tracked to Radar a few times with great results. I wish I could have a bunch of hi end conversion flavors just sittin' around! Must be nice....

Originally Posted by tiny333

are you saying that the iZ ADA sounds significantly better than the apogee?

and why when we mixed to dat did we not have this issue?

We didn't????

[delcosmos]

Once I got my Lavry Gold, my mixes started sounding just as they go out of my SSL.
I'm mixing at 96/24, the Lavry has depth, a beautiful resolution that you can actually hear on decay of a fancy reverb or low level parts of the song with a fantastic hi end.

I don't know what is the trick behind the Lavry Gold, but it really sounds better, it captures all the effort that I put on my mixes when I use my Pultecs, SSL eqs, vintage reverbs, Api eq's, colorfully compressors, even the "Dolby' trick sounds the way it should be on the Lavry Gold, now it make sense using a beautiful vintage C12 or an original Ela M250, you can actually hear the nuances and shades of every mic when you are mixing.

I know it is expensive, but it worth every cent

Best regards.

Armando Avila.

P.S. Please excuse my poor English, hey I'm trying!!

[jjblair]

Originally Posted by Roc Mixwell

Why do all that work when you can monitor the stereo mix and bounce the stem as an interleaved file? Is there really any need to use an AUX buss to print a digital copy in real time?

Yeah, in case you want to edit the file, draw a fade, etc. Particularly is you want a fade, because the auxes on the stereo bus are post fader. I really hope you aren't bouncing with a compressor on your stereo bus, while relying on the automation to do your fade.

[H-Rezz]

Originally Posted by tiny333

and why when we mixed to dat did we not have this issue?

Short memory, my recollection was it was worse, much worst even top of the line Sony dat players !

This is the most frustrating aspect of mixing, just when you think you have finished your AD convertor goes and changes your sound, as Nathan said no matter how expensive it is it's just more or less from brand to brand .... although monitoring thru your AD is maybe the way to go , something happens when you print your mix and hear it back off your DAW or Masterlink as well , as Dr.Smith once said 'Oh, the pain,the pain'

[Eric Greedy]

[quote=dick swifter;2310001
But the soft limit was engaged.[/QUOTE]

bingo

[dick swifter]

Originally Posted by delcosmos

Once I got my Lavry Gold, my mixes started sounding just as they go out of my SSL.
I'm mixing at 96/24, the Lavry has depth, a beautiful resolution that you can actually hear on decay of a fancy reverb or low level parts of the song with a fantastic hi end.

I don't know what is the trick behind the Lavry Gold, but it really sounds better, it captures all the effort that I put on my mixes when I use my Pultecs, SSL eqs, vintage reverbs, Api eq's, colorfully compressors, even the "Dolby' trick sounds the way it should be on the Lavry Gold, now it make sense using a beautiful vintage C12 or an original Ela M250, you can actually hear the nuances and shades of every mic when you are mixing.

I know it is expensive, but it worth every cent

Best regards.

Armando Avila.

P.S. Please excuse my poor English, hey I'm trying!!

Thanks for your reply. Wow $7500 for 2 channels. Yikes!
I think I might try the soft limit button first.....

Your English is perfect Armando. Very impressive!

Peace

Mitch

[sage691]

Get the Lavry Blue A/D with the Digital Saturation feature engaged and be done with it ! Let a good mastering house finish the job for you and smoke a cigar.

I have had a Mk 3 Lavry Gold here to A/B with my Lavry Blue, and for pop/rock/metal/urban I have found that the blue captures 95% of what the gold does (the low lows and hi highs the gold does 5% better IMO). Once mastered, nobody but the snobbiest audiophile slut will ever notice a difference between the gold and blue.

I had the same experience with my AD16X -- dull and greyish sound compared to the Lavry -- not close to how profound it sounds coming off the board. For the ALL IMPORTANT task of final 2 track master recording the Lavry's completely smoke the AD16x. They are highly transparent and preserve well what I am hearing off the analog monitoring of my trident 80 console, and most of all they are MUSICAL!

And the Digital saturation feature allows you to get very hot recordings (with peaks at -3 to -6), but it still sounds musical, 3D, and lush just like the analog sound coming off the board.

Well worth the $1400 I paid for it IMO!

[RoundBadge]

Dude turn that soft limit shit off .Those convertors are fine

[nadumr]

yeah first time i used my ad-16x was on a drum session and i hadnt dis-engaged the soft-limit. boy did i think my drums sounded like garbage. i was confused. then i turned off soft limit and breathed a sigh of relief.

[dick swifter]

Originally Posted by jjblair

Make sure you do NOT use the 'soft limit' function, if you do this, however. I have found it sounds much better without it.

Are you using that perhaps?

Originally Posted by Eric Greedy

bingo

Originally Posted by RoundBadge

Dude turn that soft limit shit off .Those convertors are fine

Originally Posted by nadumr

yeah first time i used my ad-16x was on a drum session and i hadnt dis-engaged the soft-limit. boy did i think my drums sounded like garbage. i was confused. then i turned off soft limit and breathed a sigh of relief.

F me..... soft limit

Thanks all....

Mitch

[PhilE]

Mix to the Masterlink but monitor through it. Works for tape, works for DAT.... works full stop.

Simply flick the console to monitor your record source rather than the mix buss.

[nickynicknick]

soft limit shouldn't even exist...turn this off and make sure it is off everytime you look at your converter.

Nick

[sage691]

Originally Posted by nickynicknick

soft limit shouldn't even exist...turn this off and make sure it is off everytime you look at your converter.

Nick

Yeah, but believe it or not it sounded better IMO on the stock AD-8000. I used it quite a bit back in the day and got stellar results. But for 2 bus mixing -- NO WAY JOSE !!!

[sage691]

Originally Posted by PhilE

Mix to the Masterlink but monitor through it. Works for tape, works for DAT.... works full stop.

Simply flick the console to monitor your record source rather than the mix buss.

Yeah, I wholeheartedly agree! Using the Masterlink's D/A into a pair of Genelec 1029A's was one of the best final mixing changes I ever made. If you can get it to sound good thru these, then switch over to your main monitors via your slutty D/A converters and be sure to have someone around to pick up your jaw from the floor.