Needing to make some changes/upgrade- need input

[Parisongs]

What I Have
What I know,
But what do I need?

Ok, here’s a little background-

I started recording on a Tascam 4 track, graduated to a 38, eventually bought a Roland 1680 to record me and my band, and now I have a custom DAW. This over a 20 year period.

I have been finding that busy mixes on the DAW to be more difficult to produce than any of the aforementioned systems I had. But I’ll never return to ancient technology unless I get rich and am able to buy a 24 2’ machine. I didn’t seem to have a problem with semi-busy mixes with the Roland 1680, but what a closed-system beast it was!

I’ve scoured the web for the last few weeks because I know I need to upgrade my system. I want to go to 24/88.2 rather than the 24/44.1 scheme I’ve been using. Supposedly I would get more headroom from this method and that’s probably what’s lacking in my current setup.


I AM NOT TRACKING A LOT OF LIVE INSTRUMENTS

Mainly, just bass and some guitar. I’m doing a hybrid type of experimental electronica using samples(my own) drum beats, midi and of course live bass(sometimes) and guitar.



Here’s what I have:

P4 2.8ghz
2 gig RAM
2- 120 Drives
1- 80 Drive
Dual Screens
Pioneer CDR/DVDR
RME Multiface linked to Tango 24 via ADAT(I’m going to lose the Tango completely)
DBX 386
FMR-RNC
2 DBX166
Mackie 1604 VLZ
Mackie HR824s
Tascam DA30-MKII DAT
Tascam 750 CDR
2 SM57s
AKG C414
AKG D112
Audio Technica 822
EV PL-20

Cubase SX 3.1.1
Ableton Live 5.2
Stylus RMX
Waves Gold Bundle

Lots of VST synths and various plugs

Some of Ethan Winer’s bass traps(Real Traps)


WHAT I KNOW

The RME stays- the Tango goes.

What I already intend to do is get 2 UAD-1 cards and Wavelab software. That seems to be some missing links that are common to everybody’s arsenal of goodies.

I’ve seen tons of threads on analog summing. A giant can of worms. I don’t really know where I stand but I probably can’t afford it.

I’ve been told by Bob Katz that a Big Ben would not improve jitter in my system- even though lots of people believe it improves image.

Also, I plan to score the soundtrack for a documentary film I’m working on. I would like to do this on other films as well so I have to consider making the move to Nuendo, correct?

I know I need a few more bass traps.


WHAT DO I NEED?

What other hardware would I need?

I’m thinking I need a processor upgrade to handle the new sample rate of 24/88.1. Does that sound correct? Dual Core? Dual Processor?


Do I suck at digital mixing? (Actually, if you know of a book that is solely dedicated to mixing digital, I’d like to give it a whirl. I could be missing something I need to know. I already have the Mixing Engineer’s Handbook.)

I really would appreciate some good input. Thanks dudes.

[Parisongs]

[DrDeltaM]

Forget about 88,2kHz. It will not solve much, if anything at all. It's just more expensive and resource consuming

You can score for films in plenty of software. Most popular programs for this are actually Digital Performer and Logic. But Cubase or Nuendo will do just fine as well. Nuendo is gonna be overkill in features and price tho.

As for analog summing: I'm doing fine without atm. I have heard differences when comparing at Chris Lambrechts' place, but it wasn't night and day, and even then, very depedant on the song itself. I'd consider analog summing as luxury.

For me, the biggest difference when mixing ITB has been integrating a few outboard compressors, combined with good EQ plugins (I use URS).

So my advice would be: buy some decent EQ plugin(s) and get some higher quality outboard compressor to use in an outboard loop during mixing.

[RainbowStorm]

Originally Posted by Parisongs

Mackie HR824s
RME Multiface linked to Tango 24 via ADAT

You need a lot, but this is mainly your problem. You need a set of better amp+speaker systems and converters. A Big Ben wouldn't solve a thing, not 88,2KHz sample rate either. Leave the Mackie 1604 VLZ out of the equation. Also forget about OTB summing.

And no, you don't suck at digital mixing!

[Parisongs]

Originally Posted by DrDeltaM

Forget about 88,2kHz. It will not solve much, if anything at all. It's just more expensive and resource consuming

You can score for films in plenty of software. Most popular programs for this are actually Digital Performer and Logic. But Cubase or Nuendo will do just fine as well. Nuendo is gonna be overkill in features and price tho.

As for analog summing: I'm doing fine without atm. I have heard differences when comparing at Chris Lambrechts' place, but it wasn't night and day, and even then, very depedant on the song itself. I'd consider analog summing as luxury.

For me, the biggest difference when mixing ITB has been integrating a few outboard compressors, combined with good EQ plugins (I use URS).

So my advice would be: buy some decent EQ plugin(s) and get some higher quality outboard compressor to use in an outboard loop during mixing.

"an outboard loop during mixing" Please elaborate in detail of you could sir. I'm intrigued.

You need a set of better amp+speaker systems and converters.

Could you make a suggestion? The Mackie HR824s are 5 months old. Better converters equals better clock- Apogee? I am going to lose the Tango 24 for sure but the RME too huh?

[TrueZebra]

I use the multiface for live use but i won't use it as a studio converter or even clock.
The multiface is better than many audio interfaces out there at a lower price point but i don't find it good for studio use.

Regarding a bigben, i know a few who connected it to a crap digi002 and were amazed at the improvements.
I also have a bigben but i also have better converters.

If you record straight into the multiface your frequency spectrum is pretty packed.
Add a nice preamp before that which colours the sound and because of it's character removes some odd frequencies.
If you record alot of synths straight into the a/d you're gonna need more EQ because most synths are HI-FI sound and just have to much information to sit in a mix.

I might suggest doing some EQ test, do some radical EQ and focus on what frequencies are most important for that instrument and cut other frequencies. It might not sound ok when in solo but it might fit perfectly in the mix.

I'd start with that if things improve, with better EQ plugins, maybe start thinking better converters with a better clock.

Better imaging can partly be generated by a better clock but also with better EQ and how you mix.

[DrDeltaM]

Originally Posted by Parisongs

"an outboard loop during mixing" Please elaborate in detail of you could sir. I'm intrigued.

For example: send out an important track (vocal, bass, kick, snare, ...) out to a DA, run it thru a nice analog compressor, get it back in via AD and do whatever ever else you want with in in your DAW. So basically, an analog insert in a DAW mix.

[Parisongs]

A lot of what I'm picking up is too much low-end mud in high-end instruments can screw with your mix. I'm tracking my bass and guitar through the DBX 386 going s/pdif though to the DAW via the RME so I shouldn't be picking up too much garbage. All the synth stuff has been internal VST.

What's weird is that I sincerely had an easier time mixing my band which I recorded and with a 1680. The band is gone and now that I felt I moved up with this DAW for my solo stuff, I'm having all this trouble mixing.

I was actually tracking my band with no isolation using JBL 4412s at close range and ended up with a damn nice sounding CD. But, alas, the band didn't last and I ditched the 1680 for a more open system. I also didn't have any of the bass traps in place that are there now. So, theoretically, I upgraded my recording environment but what the hell went wrong? My results aren't that bad but I thought I should have gotten way more mileage out of this new system(not new anymore)

[DrDeltaM]

Originally Posted by Parisongs

What's weird is that I sincerely had an easier time mixing my band which I recorded and with a 1680. The band is gone and now that I felt I moved up with this DAW for my solo stuff, I'm having all this trouble mixing.

Maybe it's the 'hands-on' difference? A controller for your DAW might help you mix more comfortably and therefor getting better results.

[TrueZebra]

The first few VS roland recorders have their sound.
I've heard eps which sound great and actually kinda lo-fi.
The roland devices don't record wav or aif files but have their own hidden roland touch audio file. That and the conversion quality is what gives the VS it's sound.

Same thing with my old recordings on studio vision pro back in 1997, 16bit 22khz !! recording on a powerbook 5300... i could get 10 tracks from that 100mhz machine.
It reminds me of the VS sound. I would export thru a roland mixer and add the midi synths in realtime (audio was mostly guitar, effects and vocals) on a minidisc (another degration) . All the degration added something, it wasn't an commercial album sound but it was a very nice 'lo-fi' sound.

Internal VST's mostly have too much frequency info. You leave them alone or eq them?

You should really try to eq more radical just as a test if you like it more.

After that i will mention in investigating a better converter and a better clock. It is weird that so many high-positioned persons are discussing the opposite of what is good or not. So i'm gonna give 4 remarks what makes a good converter.
1.the audio path
2.the converter path
3.the clock system
4.the power supply