Two D/A/D's during mixing -> limitations at mastering?

[mobius.media]

I'm looking at a mostly hybrid/analog workflow with generally one d/a/d loopback for individual track comp/eq, then a second loopback after itb fader rides for analog summing and bus compression.

Let's say everything is done well, I'm compressing the mix bus about as much as I want it compressed (modern rock), and I would prefer to remix than have drastic mastering done.

I figure the only things I'm looking for are moderate corrective eq, maybe a tad of mid-side eq for widening, a touch of corrective multi-band compression if needed, and the final limiter and dither.

In such a instance would it make sense to request digital mastering? I figure those are all things digital probably does 'well', I'm not looking for 'mojo' so to speak, and I'm kind of apprehensive about a 3rd loopback.

Or are those fears unwarranted? I figure most big name console guys do one loopback during mixing. I'd only need one more. But, on the other hand, I don't want to tie anyone's hands behind their backs.

Thoughts?

Thanks.

[Waltz Mastering]

Originally Posted by mobius.media

I don't want to tie anyone's hands behind their backs.

Adding the mix bus compression yourself is the biggest way you would be tying someone's hands behind their back and it's also the place you are adding the extra instance of conversion that you are concerned about. If it's done right it's not so bad, but if your not confident about it, I would leave it off.

If your still not sure what to do, have one mix with the mix buss compression and one mix without it... give them both to the ME and let them decide which to use.

[mobius.media]

Originally Posted by Waltz Mastering

Adding the mix bus compression yourself is the biggest way you would be tying someone's hands behind their back and it's also the place you are adding the extra instance of conversion that you are concerned about. If it's done right it's not so bad, but if your not confident about it, I would leave it off.

If your still not sure what to do, have one mix with the mix buss compression and one mix without it... give them both to the ME and let them decide which to use.

I've thought about that, but I'd still need the 2nd conversion for outboard summing and drum bus compression. Additionally, I'd be using pretty high end and well suited compressors (eg. ssl, 175b varimu), so I'm not worried about them being 'wrong' for the music. I could definitely do 2 prints at different compression levels though. thumbsup

[dave-G]

IME, the situation you're describing is pretty much common practice, and you can simply treat what you hear as "the sound" without getting hung up on the idea of how many trips through converters is too many.

Clearly you have not limited yourself in this regard, and have found that the sound you've arrived at was worth the cost of those trips (if there was any). As such, why would you then want to limit the ME's options?

It's quite possible that an end-result you'll love will come from a completely different approach than you're imagining! Ultimately, you're hiring your ME with some trust for their judgement on how best to serve your project. You can help that along by withholding presumption, stating your goals and describing your tastes, and then listening to the results!

-dave

[mobius.media]

Originally Posted by dave-G

IME, the situation you're describing is pretty much common practice, and you can simply treat what you hear as "the sound" without getting hung up on the idea of how many trips through converters is too many.

Clearly you have not limited yourself in this regard, and have found that the sound you've arrived at was worth the cost of those trips (if there was any). As such, why would you then want to limit the ME's options?

It's quite possible that an end-result you'll love will come from a completely different approach than you're imagining! Ultimately, you're hiring your ME with some trust for their judgement on how best to serve your project. You can help that along by withholding presumption, stating your goals and describing your tastes, and then listening to the results!

-dave

That makes perfect sense to me. I just sometimes get the impression 2 D/A/D's (1 at mix, 1 at master) is 'industry standard' and anything more - even just 1 more - is . Is this just paranoia and superstition?

[Waltz Mastering]

If you are using quality outboard and conversion as you are saying, and are careful with your gain staging, I seriously wouldn't worry about adding the extra instance of conversion if that's what you are concerned or paranoid about.

There is no industry standard when it comes to this, as long as the mix sounds good the ME can decide to go all dig or A and D, if that's what's needed. The noise floor you would be adding by the extra conversion would not be a factor.

[okydoky]

Originally Posted by mobius.media

That makes perfect sense to me. I just sometimes get the impression 2 D/A/D's (1 at mix, 1 at master) is 'industry standard' and anything more - even just 1 more - is . Is this just paranoia and superstition?

hi,

i think you are right. if you could avoid the intermediary loop back it would be good. i'm not sure why you feel you can't, actually.

in any event, i'm sure you can get a good result if you are using good stuff and good techniques and all that.


right.

[mobius.media]

Originally Posted by oky****

i think you are right. if you could avoid the intermediary loop back it would be good. i'm not sure why you feel you can't, actually.

in any event, i'm sure you can get a good result if you are using good stuff and good techniques and all that.

I really only want to use my DAW for precision editing work: pitch tuning, beat aligning, comping, de-essing, phase alignment, surgical eq/compression, etc.

To apply the type of outboard I want for all broader mix purposes with only one loopback, I'd need at least 40 channels of outboard eq, compression, automated faders, and summing. In other words, a $60-100k large format mixer plus additional outboard.

Unfortunately, my pockets are just not as deep as CLA's. Additionally, I prefer a smaller gear footprint. So 2 loops in mixing it becomes.

[okydoky]

Originally Posted by mobius.media

I really only want to use my DAW for precision editing work: pitch tuning, beat aligning, comping, de-essing, phase alignment, surgical eq/compression, etc.

To apply the type of outboard I want for all broader mix purposes with only one loopback, I'd need at least 40 channels of outboard eq, compression, automated faders, and summing. In other words, a $60-100k large format mixer plus additional outboard.

Unfortunately, my pockets are just not as deep as CLA's. Additionally, I prefer a smaller gear footprint. So 2 loops in mixing it becomes.

hi,

i see. i think you will be fine with it if you can just observe good levels and gain staging and stuff like that.

i'm not sure what daw you are using, but you might want to consider some sort of hybrid approach as an option. if you use the daw automation and some plugin "outboard" where appropriate, it works really well and you can get by with just a reasonable amount of actual outboard [couple reverbs, compressors, and delays]. you do need enough channels though. well, actually you can do some subgrouping in the daw. not telling you how to do it, just some ideas that might work.

i'm sure you've got it working!


right.