Major Label Singles Mixed In The Box(ITB)! List Them Here!!!

Rob G · 30th August 2005, 05:05 AM

All,

Major Label Singles Mixed Completely In The Box(ITB)! List Them Here!!!

Rob G..

P.S.: And give footnotes where possible to verify/validate the integrity of the information.

Silver Sonya · 30th August 2005, 05:28 AM

Why is this important?
- c

themaidsroom · 30th August 2005, 05:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

Why is this important?
- c

ditto

- jack

syra · 30th August 2005, 05:58 AM

99.99% of whats out there is recorded ITB...do I really have to list millions of songs in this thread??????????????????

robmix · 30th August 2005, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by syra

99.99% of whats out there is recorded ITB...do I really have to list millions of songs in this thread??????????????????

Agreed, it'd be easier to list the songs that haven't been done in the box. I can't remember the last time I saw a tape machine powered on in a major studio in Los Angeles.

**George Necola** · 30th August 2005, 06:42 AM

maybe he means recording digital, mixing analog and go back to digital (like alesis masterlink or blah)..

this is common I think...

djui5 · 30th August 2005, 06:56 AM

I think he means mixed entirely ITB. Something that's not so common, but is being done a lot more often than you think.

No, I don't know of any examples.

robmix · 30th August 2005, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djui5

I think he means mixed entirely ITB. Something that's not so common, but is being done a lot more often than you think.

No, I don't know of any examples.

I don't know, his post says "recorded in the box" not mixed ITB. Maybe he'll come back and clarify his question.

Toad · 30th August 2005, 07:26 AM

Stairway to heaven!

Playback · 30th August 2005, 09:53 AM

Lets get real here Led Zepplin I-IV

Rob G open your eyes and your ears will follow.
First one to explain the definition of frequency to Rob getts a prize!!

Rob G · 30th August 2005, 09:24 PM

All,

I mean 'completely' 'In The Box'! To some of the respondents I would have thought that the concept of this would be 'second nature' but I guess not. People do go in, & out of Pro Tools, & Nuendo to boxes like Lexicon 960L's, Eventide H8000's, Kurzweil KSP8's, & TC System 6000's. So the question is not as 'stupid' as it might seem. Maybe the 'stupidity' is in those that did'nt catch this from the beginning

Rob G..

robmix · 31st August 2005, 12:10 AM

It's not a stupid question at all, it was just worded improperly. "Recorded ITB" to most people means tracked ITB. Now if you had said what tracks were recorded and mixed completely ITB at the start it would have been clear to everyone. Thanks for clarifying. As far as I know most major label projects use a combination of outboard and plug-in's. The only one I can think of that was completely ITB is "La Vida Loca".

Rob

DivineMusic · 31st August 2005, 12:32 AM

the new mariah carey record along with almost anything coming from the so so def camp
check here too:
http://www.billboard.com/bb/charts/hds.jsp

Rob G · 31st August 2005, 03:58 AM

All,

I mean mixed completely 'ITB'. Not tracked/recorded 'ITB' at all.

Rob G..

Gregg Sartiano · 31st August 2005, 09:18 AM

www.digidesign.com/news/credits

Youn · 31st August 2005, 05:34 PM

Check the "Similar Threads" below.

Rob G · 31st August 2005, 08:15 PM

Youn,

Thanks for the info but, that thread info is about a year old. I'm talking that info plus 2005 info.

Rob G..

Rob G · 31st August 2005, 08:20 PM

Gregg Sartiano,

Thanks for the link but, the most recent info there is from December of 2004. I'm wanting info for 2005 as well. Additionally Digidesign has'nt listed consoles used in the mix section. So you might not know whether they summed everything in the box, or other details. Another reason for this post. Billboard has been reporting very limited, or no usage information recently so once again hence this post.

Rob G..

**George Necola** · 31st August 2005, 09:19 PM

can you explain me the sense of this thread?;)

sorry I don't get it...

Rob G · 31st August 2005, 10:08 PM

George Necola,

If it makes no sense to you then it makes no sense to you. No one made you view this thread, or post here. If it has no value to you then ignore it.

Rob G..

Absolute · 2nd September 2005, 05:47 AM

No way to list them dude..way too many. Its like asking how many people you know with a face

well not that many

Rob G · 2nd September 2005, 06:48 AM

All,

So would you say that as of this date the 'majority'(more than 50% of the sum total) of major label tracks are mixed 'completely' 'In The Box', or is it that we hav'nt crossed that threshold just yet?

Rob G..

P.S.: My question in this post has no bearing upon my personal knowledge of what's happening in the industry, or how I work personally. Just wanted to see what kind of 'valid' responses I'd get here at 'Gearslutz'.

juicemaster1500 · 2nd September 2005, 08:56 AM

I'd say at least 90% of all the crap the majors are putting out COULD have been done completely ITB.

**George Necola** · 2nd September 2005, 09:20 AM

Quote:

George Necola,

If it makes no sense to you then it makes no sense to you. No one made you view this thread, or post here. If it has no value to you then ignore it.

Rob G..

Rob G..

As the moderator of the computerforum I wanted to ask you where do you wanna go with your thread.. or I will move it to gearfree-zone...

ok`? just wondering..

Chrisac · 2nd September 2005, 03:06 PM

George (modertaor)
with all due respect your acting a bit strange on this one me thinks. Clearly its a query from a user who is looking for records that have been tracked and mixed completely in the box. Maybe for reference purposes? This is the Music computers forum and I think the topic is very relevant on this forum.

imo only of course

azwun25 · 2nd September 2005, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrisac

George (modertaor)
with all due respect your acting a bit strange on this one me thinks. Clearly its a query from a user who is looking for records that have been tracked and mixed completely in the box. Maybe for reference purposes? This is the Music computers forum and I think the topic is very relevant on this forum.

imo only of course

AGREED!!

Bang · 2nd September 2005, 11:11 PM

Am I the only one who thinks this is a legitimate, IMPORTANT question to ask? 99% of the rock stuff out there is definitely mixed OUT of the box, into an SSL or other analog console. A lot of R&B goes both ways.

I personally can never get the same sound ITB as I can going out, but its a lot closer now then it was two years ago. URS plugins have been a huge step... Now they need to model the harmonics of driving a mixbuss and I'll be able to get one of those fancy PT controllers and I'll mix ITB too.. but until then, most good analog mixers can give you that extra spark to my ears..

Steve

bernieL0max · 3rd September 2005, 02:46 AM

In a roundabout way your trying to create discussion about analog summing, and effecting the signal in the analog domain. You are trying to point out that major label studios/recordings often think it unnecessary? and looking for examples as a foundation.

sound fair?

I guess you're trying to justify your own methods? pffft, why? if it works, just do it! :)

Not that anyone cares, but I mix entirely ITB... IMHO screw buying expensive outboard gear when I doubt in an A/B test ayone could tell the difference - especially when the track is in the mix. Personally I dont get the whole reasoning when you are degradeing the signal by running it through DAC -> patch cable(s)/panel(s) -> FX -> patch cable(s)/panel(s) -> ADC. Sure enough if you've got some whiz-bang effect that hasnt been closely emulated in the digital domain yet... but is there any left? :)

When mixing you add FX to try and achieve a goal.. a sound that you and/or the artist are trying to achieve; a very subjective thing... as long as you achieve what you set out; who cares how you got there? there is no single right or wrong way to do it.

Just my 2c

Matt

djui5 · 3rd September 2005, 04:04 AM

wow. I'm shocked at the backlash on this thread. I think it's more than a relevant question.

How could you not see the importance of something like this? Sierously.

I've been mixing exclusively ITB lately and am more than happy with the results.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Our first Major Label single! (through Taxi, even)	burst	The good news channel	20	11th March 2008 04:57 PM
My first major label gig	DC11	The good news channel	3	14th October 2005 07:30 PM
Might be getting some major label action....	NathanEldred	The good news channel	7	27th February 2005 12:27 AM
Major Projects Mixed to 1/2 Inch?	oceantracks	High end	16	6th October 2004 10:23 PM
Mackie 8 bus -Used on major label mixes??	Farm sounds	So much gear, so little time!	39	6th August 2004 10:45 PM

30th August 2005, 05:05 AM	#1
Rob G Lives for gear Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Hampton Roads, VA - U.S.A. Posts: 597	Major Label Singles Mixed Completely In The Box(ITB)! List Them Here!!! All, Major Label Singles Mixed Completely In The Box(ITB)! List Them Here!!! Rob G.. P.S.: And give footnotes where possible to verify/validate the integrity of the information.

30th August 2005, 06:56 AM	#7
djui5 Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Phoenix Posts: 6,680	I think he means mixed entirely ITB. Something that's not so common, but is being done a lot more often than you think. No, I don't know of any examples. __________________ _________________ "What is a crossfire hurricane & why wasn't I born in one?" Randy Wright http://www.myspace.com/djui5

30th August 2005, 09:53 AM	#10
Playback Gear maniac Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NYC Posts: 175	real Lets get real here Led Zepplin I-IV Rob G open your eyes and your ears will follow. First one to explain the definition of frequency to Rob getts a prize!! __________________ www.PlaybackRecordingStudio.com

31st August 2005, 12:32 AM	#13
DivineMusic Lives for gear Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Hotlanta Posts: 1,552	the new mariah carey record along with almost anything coming from the so so def camp check here too: http://www.billboard.com/bb/charts/hds.jsp __________________ DivineMusic 2-23-07 ppl wanna praise protools like its the best thing since pu$$y

30th August 2005, 05:28 AM	#2
Silver Sonya Lives for gear Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 1,515	Why is this important? - c

30th August 2005, 05:58 AM	#4
syra Lives for gear Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: L.A. Posts: 1,423	99.99% of whats out there is recorded ITB...do I really have to list millions of songs in this thread??????????????????

30th August 2005, 07:26 AM	#9
Toad Gear addict Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Great Northwest Posts: 497	Stairway to heaven!

30th August 2005, 09:24 PM	#11
Rob G Lives for gear Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Hampton Roads, VA - U.S.A. Posts: 597	All, I mean 'completely' 'In The Box'! To some of the respondents I would have thought that the concept of this would be 'second nature' but I guess not. People do go in, & out of Pro Tools, & Nuendo to boxes like Lexicon 960L's, Eventide H8000's, Kurzweil KSP8's, & TC System 6000's. So the question is not as 'stupid' as it might seem. Maybe the 'stupidity' is in those that did'nt catch this from the beginning Rob G..

31st August 2005, 12:10 AM	#12
robmix Lives for gear Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,984	It's not a stupid question at all, it was just worded improperly. "Recorded ITB" to most people means tracked ITB. Now if you had said what tracks were recorded and mixed completely ITB at the start it would have been clear to everyone. Thanks for clarifying. As far as I know most major label projects use a combination of outboard and plug-in's. The only one I can think of that was completely ITB is "La Vida Loca". Rob

31st August 2005, 03:58 AM	#14
Rob G Lives for gear Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Hampton Roads, VA - U.S.A. Posts: 597	All, I mean mixed completely 'ITB'. Not tracked/recorded 'ITB' at all. Rob G..

31st August 2005, 09:18 AM	#15
Gregg Sartiano Lives for gear Join Date: May 2004 Location: Lost Angeles Posts: 1,781	www.digidesign.com/news/credits __________________ "We need to legitimize peer-to-peer sharing as a business model, because it's already a business. If [the P2P companies] are going to make money on us, we should have a chance to make money along with them." -- Perry Farrell on the failure of national intellectual property policy to keep up with the rapid evolution of online media "Every Internet transmission of a musical work constitutes a public performance of that work. " http://www.ascap.com/weblicense/webfaq.html

31st August 2005, 05:34 PM	#16
Youn Gear maniac Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 261	Check the "Similar Threads" below.

31st August 2005, 08:15 PM	#17
Rob G Lives for gear Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Hampton Roads, VA - U.S.A. Posts: 597	Youn, Thanks for the info but, that thread info is about a year old. I'm talking that info plus 2005 info. Rob G..

31st August 2005, 08:20 PM	#18
Rob G Lives for gear Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Hampton Roads, VA - U.S.A. Posts: 597	Gregg Sartiano, Thanks for the link but, the most recent info there is from December of 2004. I'm wanting info for 2005 as well. Additionally Digidesign has'nt listed consoles used in the mix section. So you might not know whether they summed everything in the box, or other details. Another reason for this post. Billboard has been reporting very limited, or no usage information recently so once again hence this post. Rob G..

31st August 2005, 10:08 PM	#20
Rob G Lives for gear Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Hampton Roads, VA - U.S.A. Posts: 597	George Necola, If it makes no sense to you then it makes no sense to you. No one made you view this thread, or post here. If it has no value to you then ignore it. Rob G..

2nd September 2005, 05:47 AM	#21
Absolute Lives for gear Join Date: May 2003 Location: NY Posts: 833	No way to list them dude..way too many. Its like asking how many people you know with a face well not that many

2nd September 2005, 06:48 AM	#22
Rob G Lives for gear Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Hampton Roads, VA - U.S.A. Posts: 597	All, So would you say that as of this date the 'majority'(more than 50% of the sum total) of major label tracks are mixed 'completely' 'In The Box', or is it that we hav'nt crossed that threshold just yet? Rob G.. P.S.: My question in this post has no bearing upon my personal knowledge of what's happening in the industry, or how I work personally. Just wanted to see what kind of 'valid' responses I'd get here at 'Gearslutz'.

2nd September 2005, 08:56 AM	#23
juicemaster1500 Lives for gear Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 524	I'd say at least 90% of all the crap the majors are putting out COULD have been done completely ITB.

2nd September 2005, 03:06 PM	#25
Chrisac Gear addict Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 463	George (modertaor) with all due respect your acting a bit strange on this one me thinks. Clearly its a query from a user who is looking for records that have been tracked and mixed completely in the box. Maybe for reference purposes? This is the Music computers forum and I think the topic is very relevant on this forum. imo only of course

2nd September 2005, 11:11 PM	#27
Bang Lives for gear Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 2,292	Am I the only one who thinks this is a legitimate, IMPORTANT question to ask? 99% of the rock stuff out there is definitely mixed OUT of the box, into an SSL or other analog console. A lot of R&B goes both ways. I personally can never get the same sound ITB as I can going out, but its a lot closer now then it was two years ago. URS plugins have been a huge step... Now they need to model the harmonics of driving a mixbuss and I'll be able to get one of those fancy PT controllers and I'll mix ITB too.. but until then, most good analog mixers can give you that extra spark to my ears.. Steve

3rd September 2005, 02:46 AM	#28
bernieL0max Gear nut Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Ballarat, VIC, Australia Posts: 144	In a roundabout way your trying to create discussion about analog summing, and effecting the signal in the analog domain. You are trying to point out that major label studios/recordings often think it unnecessary? and looking for examples as a foundation. sound fair? I guess you're trying to justify your own methods? pffft, why? if it works, just do it! :) Not that anyone cares, but I mix entirely ITB... IMHO screw buying expensive outboard gear when I doubt in an A/B test ayone could tell the difference - especially when the track is in the mix. Personally I dont get the whole reasoning when you are degradeing the signal by running it through DAC -> patch cable(s)/panel(s) -> FX -> patch cable(s)/panel(s) -> ADC. Sure enough if you've got some whiz-bang effect that hasnt been closely emulated in the digital domain yet... but is there any left? :) When mixing you add FX to try and achieve a goal.. a sound that you and/or the artist are trying to achieve; a very subjective thing... as long as you achieve what you set out; who cares how you got there? there is no single right or wrong way to do it. Just my 2c Matt

3rd September 2005, 04:04 AM	#29
djui5 Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Phoenix Posts: 6,680	wow. I'm shocked at the backlash on this thread. I think it's more than a relevant question. How could you not see the importance of something like this? Sierously. I've been mixing exclusively ITB lately and am more than happy with the results. __________________ _________________ "What is a crossfire hurricane & why wasn't I born in one?" Randy Wright http://www.myspace.com/djui5