Harrison Mixbus - Virtual Harrison Mixer plus full-featured DAW for OS X

[tommyboyjenks]

Surely worth the $80 just to get a plugin called "Rhythm Ferret"?

[dawhead]

Originally Posted by matt thomas

I realize what Jack does, its just very "shareware" like to have to install something like this, then the actual program is half a shareware program anyway, so theres basically three parts: Jack (shareware) Ardour (shareware)

As the original author of both JACK and lead developer of Ardour, I'd just to clarify a couple of things here.

Whenever anyone considers distributing a program that relies on an inter-application audio interconnect, the question is going to arise: do we bundle the interconnect with the application, in case the user doesn't have it already, or do we tell the user to install the interconnect separately since (a) it is trivial to do (b) has uses beyond our specific application (c) helps educate the user about the potential and capabilities of their system.

If we bundled JACK with Ardour or Mixbus so that it was "invisible", you wouldn't be able to use it for its primary intended purpose - connecting to other (CoreAudio) applications. It might be nicer for the very first time use, but not long after that, users will be asking how to wire into Logic or something else, and at that point things get complex because they will now effectively have two versions of JACK that Ardour or Mixbus knows about. How to choose which one? It justs gets way to complex for most users. One other option that we could have taken would be to include JACK and install it so that its not "invisible". We did consider this for both Ardour and Mixbus, but decided for a variety of reasons that it wasn't the best choice. This is particularly true now that JACK is being forced by Apple to play catch up with Snow Leopard.

Hence the decision to tell users to install JackOSX separately. Even if you don't use Mixbus, you can still benefit from JACK on your OS X machine.

Finally, I sense a certain kind of perjorative tone in your use of the term "shareware". First of all, it is not technically correct that Ardour or JACK are "shareware". They are licensed under the GPL, which means the source code is available and there are specific license obligations and freedoms. Second, these are programs that have been worked on over many years by many incredibly skilled programmers, and have been funded by not just users but SSL, SAE, Harrison and others (I'd love to name one of the others, but there's an NDA on that). I don't know if you intend to sound derogatory or dismissive of this software, but if you did, I'd encourage you to think again. The fact that I didn't form a company to develop this software is no more significant than the fact that Linus Torvalds didn't form a company to develop Linux, and I suspect even you may be aware of the significance of that software, even if just in terms of the internet itself. I understand that you may believe that anybody who is serious about developing quality software would form a normal for-profit company to do so, but I can assure you that this is not the case in the current world of software engineering.

[lore]

Originally Posted by Blinddot

I've bee trying to decrypt what the hell this stuff is about.. it took a while... but I think I got it.

If I'm right, they're selling the open source Ardour DAW and 3 harrison plugins in a bundle.

The plugs are:

"input channel" (which like any other plugin it's capable of unlimited instances depending on CPU)

"stereo mix bus" (limited to only four instances)

"stereo master bus" (limited to one instance)



I have a few questions to ask Harrison.


Can you only send audio to the 4 buses and master from "input channel" tracks or you can also do it from any other track in Ardour?

Do the plugins work on any other AU host? (I guess they don't)

Is the delay compensation a plug? or ardour just supports delay compensation?

Can you insert any other AU plug in the "input channels" enabled tracks? if so, can you insert them in between EQ and dynamics of the "input channels" or just before/after the "input channel"?

Are they 32float or 64float?



To be honest, I don't think it is such a bargain as some folks have said. It is a good price for 3 plugs (especially if their good) but if im not mistaking in my guess, they have a lot of limitations, don't they?

It is the weirdest approach to plugin format I've ever seen, and I find very annoying the way they are marketing them, it is very confusing and it sounds like typical prosumer stuff, very disappointing coming from harrison.

I love the bus/master meters, I must say.

For me it's a DAW where the mixing console has the Harrison algo , so Harrsion eq, comp ....
on 4 bus you still have eq,comp... but no more than 4 (you still can use other bus to group your tracks , but no harrsion's eq comp on these...)

i imagine using it with drums,bass,voice,synths ,fx bounced from my regular daw (logic) and imported into the "mixbus" which should have the harrison mojo ?

[riverrun]

Interesting. A Linux version would be great!

What happens when the regular Ardour gets an update? Will new Mixbus versions coincide?

[smoke]

wow.

[rhythminmind]

Fun idea for sure. But the low price is the only thing going for it & that is something don't get me wrong.
But compared to what most of us use are already using there is nothing technically new or improved with this mixing engine over any other DAW.
In actuality many will have a higher internal resolution 48/64bit (Live, Sonar, PT, Reaper, ect ect.) But thats just techy babble at this point.

It's hard to beat what SSL/sydec have done. They have done what everyone here is wanting already. A console with your choice of DAW.The SSL/sydec Mixtreme & Duende are examples of this. But at the cost of $.

I find the MixBus feature set very limited. Basic EQ/Comp abilities. Most stock DAW eq's/comps/& saturation should run circles around this. Nevermind something like a Duende channelstrip & URS saturation.
I do love that Ardour is getting more action tho.
I demoed a Harrison few years ago that ran on linux & had Ardour integrated. Very cool setup & smart on Harrisons part to use the open community for development. The Linux geek in me liked it. The same idea has worked really well for apple/OS X. Whenever a challenge/problem pops up all you have to do it see what the community has already created & port it over.

[Hint]

It's an interesting idea and the pricing is great, but I agree that this would have made more sense as channel strip plugins, for use in existing hosts.

Combining it with Ardour and Jack makes me think of Tritone and their reliance on Pluggo, and we know how that turned out.

[tnaugle]

Originally Posted by riverrun

Interesting. A Linux version would be great!

What happens when the regular Ardour gets an update? Will new Mixbus versions coincide?

Fixes and updates that apply to both versions are being shared, so in general Mixbus releases will follow Ardour releases.

Todd

[musicjon]

Originally Posted by rhythminmind

But compared to what most of us use are already using there is nothing technically new or improved with this mixing engine over any other DAW.

I don't see how you can come to that conclusion based on the (lack of) information in this thread. The developers have yet to explain what is or isn't happening in the mixbus that makes it unique. We don't know if they are just "adding up the files" or if they have attempted something else here.

[rhythminmind]

Originally Posted by musicjon

I don't see how you can come to that conclusion based on the (lack of) information in this thread. The developers have yet to explain what is or isn't happening in the mixbus that makes it unique. We don't know if they are just "adding up the files" or if they have attempted something else here.

It's Ardour running a LADSPA (linux audio plugin) Harrison coded channelstrip/bus that has EQ,Comp, & Saturation. I'm sure it's nice code but nicer then the next?

I know Ardours inner workings well.
This article has more indepth info
Mixbus : Ardour + Harrison DSP for OS X | ardour
&
Create Digital Music » In-the-Box Mixing, Analog Console Style, on an Open Source DAW

[ProducerBoy]

Originally Posted by musicjon

I don't see how you can come to that conclusion based on the (lack of) information in this thread. The developers have yet to explain what is or isn't happening in the mixbus that makes it unique. We don't know if they are just "adding up the files" or if they have attempted something else here.

Exactly why someone from the company needs to brush up on their marketing skills and step up to the plate. It would be nice to hear what this "True Analog Mixing"™ ... based on Harrison's renowned 32-Series and MR-Series console designs really is.

[matt thomas]

Originally Posted by dawhead

Finally, I sense a certain kind of perjorative tone in your use of the term "shareware". First of all, it is not technically correct that Ardour or JACK are "shareware". They are licensed under the GPL, which means the source code is available and there are specific license obligations and freedoms. Second, these are programs that have been worked on over many years by many incredibly skilled programmers, and have been funded by not just users but SSL, SAE, Harrison and others (I'd love to name one of the others, but there's an NDA on that). I don't know if you intend to sound derogatory or dismissive of this software, but if you did, I'd encourage you to think again. The fact that I didn't form a company to develop this software is no more significant than the fact that Linus Torvalds didn't form a company to develop Linux, and I suspect even you may be aware of the significance of that software, even if just in terms of the internet itself. I understand that you may believe that anybody who is serious about developing quality software would form a normal for-profit company to do so, but I can assure you that this is not the case in the current world of software engineering.

sorry, that wasn't my intention. There is some great shareware/freeware/donationware/etc out there. My point was more that it is three parts put together, as opposed to single whole solution. This would be true even if you had to pay for the separate parts. It reminds me of something like Gimpshop.

And then furthermore that a large part of what it appears you are buying is available free anyway.

No-one has answered my main question. What have they replaced the standard summing engine with?

"Harrison eliminated these flaws in Mixbus by completely replacing the DAW's internal mixing engine "

matt

[smoke]

Originally Posted by musicjon

I don't see how you can come to that conclusion based on the (lack of) information in this thread. The developers have yet to explain what is or isn't happening in the mixbus that makes it unique. We don't know if they are just "adding up the files" or if they have attempted something else here.

Yeah. It's a unique idea, and I get the impression that it's a serious work-in-progress.
thumbsup to this outward thinking... much better than just 'another' EQ plug-in. This has the potential to enhance workflow on many levels. I think we are seeing a start to a new type of DAW, soon everyone will have analogue summing emulation in some form or another. If this isn't the perfect solution, no worries, eventually someone else will develop it... but it has to start somewhere.

[nightscope]

Originally Posted by matt thomas

What have they replaced the standard summing engine with?

"Harrison eliminated these flaws in Mixbus by completely replacing the DAW's internal mixing engine "

Good question that deserves an answer. Facts speak louder than words.

ns

[dawhead]

Originally Posted by matt thomas

sorry, that wasn't my intention. There is some great shareware/freeware/donationware/etc out there. My point was more that it is three parts put together, as opposed to single whole solution. This would be true even if you had to pay for the separate parts. It reminds me of something like Gimpshop.

in my 26 year history as a developer and user of software, i have to say that the "single whole solutions" just about always turned out worse in the long haul than the "cooperating module" solutions. Your mileage may vary, of course. That experience has been repeated for me in the world of audio technology, where I have done much better buying cooperating modules and avoiding all in one solutions. Your mileage may vary here too.

And then furthermore that a large part of what it appears you are buying is available free anyway.

Then focus on the cost for the DSP parts of mixbus. Is $80 for what it adds to regular Ardour worthwhile? Only you can answer that, different people will have very different answers, I am sure.

[matt thomas]

in my 26 year history as a developer and user of software, i have to say that the "single whole solutions" just about always turned out worse in the long haul than the "cooperating module" solutions. Your mileage may vary, of course. That experience has been repeated for me in the world of audio technology, where I have done much better buying cooperating modules and avoiding all in one solutions. Your mileage may vary here too.

Well my milage does vary, but that is to say nothing about Harrison Mixbus, hopefully it works great

Then focus on the cost for the DSP parts of mixbus. Is $80 for what it adds to regular Ardour worthwhile? Only you can answer that, different people will have very different answers, I am sure.

Yes it seems good value for money.

I'd still like the answer to my question. Their marketing implies it more than just plugin-lke DSP on the channels and busses.

matt

[DSpec1]

Originally Posted by Number 6

Well, I bought it... and... I have to say, it doesn't do it for me.

The whole Jack / Ardour thing is clumsy, for one thing. Users will want something they can integrate with their current DAW of choice. Or if you want to make it a closed platform, do it right like Propellerheads did with Record. The 'shareware' element that people have been talking about is very evident.

The sound of the EQ DSP is disappointing, for me. It doesn't offer any improvement over the sound I can get from Logic's built-in EQ. It doesn't come close to the UAD Harrison (which is a very round and warm affair, nice bottom end to it).

The Tape Saturation is quite a nice touch, but it doesn't sound like tape, at all. More like a soft clipping / overdrive. And it can't be turned off on the master bus (unless I'm missing something).

It may work well for others, but I feel like I just wasted $80.

I haven't been able to use it (I'm on Snow Leopard), but I am now thinking that the shareware aspect is a bit of a downer...

[jyc]

Originally Posted by matt thomas

No-one has answered my main question. What have they replaced the standard summing engine with?

"Harrison eliminated these flaws in Mixbus by completely replacing the DAW's internal mixing engine "

matt

This is the golden question. Did they do something revolutionary on the summing bus or are they using the same plus and minuses as other DAWs? If not, what difference is there apart from the processing in each channel? It's like putting Waves SSL channel on every channel in Pro Tools and the Bus Compressor on the master bus and call it a small SSL console?

Jyc

[SOLOIST101]

this all sounds pretty awesome!!!

hey correct me if i'm wrong but protools le is lacking in delay compensation right?

MC

[matt thomas]

Originally Posted by SOLOIST101

this all sounds pretty awesome!!!

hey correct me if i'm wrong but protools le is lacking in delay compensation right?

MC

PT LE and PT MP are lacking

PT HD has it

matt

[Fidelis]

Why no Demo? I would just download it right now...

[bwrecordings]

+1 on a demo.
Im trying to get my workflow away from the Pro Tooling and more in the way of just laying down takes. I think this would be pretty good for that since I can use core audio hardware and then I will always have PT if I need it. But I would never buy it without a demo.

I know pro tools works and anyone who wants me to check out there sweet new plug!!!! lets me.

Rick

[WTMNMF]

Originally Posted by Nowak

OK, here's a quick bounce of a chorus of a song I'm currently mixing - instruments only.....

This sounds awesome, tomorrow I'm going to route Logic into it via Jack, lets hope all works as expected.

All EQ and compression handled in MixBus, totally dry.

Stef

Where is the rest? I want some more of that

[tuRnitUpsuM]

Well done Paul!!!
Well done Harrison!!

looking forward to following this endeavour and keeping my eyes opened for a Linux version... or picking up a used Mac maybe.

to the age old naysayers of doom....

79.99 lets you get ur feet wet in Open Source Creativity at its best and buys you Harrison DSP algo's... if its not ur cup of tea, just say so. and MOVE on.

[Reborn]

I think alot o fair questions are being asked here! A workflow change can be a major undertaking but I would gladly do that for the next level in digital audio! The Ad copy makes some bold claims, so naturally people are excited. I would love to hear more audio through this digital system. Perhaps Routing other daws( Logic, Cubase) through this systems master bus and bouncing. Then take a bounce straight from the original session. Match levels and see?


Jazztone

[riverrun]

Originally Posted by tnaugle

Fixes and updates that apply to both versions are being shared, so in general Mixbus releases will follow Ardour releases.

Todd

Thanks for the explanation, Todd.

Hope the Linux version comes soon.
I'm making an Ubuntu partition on my MBP, as a kind of alternate universe.

[BBT]

Originally Posted by DSpec1

..but I am now thinking that the shareware aspect is a bit of a downer...

Not shareware.

I have been using Ardour for 5 years now, for all kinds of recording, mixing and mastering projects. Every single mix I delivered, was received extremely well, and nobody ever asked questions about the DAW I am using.

The word shareware makes me think of badly written windows software you can get for free, but is closed source.

Open source is a wonderful concept, and even I have contributed in a small way to improve it by testing and fault-finding an issue that I had. It was solved.

Free and open software is not free as in beer. It is free as in speech. Free as in freedom. Not a downer at all.

[DSpec1]

An excellent response. Thanks!thumbsup

[Farshad]

Originally Posted by AMIEL

Waves and Digidesign are such a good friends and partners that I do not think Waves will ever make the move of creating a DAW! only would happen if Pro Tools popularity falls drastically .

Well, I meant something that you can integrate into any DAW somehow ... Does VST3 allow this?

[fossaree]

again , Buzz for Mixbus !