The digital mix bus

[trashman]

I always mixed analog until my travels forced me to go ITB. I am very happy overall with the UAD2 and Duende suites.

In analog, I used my DAW as a tape machine and brought out 16-24 tracks to my board and I then mixed into my 2bus chain of processors. I continued this practice ITB.

Here's the catch though: just like my analog setup, I mix the tracks independently, and when I likey, I send the 2 bus out at 24/48 and into an analog chain that hits my dithering AD on a second laptop. (I use a series of RND half racks). I do not freeze or sum the mix ITB. I just send it out as if it's an analog board with all the channels humming.

Here's my question: it struck me that perhaps I should sum the tracks in the DAW and then send that stereo sum out to my analog mixdown chain. Btw, I'm using nuendo and Sony acid mostly.

I suppose it would tax the CPU less, but will there be other advantages such as headroom etc? I'm newish at the ITB mixing game having used analog boards for so long.

[Charlie-O]

Which ever sound best to you. There are some nice 2 bus plugs out there that you might find beat out your hardware, or the opposite.

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by trashman

I always mixed analog until my travels forced me to go ITB. I am very happy overall with the UAD2 and Duende suites.

In analog, I used my DAW as a tape machine and brought out 16-24 tracks to my board and I then mixed into my 2bus chain of processors. I continued this practice ITB.

Here's the catch though: just like my analog setup, I mix the tracks independently, and when I likey, I send the 2 bus out at 24/48 and into an analog chain that hits my dithering AD on a second laptop. (I use a series of RND half racks). I do not freeze or sum the mix ITB. I just send it out as if it's an analog board with all the channels humming.

Here's my question: it struck me that perhaps I should sum the tracks in the DAW and then send that stereo sum out to my analog mixdown chain. Btw, I'm using nuendo and Sony acid mostly.

I suppose it would tax the CPU less, but will there be other advantages such as headroom etc? I'm newish at the ITB mixing game having used analog boards for so long.

So you're saying, you print the mix "live" but instead, should you print the mix ITB and then effectively "master" the ITB mix through your outboard chain?

I don't really understand - you say you're not summing the mix ITB....how are you summing it then? if you're coming out of a pair of stereo outputs, and into the mix buss chain, you most certainly ARE summing ITB.

It shouldn't make a difference if you print a mix then run through the outboard chain, compared to running the mix live. If it does, there's something wrong with your setup (note that 2 mixes will probably not null to 0 though, if you're using reverbs etc - this is normal).

I'd say carry on working the way you are. You always want to monitor through your mixbuss chain anyway as it will affect the decisions you make, so you may as well print the mix that way.

[WarrenBeat]

Originally Posted by trashman

I always mixed analog until my travels forced me to go ITB. I am very happy overall with the UAD2 and Duende suites.

In analog, I used my DAW as a tape machine and brought out 16-24 tracks to my board and I then mixed into my 2bus chain of processors. I continued this practice ITB.

Here's the catch though: just like my analog setup, I mix the tracks independently, and when I likey, I send the 2 bus out at 24/48 and into an analog chain that hits my dithering AD on a second laptop. (I use a series of RND half racks). I do not freeze or sum the mix ITB. I just send it out as if it's an analog board with all the channels humming.

Here's my question: it struck me that perhaps I should sum the tracks in the DAW and then send that stereo sum out to my analog mixdown chain. Btw, I'm using nuendo and Sony acid mostly.

I suppose it would tax the CPU less, but will there be other advantages such as headroom etc? I'm newish at the ITB mixing game having used analog boards for so long.

If that's your way of working and you think you do it better, why not doing it?

[trashman]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

So you're saying, you print the mix "live" but instead, should you print the mix ITB and then effectively "master" the ITB mix through your outboard chain?

I don't really understand - you say you're not summing the mix ITB....how are you summing it then? if you're coming out of a pair of stereo outputs, and into the mix buss chain, you most certainly ARE summing ITB.

It shouldn't make a difference if you print a mix then run through the outboard chain, compared to running the mix live. If it does, there's something wrong with your setup (note that 2 mixes will probably not null to 0 though, if you're using reverbs etc - this is normal).

I'd say carry on working the way you are. You always want to monitor through your mixbuss chain anyway as it will affect the decisions you make, so you may as well print the mix that way.

Thanks for the feedback. You got it exactly. Yeah, Im not geeky enough about zeros and ones or computer science to know whether the "live" summing that one hears when mixing, is mathematically different from what a DAW like Nuendo might do to data on an internal summing mixdown. It's obviously consolidating the wav files for the monitoring, but is this the same math a DAW will use to "mixdown" ITB. Is it a different algo? Different principle? I.e. There was a fantastic thread a while back with Paul Frindle and one other guy detailing how to achieve a console like gain structure ITB. It was eye opening.

Anyway, I've noticed things change slightly when I have 32 tracks humming along to the mix bus as opposed to mixing it down to a stereo track and playing that back. Just wondered if this was something already addressed in another thread etc

I don't use my chain to master anything. I mix into it for color and mojo and leave plenty of headroom for the mastering engineer that I work with. He has far superior equipment and skills.

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by trashman

Thanks for the feedback. You got it exactly. Yeah, Im not geeky enough about zeros and ones or computer science to know whether the "live" summing that one hears when mixing, is mathematically different from what a DAW like Nuendo might do to data on an internal summing mixdown. It's obviously consolidating the wav files for the monitoring, but is this the same math a DAW will use to "mixdown" ITB. Is it a different algo? Different principle? I.e. There was a fantastic thread a while back with Paul Frindle and one other guy detailing how to achieve a console like gain structure ITB. It was eye opening.

Well, since most people working on PT mixing ITB will print in real time to a new track (ie recording to disk not bouncing to disk), it's exactly the same as what you hear whilst mixing. Can't be anything else.

Offline bouncing, there's always the potential for things to go differently, but you obviously can't offline bounce if you're using outboard, so I guess that doesn't apply to you.

Originally Posted by trashman

Anyway, I've noticed things change slightly when I have 32 tracks humming along to the mix bus as opposed to mixing it down to a stereo track and playing that back. Just wondered if this was something already addressed in another thread etc

you might think it does...have you proved it does? You wouldn't be the first to think you hear a difference.

Originally Posted by trashman

I don't use my chain to master anything. I mix into it for color and mojo and leave plenty of headroom for the mastering engineer that I work with. He has far superior equipment and skills.

In that case, even if it were the case that printing a stereo bounce and running that through the 2-buss chain sounded slightly different, why would you do it if you've been mixing through it the whole time? just mix as usual, and print when you're done.

[trashman]

Thanks man. Very helpful insights.

I should have added a word or two in my previous post:

"I THOUGHT THAT I noticed a slight difference"

It got me thinking about it.
I know exactly how the placebo effect can mess with perception when it comes to pro-sound. Happens all of the time. I figured I'd approach the subject here from a different angle with the computer crowd.

As it is, I'm pretty new to Nuendo, having used radar and other devices over the years. I need to look into the features that may or may not be similar to those that you pointed out in Protools. I've even considered moving to protools since it went native.

Thanks again ; )

[trashman]

Indeed, Nuendo appears to have the "write to track" feature.

If there aren't any computer science related reasons (the math, headroom etc) for or against mixing down/rendering ITB, versus using the DAW as a virtual console with all tracks playing back simultaneously, than I suppose I'll just experiment.

Thanks for the feedback ; )