Gearslutz.com

Gearslutz.com (http://www.gearslutz.com/board/)
-   Product Alerts older than 2 months (http://www.gearslutz.com/board/product-alerts-older-than-2-months/)
-   -   Mixbus version 2.3 announced by Harrison (http://www.gearslutz.com/board/product-alerts-older-than-2-months/841499-mixbus-version-2-3-announced-harrison.html)

Lawrence 1st June 2013 04:03 PM

I didn't mean it that way... and I am not insecure. :) I am a long time Reaper owner and user, love it for audio, I'm on my second paid license.

The fact of the matter is, all good professional DAWs allow nested bus routing or grouping snares to a bus but it only seems to mostly be Reaper users who actually don't know that, because they always talk about it as if it's something special when it's not. On the contrary, it's very typical.

Apparently ... for some Reaper users it's their very first pro DAW so they just don't know that, and they often talk about some of it's features (like nested busses?) as if it's somehow unique. It's not.

That's all I meant. Every good pro daw does that... every single one of them. If you look at the Ardour product page you'd see that routing is one of it's features ...

Quote:

Route anything to anywhere (for more than ten years!). Matrix-style patching/routing. Connect Ardour tracks or busses to hardware, each other, other applications, the network ... input, output, sends, inserts, returns all managed in the same way.

iMacCartney 1st June 2013 04:13 PM

I'd like to test mixbus. Even though it's only $39 now, I'd like to know which AU plugins are working and which are not. It doesn't make any sense to buy if you can't use it. And what about crashes, CPU usage on mac? So anyone?

IIRs 1st June 2013 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawrence (Post 9092202)
The fact of the matter is, all good professional DAWs allow nested bus routing

Are you sure about that? Re-reading Ben's post above, it still sounds to me like Mixbus does not. Have you tried Mixbus, or are you just assuming it has the same features as Ardour, with which you are obviously familiar?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawrence (Post 9092202)
Apparently ... for some Reaper users it's their very first pro DAW so they just don't know that, and they often talk about some of it's features (like nested busses?) as if it's somehow unique.

My first DAW was a "VST" flavour of Cubase, after I finally retired my trusty old Atari ST, and many years before Reaper was born. But I'll ignore the implied slur and state again: I mention these features not to point out that Reaper has them, but to point out that (apparently) Mixbus does not.

feck 1st June 2013 07:21 PM

To be fair, Mixbuss is called MIXbuss - it doesn't seem as though they are trying to compete at all with other "major" DAW's, rather they are just trying to make an app which caters to solely the mixing process with some limited typical DAW functions thrown in. No need to try and stack it up against full featured DAW's. And Lawrence, I hear you about Reaper - the fanboys do quite often rave about features it has which are pretty standard fare in other DAW's. If only Reaper would join the 21st century regarding MIDI editing. In that way, Reaper can't compete with the others either.

Tui 1st June 2013 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iMacCartney (Post 9092236)
I'd like to test mixbus. Even though it's only $39 now, I'd like to know which AU plugins are working and which are not. It doesn't make any sense to buy if you can't use it. And what about crashes, CPU usage on mac? So anyone?

Mixbus, last I tried with my Mac Pro, was buggy. It didn't sound special, and Jack, which does the audio routing, was a CPU hog. I'd save the cash.

margusalviste 1st June 2013 07:28 PM

I've been trying Mixbus with different plugins and some of them really do not work with Mixbus. Or should I say Mixbus doesn't cooperate with them. Sonalksis seems to be their biggest enemy. :)
However, Ben is super cool with his supportive correspondence. Thanks Ben, you make it much easier!
I really like the work flow in Mixbus, don't want to give up so easily. Do any of you have any experience with the plugins that don't work in Mixbus? Could we put together a list of them?

Tui 1st June 2013 07:34 PM

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/music...on-mixbus.html

GIM Productions 1st June 2013 07:54 PM

Hi all,i just bought Mixbuss to try it on Soul Prj recorded in my main DAW Sonar X2,and try the feel of Harrison console sound.
I have a single problem.
When i load 3 part plugs in mono track Mixbus don't wont load couse there an incompatible number of Plug's audio channels with that track.
I have seen in the plug in manager that there are 2 in and 2 out on that plugs,and they work perfectly in Mixbus busses (stereo).
Any thougts?
Best

Lawrence 1st June 2013 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IIRs (Post 9092638)
Are you sure about that? Re-reading Ben's post above, it still sounds to me like Mixbus does not. Have you tried Mixbus, or are you just assuming it has the same features as Ardour, with which you are obviously familiar?.

Yes. I own Mixbus, and yes I am 100% certain because I actually did it in v 2.2 before I replied because I wanted to be certain, and not speculate.

Directly related to the Reaper example you gave ...

I dropped in two snare tracks, top and bottom snare, turned off the master send on both of those tracks, routed both of those to a "Snare" bus, turned off the master send on that Snare bus, and then routed that Snare bus to another "Drums" bus. Turned off the Master send on the Drums bus and sent that to Mixbus 1.

That's a track nesting that's 4 levels deep, your example exactly.

That's also a really common busing configuration for things like drums and I'd be a good bit beyond surprised at any professional DAW calling itself such a thing which couldn't do that.

Here's the graphic. You'll notice that none of those tracks is routed to the master bus. The routing is going right to left to the "Drums" bus, using sends, like Reaper.

http://theaudiocave.com/pics/mbr.PNG

Quote:

I mention these features not to point out that Reaper has them, but to point out that (apparently) Mixbus does not.
But it actually does, as do they all, all of the major recording and mixing daws, maybe not some of the EDM tools or Garageband :), but for some odd reason you didn't want to just take my word for that, so I gave you a very clear graphic example to avoid any additional confusion about it all.

Lawrence 1st June 2013 08:11 PM

I should mention in passing... that's actually one thing I don't like about Ardour, that the sends don't directly show the destination. In larger projects it's pretty obvious that not doing that could get visually confusing.

Typically sends would show the name of the destination tracks or busses right on them so you'd always know - just by looking at them - where they're going.

As to the track nesting in Ardour / Mixbus, I only mix stems in it so I cannot attest to the relative latency compensation and all that when you nest a lot of tracks like that. No clue. I assume it's all compensated for or it would be kinda broken.

iMacCartney 1st June 2013 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tui (Post 9092685)
Mixbus, last I tried with my Mac Pro, was buggy. It didn't sound special, and Jack, which does the audio routing, was a CPU hog. I'd save the cash.

Thanks Tui. Better wait until they solve the issues.

Trailmix 1st June 2013 09:51 PM

MIXBuss 2.3 has been very tempting. I have since first hearing about the Harrison approach thought, why hasn't anyone done this before. But, it still sounds too buggy once you start using outside plugins. Even at $40 I can't invest the time to figure what out of 100 plus plugins are stable in the Mac version. Isn't the idea of console mixing to patch in your favorite outboard gear when necessary?
I just looked at the link above, for plugins that don't work.
Is there a definitive list of compatible plugs with MIXBuss from Harrison???
I think that alone would help increase sales. $40 is a screaming deal for some that does what it advertises. But a day lost in tech hell, means I lose money, or cost me ten fold, when I can stay with Pro Tools HD.

Any other Mac adopters loving MIXBUSS 2.3???

Ben,
The videos look great, I am a console guy, and feel like this would simplify my preferred workflow, but if I can't install it and go to work, I should skip it for now. Would love some reassurance.

Best

Kelley

Lawrence 1st June 2013 10:10 PM

I tend to think - and mmv on this as usual, opinions do vary - most people using it probably aren't really all that concerned with plugin compatibility. They pretty much buy it just to use Harrison's DSP ... which is pretty nice imo.

Export stems from your fav DAW, load them into Mixbus, mix with their DSP. That's at least what most people I've talked to seem to be doing. As long as you can get your favorite reverb and delay plugs loaded you're good to go I suppose.

If you're actually not going to be using the Harrison Comps and EQ's and Saturation, it's almost a pointless exercise... mixing in it ... unless you just happen to like mixing in Ardour... which I personally don't so much ... except for the Harrison DSP.

At $40, it's pretty close to a no-brainer.

OMU 1st June 2013 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IIRs (Post 9092167)
that still leaves many other things that I can do in Reaper (or "any other professional DAW") that I could not do in Mixbus.

Like... freeze abduction

analogexplosions 1st June 2013 10:34 PM

I try to mix in Mixbus as much as possible.

I've tried doing a quick rough mix in Mixbus and then doing a full mix in Pro Tools and compare the two. Every time I've experimented with this, the rough mix from Mixbus will sound more like I want it to sound.

Part of that, I know, is the workflow.

Every other DAW is so visual. Parametric eq's with analyzers, beautiful gui's for plugins, etc.

With Mixbus, I'm just looking at a shit-ton of knobs and start mixing with my ears again. It feels like I'm more in-tune with my mix, and less like I'm performing open heart surgery on a song that probably means a lot to someone.

GIM Productions 1st June 2013 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawrence (Post 9093059)
Export stems from your fav DAW, load them into Mixbus, mix with their DSP. That's at least what most people I've talked to seem to be doing. As long as you can get your favorite reverb and delay plugs loaded you're good to go I suppose.

Amen kfhkh

IIRs 1st June 2013 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawrence (Post 9092758)
Yes. I own Mixbus, and yes I am 100% certain because I actually did it in v 2.2 before I replied because I wanted to be certain, and not speculate.

Great, you've reassured me on that point at least. Though I do wonder: is that routing accomplished using some of a limited number of sends that could otherwise be used for reverbs etc? In Reaper I would simply use track folders of course. I only mention that because it seems to annoy you! :D

Your screenshot did highlight another issue for me however: just 3 bands of EQ with no Q controls? Seriously? I won't be giving up Pro-Q for that.

So it really is just the dynamics and saturation that interest me. I wish I could get them in a plugin!

analogexplosions 1st June 2013 10:59 PM

[QUOTE=IIRs;9093151
Your screenshot did highlight another issue for me however: just 3 bands of EQ with no Q controls? Seriously? I won't be giving up Pro-Q for that.
/QUOTE]

This is exactly WHY I love mixbus. It will blow your mind how much you could do with 3 bands and a HPF.

Also, the EQ's are adaptive q.

IIRs 1st June 2013 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogexplosions (Post 9093169)
This is exactly WHY I love mixbus. It will blow your mind how much you could do with 3 bands and a HPF.

Also, the EQ's are adaptive q.

I have 20 years of live engineering under my belt, so I am we'll used to mixing with just the EQ on the board, good or bad, and I know what's possible and what isn't. Even in a live context, I would feel short changed with any less than 4 bands!

Lawrence 1st June 2013 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IIRs (Post 9093151)
Great, you've reassured me on that point at least. Though I do wonder: is that routing accomplished using some of a limited number of sends that could otherwise be used for reverbs etc? In Reaper I would simply use track folders of course. I only mention that because it seems to annoy you! :D

Your screenshot did highlight another issue for me however: just 3 bands of EQ with no Q controls? Seriously? I won't be giving up Pro-Q for that.

So it really is just the dynamics and saturation that interest me. I wish I could get them in a plugin!

Lol. :) It doesn't annoy me in the least. :)

Both of my two main daws (Reaper being one) have folders that can also be busses, so that is also not special to me, but I do like it very much nonetheless. Especially in the other case where the folder / bus isn't forced to one static position like in Reaper, and you can group edit all the child tracks right on the closed folder track lane, and all of the automation from all the child tracks can be edited on the folder track lane, and you can see each individual clip, and all of the data, on the closed folder lane.

See? The daw contest stuff gets old very quickly, especially when features being kinda bragged about aren't even best case examples. :)

As to the number of sends, as far as I know they're unlimited. I'm sure it's data sheet spells all that stuff out one way or another on the web page though. From the product page ...

Quote:

Unlimited stereo or mono input channels, each with unlimited plugins, sends, and hardware inserts. (limited only by CPU speed)
Re: The EQ bands, it's a little surprising (no offense intended) that my graphic was the first you've seen of that? I'd think if you were actually somewhat interested in the product you'd have seen many screenshots of it on the product page and elsewhere before now and would have already seen the EQ bands multiple times already. :) Your comment above suggests that was a surprise to you... seeing it in my posted graphic.

You seem to be involved in a discussion about a product that you've never even looked at closely, read info about, watched videos on?

http://www.harrisonconsoles.com/mixbus/website/

At any rate, I think the Q shapes automatically based on the boost. Bigger boost, smaller bandwidth and vice versa. Obviously you can still insert EQ plugins if you need more.

Hope that helps a little bit anyway.

Let Harrison do their thing. They're actually not competing with Reaper. They make megabuck consoles so they don't need to win the software DAW war. :)

Best regards my friend.

P.S. Just for the record, I am actually not a fan of Ardour. If not for the Harrison stuff I probably wouldn't (actually didn't) even touch it.

analogexplosions 1st June 2013 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IIRs (Post 9093193)
I have 20 years of live engineering under my belt, so I am we'll used to mixing with just the EQ on the board, good or bad, and I know what's possible and what isn't. Even in a live context, I would feel short changed with any less than 4 bands!

Not doubting anyone's abilities at all! I'm just saying it works for me and the workflow is a big part of why I like it.

bleeper4 2nd June 2013 03:26 AM

Would anyone be kind enough to post an audio sample? Like a stem mix through a regular DAW vs. the same stems through mixbus's channels/master tape saturation...
I'm poor and mixing is not my day job, so any money spent on audio has to be worth it! Thanks!

MustacheVerra 2nd June 2013 03:52 AM

As far as a controller all Mixbus really need is something like the CMC AI from Steinberg IMO. Just point your mouse on a knob/fader etc.. That alone should increase workflow a lot. Plus Harrison would make additional $ from the hardware... I guess every DAW should/will have this in the future. Seems like a no brainer to me.

CMC AI controller from Steinberg - YouTube

Anybody else would like to see dual panner like protools? Not a deal breaker for me but it would be nice as oppose to loadings a plugin for that. I don't know...


Anyway, i like this joint effort of free open source software like Ardour and Harrison's expertise a lot. Result seems pretty great to me and it's really cheap. At $39 I'm in for sure.

scruffydog 2nd June 2013 04:17 AM

I can hardly be bothered to upgrade..strange.

Tried it enthusiastically.....just pissed me off.

It's no good just looking good....i don't get why they bother?

Atak 2nd June 2013 04:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MustacheVerra (Post 9093660)
As far as a controller all Mixbus really need is something like the CMC AI from Steinberg IMO. Just point your mouse on a knob/fader etc.. That alone should increase workflow a lot. Plus Harrison would make additional $ from the hardware... I guess every DAW should/will have this in the future. Seems like a no brainer to me.

CMC AI controller from Steinberg - YouTube

Anybody else would like to see dual panner like protools? Not a deal breaker for me but it would be nice as oppose to loadings a plugin for that. I don't know...


Anyway, i like this joint effort of free open source software like Ardour and Harrison's expertise a lot. Result seems pretty great to me and it's really cheap. At $39 I'm in for sure.

I think a dual pan like ProTool have would be great. It would make the songs sound bigger. That is key In Protools Sound the dual panner. That is one reason why some people believe Protools sounds better that other programs.

Sent from my LG-VM696

kelvyn 2nd June 2013 08:31 AM

I'm somewhat confused by Mixbus... I purchased the first version which was very unstable, then they came out with what was a relatively expensive update which should have been the 1.0 version, I bailed but have been following its progress ever since. I was hoping that at some point Mixbus would sort it's problem with bugs and incompatibilities out as I love the concept and architecture and think it could be a good alternative to Pro Tools... but with every new update there are the same negative comments with regards to stability and compatibility. Shame really!

IIRs 2nd June 2013 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawrence (Post 9093255)

See? The daw contest stuff gets old very quickly, especially when features being kinda bragged about aren't even best case examples. :)

There's only one person here playing the DAW contest, apparently in response to the merest mention of Reaper.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawrence (Post 9093255)
Re: The EQ bands, it's a little surprising (no offense intended) that my graphic was the first you've seen of that? I'd think if you were actually somewhat interested in the product you'd have seen many screenshots of it on the product page and elsewhere before now and would have already seen the EQ bands multiple times already. :)

I was somewhat interested. Not any more. I already have load of plugins that I bought at "no brainer" prices then never used, no need to add a DAW to that list as well.

margusalviste 2nd June 2013 07:11 PM

Made some test recordings today using APB Dynasonics preamps through the Apogee AD16 converter and to the Mixbus. I love the way this combo sounds! Still had some issues, a few cracks, some Waves plugins didn't work although Ben said the Waves stuff should work. I'd love to get the Mixbus work properly! The workflow is just great! Of course, it never replaces Logic for creative work but I'd like to record some acoustic projects entirely with Mixbus.

NYCruiser 2nd June 2013 07:27 PM

There's a tone/vibe that Mixbus seems to be able to impart to a track. Can be very interesting on certain material.

I haven't had time to do a complete mix on it yet, but I have found it interesting on a few things to just run the stereo mix thru it prior to mastering to pick up some mojo.

dmm 2nd June 2013 11:15 PM

Hey Harrison,
Sell a 16 or 24 bus version upgrade. Call it Mixbus XL Charge more $ for that version. The way that you have it laid out is so fast and simple. The system for bussing that Ardour has come up with convoluted, confusing and counter intuitive.The 8 Mixbus styled busses get used up quick.Not doable if you need various delays,verbs fx etc. This rig sounds leaps and bounds better than Tools.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:59 AM.

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.