New gear + bypassing Pro Control monitor section has changed bass levels on my mixes

[Jules]

OK

I have made a few changes at my studio

I am trying a Fulcrom device instead of my Dangerous 2 Bus

And as I promised myself for a while now, I have routed directly to my ADAM speakers from my mix D/A (BenchmarkDAC-1) bypassing the Pro Control's own monitor signal path..

The result has been the mixes leaving the studio have WAY more bass guitar than before.. a bit too much really..

Odd thing is, it's JUST the bass that is off balance..

[tommyd]

Jules,
I have a Control24 / DAC-1 combo and do the same as well. DAC-1 straight to the monitors using the DAC-1's volume control. WAY better than the monitor section on the C24.
TommyD

[RKrizman]

Originally posted by Jules

The result has been the mixes leaving the studio have WAY more bass guitar than before.. a bit too much really..

Odd thing is, it's JUST the bass that is off balance..

[/B]

Two possibilities. Either the bass player was playing louder, or everything else is too soft.

-R

[Waylon]

Are you saying that the proControl had a problem - the mixes you did on the pro control sound liek they have too much bass now

or

that the DAC1 has a problem - when you mix like you did (and it used to translate well ) it now has a disproportinate amount of Bass, telling us that the DAC1 is rolling off the bottom end in the monitor path?

[Jules]

I am saying that the new set up has me adding too much bass in the mix.

I DO believe we are hearing far more bass at the console position than we did before (but don't realize it, or aren't yet tuned into it somehow)

We used to have to check bass by sitting at the back on the couch, now low traveling deep sub notes seem to be more audible..

I am only doing this monitor section bypass trick while mixing... I think I will get feedback howl using the talkback while in overdub mode..

I am going to have to think what I want to do with my set up, the mixes have sounded GREAT, I just need to get the bass levels right - kick NEEDS to be the king (in my material) or at least, not SWAMPED by the bass..

I had a bass boom complaint a while back, perhaps I can detect it better now with this direct hook up. It's a small room I am in, but it is well bass trapped.

Need to play some CD's & work I know...

Time to get out the Ecstasy album by Lou Reed - Fernando's 5 string bass playing is a great benchmark (no pun intended) + it was recorded at Sear Sound NYC!

Help me wise ones!

I think this is all about re-learning my monitors...

Question for Pro Control owners, I WILL get feedback howl if I use the talkback in this configuration wont I? (monitors NOT dimming when talkback is activated...?????)

Folks that have bypasssed the PC or control 24 monitor section - what was the improvement like? Did you have to re learn your monitors?

[juniorhifikit]

Maybe upgrade to a hi-fi/more functional monitor section (Coleman Audio perhaps) and live with it/learn it. No sense learning something that isn't functional/permanent (with your talk-back problem).

[Jules]

Yes....

But digging the purity, hard to go back once you have tasted the real stuff!

[Shaman]

Originally posted by Jules
Folks that have bypasssed the PC or control 24 monitor section - what was the improvement like? Did you have to re learn your monitors?

The improvement in clarity and depth between the Avocet test device, which I once had and my former 192 DAC / Control 24 monitor section was HUGE .
I had the feeling it didn´t change the basic character of my (Quested 32/08 and Klein & Hummel O 110) speakers but really brought out the best qualities of both.
I also had the impression, mixes -done through it translated very well on other systems.
The fine TALKBACK sound in the musicians headphones was also
a big improvement compared to my C-24.

I think the DAC 1( which sounds great) in tandem with the cheap built in talkback of PC or C-24 is really PITA. You´ll always have problems with feedback, hum and all kinds of nasty artifacts.

Buy a m 906 or an Avocet (if you can live with the lack of digital out, 5.1 and relay clicking...) and you´ll be happy with both, the excellent conversion AND the nice talkback / CUE / metering integration.

If you´re a taxi driver - it´s worth to invest in a nice designer steering wheel...

I just ordered my (Grace m 906) steering wheel and will post about it as soon as I have mixed with it.


To be able to compare ITB and summing box mixes you definetly need a high end monitor controller, on which you can level match & switch between the digital ITB ouput and the analog summing box output.

Open a PT session -->copy each track and separate all tracks into two mix groups-->mix first group with plugins and send them to your internal 2buss-->mix second group with plugins and send your single outputs through summing box.
Connect both outputs to your (m906, Avocet...) monitor controller and switch between them




Another thought Jules:
Perhaps the API preamps, you´re using for the folcrom make up gain add the bass

[David Kulka]

I doubt that the new setup is "adding bass" to the mix, unless something is horribly miswired. Any bass that was added, was probably the result of a human decision.

If the mixes leaving your studio are heavier in bass than was expected, it's probably because something in the current monitor system (monitor section of mix hardware, amps, speakers, room EQ if any, or acoustics of the room itself) is bass shy. This would cause you or other engineers to mix with too much bass.

For some reason, "engineers" often misunderstand and get this backwards.

[Steffmo]

I'd have to agree with David. The change directly affects the monitor path, the one of the most basic of monitoring issues has been changed.

Unless you are saying that the SAME mix printed again now has more bass. But I can't see how that could be the case.

[Jules]

Just taking time to get used to it!!!!

I am digging it now...We feel we are getting a different bass perspective at the console listening position where as in the past we used to check sub bass levels by sitting on the back couch (small CR room)

I am confident this a good development...



Just panicing a little!!

[hethaerto]

Hey Jules,
Just do like I do, and roll off the bottom end from 200Hz and call it a day.
Bass is going out of style anyway.
Allen

[RKrizman]

Originally posted by Shaman

Another thought Jules:
Perhaps the API preamps, you´re using for the folcrom make up gain add the bass [/B]

Ah, bingo. My API's are the only preamps I don't run my synths through, because I think it makes them sound boomy.

Try something cleaner with the Folcrum.

-R

[quadwould]

Jules, have you tried listening to the SPL MTC 2381

it's got a pretty nice feature set.

you could take the O/P off the DAC1 into the MTC and carry on as usual. using the MTC as the replacement for the whole o fthe PC monitor section.

Its very very clean, and worth a listen.

check with Niki at KMR i know he has the Surround version, maybe he has he MTC.

[Jules]

Well I am really happy with the mixes now...

I will post some up soon..

I DO need a better solution, thanks for the suggestions,

[axtrak]

The SPL Controller is great device, it was a huge improvement fpr me

[s0nguy]

Jules,

You're finally hearing what is really going on with your mix.

I tested the monitor section in my Control24 vs. straight out of the UA2192 through a NHT PVC and the difference was astounding. Going through the C24 I lost depth, cllarity and punch.

I honestly dont know how pple who can afford such pieces of gear are still using Digi monitoring sections.

I still use the C24 for talkback and headphone mixes. It's OK for that.

Welcome to the other side. Once you get used to what you are hearing since the switch it'll be easier to dial in that "sound" you want.

-S0nguy

[slolrnr]

Sorry for sidetracking the disscusion.

I've been reading on these boards as well as others lately about people bypassing their main outs by using a DAC like Mytec, Apogee, or Benchmark.

My question is, does using something like the DAC1 allow the user to hear what got lost in translation on its way to the original outs or is it hyping (coloring) the signal?

[Shaman]

Originally posted by Jules


And as I promised myself for a while now, I have routed directly to my ADAM speakers from my mix D/A (BenchmarkDAC-1) bypassing the Pro Control's own monitor signal path..

The result has been the mixes leaving the studio have WAY more bass guitar than before.. a bit too much really..

Odd thing is, it's JUST the bass that is off balance..

My 906 arrived today.
I´m having similar results like you Jules - my speakers seem to give me deeper low end.....some of my earlier mixes seem also a bit boomy through these fine converter/monitor path....strange...the m 906 seems to open up the bottom end or show it much more accurate than my earlier C-24 / 192 DAC path

[RyanR]

Originally posted by hethaerto
Hey Jules,
Just do like I do, and roll off the bottom end from 200Hz and call it a day.
Bass is going out of style anyway.
Allen

That's crazy talk! You don't listen to much hip hop, electronic, and pop, do you?

I too went from a cheap DAC to a DAC-1 and noticed the bass had more energy coming out the monitors (BM15A), causing me to lower bass volumes too much. Now that I am use to it (which wasn't hard getting used to because I love bass), I can't imagine going back to lesser quality DAC and having the bass region be so cloudy and less defined. Once I got used to the enhanced bass response, I came to appreciate it was actually more present and clear, which really helped my EQ decisions in the low end.

[Shaman]

Originally posted by RyanR
I too went from a cheap DAC to a DAC-1 ...Now that I am use to it ... I can't imagine going back to lesser quality DAC and having the bass region be so cloudy and less defined.

I couldn´t put it better......listening to some of my reference Cds
I ´m. hearing whole new details (like that high frequ. distortion on the V. Carlton CD....insane...)

Long live the m906

[musicmaniac]

Okay, so has anyone tried the Dangerous music monitor? It has a built-in mic and talkback system, dual cue sends, and the open, transparent, honest clarity that comes with the Dangerous name.
Seems like it solves both of the problems in this forum - and you dont even need to have the D2B to incorperate it into your system.

Let me know if anyone has tried it...


Ty

[Jules]

I just put up one of the mixes here

I am happy with the set up now...

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showt...threadid=26981

[hethaerto]

Originally posted by RyanR
That's crazy talk! You don't listen to much hip hop, electronic, and pop, do you?

You don't have much of a sense of humour, do you.
Allen

[Jim Williams]

You may be experiencing low end phase shift from that monitoring device. Most of this cheap stuff will measure 20-20k +-1 db but that doesn't tell the whole story. If you roll off the bass at 20 hz, you create phase lead shift beginning at 200 hz. This increases with decreasing frequency. This causes that sloppy bass you've all heard before. What is happening is the bass fundamental and it's harmonics are no longer aligned. This can cause the percieved bass response to change.

If designers use the 2 hz to 200k hz bandwidth design criteria, phase shift in the audio band is eliminated.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[NathanEldred]

Jules,

Why are you monitoring through the DAC-1 to your ADAMs instead of directly from the analog output of your Folcrom (i.e. through the makeup gain preamp outputs then to some kind of passive attenuator)? That will greatly skew your mix no matter what DAC you use. Leave the final digitization of the signal to the mastering guy. The A/D conversion combined with a DAC will do this. IMO the DAC-1 sounds really great. Greater than real life. Again, BETTER than real life. I know this isn't the popular thing to say, it's supposed to be dead on accurate, but I think it's far more pleasant than accurate. In other words what you are hearing out of the DAC-1 is sounding better than the real output signal (i.e. bigger bass, etc). Don't believe me? Compare it to your analog outputs of going out of the Folcrom. It's a hard test to do, but when I digitize A-D-A through the Lavry Blue, it's pretty darn close to what's coming off the two bus or 2 track reel.

But IMO that leads to another issue. I agree with Rick Krizman. I know you have found different, but the API on the Folcrom was at the far bottom of my list. Everything I worked for to create in the tracks themselves, frequency balances, various amounts of coloration, was changed drastically by the API. The API changed it in ways that deviated from what I tried to create in the tracks. It pushed the mids, cut the air, and attenuated the lows. It was 2-3x's more drastic in it's coloration and 'non linear' curve than tape. Where the API shines in tracking it failed miserably for the makeup gain. Just my two cents, let us know how it goes.

[lucey]

Originally posted by NathanEldred

But IMO that leads to another issue. I agree with Rick Krizman. I know you have found different, but the API on the Folcrom was at the far bottom of my list. Everything I worked for to create in the tracks themselves, frequency balances, various amounts of coloration, was changed drastically by the API. The API changed it in ways that deviated from what I tried to create in the tracks. It pushed the mids, cut the air, and attenuated the lows. It was 2-3x's more drastic in it's coloration and 'non linear' curve than tape. Where the API shines in tracking it failed miserably for the makeup gain. Just my two cents, let us know how it goes.

Have you guys tried the GTQ2 or a Phoenix w/ the Folcrum? GTQ would be my first choice.


On the low end, you were probably gaining low end distortion with the Pro Control monitor section, and thus were staying tight on the mixes at the faders. They felt right to you but were clean on the file.

Now you're used to a low end in the room and must push the lows through the DAC1 to equal the same sound in the room that your distorted monitor section was adding, and so out of the room - it's boomy.

[Jules]

I think Lucy has it down...

All the theories about what was wrong with my set up have been very interesting and I would like to thank everyone for the help.

Nathan... I have been monitoring my digital mix A/D (by listening to the D/A) ever since DAT players came out... I am on the medium budget side of the music business and piles of 1/2 inch mix tape didn't feature too often in my working life.. Being in the UK I totally missed the American ADAT craze (falls on knees in thankness) and worked allways 2" tape untill jumping to all Pro Tools in the year 2,000

So historically I have listened to my mixes via the output of these devices

Early 80's - 1/4 inch output of Ampex ATR

Mid 80's dreaded Sony F1 (yukk!)

Late 80' - mostly DAT player out put / some 1/2 Ampex ATR / Studer

90's mostly DAT / some 1/2"

Mid 90's almost ALL DAT but using Apogee D/A / AD

To date - Analog mix - Cranesong A/D - at 96k 24 bit - to Masterlink - monitored via Benchmark DAC-1

Even back when using 1/4" or 1/2" tape I would set levels by listening to the repro and driving the level to tape so that it reproduced to my satisfaction...

So I am a fan of hearing what you get from the mix MEDIUM, not hearing the mix PRIOR to the mix medium.

[NathanEldred]

Originally posted by Jules


Even back when using 1/4" or 1/2" tape I would set levels by listening to the repro and driving the level to tape so that it reproduced to my satisfaction...

That's a good idea! I'm going to do that on the next mix.

[warhead]

In my experience it is absolutely necessary to monitor at the end of the chain.

War