The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
MIXING ROCK IN THE BOX VS SSL
Old 15th February 2007
  #121
Lives for gear
 
jumpnyc's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by qubi View Post
I guess my question is, for the mid-level studio, is it justified to invest in a high end analog console (with all associated maintainance costs) or just stay purely ITB, with a solid input chain, and maybe even an analog output sum-mix solution (although that introduces more recall/consistancy) issues???
This is the question - but not the question that started this forum. I am one of those studios doing pro work - flying in and out - no way could I recall analog anything - my clients wouldn't stand for it. And the million+ would be lost on them.

But I don't mix records only. I do a lot of ads and tv and film.
Old 15th February 2007
  #122
Lives for gear
 
dokushoka's Avatar
 

This thread is so silly to me. Here's what its really about:

DAWs and digital technology promised everyone that "home studios" were now capable of hanging with the big boys. All the fancy smancey stuff is now obsolete...

But as the technology has matured, and is now expected to truly compete with the big boys, the big boys are finding problems with it while everyone is busy making excuses.

Can't handle doing recalls? Its cause your business isn't making enough to afford an assistant. Can't afford the A/C for a console? Or, can't afford a decent console? Why?

I'm not trying to piss on anyone's parade but its kind of silly to complain about not being able to afford all the serious tools and then make excuses for why you don't want them.

SSLs have, and always will be, the domain of places that are really doing heavy duty work. If you're not there, you're not there. Sorry. It sounds harsh, but its the truth, for the most part...
Old 15th February 2007
  #123
Lives for gear
 
jumpnyc's Avatar
 

seriously? I can think of 3 post houses pulling in millions that don't have SSLS - one that doesn't have any outboard. What's not serious about that kind of business.
Old 15th February 2007
  #124
Lives for gear
 
dokushoka's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jumpnyc View Post
seriously? I can think of 3 post houses pulling in millions that don't have SSLS - one that doesn't have any outboard. What's not serious about that kind of business.
Those are POST houses, not rooms for mixing rock music. I'm trying to stay on topic here.
Old 15th February 2007
  #125
Lives for gear
 
jumpnyc's Avatar
 

Sorry - you're right. I guess the point of it is - for me anyway - is that all my buddies who are making a real living have all opted for studios that can and do do it all Music, Post, VO, etc. and are all on protools with outboard.

My friends who have opted for Music only and have sunk tons of money into gear, boards, and big rooms for drums, etc. are broke. And some of them are freakin* amazing engineers.

Don't know what that means to this conversation - sorry I got off topic.

I got way off topic. Sorry.

Here - back on topic - I have never heard an AW, CLA, or TLA mix from an ITB mix.

Last edited by jumpnyc; 15th February 2007 at 04:34 AM.. Reason: content
Old 15th February 2007
  #126
Gear Maniac
 
2Low's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by delcosmos View Post
I posted that question after reading this:


I've seen MCI consoles 30' years old working this days, let's see those Icons 20 years from now.
Right
I own one for about 10 years... love the old lady
still going strong ! except for a few bad soldering points
living happily together with my protools rig
Old 15th February 2007
  #127
Lives for gear
 
dokushoka's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jumpnyc View Post
Sorry - you're right. I guess the point of it is - for me anyway - is that all my buddies who are making a real living have all opted for studios that can and do do it all Music, Post, VO, etc. and are all on protools with outboard.

My friends who have opted for Music only and have sunk tons of money into gear, boards, and big rooms for drums, etc. are broke. And some of them are freakin* amazing engineers.

Don't know what that means to this conversation - sorry I got off topic.
Well, like anything, if its not working, its not working. You have to be creative, or really, really good. That doesn't mean that an SSL is a bad investment. It just depends on who you roll with...

For me, personally, for the past several months I've been mixing (what seems like) an endless string of records ITB because I have to. I can do it and make it work to the point that my clients are happy, but I definetely hear the difference. If you don't hear the difference between a solid analog console and PT, by all means, just stay in Protools.
Old 15th February 2007
  #128
Lives for gear
 
dokushoka's Avatar
 

Quote:
Here - back on topic - I have never heard an AW, CLA, or TLA mix from an ITB mix.
The question is "why not?"
Old 15th February 2007
  #129
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jumpnyc View Post
But Pro Tools is good enough with the right outboard, taste and skill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dokushoka View Post
Which does not negate the fact that protools (or digital mixers) have a sound to them. They're just not (even with summing solutions) going to sound like a well made analog console. Period. Does that (new) sound convey rock music in a way that is compelling? That is what the discussion is about...
im not sure whether its that they have a sound or its that they dont have a sound. the reason why people like mixing on analog consoles is becuase the sound of the summing buss. its adds to the music and gives it a vibe. pro tools on the other hand doesnt add anything.
many people have different views on what is "in the box." if its digital summing using only plugins then IMO it may work for most music and may even work for most rock music. but i dont think it would compare to an analog console.
or if ITB means digital summing using analog gear well thats a little different. becuase then the only difference in sound when comparing an icon and an ssl using the same outboard gear would be the summing. bounce to disk compared to an analog summing buss.
bouncing to disk wont neccesarily make the song sound bad but a good analog summing buss would add some character and some vibe to it. of course sometimes you dont want to add any color to your mix or its too much color. which is why people have different preferences of consoles. the same reason why some people prefer summing in the digital domain.
but a good engineer should be able to make a good mix regardless of what gear or console you put infront of them. they may not get there as fast compared to using their preferred setup but it will still sound solid.
Old 15th February 2007
  #130
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dokushoka View Post
If you don't hear the difference between a solid analog console and PT, by all means, just stay in Protools.
+1
this goes for all gear not just consoles. many people ask whether they need an external clock or certain pre. most of these people dont hear a difference between an external clock or internal and are wasting their money buying one.
Old 15th February 2007
  #131
Lives for gear
 
dokushoka's Avatar
 

Quote:
im not sure whether its that they have a sound or its that they dont have a sound.
By "has a sound" I mean that I can usually spot something that was mixed digitally.

I do amateur photography in my spare time, and there is a great analogy.

I can pretty much ALWAYS spot something that was shot to digital. Even with a "vintage" lens that has "character" the images still look distinctly digital to me.

Some people ask me why I don't replace my film cameras with a digital SLR or whatever, but those are the people who can't tell the difference between film and digital, let alone the different types of film...

There are certainly applications where digital photography works great, but those are all the applications I basically don't give a **** about.

In regards to the recall thing, its just never been a big issue for me. Most mixes take me about an hour to recall manually, max. In reality, its more like 30 minutes unless its a big session.

Furthermore, I find myself getting the mix "right" (meaning approved) generally in the first series of prints when I mix on a console where as I am finding myself having to make several revisions right now while I am working ITB which totally kills the level of inspiration and objectivity which I can bring to a song.

Building a business around recalls (unless its a production/post environment) is like building a formula 1 car to not finish in first place. At some point you're just doing damage control....
Old 15th February 2007
  #132
Lives for gear
 
Skip Burrows's Avatar
 

I let my clients decide.

Hey folks I want to remind you of my experence early on this year. A Client got throught tracking drums and strings at my studio.Sorta a Pop/Rock Tune. Finished vocals at another studio. Had to go on tour for about 3 week in europe and gave me the tune to mix. I had a few days to work on it as it was just after Christmas. I mixied this tune in my Grey Room, a Big G+ with tons of mods and outboard out the wazoo. I thought it sounded pretty darn good. Now this client expects an SSL MIX. Well it was the calm before the storm and had a couple of extra days so i mixed it in my Gold Room, Our ICON room with lots of nice Outboard. I worked a bit longer than on the SSL as I was really playing around just for fun. When Chris, My client came back in town I gave him a CD of both mixes and said" Pick the one you like the best". To my supprise he picked the ICON mix. Chris said "It just sounded more NOW,More open" I thought both mixes sounded good but hey the client made the pick. Now this may not be typical, however its showing with practice my ICON room can compare to our SSL room. I'd love to post the mixes however Chris my client said not untill the entire record is finished. Sorry. When I get some time I want to do the same little test with some "Free" tunes and ill post then so you fine folks can be the judge. Thinks for the spirited debate.
Regards Skip Burrows Chief Whatever
www.sunrisesound.com
Old 15th February 2007
  #133
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vernier View Post
I wouldn't associate an SSL with rock.
Ever heard of a band called Ministry???
Old 15th February 2007
  #134
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumpnyc View Post
Well - I guess it's up to your taste. Do you like Shipley, MB, and Dave Pensado Mixes? Does their work work for you?
Do Rick Rubin's records work for you?
does that PROVE that all analogue "works"?

Are Mike Shipley's best sounding records the ones he made on analogue or the ones he's making now?
Are Mutt Lange's new records better sounding than Back In Black?


what works is what works for YOU.



I am curious why the discussion is ITB versus SSL, why not versus a good sounding desk?
Old 15th February 2007
  #135
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
I am curious why the discussion is ITB versus SSL, why not versus a good sounding desk?
Well, i guess SSL ain't your cup of tea from your numerous posts...at least you know what does NOT work for YOU.
Old 15th February 2007
  #136
Lives for gear
 
dokushoka's Avatar
 

Quote:
I am curious why the discussion is ITB versus SSL, why not versus a good sounding desk?
HA! Cause we need another diversion to start another endless battle over!

I vote this as "post of the year."

You're handing use pearls Mr Wittman. Pearls...
Old 15th February 2007
  #137
Lives for gear
 
indie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wwittman View Post

I am curious why the discussion is ITB versus SSL, why not versus a good sounding desk?
Good point.
Old 15th February 2007
  #138
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwittman View Post
Do Rick Rubin's records work for you?
does that PROVE that all analogue "works"?
what works is what works for YOU.
...:'

delcosmos.
Old 15th February 2007
  #139
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wwittman View Post
I am curious why the discussion is ITB versus SSL, why not versus a good sounding desk?
i was thinking of this thread as ITB vs large format console. i thought we were just throwing the name SSL around because its easier to type than anything else.
theres no reason to have a ITB vs SSL thread becuase SSL isnt the end all be all. there are plenty of people who work OTB and dont like the sound of SSL.
theres plenty of SSL vs Neve discussions
Old 15th February 2007
  #140
Lives for gear
 
vernier's Avatar
Maybe what I think Tasty Wheat tasted like actually tasted like oatmeal, or tuna fish. That makes you wonder about a lot of things.
Old 15th February 2007
  #141
Captain
 
Mike Shipley's Avatar
 

Mr. Wittman , If you are judging my recent work off one Nickelback song( first mixed on an SSL then remixed on the Icon "cos it sounded and felt better,) I'm sure you have no idea of my current resume , or the records I have mixed ITB as oposed to the ones I have mixed analog in the last couple of years . I am currently mixing a high profile , very picky rock band that had a "shootout" with several of the highest profile "rock" mixers around who all mix on SSL . For some reason I got the gig , on the Icon.
Must have been a fluke, cos I keep forgeting all the experts here who say rock cant be mixed ITB.
And to compare what Mutt has done since Back in Black is plain stupid .... Yes that was an amazing record for a lot of reasons but you werent there so you dont really know too much about that record and the tricks used to get the sound. His productions are vastly different these days....( I mean in the last 30 years since that record was made.) So comparing that record to his later work and production style is also pretty silly IMHO. , I dont care for your opinion , tho I do care about my clients opinion a great deal , and they are all quite happy.
Shipshape
This has to be the lamest thread with so many closed minded people , so many "experts" with no willingness to figure how to make something new, work to their advantage.
Live and let live.
Old 15th February 2007
  #142
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Fatso View Post
im not sure whether its that they have a sound or its that they dont have a sound. the reason why people like mixing on analog consoles is becuase the sound of the summing buss. its adds to the music and gives it a vibe. pro tools on the other hand doesnt add anything.
many people have different views on what is "in the box." if its digital summing using only plugins then IMO it may work for most music and may even work for most rock music. but i dont think it would compare to an analog console.
or if ITB means digital summing using analog gear well thats a little different. because then the only difference in sound when comparing an icon and an ssl using the same outboard gear would be the summing. bounce to disk compared to an analog summing buss.
bouncing to disk wont neccesarily make the song sound bad but a good analog summing buss would add some character and some vibe to it. of course sometimes you dont want to add any color to your mix or its too much color. which is why people have different preferences of consoles. the same reason why some people prefer summing in the digital domain.
but a good engineer should be able to make a good mix regardless of what gear or console you put infront of them. they may not get there as fast compared to using their preferred setup but it will still sound solid.

Sorry Bro i gotta disagree. I like mixing on an SSL first for the sound(and yes it has one), second for the EQ's/dynamics and last for the routing. The summing buss never comes into question only if mixing a song with an incredible number of tracks with a ton of inputs hitting the console at once. On some consoles the low end will collapse when hit with every input(the sausage effect as i call it). On some when you over drive it you get a fatiguing distortion.

I've never had a problem with the PT summing buss per say. If you manage the gain staging well as you are mixing(and it takes some real thought) you can hit it with a ton inputs and it will stay intact for the most part. If i had one complaint about the PT mixer itself is its lack of a concrete sound. It always sounds a little vague or opaque(which i attribute alot to the converters as well). Not colored but not transparent either. Its just "there" and when given tracks to mix that are dull sounding or unexciting to begin with you sometimes feel at a lost on what to do because the PT mixer doesn't really add any character on top. An SSL while clean sounding in some ways just gives you an extra something. Now if this extra something is right for that given song is a choice you must make. And remember a 4000E sounds different from a 4000G which sounds different from 9000J which sounds slightly different from a 9000K.
Old 15th February 2007
  #143
Lives for gear
 
Dirty Halo's Avatar
 

SSL and hardware "Wanna-be's"

This post is really about WHAT YOU HAVE and trying to feel good about it... with all due repsect, if we weed out a majority of these posts, it comes down to those how "have" and those who "don't" (for the most part)

It's human nature to defend what you have... but let me ask you this last question:

If SSL wasn't inherently better than ITB, not to mention the best hardware, WHY in the world to most ITB plugs try to "emulate" those very same pieces?

SSL Duende? 1176 plugs, Analog emulators?

Come on people! ... if an SSL and the hardware wasn't really the desired goal, would anyone bother to emulate them?

THAT's our answer... the rest is pure justification and "convenience."

If ITB REALLY sounded as good as an SSL and a true 1176 and down the line, who wouldn't want to save a bundle and just go ITB? ? But that's just not the case.

Let's get at the heart of this debate, it's about those who "have" and those who "don't" and are trying to justify... exceptions applie, but the heart is true

Back to the topic: Can good rock be mixed ITB? Yes. Make the best with what you have. Could it be better on an SSL through real 176s, LA-2A and such? Yep.

Anyone want to disagree?

-a
Old 15th February 2007
  #144
Lives for gear
 
picksail's Avatar
 

So ultimately, what you are implying is that if you had no SSL, you'd be f**ked, while the rest of us, who don't own SSLs are just fooling ourselves.

Is that a fair interpretation?
Old 15th February 2007
  #145
Lives for gear
 
picksail's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Shepperd View Post
Faster and faster, more and more everyday.
It just never ceases to amaze me how difficult it is for some to 'see the forest for the trees'.
Old 15th February 2007
  #146
Quote:
Originally Posted by picksail View Post
It just never ceases to amaze me how difficult it is for some to 'see the forest for the trees'.
Maybe some of us not only see the forest but are in it and don't like what we see or how it feels.

The same can be said about the whole loudness wars thing. No one really likes it but we all go along with it just to get paid and put food on the table. Eventually though the bad karma of "giving in because its the norm" catches up to you .
Old 15th February 2007
  #147
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
there are lots of variables: ingredients and the chef

you can fry fish
and you can fry it in good oil, or in cheap oil

you can burn it well (blacken) or you can simply burn it badly

you can use good fish, or cheap fish

some folks prefer cod, some salmon....

different fish for different folks.

and- some folks just hate fish!



Old 15th February 2007
  #148
Lives for gear
 
picksail's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor View Post
Maybe some of us not only see the forest but are in it and don't like what we see or how it feels.

The same can be said about the whole loudness wars thing. No one really likes it but we all go along with it just to get paid and put food on the table. Eventually though the bad karma of "giving in because its the norm" catches up to you .
We all have to play devils advocate at some point.

Though that wasn't entirely what I meant from that last statement.
Old 15th February 2007
  #149
Lives for gear
 
Dirty Halo's Avatar
 

Huh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by picksail View Post
So ultimately, what you are implying is that if you had no SSL, you'd be f**ked, while the rest of us, who don't own SSLs are just fooling ourselves.

Is that a fair interpretation?
Not sure if you are responding to my post, but if so, did you read it?

(If not, my sincere apologies)

I said "could a good mix be made ITB? My answer was yes... far from "fvucked" as you put it. I simply said, given the choice, why wouldn't you choose an SSL over something that tries to emulate one?

-a
Old 15th February 2007
  #150
Lives for gear
 
picksail's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Halo View Post
Not sure if you are responding to my post, but if so, did you read it?

(If not, my sincere apologies)

I said "could a good mix be made ITB? My answer was yes... far from "fvucked" as you put it. I simply said, given the choice, why wouldn't you choose an SSL over something that tries to emulate one?

-a
Sorry. I was responding to what was written before you added that last bit to your post.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump