The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
MIXING ROCK IN THE BOX VS SSL
Old 16th February 2007
  #181
Quote:
Originally Posted by raal View Post
you definitely have Thrill but my point was, center section and all, some very nice stuff has been done on G+s, and there are some people that do prefer a stock G+ to a K, so imho it basically boils down to what method one prefers, now more than ever. BTW great post. or is it that you're reading my mind?
Add me to that list and the reason i brought it up is that the AWS monitoring section has almost nothing in it. The G+ monitoring section while improved(no caps in it i believe) is still a 4K monitoring section. If you ever pulled on out you'd see what i mean.

Quote:
Originally Posted by raal View Post


Icon would take care of that part no problem.
Not really. I've checked it out and its defintely setup for a one man show. Kinda like the Euphonix is. Its intimidating for a non user...but not in the way an SSL console is. Also i and lots of producers i know prefer the cut/solo buttons of an SSL. It just feels like music is going through it. Maybe its just the feel of sitting behind an SSL. It invites you to come sit down and navigate the music in a different way than an Icon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by raal View Post

i've come to grips with the fact that the digi 888 days with real crappy plugs are gone, but i still love my outboard, so as they say in india: 'what to do?'
And i am definitely not there with you on the plugs. I still have a trepidation when using EQ plugs...to me its a last resort kinda thing. Even for a basic HP filter it still sounds better to me with out them to the point where i've been collecting Neve and other designers HP filters just to use for HP duties. Problem is i quickly run out of analog I/O's on my interfaces and i will not buy another Digi 192 interface until i figure out what i want to do.
Old 16th February 2007
  #182
Lives for gear
 
picksail's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor View Post
And i am definitely not there with you on the plugs. I still have trepedation when using EQ plugs...to me its a last resort kinda thing. Even for a basic HP filter it still sounds better to me with out them to the point where i've been collecting Neve and other designers HP filters just to use for HP duties. Problem is i quickly run out of analog I/O's on my interfaces and i will not buy another Digi 192 interface until i figure out what i want to do.
Thrill,

You gotta check out the Massenburg EQ plug-in. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. It dwarfs every other EQ plug out there.

Since using it, I rarely ever reach for anything else, unless I really want to add that top-end graininess.

The more I use the MDW plug-in the fewer bands I find are necessary. The 3-band works quite well, where with others, I would require more.

There is something strangely analog about that plug-in. It's almost like grabbing a knob and turning it. I've noticed I use much wider Qs on the bands and just crank it!!! It is not strident at the top.

As for compressors, the UA 1176/LA2A plugs are really very cool.

I'm only mentioning this in the event that you see yourself slowly transitioning into the MITB world.
Old 16th February 2007
  #183
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor View Post
Not really. I've checked it out and its defintely setup for a one man show. Kinda like the Euphonix is. Its intimidating for a non user...but not in the way an SSL console is.
i'm no digi spokesman but you can duplicate channels til you're blue in the face. how many operators do you want, where on the board do you want them, with control of what functions on what channels?

Quote:
Also i and lots of producers i know prefer the cut/solo buttons of an SSL. It just feels like music is going through it. Maybe its just the feel of sitting behind an SSL. It invites you to come sit down and navigate the music in a different way than an Icon.
that's a different story. IMO Icon copied the size of SSLs (the encoders are miles apart for no other reason i can think of, than to make the board big), but they could've worked alot more on looks and feel AFAIC. those purple ronald mcdonald's feet...

Quote:
Problem is i quickly run out of analog I/O's on my interfaces and i will not buy another Digi 192 interface until i figure out what i want to do.
same here but while you decide a good external clock helps - alot.
Old 16th February 2007
  #184
Quote:
Originally Posted by picksail View Post
Thrill,

You gotta check out the Massenburg EQ plug-in. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. It dwarfs every other EQ plug out there.
I have it and the Sony version of it.

I still hear the same thing. It just something that happens. And i'll close my eyes and toggle back and forth endlessly to not fool myself and i almost always choose with out.

But this is for an HP filter. For other duties like notching stuff they are both useful.

For EQing synths though nothing to me ears yet beats an analog EQ.
Old 16th February 2007
  #185
Quote:
Originally Posted by raal View Post
i'm no digi spokesman but you can duplicate channels til you're blue in the face. how many operators do you want, where on the board do you want them with control of what functions?
When you are working with producers that aren't tech savvy and are old school guys they don't want to hear jargon. They just want to know where the cut & solo buttons are for the tracks. They want to do things on the fly without thinking because it kills their flow. We all know in PT its pretty simple. But to them it doesn't translate as quickly that's all.
Old 16th February 2007
  #186
Lives for gear
 
Tony Shepperd's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Halo View Post
90% of all the arguments are ones coming from the above title perspective...what you have and how you're justifying it.

-a
How about this Andrews...
If I were given a choice to mix ITB or to mix on a SSL console, I would choose to mix ITB.
If I were given a choice to mix ITB or to mix on a Neve console, I would choose to mix ITB.

I could afford to buy an SSL or a Neve.
Actually, with the way those consoles have dropped in price, practically anyone who has been in business could.
I CHOOSE not to.

I don't want to go back to the days of moving up and down on a console, in and out of the sweet spot.
Having a tech on call 24 hours a day. Going to an EQ and finding out the pots are going bad.
Finding that the recall "didn't quite" come back like it was supposed to and I lost another day on a song.
Having to mult a track because every other word needs a different EQ setting.

I have taken the time over the past 6 years to develop my sound around mixing in the box.
During the past 6 years I constantly debated whether or not I was missing something in my mixes.
I would talk to my clients and get feedback from them about the direction of the sonics of each mix.
Whether or not THEY were missing something.

I am averaging about 200 to 250 mixes a year.
To my knowledge, I have not lost one mix gig because I mix ITB.

Now, to honest I never liked SSL's.
I went from my Trident Series 65 in 1986 to a Neve 8232 in 1987 to the Neve VR series to Euphonix to ITB.

I don't know how more plainly someone can say this over and over again.
There are people doing it everyday. They have made the switch to ITB.
Yes, it was difficult at first, but like any other true art form, the more you practice it, the better you get at it.
Old 16th February 2007
  #187
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor View Post
When you are working with producers that aren't tech savvy and are old school guys they don't want to hear jargon. They just want to know where the cut & solo buttons are for the tracks.
on an Icon just put them wherever they want.

Quote:
They want to do things on the fly without thinking because it kills their flow. We all know in PT its pretty simple. But to them it doesn't translate as quickly that's all.
bottom line is if you want a big console with dedicated pots or encoders per channel so some guy can feel a bit more comfy (if i understood correctly), you're going to have to pay a huge price and have a huge space, besides considering other practical and ergonomic factors. i can't see a 32 fader Icon not working for an engineer + 1 hands on producer guy but that's just me.

anyway i'm still quite undecided so what the hell am i defending?
Old 16th February 2007
  #188
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Shepperd View Post
I went from my Trident Series 65 in 1986 to a Neve 8232 in 1987 to the Neve VR series to Euphonix to ITB.
whoa. my 1st studio board was a trident 80B, 2nd was a V with FF, then a little trident in the home rig, and the last homeboard before procontrol was a CS2000. insert twilight zone music here.
Old 16th February 2007
  #189
Lives for gear
 
picksail's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Shepperd View Post
How about this Andrews...
If I were given a choice to mix ITB or to mix on a SSL console, I would choose to mix ITB.
If I were given a choice to mix ITB or to mix on a Neve console, I would choose to mix ITB.

I could afford to buy an SSL or a Neve.
Actually, with the way those consoles have dropped in price, practically anyone who has been in business could.
I CHOOSE not to.

I don't want to go back to the days of moving up and down on a console, in and out of the sweet spot.
Having a tech on call 24 hours a day. Going to an EQ and finding out the pots are going bad.
Finding that the recall "didn't quite" come back like it was supposed to and I lost another day on a song.
Having to mult a track because every other word needs a different EQ setting.

I have taken the time over the past 6 years to develop my sound around mixing in the box.
During the past 6 years I constantly debated whether or not I was missing something in my mixes.
I would talk to my clients and get feedback from them about the direction of the sonics of each mix.
Whether or not THEY were missing something.

I am averaging about 200 to 250 mixes a year.
To my knowledge, I have not lost one mix gig because I mix ITB.

Now, to honest I never liked SSL's.
I went from my Trident Series 65 in 1986 to a Neve 8232 in 1987 to the Neve VR series to Euphonix to ITB.

I don't know how more plainly someone can say this over and over again.
There are people doing it everyday. They have made the switch to ITB.
Yes, it was difficult at first, but like any other true art form, the more you practice it, the better you get at it.
Good points Tony.

I'm not going to agree with you anymore. I just sound redundant. heh heh

There are at least five of us on this board who are major proponents of MITB.

It works for us. It's doubtful that anyone is going is going to understand unless they are doing it themselves.

We are the black sheep...for now.

I plan on coming over the hill next week. Speak soon.
Old 16th February 2007
  #190
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by picksail View Post
There are at least five of us on this board who are major proponents of MITB.
i really don't see what the fuss is. i'm fascinated by seeing different peoples' techniques on different stuff. that's why i love this place.

dr.jekyll
Old 16th February 2007
  #191
Lives for gear
 
picksail's Avatar
 

Me neither. I can't understand the fuss at all.
Old 16th February 2007
  #192
Registered User
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Shepperd View Post
How about this Andrews...
If I were given a choice to mix ITB or to mix on a SSL console, I would choose to mix ITB.
If I were given a choice to mix ITB or to mix on a Neve console, I would choose to mix ITB.

I could afford to buy an SSL or a Neve.
Actually, with the way those consoles have dropped in price, practically anyone who has been in business could.
I CHOOSE not to.

I don't want to go back to the days of moving up and down on a console, in and out of the sweet spot.
Having a tech on call 24 hours a day. Going to an EQ and finding out the pots are going bad.
Finding that the recall "didn't quite" come back like it was supposed to and I lost another day on a song.
Having to mult a track because every other word needs a different EQ setting.

I have taken the time over the past 6 years to develop my sound around mixing in the box.
During the past 6 years I constantly debated whether or not I was missing something in my mixes.
I would talk to my clients and get feedback from them about the direction of the sonics of each mix.
Whether or not THEY were missing something.

I am averaging about 200 to 250 mixes a year.
To my knowledge, I have not lost one mix gig because I mix ITB.

Now, to honest I never liked SSL's.
I went from my Trident Series 65 in 1986 to a Neve 8232 in 1987 to the Neve VR series to Euphonix to ITB.

I don't know how more plainly someone can say this over and over again.
There are people doing it everyday. They have made the switch to ITB.
Yes, it was difficult at first, but like any other true art form, the more you practice it, the better you get at it.
Wait uhhhh minute Tony.... aren't you looking into the Tonelux deally? heh
Old 16th February 2007
  #193
Lives for gear
 
Tony Shepperd's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdiggy View Post
Wait uhhhh minute Tony.... aren't you looking into the Tonelux deally? heh

Uh... Ya, and I still MITB!
It's not an either or folks. It's what works.

The style and direction of the song dictates whether or not I will sum my ITB mix to a Tonelux.
Regardless or whether or not it gets summed to a Tonelux, it is STILL mixed ITB.
Old 16th February 2007
  #194
Registered User
 

Easy guy.... just funning with ya! heh
Old 16th February 2007
  #195
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Shepperd View Post
Uh... Ya, and I still MITB!
It's not an either or folks. It's what works.

The style and direction of the song dictates whether or not I will sum my ITB mix to a Tonelux.
Regardless or whether or not it gets summed to a Tonelux, it is STILL mixed ITB.

hang on - is the tonelux doing SOME summing? (when you use it)

then it is a hybrid

just saying....



Old 16th February 2007
  #196
Lives for gear
 
Tony Shepperd's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixerguy View Post
hang on - is the tonelux doing SOME summing? (when you use it)

then it is a hybrid

just saying....



Guys, were not going down this road.
Call it what you like, call it a hybrid if you wish.

But at the end of the day... write the check out to Tony Shepperd.
Old 16th February 2007
  #197
Quote:
Originally Posted by raal View Post

bottom line is if you want a big console with dedicated pots or encoders per channel so some guy can feel a bit more comfy (if i understood correctly), you're going to have to pay a huge price and have a huge space, besides considering other practical and ergonomic factors. i can't see a 32 fader Icon not working for an engineer + 1 hands on producer guy but that's just me.

I hear you and this is where i am at. To me its just not financially solvent anymore to invest on the first but there are guys who still want it an are used this way of working. If it were me just working alone i probably wouldn't care(like a NYC cockroach i can get accustomed to anything).

Maybe i can just wait for the older guard to die out.
(Even though to me they make the coolest music and are the most fun to work with. I also always learn something about the history of popular music that i just wasn't around to experience).

Quote:
Originally Posted by raal View Post

anyway i'm still quite undecided so what the hell am i defending?
Yeah what's up with that?

It looks like there is an Icon in your future.
Old 16th February 2007
  #198
Moderator
 
TonyBelmont's Avatar
 

Wow, 200 posts of this stuff....
Old 16th February 2007
  #199
Registered User
 

Can we say "exercise in futility"?. That's 202.

Last edited by Bdiggy; 16th February 2007 at 04:44 AM.. Reason: spellin
Old 16th February 2007
  #200
Lives for gear
 
Dirty Halo's Avatar
 

Wow.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Shepperd View Post
How about this Andrews...
If I were given a choice to mix ITB or to mix on a SSL console, I would choose to mix ITB.
If I were given a choice to mix ITB or to mix on a Neve console, I would choose to mix ITB.

I could afford to buy an SSL or a Neve.
Actually, with the way those consoles have dropped in price, practically anyone who has been in business could.
I CHOOSE not to.

I don't want to go back to the days of moving up and down on a console, in and out of the sweet spot.
Having a tech on call 24 hours a day. Going to an EQ and finding out the pots are going bad.
Finding that the recall "didn't quite" come back like it was supposed to and I lost another day on a song.
Having to mult a track because every other word needs a different EQ setting.

I have taken the time over the past 6 years to develop my sound around mixing in the box.
During the past 6 years I constantly debated whether or not I was missing something in my mixes.
I would talk to my clients and get feedback from them about the direction of the sonics of each mix.
Whether or not THEY were missing something.

I am averaging about 200 to 250 mixes a year.
To my knowledge, I have not lost one mix gig because I mix ITB.

Now, to honest I never liked SSL's.
I went from my Trident Series 65 in 1986 to a Neve 8232 in 1987 to the Neve VR series to Euphonix to ITB.

I don't know how more plainly someone can say this over and over again.
There are people doing it everyday. They have made the switch to ITB.
Yes, it was difficult at first, but like any other true art form, the more you practice it, the better you get at it.
Looks like I upset ya. Didn't mean to do that. The funy thing is, I mix ITB too...that is if we're going by the definition of still using hardware, summing with hardware, etc.

I happen to want to "sum" using a modified SSL, but that's neither here nor there, Tonelux, Neve, SSL, etc.

I'm not moving up and down a console or doing ANY of the things you seem to be talking about either... I simply said, people "seem" to promote and justify what they have.

That's great you can afford pretty much anything. I bet that's not the majority of people though. I can pretty much afford whatever I choose to work on as well, doesn't make me much more qualified to answer THE question though...other than what I like and why.

Sorry for stepping on any toes.

-andrews

P.S. Congrats to those in the 10%! Now, go take your Effexor... kidding.
Old 16th February 2007
  #201
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyBelmont View Post
Wow, 200 posts of this stuff....
I just see it as a bunch of hacks knocking back a few after a long day of sessions at the local pub. As always a spirited debate can start. Once in a while one or more persons has more to drink than others and it gets heated(but its usually over a chick).LOL

In the end though we calm down because we are all pals going after the same thing.thumbsup
Old 16th February 2007
  #202
Lives for gear
 
Dirty Halo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor View Post
I just see it as a bunch of hacks knocking back a few after a long day of sessions at the local pub. As always a spirited debate can start. Once in a while one or more persons has more to drink than others and it gets heated(but its usually over a chick).LOL

In the end though we calm down because we are all pals going after the same thing.thumbsup
Amen, sister.

-andrews
Old 16th February 2007
  #203
Deleted bd1be4f
Guest
As the esteemed Mr. Shipley has demonstrated (and reinforced with his post in this thread), the question of whether great rock mixes can be done without a large format analog console has been answered, and the answer is yes. End of story IMO.
Old 16th February 2007
  #204
Gear Nut
 

Cancer sucks

Last edited by Musikvilla; 18th December 2009 at 04:14 PM.. Reason: no I don't have it
Old 16th February 2007
  #205
Quote:
Originally Posted by delcosmos View Post
And the last ROCK record made by Mr. Killen mixed in the box without any hardware is...??
You know..... I let this go for a while now because it really kind of torqued me off when I first read it.... I am a little less torqued now....

lol heh

This is really disrespectful of a cat who 1) has more talent than almost all of us on this forum combined and 2) is taking time out of his life to hang out with us.

Look man, so you are saying that a guy with that kind of talent and with that resume doesn't know good sound?

He can't make a rock mix sound good ITB?

Sorry, willing to bet he could mix rings ITB around you and me on whatever you want to bring to the party.

He flat out said that he does not care, ITB, OTB doesn't matter. The guy has talent and he knows good sound and he knows bad sound. If he thought ITB sounded bad he would not use it. At this point in his career I think he could turn down gigs if he was worried about lowering his standards by mixing ITB..... obviously he feels that is not the case.

Oh and WTF? So now we are pre qualifying the OTB argument by saying that other styles might work but oh no... not a ROCK mix. Give me a F'in break.
Old 16th February 2007
  #206
Lives for gear
 
Tony Shepperd's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor View Post
I just see it as a bunch of hacks knocking back a few after a long day of sessions at the local pub. As always a spirited debate can start. Once in a while one or more persons has more to drink than others and it gets heated(but its usually over a chick).LOL

In the end though we calm down because we are all pals going after the same thing.thumbsup

Excellent analogy. LOL

I am not upset, Andrews. The reason I called you was to tell you I do have a choice and I choose ITB.

It just seems that too many of us speak in absolutes of what will or will not work. The paradigm has shifted. Maybe not for everyone but for enough of us to make a difference.
If we are all working professionals, we can work in our chosen formats and try and help each other out. If someone wants to make the switch to ITB, then (to me) that what this and the other forums should be about. Not clobbering each other about absolutes.

Now I have been MITB for some time now and I love the sound I am getting, but I am always open to getting better at what I do.
When I was at the GS NAMM party I got a chance to speak at length with Mike Shipley. It was the same week I had the Tonelux over my studio.
I told Mike I didn't hear a huge difference when I broke out the mix into the stereo of the Tonelux.
Mike said to me, go back and break out 8 channels of the Tonelux and then listen. He and Jules said, you will hear a larger difference. So I gave it a shot. I'm glad I did.

Now for some of the music I mix, that will be my new MO. He could have blown it off and said whatever,
but instead of being combative he just gave me his insight about how he thought there would be a better use of the summing unit. He was right.


My point is we have got to stop the bickering back and forth. Of course I know within a week of writing this someone will post another inane thread along the same lines.
Then someone will make another outrageous statement and the flame wars begin...

Gentlmen, we are better than this.
Old 16th February 2007
  #207
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Shepperd View Post
Guys, were not going down this road.
Call it what you like, call it a hybrid if you wish....... (snip)....
I just want to call an apple an apple, and a pear a pear. Both wonderful, yet different.



or a fruit salad.... just that.

heh
Old 16th February 2007
  #208
(this thread is like watching a car crash in slow motion, you know what is coming but somehow you just can't look away from the impending carnage)

Quote:
Originally Posted by shipshape View Post
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.
Thank you for that.

thumbsup thumbsup

To the rest...

It's fine if you want to mix on a console, ITB or with your fingers up your arse. Use what the f*ck you want to use but don't assume that when something doesn't work for you it CAN'T work for someone else. That is foolish and pretty self centered isn't it?

Oh and for the record, I mix ITB, hybrid, OTB or whatever I can get my hands on.
Old 16th February 2007
  #209
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor View Post
Its funny after all this no one has really answered the question.

(Maybe the question should be can anybody beat AW,CLA or TLA at mixing rock period).heh
With Bob Ludwig Mastering I bet you I could beat them.
Old 16th February 2007
  #210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musikvilla View Post
With Bob Ludwig Mastering I bet you I could match them.
Ted J,Big Bass Gardner and Vlado Meller do alot of the masters for these guys.
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