The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
ITB vs. console summing test Consoles
Old 2nd June 2018
  #121
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyc View Post
High quality is CPU intensive which becomes an issue with things like real time sample libraries.
Sample rate is an interesting aspect within ITB mixing in 2018. Computing power is cheap with all the work stations offered for extensive video editing, we audio people can get lots of CPU headroom for reasonable money.
Old 2nd June 2018
  #122
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by shahstlz View Post
So shouldn't a session with massive plugin use sound better at let's say 88,2 than 44,1?
In general, yes it will.
Old 3rd June 2018
  #123
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
“Lag” - please elaborate? I don’t feel I’ve experienced this at any sample rate.
Converters take a specific amount of samples to converter the signal AD or DA. Ranging from 12 to whatever depending on the converters.


The faster the clock rate, the less time is needed for the conversion.

For example My SSL alpha link requires a total of 53 samples for the round trip from AD to DA including four samples for SSL mix/soundscape to do it's thing and all of the steps between. I use a buffer setting of 128 in the DAW.

The total lag is = 128+53 samples/sample rate. At 96K that's about 1.7 ms. At 48K thats about 3.4 ms.
The faster the sample rate, the less the lag.

My math is confirmed with my ASIO reported lag from the SSL drivers. 1.7ms

I think the practical value is slightly higher.

Adding plugs to the DAW's path increases the lag when monitoring the recording signal through the DAW


I am always very attentive to the lag, because I use E-drums. The triggers on Roland brains require 3ms to do a decent job of measuring the trigger volume. The MIDI system needs about 0.7 ms to send the signal to BFD3. The output side of the converters are faster than the input. I think 23 samples for the output side. I end up with a barely acceptable 4.5 ms response time between trigger and sound. I am waiting for better triggers/trigger converters to arrive on the market to solve the problem better.

I am waiting to recieve an RME QS8 converter that only needs 12 sample for the output. Shaving a bit of that response time.
Old 3rd June 2018
  #124
Quote:
Originally Posted by elegentdrum View Post
Converters take a specific amount of samples to converter the signal AD or DA. Ranging from 12 to whatever depending on the converters.


The faster the clock rate, the less time is needed for the conversion.

For example My SSL alpha link requires a total of 53 samples for the round trip from AD to DA including four samples for SSL mix/soundscape to do it's thing and all of the steps between. I use a buffer setting of 128 in the DAW.

The total lag is = 128+53 samples/sample rate. At 96K that's about 1.7 ms. At 48K thats about 3.4 ms.
The faster the sample rate, the less the lag.

My math is confirmed with my ASIO reported lag from the SSL drivers. 1.7ms

I think the practical value is slightly higher.

Adding plugs to the DAW's path increases the lag when monitoring the recording signal through the DAW


I am always very attentive to the lag, because I use E-drums. The triggers on Roland brains require 3ms to do a decent job of measuring the trigger volume. The MIDI system needs about 0.7 ms to send the signal to BFD3. The output side of the converters are faster than the input. I think 23 samples for the output side. I end up with a barely acceptable 4.5 ms response time between trigger and sound. I am waiting for better triggers/trigger converters to arrive on the market to solve the problem better.

I am waiting to recieve an RME QS8 converter that only needs 12 sample for the output. Shaving a bit of that response time.
Ah right.

The correct terminology is “latency”, hence the confusion.

Yes, the converters add a small amount of latency. I’ve never found this to be an issue on any setup - you can’t reall hear an 8 sample discrepancy in conversion, if all your converters are operating the same.

I track either on an HDX system, or using the cue mixer of whatever interface I’m running. Both are buffer independent, so stacking plugins increasing latency doesn’t really matter (yes both hdx and UAD cue mixer plugins do add a few samples here and there, but it’s not in the same league as native plugins with a buffer).

I also don’t use e drums so that part i have no experience on!

In practical terms - I don’t find it makes a difference, though tracking through a daw buffer it might.

But yes - latency, not “lag”. It’s easier to communicate if we all use the same terminology!
Old 3rd June 2018
  #125
Quote:
Originally Posted by shahstlz View Post
Interesting information here. Why I brought this up in this thread: Besides an ideal sampe rate for AD conversion while tracking, it's also about mixing ITB:

I would have presumed that the higher the sample rate the more accurate all processing like plugins and summing. So shouldn't a session with massive plugin use sound better at let's say 88,2 than 44,1?
Many plugins use oversampling to make this much less of an issue.
Old 3rd June 2018
  #126
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by shahstlz View Post
Interesting information here. Why I brought this up in this thread: Besides an ideal sampe rate for AD conversion while tracking, it's also about mixing ITB:

I would have presumed that the higher the sample rate the more accurate all processing like plugins and summing. So shouldn't a session with massive plugin use sound better at let's say 88,2 than 44,1?
This is true. But according to Dan Lavry, if you recorded that session at high rates you will have less accurate information to process. Like he says in his note above, it's a trade off.

maybe @Psycho-monkey knows: Was it ADAT that triggered the 48k standard or was it something in the tech or perhaps video/film work that demanded?


It's just curious that not a single company went for the optimal freq of 60khz.
Old 3rd June 2018
  #127
Quote:
Originally Posted by godlesshorror View Post
This is true. But according to Dan Lavry, if you recorded that session at high rates you will have less accurate information to process. Like he says in his note above, it's a trade off.

maybe @Psycho-monkey knows: Was it ADAT that triggered the 48k standard or was it something in the tech or perhaps video/film work that demanded?


It's just curious that not a single company went for the optimal freq of 60khz.
I believe (but don't quote me) 48k was chosen since it does divide nicely into 24,25 and 30 frame rates - and at the time when digital audio was becoming common place, as mentioned earlier the maths would have worked out better for the synchronous converters used.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/44,100_Hz there was other options, but the 44.1k standard was a sony/phillips development.
Old 3rd June 2018
  #128
Lives for gear
 
127Riot's Avatar
 

Comparing ITB summing to OTB summing varies depending on the console and how it's made.

I would think ITB mixes at this point would/could sound better than a poorly designed chipped based console. However compared to a board that's Class A Discrete Transformer Balanced I/O with good opamps, etc... I believe it would be much more of a noticeable difference.

At this point in the game I think it has been proven you do not need a console. However, a good console makes a great difference. Yes recall is a bitch and sometimes not worth going OTB as bands that think they know more than the engineer with their nit picking do not realize they are not helping but hurting their mix.

It seems every band member looks to make changes beating a mix to death sucking the life out of it. Doing a pass on a mix capturing the feeling you have of a fresh song does better than you thinking here I go again revision 68, now they want it closer to the first mix.

Also I think ITB/OTB makes a difference depending on the style of music.
Old 3rd June 2018
  #129
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by 127Riot View Post
Comparing ITB summing to OTB summing varies depending on the console and how it's made.

I would think ITB mixes at this point would/could sound better than a poorly designed chipped based console. However compared to a board that's Class A Discrete Transformer Balanced I/O with good opamps, etc... I believe it would be much more of a noticeable difference.

At this point in the game I think it has been proven you do not need a console. However, a good console makes a great difference. Yes recall is a bitch and sometimes not worth going OTB as bands that think they know more than the engineer with their nit picking do not realize they are not helping but hurting their mix.

It seems every band member looks to make changes beating a mix to death sucking the life out of it. Doing a pass on a mix capturing the feeling you have of a fresh song does better than you thinking here I go again revision 68, now they want it closer to the first mix.

Also I think ITB/OTB makes a difference depending on the style of music.
What I know for sure, is that my mixes sound better since I upgraded my front end. I spend a little more time trying to capture the sound most suited to the mix (regardless of what the artist has/wants) and I spending less time “fix mixing”. If I find I’m mixing the sht out of a track, I re-record with something different.

For example, if the bass is giving me trouble, I change the bass in some way and record again. This takes less time and money than tweaking for hours and/or buying plugs or outboard to “fix” it. I know you can’t always do this, but I try to.
Old 3rd June 2018
  #130
Lives for gear
 
127Riot's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by godlesshorror View Post
What I know for sure, is that my mixes sound better since I upgraded my front end, spend a little more time and that trying to capture the sound most suited to the mix (regardless of what the artist has/wants) and spending less time “fix mixing”. If I find I’m mixing the sht out of a track, I re-record with something different.

For example, if the bass is giving me trouble, I change the bass in some way and record again. This takes less time and money than tweaking for hours and/or buying plugs or outboard to “fix” it. I know you can’t always do this, but I try to.

Agreed 1000% getting it right from the start is extremely important. When I have good tight bands in my place, everything comes together in the mix much easier. I was mainly talking about the OP when he mentioned ITB vs OTB summing. Provided the band is good and everything was tracked right.

ITB summing works but for certain styles of music a good console can really make a great difference. Not that the ITB can't sound great it can. Certain consoles much like certain mics, Preamps, eq's, Compressors, add a character/flavor that work great for the style.
Old 3rd June 2018
  #131
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by godlesshorror View Post
This is true. But according to Dan Lavry, if you recorded that session at high rates you will have less accurate information to process. Like he says in his note above, it's a trade off.

maybe @Psycho-monkey knows: Was it ADAT that triggered the 48k standard or was it something in the tech or perhaps video/film work that demanded?


It's just curious that not a single company went for the optimal freq of 60khz.
Optimal frequency according to ONE manufacturer, over ten years ago. There is a much higher level of engineering involved in making the adda chips, rather than just implementing them. They've all long since moved to top rate 768k.
Old 3rd June 2018
  #132
Lives for gear
 
nyandres's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timesaver800W View Post
Optimal frequency according to ONE manufacturer, over ten years ago. There is a much higher level of engineering involved in making the adda chips, rather than just implementing them. They've all long since moved to top rate 768k.
Over a decade later, even cheap converters perform bettef than the tip top of back then
Old 3rd June 2018
  #133
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyandres View Post
Over a decade later, even cheap converters perform bettef than the tip top of back then
In my experience, this is not true at all. Not even close.

An Apogee AD16x and DA16X is so much better than the Mackie, Focusrite and Presonus converters I was using.

Probably use the similar chips, but everything before and after the actual chipset or whatever, is so much better than the cheapo converters. I can definitely hear it.
Old 3rd June 2018
  #134
Lives for gear
 
nyandres's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by godlesshorror View Post
In my experience, this is not true at all. Not even close.

An Apogee AD16x and DA16X is so much better than the Mackie, Focusrite and Presonus converters I was using.

Probably use the similar chips, but everything before and after the actual chipset or whatever, is so much better than the cheapo converters. I can definitely hear it.
The tascam uh7000 is leagues and bounds better than that apogee. Mckie and presonus are terrible at most price ranges. It goes for 300 bucks. Pretty much anything in the cheap, but not absolute trash category. And the apogee symphonies, well... the difference is not even funny... it makes the ad16x sound like a scarlett
Old 3rd June 2018
  #135
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyandres View Post
The tascam uh7000 is leagues and bounds better than that apogee. Mckie and presonus are terrible at most price ranges. It goes for 300 bucks. Pretty much anything in the cheap, but not absolute trash category. And the apogee symphonies, well... the difference is not even funny... it makes the ad16x sound like a scarlett
Thank you for this revealing post.
Old 7th June 2018
  #136
I liked the B loop better on the first example.
Old 12th June 2018
  #137
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjblair View Post
Yeah. That's the sound of the Dangerous circuit laying a fingerprint on the mix. The sound of the Dangerous isn't really my thing, but that's just my personal taste. Lots of people love it. But from what I've read about the 2-Bus, most of the flavor is happening after the summing. The circuitry before the summing is just about providing as clean a signal as possible, with minimal loss, before the summing op amps.
Yes, yes. I have a summing box like this as well. Most of the heavy lifting is done by 5532's. Only in the master section do they put it through some iron and a class-A output stage to add some mojo to it.
Old 12th June 2018
  #138
Gear Nut
 

hey guys , i got an interrogation on my mind.
2 bad experiences with 2 very good producers ( not known ) , totally stranger one from another , one hip hop , one pop, gave me ITB stems to "polished" in a analogue mix
with my usual workflow , heritage 1073 , high end comp , inward connection summing mixer, SSL comp on master barely moving, i'm doing this for 15 years and everything acoustic gets out very well But those 2 times were VST instruments , ITB mixing and with all my best efforts , i can correct the stuff i didn't like on their mixes like coloration , natural compression with analogue, fine automation BUT at the end i'm losing so much punch regarding their ITB masters.
i'm not very familiar with all the newest plugin , i'm kind of a old school hardware parallel guy
is someone shared that frustrating experience ?
Old 12th June 2018
  #139
Quote:
Originally Posted by themixbedroom View Post
hey guys , i got an interrogation on my mind.
2 bad experiences with 2 very good producers ( not known ) , totally stranger one from another , one hip hop , one pop, gave me ITB stems to "polished" in a analogue mix
with my usual workflow , heritage 1073 , high end comp , inward connection summing mixer, SSL comp on master barely moving, i'm doing this for 15 years and everything acoustic gets out very well But those 2 times were VST instruments , ITB mixing and with all my best efforts , i can correct the stuff i didn't like on their mixes like coloration , natural compression with analogue, fine automation BUT at the end i'm losing so much punch regarding their ITB masters.
i'm not very familiar with all the newest plugin , i'm kind of a old school hardware parallel guy
is someone shared that frustrating experience ?
difficult to say without hearing, but if the ITB masters sound better, why not ditch the summing mixer and compressor, and just do the EQ tweaks?

The sound of EDM/urban (which is also really the sound of pop) is ITB.
Old 12th June 2018
  #140
Gear Nut
 

yeah i'm a pragmatic person , this is how i ended up but i was wondering if someone shared that kind of "analogue failure" lol
Old 12th June 2018
  #141
Gear Nut
 
Jpastor's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 127Riot View Post
Yes recall is a bitch and sometimes not worth going OTB as bands that think they know more than the engineer with their nit picking do not realize they are not helping but hurting their mix.

It seems every band member looks to make changes beating a mix to death sucking the life out of it. Doing a pass on a mix capturing the feeling you have of a fresh song does better than you thinking here I go again revision 68, now they want it closer to the first mix.
Totally agree with that.
Old 13th June 2018
  #142
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
difficult to say without hearing, but if the ITB masters sound better, why not ditch the summing mixer and compressor, and just do the EQ tweaks?

The sound of EDM/urban (which is also really the sound of pop) is ITB.
No no no they really dont
Old 13th June 2018
  #143
Lives for gear
 
myles's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saxplayerz View Post
No no no they really dont
Care to clarify?
Old 13th June 2018
  #144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saxplayerz View Post
No no no they really dont

Quote:
Originally Posted by myles View Post
Care to clarify?
My thoughts exactly...how would one know if they haven’t heard them?!
Old 13th June 2018
  #145
Lives for gear
 
myles's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
My thoughts exactly...how would one know if they haven’t heard them?!
I’m still trying to figure out who they are!
Old 18th June 2018
  #146
Gear Nut
 

for those who experienced my sad story , i did win the battle on my third mixing attempt with ....headphones like an audio surgeon lol subtle eq , subtle moves , then subtle analog chain....big master !!! instant facelift !!! never give up guys !!
ITB vs Summing ........SUMMING !!!!!
Old 19th June 2018
  #147
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by themixbedroom View Post
for those who experienced my sad story , i did win the battle on my third mixing attempt with ....headphones like an audio surgeon lol subtle eq , subtle moves , then subtle analog chain....big master !!! instant facelift !!! never give up guys !!
ITB vs Summing ........SUMMING !!!!!
It’s funny, I just concluded the opposite. Better AD and ITB.

Different strokings for different people.
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