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
Eight is Enough...for Summing Mixers??? Summing Mixers
Old 7th May 2008
  #91
Gear Maniac
 
kenkelly81's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by corruptmary View Post
we do have in stock right now and you don't need anything else, just the lunchbox. My name is Shelsey if you come in the store, I'll show you
Can't find it on your website?
Old 7th May 2008
  #92
Gear Nut
 

Shootout? LOL

I gotta tell you guys.....the first time I heard that shootout on Viintage King I laughed out loud....first of all, it's a bit like phone sex....who knows what's really happening on the other end? How fair and balanced were they in the creation of those mixes?

But the real reason I laughed is that the source material isn't particularly good in the first place. Kind of like testing out guitar amps with a Harmony Rocket, a cheap guitar would level the playing field somewhat.

That being said, I'm a believer in analog summing and I'm close to buying the Chandler because of its discrete design and 22 trannies.

But...I'm sure most of you have done much better work right in the box or on cheaper analog gear that sounds better than these shootout tracks.

T
Old 7th May 2008
  #93
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kenkelly81 View Post
Can't find it on your website?
It's not on there, we have a lot of products that aren't there. My manager is working on a new site, hopefully will be up soon.
Old 7th May 2008
  #94
Lives for gear
 
seaneldon's Avatar
 

After spending a couple of weeks with it, I've found that mixing into an Innertube Atomic Sumthang (as in always listening through it, not just patching it when the ITB mix is "done") can make 8 channels "good enough" very, very quickly.

Our room's been stupid-busy as of late, so there's almost always something up on the console that must stay untouched. Having the Sumthang has been a godsend for retaining the weight and space of a mix and it is ABSOLUTELY NOT a subtle difference, even if you're putting a 24-32 track tune down to 8. Gaining up a click at a time throughout the mix is awesome. It's something you'd have to hear.

And when I am able to use the console...there's still use for it. See attachment for details
Attached Thumbnails
Eight is Enough...for Summing Mixers???-thedrums.jpg  
Old 13th May 2008
  #95
Gear Head
 
ryanfrith's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thermos View Post
Ryan,
did you ever say what DAW you use. I personally think that makes a gigantic difference.

FWIW, I use a Dangerous 2 Bus LE that I changed the summing chips on. I felt the stock ones robbed air. I keep trying to mix itb, hoping to sell the Dangerous and buy something else groovy, but it never happens. I noticed the biggest difference when using it with DP, but even with PT and Logic I still find it very beneficial.

And Peeder, have to say you are grossly misinformed about BLA. I have a SM Pro PR8E that they did, and it was much worth the admission price. They did a better job than my local tech did with my other unit, and they also did it cheaper. Thus I end up with 8 pres (for remote use only) that sound way better than the RNP I had here for a while, and you get 8 pres for the price of 2. Those are super knowledgeable people. You should call them and talk to them about clocking, converters, etc. I bet you'd learn something.
I've got a Digi 003 w/ the Black Lion HD upgrade on Pro Tools 7,4. I'm now thinking about one of those nice Toft ATB boards since they do have 8 busses.
Old 13th May 2008
  #96
Gear Head
 
ryanfrith's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by SK1 View Post
Wow.

You talked a lot of sheet on this thread to end up buying a dbox.

What a crack up ....... ROTFLMAO

Maybe you owe Ryan an apology?

I don't expect i'll get one. I'm actually glad Peeder got the D-Box, 'cause if he likes it, then it MUST be good, and all you owners out there can finally get a good night's rest. Plus I get the satisfaction of knowing that in some small way I helped influence his decision making strategy, thereby also contributing to the stimulation--vicariously through Peeder--of our weak economy; all this while enjoying some well played out drama.

Considering the fact that I still don't own a summing mixer (and probably won't ever), I now find it quite entertaining to ponder just how untrue his original post to this thread actually was...

Quote:
Originally Posted by peeder View Post
There are a lot of manufacturers hoping there are more Ryans out there than peeders.
How's that for some fancy situational irony?
Old 13th May 2008
  #97
Lives for gear
 
Kronos147's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman View Post
The better I get at mixing inside the computer the more reluctant I am to junk up my mix with a lot of arbitrary analog circuitry.

-R
You can't use arbitrary analog gear, ya have to use the good stuff!


Quote:
Originally Posted by peeder View Post
The summing device concept... has now become a half-baked fad motivated by people who can't afford a real analog console but don't know what to do to make digital sound good.
I kind of see two camps of consoles being used for recording, 1 being the do everything "split" console with inputs (mic pres) on one side, returns on the other. The other camp is the mixer is a playback monitor and router.

I think the Speck Lilo is an example of a product that is a great step towards filling the need of members in camp two. Also the Neve 8816/8804 combo.

The ultimate in recording line mixers would have inserts, busses, and auxes/cues. If the faders can fly so much the better. Make it in 16, 24, and 32 (line in) configurations.

I think I am ok on pre amps, so I don't need/want to pay for them in a console. Having compression on each channels seems overkill as I would rather patch in different compressors for different sounds. Having EQ on every channel is great, but this theoretical line console would be more affordable.

You can use EQ in the inserts. Building this line console with 500 series buckets for EQ's would be even more desirable and marketable IMO! I can't help but think API missed the boat on this with the 1608. If the pres were modular, and you could take another $8000 off the list without them, I think many more of us would consider that as an option.

How many other people are in this boat and would pay equal or more than the Toft price, less than an API 1608 (without EQ's - about $35k list right?). I think that is the niche that needs filling in this market.

I am glad to have found a solution that works for me, but the problem with my solution is it not a universally viable option (bought 3 used broadcast consoles for a song to make one playback console). I read about the trial and tribulations of GYang and feel for him! Damn, I truly do. I saw how his mind wrapped around the 1608, SSL Matrix, and Neve console threads and I was right there with him!

Good luck fellow Gearslutz!
Old 13th May 2008
  #98
SK1
Lives for gear
 
SK1's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kronos147 View Post
You can't use arbitrary analog gear, ya have to use the good stuff!




I kind of see two camps of consoles being used for recording, 1 being the do everything "split" console with inputs (mic pres) on one side, returns on the other. The other camp is the mixer is a playback monitor and router.

I think the Speck Lilo is an example of a product that is a great step towards filling the need of members in camp two. Also the Neve 8816/8804 combo.

The ultimate in recording line mixers would have inserts, busses, and auxes/cues. If the faders can fly so much the better. Make it in 16, 24, and 32 (line in) configurations.

I think I am ok on pre amps, so I don't need/want to pay for them in a console. Having compression on each channels seems overkill as I would rather patch in different compressors for different sounds. Having EQ on every channel is great, but this theoretical line console would be more affordable.

You can use EQ in the inserts. Building this line console with 500 series buckets for EQ's would be even more desirable and marketable IMO! I can't help but think API missed the boat on this with the 1608. If the pres were modular, and you could take another $8000 off the list without them, I think many more of us would consider that as an option.

How many other people are in this boat and would pay equal or more than the Toft price, less than an API 1608 (without EQ's - about $35k list right?). I think that is the niche that needs filling in this market.

I am glad to have found a solution that works for me, but the problem with my solution is it not a universally viable option (bought 3 used broadcast consoles for a song to make one playback console). I read about the trial and tribulations of GYang and feel for him! Damn, I truly do. I saw how his mind wrapped around the 1608, SSL Matrix, and Neve console threads and I was right there with him!

Good luck fellow Gearslutz!
If you've thought about a 1608 without pres, you should research the tonelux. You could build yourself a badass mixer with no pres , and have aux sends and returns and real automation with audio in the fader.

OR buy a more traditional board for the 25K you would have spent on a 16 channel tonelux setup with no eq or pres.
Old 13th May 2008
  #99
Lives for gear
 
Kronos147's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by SK1 View Post
If you've thought about a 1608 without pres, you should research the tonelux.
I went with Larry King's old mixer, the Wheatstone TV-600. I am set, but I fear this is not a good solution for many.

I bought 3 consoles to make sure I had the load-out for the one board I put into the control room. Not a viable solution for many, I fear.

Old 13th May 2008
  #100
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by GYang View Post
Willingly
Of course not all is that simple.
Not all that simple, indeed.

I went down a similar path.

A console for my home studio has never been a truly serious consideration, though I keep lusting for one in my dreams. But I am deterred by cost, floor space, maintenance, required cooling, etc.

I have ended up with three Neve 8816's (48 channels), two 8804's, four 96TT patchbays, and a room full of gear that pretty well suits my needs (after years of testing, buying/selling).

I typically sum drums in one 8816, other tracks in a 2nd, and reverbs/delays/effects in the 3rd.

I can:
- Control levels post-processing with the 8804 faders
- Use the 8804 direct outs, which are patched to the patchbays, to patch to delays/reverbs/effects, post-processing
- Analog pan at the the 8816's
- Take the tracks out from the DAW thru only one DAC pass, 100% outboard process, sum, (sometimes) go to ATR 102 tape, and then take the mix thru only one ADC pass.

The shortcomings versus a flexible high end console are:
- Automation post-processing
- Grouping post processing.

On the other hand, the summing units and patchbays need almost zero maintenance, don't generate significant heat, take up no space except for the relatively small 8804's.

If I were super rich, I'm sure I'd expand my house and buy a console (starting with a hard look at the Genesys). All I have to do is talk with thethrillfactor and RoundBadge to start thinking about it. But I don't think it will happen..........

Back to the original question.
I think a 16-channel summing unit is really a minimum step, if you are serious. And to me, you go this route because you have the DAC's and quality outboard gear to mix OTB and you want to stay OTB until you take the final mix back into the DAW.

Better than ITB?
For me, yes.
But I just couldn't make ITB work....it is MUCH harder to get a good mix, for me.
For a guy with the experience/talent like thethrillfactor, it is a different story.
And.............I love pushing the faders and turning the (real) knobs.

If you want me to email you my patchbay layout, PM me.
Old 25th May 2008
  #101
Gear Maniac
 
sharky's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by u b k View Post

it's a very different approach, i give you that. but it's addictive as hell and gives a push-pull to the music that i can't get any other way.

.
Something I may not have normally tried, but something that does indeed sound "insanely badass".

I've gotten a lot of tips over the years from your posts. And for that I'm very appreciative!
Old 28th September 2010
  #102
Lives for gear
 
DeyBwah's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by johndykstra View Post
Pardon my interuption into this heated debate. In regards to "is 8 enough"...granted I have no experience with summing mixers, so I may be way off bas here; please straighten me out if that's the case... Couldn't you make multiple passes? I.E. Output DAW 8 tracks of drums and summ them analog to 2...back into the daw. Repeat with guitars, vocals, what have you; until you end up with 4 stereo analog summed groups? It's more time consuming, but am I missing a fundemental component here?
I took a multiple pass for my drums as you described.

With enough patience and comfort in the workflow, it seems like you could accomplish almost everything a 16+ summing mixer would with a 8 channel summing mixer.

I recently got the D-Box as I was in dire need of monitor controls and headphone amps. I've always been curious if analog summing would make a noticeable difference in the end mix. The D-Box seemed like a great bargain and I know Dangerous makes great quality products.

Verdict: The difference is noticeable. Not subtle either, to my ears at least. I tested by a/b'ing, 1 summed ditigitally, the other through D-Box. I'm aware that this method doesn't really test the full spectrum of the summing 'experience', you need to mix through the summing bus to get a more realistic, workflow-based, experience. But I was more curious of just purely the audible differences. Even if the levels sounded imbalanced (because the mix is mixed without sum mixer), I listened more for how the stems 'interacted' with each other.

The end result is a more musical mix. The summed mix sounds more natural and spacious. The low end has more solidity and works 'with' the rest of the mix better.

Props to the OP for keeping this thread from going to hell.

And P Diddy, we're D-Buddies now.
Old 29th September 2010
  #103
Gear Addict
 
payne104's Avatar
I've experimented with a few 8 ch summing mixers and found that it's more trouble than it's worth and there are better ways to spend your money...

That was just my experience... a 48 channel analog console... now that's a different story
Old 29th September 2010
  #104
Lives for gear
 

Personally i think its how you're mixing...

for example.

Say you have outboard gear for... a drum and guitar buss, and maybe a final compressor for a lead vocal... but you also have outboard on your mix buss.

Now you could send the tracks out, and back in... then out and in again... or you could use a summing box to bring it down to 2 then send it through your outboard which stops one ad/da process which WILL help.

Thats my 2c
Old 30th September 2010
  #105
Lives for gear
 
B-San's Avatar
 

Summing thru 8 channels works for me...

Although the 2192 I'm using for the AD and 2 channels of the DA surely play a significant role..

I use a Lynx clocked to the 2192 for the other 6 channels...

One thing I like is the process seems to take a little 'edginess' off of the vocals - while mantaing a brightness that I had originally intended...

Secondly - I notice my ITB delays & reverbs seem to sound a bit more analog - probably due to them being sent out through different DA channels?

I also love the extra bit of headroom I can get by sending the mix out to the analog domain...

Would I like to be working with more channels? Of course... but this is working great for now.. and every little bit is needed when supporting my habit!!
Old 14th January 2018
  #106
Gear Maniac
Hi!

8 years later...with the new 64bit audio engines available in several DAW.. Do you still think that analog summing worhts?
how many channels would be enough?

Thanks
Quote:
Originally Posted by u b k View Post
yes, 8 channels is a great start and you will notice the difference immediately.

- stereo drums

- mono bass

- mono vox

- stereo midrange instruments

- stereo bvox, fx & low level stuff

that's just one of a million different ways to utilize 8 channels and have things feel really different. bass will be much tighter, front-to-back will be deeper, and things will just come together easier. the fx bus is particularly critical; having analog circuits blending the quiet stuff into the mix is a vast ocean away from having digital do it. it's more audible, yet further back and less obtrusive, and easier to balance. everything is, for that matter.

adding 8 relatively inexpensive d/a and getting fewer things submixed in the daw will improve things even further imo, and you can do that when your budget allows.

my last bit of advice is to audition a colored summer alongside the dangerous to find out which flavor you prefer.


gregoire
del
ubk
.
Old 14th January 2018
  #107
Lives for gear
 

i personally would love to have 32 channels. Right now i have 16 with the A Designs mix factory. That box changed my life and gives me something that i can not achieve itb. I've tried. Tony Sheppard tells me that 32 channels would give me even more depth and stereo width than what I have now and I trust him completely. I for sure like 16 channels vs 8.

ej
Old 14th January 2018
  #108
I have the Dangerous D Box and with just 8 channels I have more headroom, the image is a little wider and deeper and the sound has this top end openness while still being clean. 8 is Enough for an improved sound. I heard the 16 Dangerous summing compared to the 8 channels and there is a slight difference of more separation but for the price difference of buying 16 channels Converters for that slight difference is not worth it for me
Old 14th January 2018
  #109
Lives for gear
 
Oldone's Avatar
I have 8 and it's like going family camping with a pup tent. Are you enjoying the scenery, well yeah but it could be more comfortable.

16 or 32 is going to give you options with your outboard as well as summing breathing room. My two cents.

Even 8 however, adds some dimension that ITB doesn't provide with my rig.
Old 14th January 2018
  #110
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by seaneldon View Post
After spending a couple of weeks with it, I've found that mixing into an Innertube Atomic Sumthang (as in always listening through it, not just patching it when the ITB mix is "done") can make 8 channels "good enough" very, very quickly.

Our room's been stupid-busy as of late, so there's almost always something up on the console that must stay untouched. Having the Sumthang has been a godsend for retaining the weight and space of a mix and it is ABSOLUTELY NOT a subtle difference, even if you're putting a 24-32 track tune down to 8. Gaining up a click at a time throughout the mix is awesome. It's something you'd have to hear.

And when I am able to use the console...there's still use for it. See attachment for details
Also bought an Atomic Sumthang
Can't wait to sse the results : this summing box is full of transformers and tubes.
Should make a difference !

Sergio
Old 23rd January 2018
  #111
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sergioelectro View Post
Also bought an Atomic Sumthang
Can't wait to sse the results : this summing box is full of transformers and tubes.
Should make a difference !

Sergio
Any feedback from Atomic Sumthang users ?
Old 23rd January 2018
  #112
Gear Guru
 
jwh1192's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sergioelectro View Post
Any feedback from Atomic Sumthang users ?
i was present when the expansion unit was being named .. !!! i said sumthang Else but it became Sumthang More !!! haha .. my name was not as good as what it became ..

i own two Atomic Squeeze Boxes .. adds something special .. just like the Sumthang Does .. very special .. you will dig it ..
Old 23rd January 2018
  #113
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwh1192 View Post
i was present when the expansion unit was being named .. !!! i said sumthang Else but it became Sumthang More !!! haha .. my name was not as good as what it became ..

i own two Atomic Squeeze Boxes .. adds something special .. just like the Sumthang Does .. very special .. you will dig it ..
Cool, please tell me more please ? What so special that it brings ?
Please describe me what it does to the sound

Regards
Sergio
Old 23rd January 2018
  #114
Lives for gear
 
herecomesyourman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by GYang View Post
We are on the advent of new trend on GS.
Sell your outboards, fvck analogue summing, finally one of the smartest steps would be to put your tape decks on ebay with low Buy it Now price.
And, yes, I don't like Vintage King because they displayed all that gears I don't owe (yet). I hate Mike Nehra because he can't give me Tonelux with 50% discount and Shadow Hills compressor just as bonus.
More of all I don't like Ruppie (Neve) who creates all life long some boxes that most likely do nothing more than nicely distort otherwise ideal digital signals.
If anyone is in serious doubt, don't fool yourself.
Buy 1000$ PC + 1000 $ controller and spend 1000 $ on software. Plenty of software around is shareware and free of charge.
If you can't make album on that, than you are in trouble.
Reading posts on GS, you might find yourself spending 20-30 k on worthless outboards and even more worthless summing boxes.
BTW I'm also complete idiot, as I spent at least couple of hundreds grands just to understand that it was all wrong.
So, naturally, I have devil's advocate interest to put as much as possible virgins on the wrong path. Most likely I get some fees from manufacturers and dealers.
Yes, it is not easy to make music nowdays.

Welcome home

Hey GYang, I'm with you to an extent but I miss my old Great River EQ2NV's (I used to have two).

I am thinking about getting an MAQ2NV and a Thermionic Phoenix for 2Bus duty in a hybrid setup for mixing only in my spot.

I'm mastering 100% digital (though I'm using a software suite I developed and have done R&D for since 2009 which is not yet available to the public). I'm getting what I find to be superior results with my own creations and I don't feel I need analog stages there at all anymore.

What I do like is having something tube and something solid state on my 2Bus when mixing, because the tubes at the end of the chain lessen ear fatigue over long periods of time (I can just work longer), and a solid state EQ prior to that gives me a curve to mix into which I'm comfortable with on program.

This way everything would be stepped for recall, and very simple. I'm also using some Maag EQ's lately which may or may not stay in the chain. But I don't think I need a million options for mixing.

Lastly, I'm looking hard at potentially buying a Louder Than Liftoff Silver bullet to try. I feel that having something that can mechanically act as a 2Bus with high headroom is key. The Great River EQ's have around 32dB of headroom, Etc. for example. So having something that can work that way with tonal options might be very ergonomic without having to run a summing mixer which will inject a ton of crosstalk.
Old 23rd January 2018
  #115
Gear Guru
 
jwh1192's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sergioelectro View Post
Cool, please tell me more please ? What so special that it brings ?
Please describe me what it does to the sound

Regards
Sergio
width depth .. euphoric presence .. you need to listen to the innertube audio gear to appreciate it .. can you get a rental / loaner / buy one with option to return it if you wish ?? or know anyone near you that has any of their gear ??
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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
gyemusic / So Much Gear, So Little Time
1
nemisis633 / High End
19
guitarmorod / Mastering Forum
15
AdamB420 / So Much Gear, So Little Time
9
jebjerome / So Much Gear, So Little Time
9

Forum Jump
Forum Jump