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
HW Worth Owning for Mixing Hybrid?
Old 1 week ago
  #451
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
@drBill or anyone else.

Do you know if a Digidesign 192 can be connected to an HD I/O as a secondary I/O for digital? I certainly wouldn't use for analog I/O, but wondered if it'd be a cheaper way to expanding digital i/o.
Old 1 week ago
  #452
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlesicily View Post
@drBill or anyone else.

Do you know if a Digidesign 192 can be connected to an HD I/O as a secondary I/O for digital? I certainly wouldn't use for analog I/O, but wondered if it'd be a cheaper way to expanding digital i/o.
Yes, no worries. They work perfectly. I have 5 16X16's and 2 192's. You need an adapter cable though. Gary can hook you up.
Old 1 week ago
  #453
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
Yes, no worries. They work perfectly. I have 5 16X16's and 2 192's. You need an adapter cable though. Gary can hook you up.
Great, thx! I have an adapter cable so I'd be all set.
Old 6 days ago
  #454
Lives for gear
 
dandeurloo's Avatar
I find hardware FX are much better then ITB Fx. The only thing ITB is better for is automating the fx. I wish I had more sends on my console for more FX!
Old 6 days ago
  #455
Quote:
Originally Posted by dandeurloo View Post
I find hardware FX are much better then ITB Fx. The only thing ITB is better for is automating the fx. I wish I had more sends on my console for more FX!
Have to disagree - I know there are instances where this is true, but DSP code is DSP code, and if it's the same ITB as the hardware FX, then it's the same. The RMX-16 is identical ITB or OTB. I think the Eventide 2016 code is the same as well.
Old 6 days ago
  #456
Lives for gear
 
dandeurloo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoop View Post
Have to disagree - I know there are instances where this is true, but DSP code is DSP code, and if it's the same ITB as the hardware FX, then it's the same. The RMX-16 is identical ITB or OTB. I think the Eventide 2016 code is the same as well.
Hey Hoop, I agree I think the DSP is the same. But the audio is different because of the analog stages. Which for me is a huge difference. I do use plenty of ITB fx but I almost always prefer the analog versions in use.

My 2 cents
Old 6 days ago
  #457
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by dandeurloo View Post
Hey Hoop, I agree I think the DSP is the same. But the audio is different because of the analog stages. Which for me is a huge difference. I do use plenty of ITB fx but I almost always prefer the analog versions in use.

My 2 cents
Dan, would you mind elaborating? Maybe even a particular DSP unit that has been modeled 1:1, yet the analog stages still make an improvement. This is not a challenge... rather I'm wanting to understand bc I know u have a lot of knowledge in this area.
Old 6 days ago
  #458
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
I ain't Dan, but it never stopped me from elaborating before.....


There's three or four things that come into play here which can make ITB verbs/FX different than their OTB verbs/FX ancestors :

- Is the code REALLY identical between your OTB unit and your plugin - or is it another coders "approximation"?

- Is your computer or the hardware unit doing any "funny things" with the code to get the job done? Is the computing and computational power addressing and using the code in the same fashion?

- Do the analog electronics and the conversion of the unit itself come into play in the plugin? Some feel the "code" is enough, perfectionists will disagree. Some developers will try to model the analog electronics and conversion "sonics", some won't. For those that do, they will get anywhere from "fail" to "very close". I personally don't think modeling is close enough yet for a perfect clone.

- The unique characteristics of your studio itself. If you are using a console or other outboard along with your verb/FX sends, returns, that gives a unique and unrepeatable thumbprint to the sound of how you use said OTB FX.


MO, some plugins (for me, the new AAX version of EchoFarm is replacing the hardware) really are close enough. *Others always leave me wanting.

All these things come together in unique and organic ways that become a sonic characterization of the user when you are OTB. ITB is identical for everyone else. My $0.02 - re-amortized to $0.000004276 for streaming.
Old 6 days ago
  #459
Hey Sal, don't know if you're still looking for 2-buss EQ, but the Hendyamps Michelangelo is worthy of a demo, should the chance arise. Love mine. Always adds depth and excitement.
Old 6 days ago
  #460
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamj31 View Post
Hey Sal, don't know if you're still looking for 2-buss EQ, but the Hendyamps Michelangelo is worthy of a demo, should the chance arise. Love mine. Always adds depth and excitement.
Adam, thanks for the suggestion. I've decided to stay ITB for 2buss eq at this point. Just prioritizing, as I've found HW comps to yield more improvement than eq.
Old 6 days ago
  #461
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
I ain't Dan, but it never stopped me from elaborating before.....


There's three or four things that come into play here which can make ITB verbs/FX different than their OTB verbs/FX ancestors :

- Is the code REALLY identical between your OTB unit and your plugin - or is it another coders "approximation"?

- Is your computer or the hardware unit doing any "funny things" with the code to get the job done? Is the computing and computational power addressing and using the code in the same fashion?

- Do the analog electronics and the conversion of the unit itself come into play in the plugin? Some feel the "code" is enough, perfectionists will disagree. Some developers will try to model the analog electronics and conversion "sonics", some won't. For those that do, they will get anywhere from "fail" to "very close". I personally don't think modeling is close enough yet for a perfect clone.

- The unique characteristics of your studio itself. If you are using a console or other outboard along with your verb/FX sends, returns, that gives a unique and unrepeatable thumbprint to the sound of how you use said OTB FX.


MO, some plugins (for me, the new AAX version of EchoFarm is replacing the hardware) really are close enough. *Others always leave me wanting.

All these things come together in unique and organic ways that become a sonic characterization of the user when you are OTB. ITB is identical for everyone else. My $0.02 - re-amortized to $0.000004276 for streaming.
With 18,438 posts, I'd say not!
Always great info so keep elaborating!
Old 6 days ago
  #462
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Latest songs I've been mixing I've been sending out individual tracks or stereo pairs (keys, gtrs, etc) thru various HW comps and printing back to PT so that I can use on multiple sources. Only takes 3-4 min per pass, but each time I a/b my fave plug and have yet to not prefer the HW. (Sigh).

Sure, it might add 20 min to my mix time by doing several passes, but then it saves me easily as much by not needing to fiddle with those tracks later. End result is better...so it's worth it to me.

@drBill

Now I can see why you have so much I/O.
Old 6 days ago
  #463
Lives for gear
 
Wiggy Neve Slut's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dandeurloo View Post
Hey Hoop, I agree I think the DSP is the same. But the audio is different because of the analog stages. Which for me is a huge difference. I do use plenty of ITB fx but I almost always prefer the analog versions in use.

My 2 cents
Agree all day long.. The ADDA of these original pieces is the crux of why there's an empirical difference. Code is code you're very correct but the output stages are steeped in time when digital was nascent technology. Everyone has the same outputs on their fx but now the same code goes into a digital mix buss or otb via different convertors.. Hear the difference!
Old 6 days ago
  #464
Lives for gear
 
antichef's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamj31 View Post
Hey Sal, don't know if you're still looking for 2-buss EQ, but the Hendyamps Michelangelo is worthy of a demo, should the chance arise. Love mine. Always adds depth and excitement.
Another vote for the Michelangelo - I use it on every mix. I can do a lot with ITB EQ, but not what this does - depth and excitement - that's right

Got the 2nd M7(m) in today. Drowning in amazing reverb
Old 6 days ago
  #465
Lives for gear
 
Funny Cat's Avatar
These past couple pages are real interesting. I'm actually finding ITB compression to be very close to using HW. Maybe there is a slight mojo advantage to HW but I find ITB compression is really good nowadays.

EQ on the other hand? Not even close! HW EQ slays plugs hands down. Actually, I don't think EQ plugins sound that different from one another once you get a handle on getting the sounds in your head. They are mostly just kind of clean and boring. HW EQ is untouchable at this time in my mind though.

When I'm twisting EQ's on a good desk or piece of tube gear, I can totally transform the source sound. When I twist ITB EQ's I don't find the sound changing all that much. Yeah a little additive lows/highs but I need all kinds of combinations of plugs to get what I get when using HW.

The uad Pultec does do something really special but I can only think of one or two other EQ plugins that give me that same smile (a few Acustica EQ's in particular). Maybe I'm doing it wrong though...who knows.

Last edited by Funny Cat; 6 days ago at 02:20 AM..
Old 6 days ago
  #466
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by littlesicily View Post
With the exception of the Bricasti, are HW fx really worth it over plugs?
Maybe my ears are just different than others but IMO they're almost always better.

I've got some of the highest end plugins out there and even my lower tier hw I put to work fair better to my ears.

It all boils down to the right tool for the right job. When I just had a few hw pieces I don't think it was the same case but after having quite a variety of goto pieces I'm almost always using hw.. and for me there's still a lot of hw to be had. For instance I'd still like to get a sta level, space echo, and...

I still buy the latest plugins and they still get used.. nothing like running infinite 1176 or MJUC plugs when you need em
Old 6 days ago
  #467
That's exactly what I do. And I ALWAYS prefer my hw comps. I print back just like you. On lead vocal I never am able to get a finished album ready "polished" sound itb, maybe I haven't tried enough plugs but hw gets me there so fast! And sits so well in the mix. My massive passive lives on 60% of my tracks and the boost and cut features are incredible. But the uad version doesn't give me the same sound. My dream console would have 12 ch of MP
Something about the massive p on individual ch that is incredible! That's why I love printing. I also save my settings on a notepad on every ch incase I need to tweak later. Like you said it's about 40-60 min longer to print the tracks but you get better sounding mixes and good recall..
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlesicily View Post
Latest songs I've been mixing I've been sending out individual tracks or stereo pairs (keys, gtrs, etc) thru various HW comps and printing back to PT so that I can use on multiple sources. Only takes 3-4 min per pass, but each time I a/b my fave plug and have yet to not prefer the HW. (Sigh).

Sure, it might add 20 min to my mix time by doing several passes, but then it saves me easily as much by not needing to fiddle with those tracks later. End result is better...so it's worth it to me.

@drBill

Now I can see why you have so much I/O.
Old 5 days ago
  #468
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlesicily View Post
Latest songs I've been mixing I've been sending out individual tracks or stereo pairs (keys, gtrs, etc) thru various HW comps and printing back to PT so that I can use on multiple sources. Only takes 3-4 min per pass, but each time I a/b my fave plug and have yet to not prefer the HW. (Sigh).

Sure, it might add 20 min to my mix time by doing several passes, but then it saves me easily as much by not needing to fiddle with those tracks later. End result is better...so it's worth it to me.
I think I'm heading towards this route as well. For the past year or so I was mainly using hardware to track, then plugin's for mixing and then some hardware on the 2 bus.

However, it kinda seems like hardware on the way in, then mixing the stems through hardware should yield a mix that doesn't need TOO much on the mix bus. Maybe even plugins for just a bit of glue and minimal frequency adjustments.

So, when you run your stems through your comps is that post all other processing as well? Or are you getting a little compression first then adding a little eq or various coloring plugins?

I'm kind of wondering how this process will work, since whatever stems get mixed earlier on are slightly out of context to the song, since the other stems aren't really processed with hardware yet.

I also have a pair of Kush Electra's and a Neve 551 enroute to help with this... I'm pretty stoked. GAS definitely flared up a bit from this thread haha.
Old 5 days ago
  #469
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by szyam View Post
I think I'm heading towards this route as well. For the past year or so I was mainly using hardware to track, then plugin's for mixing and then some hardware on the 2 bus.

However, it kinda seems like hardware on the way in, then mixing the stems through hardware should yield a mix that doesn't need TOO much on the mix bus. Maybe even plugins for just a bit of glue and minimal frequency adjustments.

So, when you run your stems through your comps is that post all other processing as well? Or are you getting a little compression first then adding a little eq or various coloring plugins?

I'm kind of wondering how this process will work, since whatever stems get mixed earlier on are slightly out of context to the song, since the other stems aren't really processed with hardware yet.

I also have a pair of Kush Electra's and a Neve 551 enroute to help with this... I'm pretty stoked. GAS definitely flared up a bit from this thread haha.
What I've been doing is taking certain tracks...piano, synths, ac & el gtr and running them individually thru various HW comps and then print back. This is bc I prefer these HW comps over the SW plug comps and I don't have multiple units of each comp. Once I get to the actual mix stage, I then have access (again) to my Red3 on 2buss, SSL comp for drum sub (or whatever), STA or La2a on bass, Splice's in Blue Stripe mode for vocals, etc. Right before I print mix .01, I commit the inserts on individual tracks.
As for where I'm inserting the comps while printing earlier in the process... kinda depends. On instruments, usually after any corrective eq. Might have a bx_SSL E eq or FabFilter ProQ2 to cut some 250 or a peaky mid thing, then to HW comp and print. Later while mixing if I need a little more shine I'll add some 8k w/ the SSL eq or chose another flavor. I don't seem to need any more compression on those tracks again.
The biggest differences with HW comps for me are:
1) the transients don't get flattened out like plugs do. The audio is controlled yet still feels lively.
2) the tone of the various xformers and analog circuitry shapes the audio in a more pleasing way.
Old 5 days ago
  #470
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlesicily View Post
What I've been doing is taking certain tracks...piano, synths, ac & el gtr and running them individually thru various HW comps and then print back. This is bc I prefer these HW comps over the SW plug comps and I don't have multiple units of each comp. Once I get to the actual mix stage, I then have access (again) to my Red3 on 2buss, SSL comp for drum sub (or whatever), STA or La2a on bass, Splice's in Blue Stripe mode for vocals, etc. Right before I print mix .01, I commit the inserts on individual tracks.
As for where I'm inserting the comps while printing earlier in the process... kinda depends. On instruments, usually after any corrective eq. Might have a bx_SSL E eq or FabFilter ProQ2 to cut some 250 or a peaky mid thing, then to HW comp and print. Later while mixing if I need a little more shine I'll add some 8k w/ the SSL eq or chose another flavor. I don't seem to need any more compression on those tracks again.
The biggest differences with HW comps for me are:
1) the transients don't get flattened out like plugs do. The audio is controlled yet still feels lively.
2) the tone of the various xformers and analog circuitry shapes the audio in a more pleasing way.
Gotcha, your tweaking the individual channels with hardware before you even route them to busses...makes perfect sense. cheers
Old 5 days ago
  #471
To the OP: I've been using a Summit / Neve MPE-200.

Has both stereo ganged or separate L/R control, recall, digital front end with all analog circuit. Outstanding mic pres to boot. The box tone is excellent, not overly colorful, very low noise and distortion. I find the eq in general to be smooth and forgiving, and has LP/HP filters. It's built like a tank. This is a mastering worthy unit. The down-side is it's no longer being manufactured. But when I contacted Summit about the unit, there were certain aspects of the unit that can be maintained over time. This unit was around 5k when it came out, I think they're going for around 2k on the used market.
Old 5 days ago
  #472
Lives for gear
 
andychamp's Avatar
I'm usually running through an EQ>compressor chain, like Kush Electra and 1176.
But the real fun starts when I use FX pedals.
Old 5 days ago
  #473
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Fun fun fun!!

Hey hardware in your DAW guys!

Recently pro-tools-expert did a review on the Silver Bullet and I was wandering around their website because of it and ran across this .

Ingenious New Free Plug-in - Snapshot - Store Images Of Hardware Settings In Your DAW — Pro Tools Expert

It's a RECALL / Photo / Plugin Software piece called "snapshot". It's pretty cool. You can have multiple windows open, there's a spot for notes (although a bit kludgy on this version) which is super useful, and all your "recall info" - picture, notes, etc. is all stored in a recallable plugin that's imbedded in your DAW session. VST, AU, AAX. Mac only at this point I think, although they are looking to go Windows soon.


AND IT"S FREE!!!

I included a pic of a session with recall pics and notes so you can see what it's all about.


[edit] : Just noticed. In Pro Tools you can save "presets" so you can start with your gear in it's sweet spot, and save it as a "preset". If there are no changes, bam! You're done. If there are changes, you can make comments to that effect in the notes. Pretty sweet.
Attached Thumbnails
HW Worth Owning for Mixing Hybrid?-screen-shot-2017-10-12-8.04.02-pm.jpg  
Old 5 days ago
  #474
Lives for gear
 
antichef's Avatar
This has been a good thread for me. Thanks again drBill!
Old 4 days ago
  #475
Gear Maniac
 
Petermix's Avatar
This. Is. Dope.

Good looking out @drBill

Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
Hey hardware in your DAW guys!

Recently pro-tools-expert did a review on the Silver Bullet and I was wandering around their website because of it and ran across this .

Ingenious New Free Plug-in - Snapshot - Store Images Of Hardware Settings In Your DAW — Pro Tools Expert

It's a RECALL / Photo / Plugin Software piece called "snapshot". It's pretty cool. You can have multiple windows open, there's a spot for notes (although a bit kludgy on this version) which is super useful, and all your "recall info" - picture, notes, etc. is all stored in a recallable plugin that's imbedded in your DAW session. VST, AU, AAX. Mac only at this point I think, although they are looking to go Windows soon.


AND IT"S FREE!!!

I included a pic of a session with recall pics and notes so you can see what it's all about.


[edit] : Just noticed. In Pro Tools you can save "presets" so you can start with your gear in it's sweet spot, and save it as a "preset". If there are no changes, bam! You're done. If there are changes, you can make comments to that effect in the notes. Pretty sweet.
Old 4 days ago
  #476
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Thanks for reminding me of that plug @drBill. I saw some press on it a while back and forgot about it.
Old 4 days ago
  #477
The thing I always have trouble grasping when printing HW is judging HW settings in the context of a mix that isn't finished. Especially if I have subtractive ITB eq before the HW comp. It seems I'm always tweaking things across the board. But how can you make confident HW decisions when other elements haven't been processed yet? Or am I overthinking things?

I've maxed out my 16 i/o with HW, so that I'm engaging the most I can simultaneously to avoid printing so much.
Old 4 days ago
  #478
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamj31 View Post
The thing I always have trouble grasping when printing HW is judging HW settings in the context of a mix that isn't finished. Especially if I have subtractive ITB eq before the HW comp. It seems I'm always tweaking things across the board. But how can you make confident HW decisions when other elements haven't been processed yet? Or am I overthinking things?

I've maxed out my 16 i/o with HW, so that I'm engaging the most I can simultaneously to avoid printing so much.
Couple thoughts:

1. Cutting bad freq is the same philosophy/decision making skill as in tracking. If you know what the end-goal is for the sound, you can make good decisions as you go.

2. Compressing/printing... similar to the above philosophy. I'm usually not squashing things to death, just controlling dynamics... and that can be done appropriately at any stage IMO. If I need more compression near the end of a mix, I can always add more. The printing process is giving me the control and tone I desire from my HW comps.

3. Both the above are no different than arranging music. I don't need to revisit the piano performance/part because I know what it's role is. I can play the piano part first to a click or drum track, then add all the other harmonic instruments and it'll work 99% of the time. Why? Because I've arranged/produced thousands of songs. When you've taken a song (musically, technically, or both) from start to finish countless times, your ability to know how things will work in a setting gets better.
Old 4 days ago
  #479
Lives for gear
 
Hardtoe's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamj31 View Post
The thing I always have trouble grasping when printing HW is judging HW settings in the context of a mix that isn't finished. Especially if I have subtractive ITB eq before the HW comp. It seems I'm always tweaking things across the board. But how can you make confident HW decisions when other elements haven't been processed yet? Or am I overthinking things?

I've maxed out my 16 i/o with HW, so that I'm engaging the most I can simultaneously to avoid printing so much.
One technique I have developed for hardware printing, is to do several passes of a part once I am rolling - one darker, one more compressed, one more distorted, etc.

Then, once I have 3 or so options that are all inspiring tonally, I can flip between them as I get further into the mix and easily change gears if it feels better in the current context.
Old 4 days ago
  #480
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
Another option is to just buy more hardware so you have it all active real-time.

Brad
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+  Submit Thread to Reddit Reddit 
 
Topic:
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