The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Man, if I decide not to upgrade to 96k.....
Old 17th September 2002
  #1
Man, if I decide not to upgrade to 96k.....

There are a WHOLE LOT of relatively low priced 24 bit 44.1/48 mix toy goodies out there...

TC D Two
Kurz multi FX
Quantec ?
Lexicon - MPX range

If I picked up a(nother) second Digi 888/16 interface (24 bit via AES) used
I could hang 4 x more stereo AES or SPDIF i/o outboard units off my PT rig.....

Hmmmmmm....

See what AES brings... I may just stick at Mix + 44/48 operation untill DAW WARS blows over... and that could last YEARS!

I am suffering from Pre Aes Syndrome!

Old 17th September 2002
  #2
Jax
Lives for gear
 

Um... assuming (correctly) that you are moving "up" to PTHD eventually, you could still use those 44.1/48k toys with the rig.

From the Digi site, this applies to both the 192 and 192 Digital interfaces:

"The digital inputs on the Digital I/O card can utilize the on-board sample-rate converter chips for hardware-based sample-rate conversion, allowing you to stream digital signals at any sample rate into your Pro Tools sessions."

Old 17th September 2002
  #3
back into PT yes!

But the mini scandal is - that they can not be sent TO the units digitally!

The live SRC is only on the WAY IN.

(a feature designed with 44.1 DATS CD's etc in mind)

So I would have to waste a bunch of outputs at mixdown on analog sends to the toys...

So it's back to the old cat drawing board for you Jax!

heh
Old 17th September 2002
  #4
Lives for gear
 
C.Lambrechts's Avatar
 

Re: Re: Man, if I decide not to upgrade to 96k.....

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules
There are a WHOLE LOT of relatively low priced 24 bit 44.1/48 mix toy goodies out there...
and they ain't going anywhere .... only getting cheaper

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules

If I picked up a(nother) second hand Digi 888/16 interface (cheap & 24 bit via AES) I could hang 4 x more stereo AES or SPDIF i/o outboard units off my PT rig.....
I can understand your reasoning and who am I to argue them but imvho second hand 888/24's are very soon going to be in the same price range and at least they are better in case you would need extra AD ... 888/16 is not even an option anymore for that.


Quote:
Originally posted by Jules

See what AES brings... I may just stick at Mix + 44/48 operation untill DAW WARS blows over... and that could last YEARS!

I am suffering from Pre Aes Syndrome!



What is a Gearslut to do?

I wish I knew .... I have placed me bets on HD. But I find it hard to find real life arguments to convince people like you. I wish I knew for sure .... I hope that HD has something up the sleeve. Stuff that "realy" will make a difference. Not only a slightly improved mixbus and 96K , ... which does sound better but even I find myself recording at 96k only in what I call pure acoustics / low track count sessions, The bigger sessions with lots of synths and midi and drum programming are still done at 48k.

Realy wish I could say "Jeez you must be stupid not to upgrade" but in reality I wonder myself as much as you do if it is the right thing and worth doing.

Still for what it might be worth .... my upgrading reasons sum up :

(although some of these are relative ....)

1. better sound
2. future development compatibility within OSX or XP, .... mix is NOT going to be around for ever.
3. The mix bus does sound better and improved. although hard evidence is missing and it is more a feeling .... find it easier to mix and achieve good sound on HD ..... even at 48K.
4. better convertors, I happen to like the 192 a lot. Used to do AD with SPX-100 SE and sold it since I got the 192. To me it sounds better.
5. Midi I/O ... for those using midi in PT like me .... this looks very promissing ... have to wait for OSX for real functionality.
6. Plugins have improved in HD, also a reason why it is easier to get a good sounding result then with a MIX system.
7. Processing power on cards is realy impressive .... while waiting for even better plugins which will probably only be available on those dsp's.


Like I said .... although relative in most cases it is there and the future possibilities are open ....
Old 17th September 2002
  #5
Jax
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules
The live SRC is only on the WAY IN.
I was wondering how else Digi would screw up PTHD! That "feature" alone greatly reduces the usefulness of HD for MANY people. Forced to use a 48/44.1 session just so I can use my digital outboards?? tut fuuck Between that and the questionable wc sync method, where using your choice of external clock ADDS to the instability of the clock reference, I'm glad to be sticking with Mix... at least for awhile.
Old 17th September 2002
  #6
Lives for gear
 
C.Lambrechts's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jax


I was wondering how else Digi would screw up PTHD! That "feature" alone greatly reduces the usefulness of HD for MANY people. Forced to use a 48/44.1 session just so I can use my digital outboards?? tut fuuck Between that and the questionable wc sync method, where using your choice of external clock ADDS to the instability of the clock reference, I'm glad to be sticking with Mix... at least for awhile.
On the other hand good outboard operating at 44.1 usually has good AD in it too. and you can allways go into the outboard analog and come back in digital. or even analog. I still use my PCM91 in an all analog way.

Oh btw ... brings up another argument in favour of HD. Routing the digi interfaces in HD is WAY better then in MIX.
Old 18th September 2002
  #7
How about that at 48K, HD still sounds better than the old mixplus at 48k(especially when you go over 32 tracks). You can also finally sell your Dangerous Box and buy that stereo 2 bus compressor you've been looking for.
Old 18th September 2002
  #8
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by thethrillfactor
How about that at 48K, HD still sounds better than the old mixplus at 48k(especially when you go over 32 tracks).
Only if you mix in the box or use crud-ins. Maybe. heh
Old 19th September 2002
  #9
Hi Jon,

Have u tried mixing in HD yet?


Quote:
Originally posted by jon


Only if you mix in the box or use crud-ins. Maybe. heh
Old 19th September 2002
  #10
Lives for gear
 
C.Lambrechts's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by thethrillfactor
Hi Jon,

Have u tried mixing in HD yet?



Oh now did you realy have to ask that ????
Old 19th September 2002
  #11
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

i just think jon has to rationalize his setup.

when PT gets FULL auto delay compensation, im there [unless DP does it as well]. altiverb used to be one... but PT has it now, of course i would still like the PSP stuff.

the more i listen, the more i hear the tools are nothing in the wrong ears. i prefer to be proactive rather than reactive to my gear.
Old 19th September 2002
  #12
One with big hooves
 
Jay Kahrs's Avatar
Jules, it's interesting that a year ago you were happy to NOT upgrade to HD and use the D2B and analog outboard as a sonic upgrade. Why are you thinking about it now? Trying to stay on the cutting edge for your own reasons or are you feeling pressure from lables and A&R mooks to get the latest and greatest? Or is it a feature thing that you need higher track counts and stuff like that?
Old 19th September 2002
  #13
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Guys,

From what I can gather, PT HD offers no benefits sonically at 48k over a MixPlus+Apogee system if you don't mix inside it.

On the other hand, if I needed to have huge track counts coming out to the console in the future, then HD would be a good idea.

We're having an HD system coming in to our Studio B starting next week and I will compare mixing in it.

Remember, I'm interested in sonics and big-sounding mixes for a great record...which is where mixing in a DAW is in a very different league from on a high-end analog desk....even though that is not what many clever DAW home and project studists who populate these forums want to hear.

That also runs counter to the comfort level of some mid-level freelance engineers I've seen....who know PT well because they have it at home...but who don't have enough experience on the big desk to take advantage of its strengths. Naturally, they don't tell their label friends that, so they accept the gig and then mix with plug-ins summed on the desk. And it sounds like poop...

A major-label priority new-signing pop-rock album (sounds familiar) begins here on Tuesday for 2 1/2 months...guess what, no DAW. Just good musicians, tape, and 48 days for tracking. A conscious effort is apparently going to be made to NOT sound like a ProTools record. Maybe it's going out of fashion. Remember, I own ProTools, so it's not like I'm slamming some gear I wish I had.
Old 19th September 2002
  #14
Jay Wrote -"Jules, it's interesting that a year ago you were happy to NOT upgrade to HD and use the D2B and analog outboard as a sonic upgrade. Why are you thinking about it now? Trying to stay on the cutting edge for your own reasons or are you feeling pressure from lables and A&R mooks to get the latest and greatest? Or is it a feature thing that you need higher track counts and stuff like that?"

Ashley PTHD wasnt around when I 'upgraded' to the D2B, and I've since got myself 16 chanells of Prism converters that can work at 96k. The D2B and the Prisms have 'cheered me up greatly' and are a great distraction from the temptation of HD. (I just need to rob a bank first)

I am desirous of 96k operation, thats all.. I have heard it and there is more depth + more highs and lows.. I am not of the opinion that it is 'closer to tape' - I feel it is a simply a big step forward in sound quality or perhaps more importantly 'magic & vibe capture'. I feel definately 'stuck' at 48k operation now..."world class digital" is now 96k IMHO.

I have the converters at the ready. I am still on the fence about what to connect them to next.

No client pressure at all BTW.
Old 19th September 2002
  #15
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by jon
Remember, I'm interested in sonics and big-sounding mixes for a great record...which is where mixing in a DAW is in a very different league from on a high-end analog desk....even though that is not what many clever DAW home and project studists who populate these forums want to hear.
that just isnt true anymore... but if you like to keep convincing yourself of that... go ahead. i can easily beat out analog mixes in the genre i do on a daily basis. all my "reference" discs have no longer become of any use.

i will say its an entirely different method of working, but once you head in that direction and it starts clicking, then there is no going back.
Old 19th September 2002
  #16
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk


that just isnt true anymore... but if you like to keep convincing yourself of that... go ahead. i can easily beat out analog mixes in the genre i do on a daily basis. all my "reference" discs have no longer become of any use.
AJ,

You forget that I have a couple of popular DAWs here in the control room, with a full set of crud-ins, and am very aware of what it sounds like mixing in them. Oh, and you work on a high-end analog desk every day.

But I guess you don't need to, since you said you now blow away all your reference discs nowadays just mixing in your DAW at home.

Who needs a top mix engineer, a great room, $50k tuned monitors and top gear anymore when a dude with a DAW at home easily beats those platinum mixes on a daily basis?

If that were true, geeeeez...it would sure solve a lot of my problems and make my life easier.

I wish I WERE convinced. I kid not. I could sell a ton of gear, upgrade to the latest DAW, and be on easy street. But unfortunately, it's just not like that.
Old 19th September 2002
  #17
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk
i will say its an entirely different method of working, but once you head in that direction and it starts clicking, then there is no going back.
It's not entirely different. Many pro engineers do both, and they go back and forth all the time.
Old 19th September 2002
  #18
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Jules,

FWIW, IMHO...I agree that 88k with good converters can sound better than 44k with good converters...at least that has been my experience when putting down mixes to a Masterlink via the PSX100SE at 44 vs 88.

With the PSX100SE, the lower rates tend to gel things together better and sound 'heavier' in the bottom end, while the higher rates have better definition and hi end -- and conversely the mix sounds somewhat less glued together.

For multi-track, I am not sure that 88k/96k is as useful as it is for mixdown, at least when mixing on an analog board, since I'll tend to EQ things to get them where I want them to be. For this same reason, I'm not quite as concerned about converters as I used to be.

However, if mixing in the box, perhaps 96/88k might make more of a difference.
Old 19th September 2002
  #19
Lives for gear
 
C.Lambrechts's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by jon
We're having an HD system coming in to our Studio B starting next week and I will compare mixing in it.


I'll be looking foreward hearing your opinion Jon.
Old 20th September 2002
  #20
Lives for gear
 
XHipHop's Avatar
Did anyone read Roger Nichol's article in one of the last EQ's claiming that 96k DOES sound better and make a difference. I think it had something to do with the way the filters were sloped or something. I browsed it in a bookstore and i'm suprised more people haven't refrenced it. I'm gonna go try to find a copy and post it here if i do.
Old 20th September 2002
  #21
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by jon


It's not entirely different. Many pro engineers do both, and they go back and forth all the time.
see, there is your problem. even those "pro" engineers state that it IS different. they might go back and forth but i am willing to bet how they do things are very dependant on which way they go.
Old 20th September 2002
  #22
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by jon

I wish I WERE convinced. I kid not. I could sell a ton of gear, upgrade to the latest DAW, and be on easy street. But unfortunately, it's just not like that.
actually, you couldnt with trying to run the kind of place you run. people are sheep. thats why you have an SSL. its not that its the best sounding desk out there.

and no, i dont need to work on a high end desk to get great results... in fact a lot of people here dont either. i have heard many mixes from people in DAWs and other digital domains make great sounding records. i have even heard some great sounding **** on very ****ty equipment.

there are just too many records that dont sound that great made on top of the line gear making your point invalid.
Old 20th September 2002
  #23
One with big hooves
 
Jay Kahrs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally posted by jon
Who needs a top mix engineer, a great room, $50k tuned monitors and top gear anymore when a dude with a DAW at home easily beats those platinum mixes on a daily basis?

If that were true, geeeeez...it would sure solve a lot of my problems and make my life easier.

I wish I WERE convinced. I kid not. I could sell a ton of gear, upgrade to the latest DAW, and be on easy street. But unfortunately, it's just not like that.
I'm probably more pro-analog then you Jon and I just can't agree with that. While I don't think that mixing inside a DAW sounds all that great when compared to a decent console it's not horrible either. I've heard some good DAW mixes and some really bad ones. I've also heard great analog mixes and really bad ones. Where and what is the correct answer? Look in the mirror man. It's all about the engineer.

While none of my mixes are ever going to win an award for being squeaky clean they get the job done. I prefer mixing on an analog console. I own a Trident 65 and I've also spent time on an SSL G, G+, Amek Big & a Mozart with RN modules, MCIs, a Trident 80C, PT Mix +, DP, Cakewalk, an 02R and D8B among others. The best results for me have always come from an analog console. A lot of it is due to the way I work. I'm just more comfortable with real knobs and faders. Some people are happy mixing on a DAW or digital desk, I'm just not one of them. Also, I don't think a digital desk makes a lot of sense for a busy midlevel studio just from a business perspective.

As for room design and $50K monitors well...You need a good room to mix in but plenty of musically and sonically good records have been made in bad rooms. I would also never spend $50K on a pair of monitors. Maybe in 20 years if my business ever grows to something I never expected but still. I'm way too happy with a set of Tannoy DMT215's or Ausburger 2x15" for mains. Neither one of those cost anywhere near $50K even after amps and installs. Hell if I had to go out and buy mains right now I'd probably get KRK's or some old Urei 813s.
Old 20th September 2002
  #24
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk
see, there is your problem. even those "pro" engineers state that it IS different. they might go back and forth but i am willing to bet how they do things are very dependant on which way they go.
AJ, there is a large difference between reading about a topic...and experiencing, doing it on a daily basis...on the front lines.

Every now and then in this music biz, I meet an otherwise nice, intelligent artist or musician at a dinner or party, who upon learning that I am American, launches into an anti-American diatribe based on things that person has read about in the press or in books or on the net or saw on TV.

As someone who has spent about half my life in the US and about half in Europe (London, Berlin, Moscow, Paris), it always amuses me that these guys have, generally, never actually BEEN to the country they are lecturing me about, much less lived there for any extended period of time. I think you get the point.
Old 20th September 2002
  #25
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk
actually, you couldnt with trying to run the kind of place you run. people are sheep. thats why you have an SSL. its not that its the best sounding desk out there.
For the record, I would sell off anything that is superfluous to the quality of work done here, particularly regarding the quality of MY work. Including the 9000J, should that become the case one day.

For a boutique 2-room facility like this one, the real money is not so much in renting an empty studio as it is in tracking/mixing albums as a package of engineer+studio. Plus the producer hat, too, when possible. It's what makes MY mixes sound better that really matters around here. If clients call asking if we have an SSL (which is what often happens) then that's great, but it's a supplement to our primary niche of high-end tracking and mixing work.

As to the quality of SSL, part of it is the excellent service...and the other is all those working engineers who like them, that you call 'sheep'. I guess it's your opinion against theirs. See my post above.

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk
and no, i dont need to work on a high end desk to get great results... in fact a lot of people here dont either. i have heard many mixes from people in DAWs and other digital domains make great sounding records. i have even heard some great sounding **** on very ****ty equipment.
AJ, I'd suggest spending a few months mixing on one so you can talk about the topic with a some actual experience behind you.

While I know PT MixPlus very well, I can't fully judge mixing in PT HD until I actually do it. If it ever sounded as good as the 9k, I would be very, very excited...as that would be one HELL of a leap from MixPlus. If it wasn't, I'd work on MixPlus!

P.S. Jay - I believe you'd just have to hear what I'm talking about to understand.

AJ, as you point out, mediocre work sometimes comes out of great rooms, not just home studios...but there are way too many variables involved to make a generalized conclusion.

Great equipment/rooms/monitors....while they enormously improve the potential result and help remove potential excuses....are not by themselves enough to guarantee world-class results. As Jay wrote, the engineer's experience and expertise are critical. The problem could be the arrangement or production...or a lack of time or poor planning. Finally, it's not always possible to transform those home-tracked DAW turds into platinum with a high-end room...sometimes you have to settle for gold.

Gotta go do my mix thang now.
Old 20th September 2002
  #26
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

jon, i do know how to molest a large frame console, and am aware of the sonic imprints of one on a recording. it surely isnt rocket science. ill admit its been a few years now since i have used a largeframe... but i dont miss it.

your attitude is a little odd considering most recordings coming out of these large rooms really arent that great. so by jays example... the "pros" working these rooms arent that great either... so those millions of dollars really arent buying jack ****.

kinda like owning a ferrari but not knowing how to drive. someone in a civic could whip their ass around the lap time after time.

i dont buy/subscribe to your holier than thou sonic statement. i have heard great recordings done in all enviroments the gear becomes almost meaningless... from a business standpoint, i can see your point, not from a sonic one however. and even the business side is a tough sell in the current climate.


it all comes down to the engineer... to use your american/european example, your little euorpean friends can think they know ALL americans but they dont. it might be real easy to clump them all together but we know what kind of ignorance that is. when the truth is that is comes down to the actual PERSON [not a machine].
Old 20th September 2002
  #27
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

another thing i notice in your posts jon is you seem to equate commercial success with sonic bliss... but reality is that the absolute BEST sounding recordings are likely to only go copper because the population at large really doesnt give a **** about the sonics.
Old 20th September 2002
  #28
Gear Maniac
 
recorderman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk
in the genre i do
...is this the key?
Old 20th September 2002
  #29
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by recorderman

...is this the key?
nope. i have no issues when working with other genres either.... not to mention the heavy rock genre seems to be the last bastion of analogs dominance.

heavy rock IMO is one of the hardest genres to do due to the instrumentation and thickness of the productions [and everything has to be huge]. other styles are just so much easier to do [at least for me]... and the results have very little to do with the medium because i own quite a number of recordings done analog that fall short of sonic bliss [many made by TOP guys in the field... in fact, most of the good recordings i have heard of late were made by "little guys"]
Old 21st September 2002
  #30
One with big hooves
 
Jay Kahrs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally posted by jon

P.S. Jay - I believe you'd just have to hear what I'm talking about to understand.

AJ, as you point out, mediocre work sometimes comes out of great rooms, not just home studios...but there are way too many variables involved to make a generalized conclusion.

Great equipment/rooms/monitors....while they enormously improve the potential result and help remove potential excuses....are not by themselves enough to guarantee world-class results. As Jay wrote, the engineer's experience and expertise are critical. The problem could be the arrangement or production...or a lack of time or poor planning. Finally, it's not always possible to transform those home-tracked DAW turds into platinum with a high-end room...sometimes you have to settle for gold.
Jon, I have worked in high-end rooms before so don't assume that I haven't. I have also heard the difference between a mix done in PT and on an 80 series Neve. There was a record I tracked a while ago that was mixed by another engineer in a few different studios. Most of the songs were done on a Neotek Series II and a few were done on an SSL G+ and the Neotek mixes are better. Is it the engineer, the equipment or both?

I'm sorry man, but to spend $50K on monitors and $300K or whatever on a console just to remove potential excuses is just pissing money away. Do the best job you can, make sure that your **** works and that's all you need. Would I like to work on a 9000J or K all the time? Sure, who wouldn't but to say that it's the only thing you can mix on is just plain stupid.
📝 Reply
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…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
🎙️ View mentioned gear