TRC is primarily funded by ad revenue. If you like the content you find here, don't block the ads check them out instead. Thank you.

Mixers and mixing

  1. rodbargee
    rodbargee
    Okay then..who advocates a "real mixer" for the best results and who reckons pro tools and the like are just as good "In Software". Can you really get that first pass....My god listen to that moment, from software or do you really have to have the hands on some faders with little to no "latency" Or is the cost the arbiter of a good mix. Does the fact you can eventually beat a set of tracks into submission in the box make up for the lack of feel. If you played your instruments in the same way it might lessen the appeal..........discuss

    I'm not necessarily talking huge, very expensive desks, just ones you can drive and with practice fly.
  2. stoo
    stoo
    From my limited experience of it, real mixing desks are great if you've got lots of different input sources whether it be instruments, amps, mics, samplers, effects units etc... or if you're using an external multitrack recorder of some description.

    Lets you leave lots of stuff connected so you can quickly jump from one thing to another without rewiring the whole lot.


    If you're mostly recording one track at a time with a fairly small number of input sources then the benefits aren't as overwhelming, and can end up leading to needlesly complicated hardware setups. There's plenty of USB / MIDI controllers that will drive a virtual mixer if you're not keen on dragging sliders with a mouse... latency shouldn't be an issue there if the setup's OK.... should it?
  3. rodbargee
    rodbargee
    Quote Originally Posted by stoo View Post
    MIDI controllers that will drive a virtual mixer if you're not keen on dragging sliders with a mouse... latency shouldn't be an issue there if the setup's OK.... should it?
    Even quite expensive controllers do have quite a lot of latency compared to a real desk. I dont like them, I dont feel connected to what I'm working on.

    Real kit has a sound and feel all of it's own and yes it cost (though not always) but the character comes across with everything that's bolted together, so to speak. Seesick Steve's a good example of an amazing sound got from a few real "bits of kit" some very old and not that expensive (not counting Steve)
  4. Twigman
    Twigman
    When mixing down my projects I use my Behringer BCR2000 as a contoller of the in the box Sonar mixer. I don't have need for a huge outboard desk.

    I use a small MG10/2 to choose outboard sources when tracking - it does a good job.
  5. Twigman
    Twigman
    Quote Originally Posted by rodbargee View Post
    Even quite expensive controllers do have quite a lot of latency compared to a real desk.
    That totally depends on the MIDI interface you use to your box.
    It's possible to get this down to <2ms easily and is thus irrelevant.
  6. rodbargee
    rodbargee
    Quote Originally Posted by Twigman View Post
    That totally depends on the MIDI interface you use to your box.
    It's possible to get this down to <2ms easily and is thus irrelevant.
    Yes to a point, but using many channels and long mixes 30-50 minute projects and say 50 or 100 channels plus plugins eq dynamics etc etc, the latency is often much greater, for example using pt hd3 with long form projects the latency climbs with the processor loads....eq gets rubbery and fades get knotchy, huey control faders not good generally the definition is poor,and the bigger the mix and processing demands, the bigger the latency.

    Actually with the exception of .....The fastest mix engine out there at the moment is the Fairlight CC1 chip which really does control 98 plus channels all with eight band eq and full dynamics 5.1 stem mixing with a latencey of less than 0.5 ms ......but it starts at about 13K (as do PT HD type systems but thery're not half as quick as the fairlight)
  7. Twigman
    Twigman
    Quote Originally Posted by rodbargee View Post
    Yes to a point, but using many channels and long mixes 30-50 minute projects and say 50 or 100 channels plus plugins eq dynamics etc etc, the latency is often much greater,
    True - large track counts necessitate large I/O buffers and so high latencies.

    I tend to automate most of my mixes anyway. I know this takes a lot longer but given the constraints of large buffers it's a necessity.
  8. Bobzilla
    Bobzilla
    Only ever used hardware, and can't see any reason to switch. A real mixer is not much bigger than a laptop (unless you're talking 24 channel, in which case I can see the benefit, but if you're putting that much audio gear in a venue, the mixer will be not that much of a problem.

    How many pros use a software mixer compared to a Mackie? None of the ones I know...
  9. Lord_of_Moo
    Lord_of_Moo
    horses for corses. i've used 48 track analogue into sonar, yamaha01v into mackie hdr, all sorts. i think its becoming more and more important to be flexible as regards to what you can use. i'd personally like a big old valve desk, running into sonar. best of both worlds. the editing is undenyably better in the digital domain, easier, cheaper. cleaning heads with a cotton bud isn't my idea of fun.

    as far as live, i use my old 01v. it has acceptable gates, compressors,limiters,reverbs etc etc without needing a van to cart it about in. in fact i've turned up at gigs on my bike, with everything i need. yes you get a bit of lag on the controls but it doesn't take long to adjust your brain. with the o`1v i potentially have 24 independant compressors/gates/limiters alone, imagine the size/cost of lugging that lot to every gig...
Results 1 to 9 of 9

TRC Affiliates - Help TRC make a small amount of commission