You can get great mixes using both approaches, it all comes down to the skill of the engineer. However, I greatly prefer an analog mix and I don't think the sound difference is subtle. Anyone who takes a class on DSP will quickly learn that there are numerous mathematical compromises that must be made in order enable digital mixing and processing. Those compromises add up, quickly. As someone who went digital and then went back to analog, it my opinion that digital audio has a long way to go.
also about headroom... in a daw, mix down around -10db. there's your headroom. People that say you have no headroom in a daw are mixing up around -2db. duh Conversely on a analog desk you have headroom above 0db. this is the key to understanding the difference and getting quality mixes on a daw - don't overload your faders,plugins,and busses
at 3:54 so true!!! in mixing you have to really be aware of not just what you're hearing, but what you're experiencing psychologically as well. Your mind will play tricks on you and a big part of getting better at mixing is overcoming these auditory illusions
Soon we can expect big name record producers and labels mixing albums entirely on their iMix app.
Gives me a very good reason to expand my record collection using original all analog recordings from the 70's and early 80's. Sorry, but im not a fan of constrained, in the box mixing.
@Raindarsus Although there was digital reel to reels machines in service, the majority by far was analogue. Especially in the 70s, I dont think there were digital machines out at all. Could be wrong about that but between both decades you can bet 98% was still analogue. But the format is not important. Its the content that people respond to. "It's not the bicycle, its the rider." I am getting great sounds with Pro Tools, Waves and great analog front end. Its about the music, not the technology;)
OMG - this is such a blatent product endorsement for ProTools and Waves. I expect they got 'payment' in the form of £10k + free software.
Real producers/engineers prefer analog consoles/eq/compressors etc as opposed to mixing within an all digital environment. There is a big difference in sound quality. I cannot be arsed to try and convince people of this. Its a fact.
@DIGITALSCREAMS Real producers? And what defines real for you, one that happens to agree with you? I've been doing this art for the past.. 18 years at least.. I think I'm real at what I do. And compared with working with tape.. damn I love daws. And when you actually have a control surface like the icon.. or a system 5.. or even the ssl. Well it's exactly like working back in the days with nobs and faders, just no tape hassle.
@Raindarsus This is exactly where I am coming from. I think people loose sight that all that great sound from an SSL is not because of the board in istelf, but because of the descisions made by talented people using it. All those A rooms worth millions also have A list engineers. Many of whom conclude exactly as you have about the Icon and modern digital. I have a C24, but that workflow is definitely there, and why mixing ITB is now way cool. Big, deep, woody, full and no complaints here.
@DIGITALSCREAMS Not really. We are at a turning point with the Icon, Waves SSL in particular and Pro Tools that many old school guys are converts now. Andy Johns for example prefers digital recording stating "I have always fought analog, and vinyl. If you need some tape machine to warm up your sound then you are in trouble to begin with." and "You dont get your sound from a console, you get it from the instruments and the room." A good controller like even c24 brings the pleasure of a mixer.
@DIGITALSCREAMS Those quotes, by the way, were not extracted from a Pro Tools promotional, but from a book called The Mixing Engineer's Handbook by Bobby Owsinski. Still, I use a hybrid. I have real 1176s and the plug-in by Bomb factory. The plug ins work great for drums, I cant tell the difference. But the real one is slightly better for vocals. Real Pultec any day, no comparison. SSL eq? the plug in is just as good. So a Waves SSL and C24 make a good workflow with a few analog gems up front.
@ace9031 Can't agree with you there. There's a lot less noises in actual digital recording if your AD are true. Tape had wow and flutter, hisses, low noise distortion, high noise distortion .. so much that you actually had to track hot to get over the noise floor, compared to what you have to do with daws and a good AD/DA. In fact you might think that you have more noise, but in reality you're actually getting a better image of what your recording.
@Raindarsus Absolutely. People are just so used to hearing the harmonic distotion of tape that they think its part of the surce that digital is missing. On the contrary, Digital is much more honest and sometimes that is not as good, sometimes its better. Comparing an A and D recording of drums the A sounded fatter, punchier and perceived as louder. Better, yes, but I took the D recording, ran it through a decent tube mic pre with 10k lowpass and the A and my D were indestinguishable. Really!
@Raindarsus You also got to look at the sampling rate being applied to the recording and if its a studio in a box then your having to round the quantizatiion error. After that you need proper balance and then you have to make sure the signal is routed correctly.
I'm tired of all these videos comparing SSL analog vs plugins. COME ON !!! You will NEVER EVER beat a traditional ssl console with fucking plugins. And all the people involved in these videos telling : "Waaooo it's so cool, it tastes like the real thing." are just paid a huge check to tell these LIES and sell their products
Source: myself. Assistant Engineer using SSL 4000 G at my work.
@Midou75 when people lie u can see the lies in their eyes. i got protools and all my plug ins for an affordable price and they work. i sound fucking cool as hell in my home studio
...as for me...I would much rather spend my time creating and performing great music...than piss it away arguing digital v analog. Fact is, no matter how you mix, if you have Justin Bieber coming in; you have Justin Bieber going out...pure shit. If you have Brian Wilson going in...no matter how you mix...you have Brian Wilson coming out...straight butter, baby...straight butter. You screw with the gear...I'd rather make the sounds.
I have been practicing for about two and a half years only mixing and levels and sound card adjustments. I can only advise to many people. Get it all together before you judge anything. So I feel ready to mix totally in the box. After getting all of the facts first. I can give you Low lows and Bright crispy highs with out killing your ear drums. People understand every in the box mix comes down to YOUR setup. I love digital!!! Peace.
I made the test on avid homepage,,,,I could not tell what was what,,,Digital or analog BUT,,,,I heard a difference !! I thought the best must be the digital so on the best clip I voted in the box,,,80 % wrong ,,,The best was the analog. I heard a better presence, moore overtones, moore realistic. Just a little but still I did.
apples and oranges!!! you will eat them differently! you will have a completly different intuitive and emotional experience using in the box and analog albeit a similar experience making love to a real woman and making love to yourself watching a porn site. do the math
all i had to do was plug a mic into a pre amp and then run it into my computer (delta 1010) and then using the same preamp and mic and settings secounds later pluging it into my reel to reel, using the same speaker the digital sounds like its not even picking up the hole signal and sounds very weak like you need to proccess it, on my reel to reel it sounds like you spent millions of dollars on proccessing equipment and all that is different is the analog.......idon'tknowaboutprotoolsneverusedit
Ah come on! OK you might be able to reproduce a mix done on an SSL inside the box... But the difference is in the MIXING ACTION! It's a totally different experience on the real thing. Tons of headroom! Tons of nice natural saturation! Tons of fun!... A completely different mixing gesture. Sorry I love ProTools but the sound of actual electricity CANNOT be beaten by no daw! Honestly
@culturekiller The sound is no real issue anymore (as is stated in the clip) but Amen brother on the "feel" part of it. A console makes you WANT to touch it and turn knobs. A computer mouse is so NOT fun for me, but I do love Pro Tools. Now I just put in a c24 console and now I have a modern form of what can be compared to a digital console. All analog/digital differences aside, I am back to looking at a console and not a computer screen and Voila'! The joy is back. The SSL Bundle does rock:-)
@culturekiller sure dude i will, i've only been mixing for a week but i uploaded three songs of me learning. so check them out, my videos of me learning how to mix for the first time ever are on my channel.
@TranceElevation We are talking about music and about art here, so there are no set rules. Sometimes I mix electronic music and inside the box i get more dynamics, which can be useful on a house mix. The thing with analog equipment and analogue mixing is you get more of a "sound", more of a vibe. The act of mixing on a desk makes your work an unrepeatable performance, a unique moment that can't be recalled. THAT gives your mix a unique and personal character... You see what I mean?
@culturekiller Since you talked about more headroom, natural saturation and electricity sound I wanted simply to know if there is any objectvie technical advantage of using analog mixer.
I'm simply ignorant on the matter, that's why I'm asking you.
Also, would this eventual advantage apply to vsts as well?
@TranceElevation Mmm is there a technical advantage in using an analogue desk over a daw? no. Actually you loose total recall. And nothing is "objective" in music making :-) In my opinion once you're in the digital domain it doesn't make a world of difference if you use a VST, AU, TDM or RTAS. Whatever. But in the analogue domain everything contributes to the uniqueness of your sound: your desk? Maybe your cables? Maybe even the power! Ok now I'm pushing it, but you get what I'm saying, right?
@culturekiller I don't think they're suggesting the sound can be beaten by a daw, just that it's so close that it's worth it for the benefits a daw has over a mixing desk. If you watch Pensados Place where they interview many top mixing engineers - almost all of them are in the box at this point. It really comes down to a mixer's skill and ability to use his tools effectively. A mixer will sound the same whether on a daw or desk - it's his ear that leads his decision making imo
@hershism Mmm, top mixing engineers do it in the box? I'm not sure about that.. check on Jack Joseph Puig vids on youtube. I agree with you it all comes down to your ears, judgment, taste, experience of the mixing engineer. But if you use an actual analog desk then your decisions change slightly! As I said it's a different gesture, a different action. Plus the sound goes through lots of circuitry, and metal and stuff! It does take a unique character. Maybe less clean? Maybe. But I like that!
It's like arguing religion: the human brain is so biased it's impossible to arrive at any meaningful conclusion. I use a DAW workstation and mix in the box with these modern "analog" plugins with the intent to create a "vintage" sound just like my favorite 70's records. If I lied and showed you a picture of me using old analog recording gear, you would absoltely believe thats what I was doing.
I can tell I have never been around any loud sounds my ears are lucky I have lived indoors for 19 years i would like to test the fine parts of my hears ps i love old gear and thick warm sound yoes i have pro tools ok test me
remember please. In the fifties and sixties the sessions were recorded on three tracks recorders and later on 8 tracks recorders. Have you ever heard lp mixed like the beatles, The beach boys, stones, Eddie Cochran etc etc. All of this discussion about pro tools or analog mix is bullshit. All of the talent comin' from the musicians and the producer. That's all folks.
@00Jackacid because he made the sound well. Remember Phil Spector, George Martin, Brian Wilson and many many more. But maybe you're too young to understand what i say.
@The170460 then dont devalue the gear either. jimmi hendrix wouldnt have sounded the same on a crappy kay guitar going through a transitor amp. thats is where the sounds come from. maybe when they are gone people will respect that more.
@The170460 Part of the sound did indeed have to do with analog versus digital. Try listening to the same artists recording analog versus digital. Pink Floyd's Division Bell sounds WAY different than their other albums. Easily tell it's digital.
Thank for sharing the video man! You cannot find it in hte Avid website since it is not digidesign anymore!! I got to this topic Mixing in the box or on an analag board, from 2 sources Charles Dye with MILAR and a SSL show off the Matrix consoles, where the representant of SSL show us an A/B coparisson of a Peter Gabriel´s MIX. He stated that the bigger difference was in the deph of the mix, and that it has something to do with the amount of dither. Does anyone have info about it? Thanks!!
Waves is the shit! But there sooooooooo flipping expensive! Why do they need to charge so much? You'd thing with it would be logical business sense to lower the prices of these things. They force some people to run to their local torrent store. Not me though,,,,oh know! Gawd no! Now that would be steeling..........the basturds!
digital is used to be quick and efficient.. Analog is needs more dedication but the in the end it gives that tad extra.
And by the way, a digital desk is most of the time more expensive than an analog of the same quality. add a mac pro to that list, a few big screens, DAW, Soundcards, digital processing units.. I don't think analog is that much more expensive..
@PattyWhomperOFFICIAL and on top of that: analog encourages you to use your ears in stead of having everything layed out in front of your eyes.. Some people work better that way
@Adefesio94 Engineers are just getting too lazy these days. Why duplicate or mimic when you can have the real thing? If my favourite artists in the 60's and 70's were able to record analogue, then when can't I when I have a band?
People arguing about analog vs. digital are just noobs. Fucking fools. No one can tell the difference anymore and who fucking cares. Now you can make record at home with v drums and amplitube, master it with Waves and no one will know if it was analog console. I hate this analog bullshit. You want analog ? want noise ? Turn fan or heater in the room and record that. That's very analog.
@Adefesio94 IF YOU KNOW what makes analog sound analog you can make it or I can say, mimic it in DIGITAL even BETTER. But you can never make analog sound clean and real as digital. Basically with EQ, Tube Saturation (optional) plugin and Compressor you can make any recording sound analog. I did it and a lot of my friends producers did it as well. DAW owns these days. Sometimes I'll use analog summing but going to tape these days..ohh please. Big ass desk for sum would be nice but tape, nah.
@SaGruenwdt Oh, definitely. Don't get me wrong. I'm VERY aware of the loudness war.
But what I was talking about specifically was how different music made digitally sounds compared to music made in analogue. Try listening to Pink Floyd's Division Bell as opposed to their earlier works. You can hear the difference right away in the production.
Analogue is the way to go. I spend a lot of time in front of the computer as it is. I wouldn't want to be around one when I make music.
Thank You Very Much for this wonderful infomercial. !!!!!
BTW, I wonder if all those "pro" "sound engineers" always honestly and proudly tell their "potential clients" that they can't hear (a) diffrence between their SSL(s) (or what ever they got as a "flagship" that they always use as background for their photos and interviews ;) ) and ProTools with bunch of plug-ins ... heh heh heh ;).
They are just saying that it gets harder to tell the difference...and that is true .... the question is why all those guys still use consoles.... ha ha ha ... all that does not mean that those guys can get it right ITB.... and I believe they can.
The Cult of Analog is out in full effect. No one is saying that mixing ITB is the same, what they're saying is that if you mix ITB *with* a plug-in that models what the SSL does, you can't tell the difference. I'll believe all you clowns when you can prove that you can hear the difference with this setup in an ABX test.
The cult of Pro Tools must be stopped. It's over priced and quite annoying! If you want the analog sound then, record on analog gear and visa versa. Just stop trying to bend digital into analog, it just sounds cheap. The Foo Fighters got it right on the new record, I hope it sticks.
Interview with Allen Sides:Here's a reference point. When I was doing a record with Phil Collins we had done 10 background vocal tracks. I was moving along quickly so I just bounced those to two channels in the Pro Tools mix buss to call it a day. Phil's still sitting there, we're listening to it, and he says, "what happened to the sound of the backgrounds? I thought it sounded much bigger than that."
I still had 10 faders up on the console, and I had the two I had just made. I could match the levels exactly and A/B it, and the stuff I had just sent to the Pro Tools mix buss sounds significantly smaller and not as good. So then I simply assigned the 10 faders to an analog buss, printed that to the Pro Tools, and that sounded fine. And that's just a classic example.
I've also found that if I change a level up or down 10dB in Pro Tools, the sound will be degraded. [Mix moves] like a guitar solo or a piano that's a major level change, like 10dB for the solo, it gets grainier sounding. If I come out of Pro Tools [level] changed to any major degree, I hear it. If you're riding a vocal and you're only taking one word up, [it's too fast to] even notice it.
If you have to take a big stereo instrument and bring the whole thing up 10dB, assign the track to two sets of outputs. Then bring it up on two sets of faders: one is how it was recorded, one is 10dB up. There's a tremendous difference in sound - some sort of horrible truncation is going on. Try it, A/B it.
The majority of hit records you hear are mixed analog. Probably 85% of the high-end albums that come out, all of those mixes are done analog. A lot of consumers are mixing in the box, they don't know any better.
Thats not a comparison between a ITB & Analog mixing but a hidden product placement for the Waves SSL Bundle wich is about 8k $ (remember: for a software)
These dudes just want their own plug-in Bundle by Waves, and be able to make ton of money off it. Don’t get me wrong, I love Waves, McDsp, and the UA Plugs. However, I have mixed with the SSL by Waves and UA (both were good). However, when I mixed on my first SSL 4000 in Atlanta this past year, I heard a difference almost immediately. I get better results with the analog over the digital with anything. Don’t try to be one way or the other. Hybrid mixing the way to go! Use both!
To maintain your recordings transfer to digital, (fine I do it everyday) But, for artistic value, track on Professional open reel to reel Analog. Why?.. Because analog has that warm natural sound, Digital has that flat dynamic sound. All and I mean All Digital recordings sound exactly the same. Bands like Nickelback or Muse while yes the music is different, but their recordings sound exactly the same. And that makes the recording industry boring.
I trained on pro tools on its first release something like 20 years ago and have watched that dreaded zombie program made so many engineers drones of the gattaga. I love analog and my ears do to.
Yeah....whatever. Looks like someone recieved a big brown paper bag from pro Tools. Can you picture Elvis recording into Pro Tools loaded with 4 million gigatrons of digital interforce. I don't think so, it would have sounded like todays wanna be plastic if he did. Next you'l be telling me that its good to eat Mc Donalds and that its no different to mummas cooking. Shame on you.
If you want to use an eq with "grit and character", why don't you just say you want to add some coloration to the track or mix. Do yourself a favor and try the meridian 3100's and see if your mixes don't sound better in the studio and the finished product.
Check out the George massenburg integrate 2009 series videos, he brings up some valid arguments on recording equip and methodology that is interesting.
I guess if someone is recording someone like Lady Gaga, that using ns10's or aura tones, or krk with 16/44 dig converters will sound just fine, just make sure you got your auto tune and a huge sample library and your good to go.
In the audiophile community, they'll compare the differences between a reference recording of a grand piano to the same piano in the room and see if they can tell the difference between the recording and a live musician. They get that anal.
"it's music after all"????? that sounds like a statement one would make to try to validate commercialized music as something of quality that is equal to sophisticated music for audiophiles that appreciate classical, jazz, or other forms of predominately acoustic based music where the recording does make a difference.
Of course you can't tell the difference in conveters because your playback system isn't detailed enough. If you find out how good your mix is, are you going to listen to a 13 year old that uses earbuds and computer speakers playing mp3's or are you going to listen to an experienced audiophile using high end audio equipment in a good room that has trained ears? 13 years just want to bop go the tune, they could care less how good the recording is.
I've read emails written by studio engineers that were comparing converters and they did tell a difference and yeah 192 takes up hard drive space, but HD space is cheap. Oh wait, Pro Tools has a limitation on file size whereas CAF under Logic doesn't, OOPS.
I guess if one is spitting out commercialized MP3 content for 13 years, just get a sm57, run it through a mbox running pro tools lite, get auto tune on the vocals and add tons of signal processing and you'll a million copies while you only spent a couple thousand on gear,
adamskio123 there are monitors from the audiophile community that are uncolored, try a pair of Meridian DSP3100's for mini monitors. they are DSP digital speakers with class A amps, digital crossover, digital pre amp, 24/192, and one cannot hear the point source. Bryston amps are goods amps, but there are better amps on the audiophile world. But KRK aren't that good from an audiophile perspective. They are just prosumer grade speakers.
@FenderRhodes2 I am no stranger to the "audiophile" world.There is also no such thing as an uncoloured speaker,some are flatter than others, but nothing is "totally transparent" nor is this necessarily a good thing. If you're using digital is your A/D not just as important? There is nothing wrong with KRK 9000b's, indeed with these we've had some of the best selling UK singles in the last decade.Perhaps you're confusing these with the lower end KRKs I admit I am not a fan of.It's my livelihood!
I wish engineers would use a high end audiophile grade playback system, rather than relying on NS10's which produces too much coloration. When I listen to mixes on an audiophile system, I find a lot of bad mixes because it exposes more detail. I am still trying to figure out why use $200 speakers when using millions of dollars worth of gear. Can someone explain why?
@FenderRhodes2 they're used for reference, we have KRK 9000's as mini 1 and NS10s as mini 2, the KRKs are incredible speakers and are the primary mixing speakers. NS10s allow you to get a real "vibe" going, and let you know how mixes translate to other systems. Bear in mind that we have bryston amplification for all speakers (other than the wall mounted genelecs)... All speakers are coloured, "audiophile" ones included, so it's important to use reference speakers to see how mixes translate.
@adamskio123 Reference? You mean reference for a cheap pair of speakers. The ns 10's sound like the average cheap pair of speakers running through a medium grade audiophile amp, using standard cabling. Now, Abbey Road, which does a lot of classical recordings use high end B&W speakers, Classe Power amps, high end cables, but those still have small amounts of x-over, pre amp distortion at high volumes, but Meridian uses digital x-over, pre amp, sonically dead cab, etc. Totally transparent.
@adamskio123 Skywalker Ranch uses, I believe Wilson Audio speakers, MIt cables, and I am not sure what amps they are using currently. I guess some studios invest in audiophile systems, especially if they are creating more classical related content and they demand uncolored mixes. Unfortunately the film industry generally boosts the bottom end for a more dramatic mixes. From my perspective, comparisons suchas this should be using high end playback, high end ref mics to record acoustic inst.
@adamskio123 In addition, you'll need to compare using a high end AD/DA converters such as iZ 24/192. The problem with comparisons of analog vs digital is not well conceived since one digital system is not the same as another, just like one analog system is not the same as another. In a comparison, one has to examine what is different in equipment and if the playback system can reproduce enough detail and to the listener and the listener must be trained to notice the difference.
@FenderRhodes2 don't patronise me... There are so many factors in the chain that a little youtube comments page isn't going to cut it. I am happy with my mixes and as I am still in work I guess the labels I work with are too. I take it very seriously as it is my career, but come on mate - it's only music after all...!
@adamskio123 Also digital conversion is also a culprit since converters, settings, etc. iZ Corp 24/192 converters are going to sound different than Digi, Apogee, Lynx, etc, converters. I personally would love to use a console such as a SSL Duality, iZ 24/192 converters, with some Meridian speaks, and some nice mic's, cables and mastering grade OB gear like GML, SPL, etc., and eliminate cheap equipment unless I am going for a cheesy sounding track.
@FenderRhodes2 I think you're missing the point...perhaps for classical music some MIGHT record at 192.I have never been able to hear the advantage of 192 however and the hard drive space it uses is outrageous, especially if you're working in a fast paced studio."Mastering grade" doesn't mean that it's necessarily ideal either.Sure I use the GML eq almost daily - but sometimes you need something with some grit and character. again, please don't try to patronise me, I use what works for my work.
@adamskio123. The problem with a Digi created comparison, is that they are going to slant the comparison to make the listener think that they can't hear the difference, Typical of corp sponsored comparisons because they are there to sell digidesign. But if you got some qualified non-biased engineers to develop a valid testing methodology, then it might be more fair, but it is possible to design a test to create whatever outcome you desire.
im really a fan of adobe audition 3.0 but im beginning to have problems with the mix down. when i try to mix down a music file normally when it's done it goes to the edit screen and show everything that I've mixed down. but now it's not working at all and it's not mixing down my songs. i need to know... am i making the right choice switching to pro tools??? and does pro tools have the great quality that adobe audition 3.0 has??? someone fill me in.
You guys must have very boring lives to be studying the syllables, but it's funny cuz I just used 25, wich in the vocabulary, there are 25 letters, maybe I used all of them, and maybe i just doubled the numbers of syllables by saying it.
Excellent video and test. I listened closely to the tracks and couldn't reliably pick out one or the other. I guess I'll have to start blaming myself for bad mixes rather than my gear. Thanks so much, Digidesign
I'm still trying to figure out why everybody abbreviates the word "Equalizer" (eq) but not "Compressor." The word "Compressor" has more letters. Is everybody just really stupid and hasn't noticed that?
It just doesn't make any sense to me. You hear it all the time.
Well, if you haven't noticed, the verb forms of equalizer: equalize and equalizer have 3 and 4 syllables, the verb forms of compressor: compress and compressing only have 2 and 3 syllables. Also, the noun equalizer has 4 syllables while the noun compressor only has 3. Therefore, it is much quicker to say compress, compressing, or compressor than it is to say equalize, equalizer, or equalizing. Hope this helps Einstein. :D
It's not about syllables (My audio engineering instructor gave the same explanation), it's about letters! Especially if EQ is written on your Equalizers and the word Compressor is never abbreviated.
It's utterly ridiculous.
Moreover, at the end of the day they are "EQUALIZERS" not "EQs." People are just too lazy to say it... It's not hard.
@bluecafe69 I think it's because there is no other meaning for 'eq', but there is for comp. That could mean computer, compassion, compare (you finish the list). So it makes perfect sense that people won't use that word.
To the people who say they still hear the difference: Maybe. Just wondering what you think is better and why. Because if it is 'warmth', then you should realize that it's actually distortion you are talking about. And you got used to distortion, so it sounds more familiair
this is great ...i would love a test to put to rest all this crap about what DAW is the best or better than the other in my opinion they all do great and it really comes down to the operator IMPO ...
You can get great mixes using both approaches, it all comes down to the skill of the engineer. However, I greatly prefer an analog mix and I don't think the sound difference is subtle. Anyone who takes a class on DSP will quickly learn that there are numerous mathematical compromises that must be made in order enable digital mixing and processing. Those compromises add up, quickly. As someone who went digital and then went back to analog, it my opinion that digital audio has a long way to go.
Cubik303 1 week ago
@Cubik303 Well said.
archieh70 1 week ago
but thats 32 bits fp processing.... lets hear some stuff about that
deetgeluid 1 week ago
lazy motherfuckers gonna make less creative decisions BECAUSE of the digital tech.
zambot3 2 weeks ago
also about headroom... in a daw, mix down around -10db. there's your headroom. People that say you have no headroom in a daw are mixing up around -2db. duh Conversely on a analog desk you have headroom above 0db. this is the key to understanding the difference and getting quality mixes on a daw - don't overload your faders,plugins,and busses
hershism 3 weeks ago
at 3:54 so true!!! in mixing you have to really be aware of not just what you're hearing, but what you're experiencing psychologically as well. Your mind will play tricks on you and a big part of getting better at mixing is overcoming these auditory illusions
hershism 3 weeks ago
you've got the big guys right here saying its the same thing. whats there to discuss?
chrism216 1 month ago
Soon we can expect big name record producers and labels mixing albums entirely on their iMix app.
Gives me a very good reason to expand my record collection using original all analog recordings from the 70's and early 80's. Sorry, but im not a fan of constrained, in the box mixing.
Byeee...
DIGITALSCREAMS 1 month ago
@DIGITALSCREAMS BTW, 70-80 were not analogues.. they were digital tapes.. yep.. 1 and 0's on tapes..
Raindarsus 1 month ago
@Raindarsus Although there was digital reel to reels machines in service, the majority by far was analogue. Especially in the 70s, I dont think there were digital machines out at all. Could be wrong about that but between both decades you can bet 98% was still analogue. But the format is not important. Its the content that people respond to. "It's not the bicycle, its the rider." I am getting great sounds with Pro Tools, Waves and great analog front end. Its about the music, not the technology;)
TheProgmagog 1 month ago
@TheProgmagog "" I am getting great sounds with Pro Tools, Waves and great analog front end. Its about the music, not the technology;)"
Oh on that I can certainly agree with you :D
Raindarsus 1 month ago
OMG - this is such a blatent product endorsement for ProTools and Waves. I expect they got 'payment' in the form of £10k + free software.
Real producers/engineers prefer analog consoles/eq/compressors etc as opposed to mixing within an all digital environment. There is a big difference in sound quality. I cannot be arsed to try and convince people of this. Its a fact.
DIGITALSCREAMS 1 month ago
@DIGITALSCREAMS Real producers? And what defines real for you, one that happens to agree with you? I've been doing this art for the past.. 18 years at least.. I think I'm real at what I do. And compared with working with tape.. damn I love daws. And when you actually have a control surface like the icon.. or a system 5.. or even the ssl. Well it's exactly like working back in the days with nobs and faders, just no tape hassle.
Raindarsus 1 month ago
@Raindarsus This is exactly where I am coming from. I think people loose sight that all that great sound from an SSL is not because of the board in istelf, but because of the descisions made by talented people using it. All those A rooms worth millions also have A list engineers. Many of whom conclude exactly as you have about the Icon and modern digital. I have a C24, but that workflow is definitely there, and why mixing ITB is now way cool. Big, deep, woody, full and no complaints here.
TheProgmagog 1 month ago
@DIGITALSCREAMS Not really. We are at a turning point with the Icon, Waves SSL in particular and Pro Tools that many old school guys are converts now. Andy Johns for example prefers digital recording stating "I have always fought analog, and vinyl. If you need some tape machine to warm up your sound then you are in trouble to begin with." and "You dont get your sound from a console, you get it from the instruments and the room." A good controller like even c24 brings the pleasure of a mixer.
TheProgmagog 1 month ago
@DIGITALSCREAMS Those quotes, by the way, were not extracted from a Pro Tools promotional, but from a book called The Mixing Engineer's Handbook by Bobby Owsinski. Still, I use a hybrid. I have real 1176s and the plug-in by Bomb factory. The plug ins work great for drums, I cant tell the difference. But the real one is slightly better for vocals. Real Pultec any day, no comparison. SSL eq? the plug in is just as good. So a Waves SSL and C24 make a good workflow with a few analog gems up front.
TheProgmagog 1 month ago
Command + J
MrJazzeman 2 months ago
Ouch!!! Those NS-10's are caved in.
MrJazzeman 2 months ago
mixing in the box is fun but analog is the way to go because anything that is digital brings is unnecessary noise
ace9031 2 months ago
@ace9031 Can't agree with you there. There's a lot less noises in actual digital recording if your AD are true. Tape had wow and flutter, hisses, low noise distortion, high noise distortion .. so much that you actually had to track hot to get over the noise floor, compared to what you have to do with daws and a good AD/DA. In fact you might think that you have more noise, but in reality you're actually getting a better image of what your recording.
Raindarsus 1 month ago
@Raindarsus Absolutely. People are just so used to hearing the harmonic distotion of tape that they think its part of the surce that digital is missing. On the contrary, Digital is much more honest and sometimes that is not as good, sometimes its better. Comparing an A and D recording of drums the A sounded fatter, punchier and perceived as louder. Better, yes, but I took the D recording, ran it through a decent tube mic pre with 10k lowpass and the A and my D were indestinguishable. Really!
TheProgmagog 1 month ago
@Raindarsus You also got to look at the sampling rate being applied to the recording and if its a studio in a box then your having to round the quantizatiion error. After that you need proper balance and then you have to make sure the signal is routed correctly.
ace9031 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
An Analog feedback loop is easy ..
How do you make a feedback loop in Pro tools ?
because when i try to add FX it Mutes the sound ...
Sux how FL Studio , Reason and ableton can all do this , but pro tools isnt so pro at it...
( dont know what a feedback loop is ? check my videos )
JSprayaEntertainment 2 months ago
Analog (SSL G) summing adds depth to a mix that can't be achieved in the box. Love mixing in the box though.
MixaxiM 2 months ago
i like the way the guy in the polka dot shirt says pro tools.. lol
19BARD85 2 months ago
I'm tired of all these videos comparing SSL analog vs plugins. COME ON !!! You will NEVER EVER beat a traditional ssl console with fucking plugins. And all the people involved in these videos telling : "Waaooo it's so cool, it tastes like the real thing." are just paid a huge check to tell these LIES and sell their products
Source: myself. Assistant Engineer using SSL 4000 G at my work.
Midou75 2 months ago
@Midou75 when people lie u can see the lies in their eyes. i got protools and all my plug ins for an affordable price and they work. i sound fucking cool as hell in my home studio
19BARD85 2 months ago
3:43. So true :)
snolan1990 2 months ago
...as for me...I would much rather spend my time creating and performing great music...than piss it away arguing digital v analog. Fact is, no matter how you mix, if you have Justin Bieber coming in; you have Justin Bieber going out...pure shit. If you have Brian Wilson going in...no matter how you mix...you have Brian Wilson coming out...straight butter, baby...straight butter. You screw with the gear...I'd rather make the sounds.
ShikataGaNai100 3 months ago
I have been practicing for about two and a half years only mixing and levels and sound card adjustments. I can only advise to many people. Get it all together before you judge anything. So I feel ready to mix totally in the box. After getting all of the facts first. I can give you Low lows and Bright crispy highs with out killing your ear drums. People understand every in the box mix comes down to YOUR setup. I love digital!!! Peace.
starblueneon 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
there is even new developements for legacy products
TheKonnektor 3 months ago
Or they could just record on water.
"Ehhhh, it's too digital.
We're getting back to analog."
confessionsofapwner 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
hey i got a question for you
do you know how to send individual track from DAW to the mixer so i can mix music in an analog mixer?
i saw many people do but do not know how it work, if you know please help
thanks
sxayaxang 3 months ago
2:24 and more: FINALLY! I'm really upset about the "phantomatic" nonexistent differences. Thank you guys for that video! ;-)
iw2mln 3 months ago
I made the test on avid homepage,,,,I could not tell what was what,,,Digital or analog BUT,,,,I heard a difference !! I thought the best must be the digital so on the best clip I voted in the box,,,80 % wrong ,,,The best was the analog. I heard a better presence, moore overtones, moore realistic. Just a little but still I did.
So ANALOG mix RULES.
perceptivum 3 months ago
Hmmm well its stilll digital :) lol
azombiestool 4 months ago
apples and oranges!!! you will eat them differently! you will have a completly different intuitive and emotional experience using in the box and analog albeit a similar experience making love to a real woman and making love to yourself watching a porn site. do the math
cprostudio 4 months ago
all i had to do was plug a mic into a pre amp and then run it into my computer (delta 1010) and then using the same preamp and mic and settings secounds later pluging it into my reel to reel, using the same speaker the digital sounds like its not even picking up the hole signal and sounds very weak like you need to proccess it, on my reel to reel it sounds like you spent millions of dollars on proccessing equipment and all that is different is the analog.......idon'tknowaboutprotoolsneverusedit
fastforward26 5 months ago
Ah come on! OK you might be able to reproduce a mix done on an SSL inside the box... But the difference is in the MIXING ACTION! It's a totally different experience on the real thing. Tons of headroom! Tons of nice natural saturation! Tons of fun!... A completely different mixing gesture. Sorry I love ProTools but the sound of actual electricity CANNOT be beaten by no daw! Honestly
culturekiller 5 months ago 18
@culturekiller that was the whole point of the video, the digital software is equivalent to the analog, not trying to surpass it
omgimgfut 4 months ago
@culturekiller The sound is no real issue anymore (as is stated in the clip) but Amen brother on the "feel" part of it. A console makes you WANT to touch it and turn knobs. A computer mouse is so NOT fun for me, but I do love Pro Tools. Now I just put in a c24 console and now I have a modern form of what can be compared to a digital console. All analog/digital differences aside, I am back to looking at a console and not a computer screen and Voila'! The joy is back. The SSL Bundle does rock:-)
TheProgmagog 4 months ago
@culturekiller It ends up on a 16bit CD anyway
GuitarsOfVideoGames 4 months ago
@culturekiller A great song recorded on an iMac beats a mediocre song recorded on an SSL, hands down. Period. Ever.
Honestly.
The2020Watcher 3 months ago
@The2020Watcher Ah, no doubt there... there are only 2 kind of songs
culturekiller 2 months ago
@culturekiller who gives a shit. out with the old and in with the new!
19BARD85 2 months ago
@19BARD85 Oh yeah? Show us one of your mixes then :-) Go on ;-)
culturekiller 2 months ago
@culturekiller sure dude i will, i've only been mixing for a week but i uploaded three songs of me learning. so check them out, my videos of me learning how to mix for the first time ever are on my channel.
19BARD85 2 months ago
@culturekiller Does it apply even if you use virtual sounds only?
TranceElevation 1 month ago
@TranceElevation We are talking about music and about art here, so there are no set rules. Sometimes I mix electronic music and inside the box i get more dynamics, which can be useful on a house mix. The thing with analog equipment and analogue mixing is you get more of a "sound", more of a vibe. The act of mixing on a desk makes your work an unrepeatable performance, a unique moment that can't be recalled. THAT gives your mix a unique and personal character... You see what I mean?
culturekiller 1 month ago
@culturekiller Since you talked about more headroom, natural saturation and electricity sound I wanted simply to know if there is any objectvie technical advantage of using analog mixer.
I'm simply ignorant on the matter, that's why I'm asking you.
Also, would this eventual advantage apply to vsts as well?
TranceElevation 4 weeks ago
@TranceElevation Mmm is there a technical advantage in using an analogue desk over a daw? no. Actually you loose total recall. And nothing is "objective" in music making :-) In my opinion once you're in the digital domain it doesn't make a world of difference if you use a VST, AU, TDM or RTAS. Whatever. But in the analogue domain everything contributes to the uniqueness of your sound: your desk? Maybe your cables? Maybe even the power! Ok now I'm pushing it, but you get what I'm saying, right?
culturekiller 3 weeks ago
@culturekiller thats is true!!!
romeo885 4 weeks ago
@culturekiller I don't think they're suggesting the sound can be beaten by a daw, just that it's so close that it's worth it for the benefits a daw has over a mixing desk. If you watch Pensados Place where they interview many top mixing engineers - almost all of them are in the box at this point. It really comes down to a mixer's skill and ability to use his tools effectively. A mixer will sound the same whether on a daw or desk - it's his ear that leads his decision making imo
hershism 3 weeks ago
@hershism Mmm, top mixing engineers do it in the box? I'm not sure about that.. check on Jack Joseph Puig vids on youtube. I agree with you it all comes down to your ears, judgment, taste, experience of the mixing engineer. But if you use an actual analog desk then your decisions change slightly! As I said it's a different gesture, a different action. Plus the sound goes through lots of circuitry, and metal and stuff! It does take a unique character. Maybe less clean? Maybe. But I like that!
culturekiller 3 weeks ago
@culturekiller & you have how many Grammys?
puppiesinspace 1 week ago
@puppiesinspace Just the one :-)
culturekiller 1 week ago
It's like arguing religion: the human brain is so biased it's impossible to arrive at any meaningful conclusion. I use a DAW workstation and mix in the box with these modern "analog" plugins with the intent to create a "vintage" sound just like my favorite 70's records. If I lied and showed you a picture of me using old analog recording gear, you would absoltely believe thats what I was doing.
audiotrax2000 5 months ago
I can tell I have never been around any loud sounds my ears are lucky I have lived indoors for 19 years i would like to test the fine parts of my hears ps i love old gear and thick warm sound yoes i have pro tools ok test me
kickingsaturdaymiami 5 months ago
Future Engineers need to really pay attention around the 3:42 mark
DaBlackJedi 6 months ago
remember please. In the fifties and sixties the sessions were recorded on three tracks recorders and later on 8 tracks recorders. Have you ever heard lp mixed like the beatles, The beach boys, stones, Eddie Cochran etc etc. All of this discussion about pro tools or analog mix is bullshit. All of the talent comin' from the musicians and the producer. That's all folks.
The170460 7 months ago 12
@The170460 But listen to the newer Beatles mixes where they were able to mix on more than a 4 track, HUGE difference in clarity
SunbeltRyders 4 months ago
@SunbeltRyders i hate digital mixing. Back to mono.
The170460 4 months ago
@The170460 Mostly people saying Other pople Talking bulshit,,,,,they do it themself.
perceptivum 4 months ago
@The170460 haha why include the producer at all lol
00Jackacid 3 months ago
@00Jackacid because he made the sound well. Remember Phil Spector, George Martin, Brian Wilson and many many more. But maybe you're too young to understand what i say.
The170460 3 months ago
@The170460 well dont devalue the gear then. jimmi hendrix wouldnt have sounded the same playing a shitty ass lay out of a transitor amp.
00Jackacid 3 months ago
@The170460 then dont devalue the gear either. jimmi hendrix wouldnt have sounded the same on a crappy kay guitar going through a transitor amp. thats is where the sounds come from. maybe when they are gone people will respect that more.
00Jackacid 3 months ago
@The170460 Part of the sound did indeed have to do with analog versus digital. Try listening to the same artists recording analog versus digital. Pink Floyd's Division Bell sounds WAY different than their other albums. Easily tell it's digital.
TheOneartist 2 months ago
Thank for sharing the video man! You cannot find it in hte Avid website since it is not digidesign anymore!! I got to this topic Mixing in the box or on an analag board, from 2 sources Charles Dye with MILAR and a SSL show off the Matrix consoles, where the representant of SSL show us an A/B coparisson of a Peter Gabriel´s MIX. He stated that the bigger difference was in the deph of the mix, and that it has something to do with the amount of dither. Does anyone have info about it? Thanks!!
eprotz 8 months ago
Waves is the shit! But there sooooooooo flipping expensive! Why do they need to charge so much? You'd thing with it would be logical business sense to lower the prices of these things. They force some people to run to their local torrent store. Not me though,,,,oh know! Gawd no! Now that would be steeling..........the basturds!
NicroticSouls 8 months ago
mixing digitally = capitalism
mixing analog = art
2ManyNoobs 8 months ago 2
@2ManyNoobs analog takes more capitalism to afford to buy it... rofl
PattyWhomperOFFICIAL 8 months ago
@PattyWhomperOFFICIAL it takes more capital*
digital is used to be quick and efficient.. Analog is needs more dedication but the in the end it gives that tad extra.
And by the way, a digital desk is most of the time more expensive than an analog of the same quality. add a mac pro to that list, a few big screens, DAW, Soundcards, digital processing units.. I don't think analog is that much more expensive..
2ManyNoobs 8 months ago
@PattyWhomperOFFICIAL and on top of that: analog encourages you to use your ears in stead of having everything layed out in front of your eyes.. Some people work better that way
2ManyNoobs 8 months ago 3
@2ManyNoobs so ur saying there was no analog metering, and soft synths and convolution plug-ins are more expensive... made me rofl again...
i'll just leave this here:
watch?v=ApLHCbQ3gnw <---total german n00b.
PattyWhomperOFFICIAL 8 months ago
@PattyWhomperOFFICIAL we were talking about mixing/recording equipment. Not sound generating devices/sound sources..
obviously that guy in the vid has as much eye for audio equipment as he has for his make up. Your point is thus invalid
2ManyNoobs 8 months ago
@2ManyNoobs a studio with nothing but a mixing board in it like u seem to think is rather invalid...
PattyWhomperOFFICIAL 8 months ago
@PattyWhomperOFFICIAL you're absolutely right
2ManyNoobs 8 months ago
here it is:
ProTools:
- Easy
- Faster
- Versatile
- Supermodificable...
Analog:
- Pure organic sound.
- Old School.
- It has SOUL.. and touch.
Adefesio94 9 months ago
@Adefesio94 Engineers are just getting too lazy these days. Why duplicate or mimic when you can have the real thing? If my favourite artists in the 60's and 70's were able to record analogue, then when can't I when I have a band?
TheOneartist 2 months ago
People arguing about analog vs. digital are just noobs. Fucking fools. No one can tell the difference anymore and who fucking cares. Now you can make record at home with v drums and amplitube, master it with Waves and no one will know if it was analog console. I hate this analog bullshit. You want analog ? want noise ? Turn fan or heater in the room and record that. That's very analog.
Vanjal 9 months ago
@Vanjal analog owns for high professional, unique, original sounds. !! Less easy and confort. ProTools is mechanical, easy, faster and versatile...
Adefesio94 9 months ago
Comment removed
Vanjal 9 months ago
@Adefesio94 IF YOU KNOW what makes analog sound analog you can make it or I can say, mimic it in DIGITAL even BETTER. But you can never make analog sound clean and real as digital. Basically with EQ, Tube Saturation (optional) plugin and Compressor you can make any recording sound analog. I did it and a lot of my friends producers did it as well. DAW owns these days. Sometimes I'll use analog summing but going to tape these days..ohh please. Big ass desk for sum would be nice but tape, nah.
Vanjal 9 months ago
@Vanjal Then how comes albums mastered now sound so different from albums mastered in the 60's and 70's? Hmmmm? Looks like there is a difference.
TheOneartist 2 months ago
@TheOneartist Loudnesswar...
SaGruenwdt 2 months ago
@SaGruenwdt Oh, definitely. Don't get me wrong. I'm VERY aware of the loudness war.
But what I was talking about specifically was how different music made digitally sounds compared to music made in analogue. Try listening to Pink Floyd's Division Bell as opposed to their earlier works. You can hear the difference right away in the production.
Analogue is the way to go. I spend a lot of time in front of the computer as it is. I wouldn't want to be around one when I make music.
TheOneartist 1 month ago
Thank You Very Much for this wonderful infomercial. !!!!!
BTW, I wonder if all those "pro" "sound engineers" always honestly and proudly tell their "potential clients" that they can't hear (a) diffrence between their SSL(s) (or what ever they got as a "flagship" that they always use as background for their photos and interviews ;) ) and ProTools with bunch of plug-ins ... heh heh heh ;).
DrZEEworkshop 9 months ago
I need to know, what is the brand of that black shirt the first speaker (Rich Nevens) has.
silawebu 9 months ago
@silawebu
LOL :) :) :)
DrZEEworkshop 9 months ago
They are just saying that it gets harder to tell the difference...and that is true .... the question is why all those guys still use consoles.... ha ha ha ... all that does not mean that those guys can get it right ITB.... and I believe they can.
andreasoberholz 9 months ago
The Cult of Analog is out in full effect. No one is saying that mixing ITB is the same, what they're saying is that if you mix ITB *with* a plug-in that models what the SSL does, you can't tell the difference. I'll believe all you clowns when you can prove that you can hear the difference with this setup in an ABX test.
acjohnson55 9 months ago
The cult of Pro Tools must be stopped. It's over priced and quite annoying! If you want the analog sound then, record on analog gear and visa versa. Just stop trying to bend digital into analog, it just sounds cheap. The Foo Fighters got it right on the new record, I hope it sticks.
XxxxxxxOoooooo analog, I LOVE YOU!!!!
chimptor50 10 months ago
Interview with Allen Sides:Here's a reference point. When I was doing a record with Phil Collins we had done 10 background vocal tracks. I was moving along quickly so I just bounced those to two channels in the Pro Tools mix buss to call it a day. Phil's still sitting there, we're listening to it, and he says, "what happened to the sound of the backgrounds? I thought it sounded much bigger than that."
jeromelester8 10 months ago
I still had 10 faders up on the console, and I had the two I had just made. I could match the levels exactly and A/B it, and the stuff I had just sent to the Pro Tools mix buss sounds significantly smaller and not as good. So then I simply assigned the 10 faders to an analog buss, printed that to the Pro Tools, and that sounded fine. And that's just a classic example.
jeromelester8 10 months ago
I've also found that if I change a level up or down 10dB in Pro Tools, the sound will be degraded. [Mix moves] like a guitar solo or a piano that's a major level change, like 10dB for the solo, it gets grainier sounding. If I come out of Pro Tools [level] changed to any major degree, I hear it. If you're riding a vocal and you're only taking one word up, [it's too fast to] even notice it.
jeromelester8 10 months ago
If you have to take a big stereo instrument and bring the whole thing up 10dB, assign the track to two sets of outputs. Then bring it up on two sets of faders: one is how it was recorded, one is 10dB up. There's a tremendous difference in sound - some sort of horrible truncation is going on. Try it, A/B it.
jeromelester8 10 months ago
The majority of hit records you hear are mixed analog. Probably 85% of the high-end albums that come out, all of those mixes are done analog. A lot of consumers are mixing in the box, they don't know any better.
jeromelester8 10 months ago
Thats not a comparison between a ITB & Analog mixing but a hidden product placement for the Waves SSL Bundle wich is about 8k $ (remember: for a software)
Senj1n 10 months ago
its the same with mpc's vs software seq...don't believe the hype...both have strengths and weaknesses both get the job done
UniqueThaPoet 10 months ago
The difference is in the Headroom.
I mix on a SSL 4000G+, and I have the plugins there good but not as good as the real deal's headroom capability.
drummerguyhughes 10 months ago
These dudes just want their own plug-in Bundle by Waves, and be able to make ton of money off it. Don’t get me wrong, I love Waves, McDsp, and the UA Plugs. However, I have mixed with the SSL by Waves and UA (both were good). However, when I mixed on my first SSL 4000 in Atlanta this past year, I heard a difference almost immediately. I get better results with the analog over the digital with anything. Don’t try to be one way or the other. Hybrid mixing the way to go! Use both!
studiofive17 11 months ago
The conclution is true propaganda. It is an enormous difference mixing trough an analog console.
I have proof on that this is a malicious lie!!!
Dont belive this!!!
axemit 11 months ago
@axemit Do you have any tracks that I could compare? I am an amateur mixer and I kinda would like to hear some different tracks.
PTonyJr 10 months ago
To maintain your recordings transfer to digital, (fine I do it everyday) But, for artistic value, track on Professional open reel to reel Analog. Why?.. Because analog has that warm natural sound, Digital has that flat dynamic sound. All and I mean All Digital recordings sound exactly the same. Bands like Nickelback or Muse while yes the music is different, but their recordings sound exactly the same. And that makes the recording industry boring.
RegionalChronicles 11 months ago
what? I thought we were talking about speakers?!
adamskio123 11 months ago
I trained on pro tools on its first release something like 20 years ago and have watched that dreaded zombie program made so many engineers drones of the gattaga. I love analog and my ears do to.
thatsbananas71 11 months ago
Yeah....whatever. Looks like someone recieved a big brown paper bag from pro Tools. Can you picture Elvis recording into Pro Tools loaded with 4 million gigatrons of digital interforce. I don't think so, it would have sounded like todays wanna be plastic if he did. Next you'l be telling me that its good to eat Mc Donalds and that its no different to mummas cooking. Shame on you.
thatsbananas71 11 months ago
If you want to use an eq with "grit and character", why don't you just say you want to add some coloration to the track or mix. Do yourself a favor and try the meridian 3100's and see if your mixes don't sound better in the studio and the finished product.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
Check out the George massenburg integrate 2009 series videos, he brings up some valid arguments on recording equip and methodology that is interesting.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
I guess if someone is recording someone like Lady Gaga, that using ns10's or aura tones, or krk with 16/44 dig converters will sound just fine, just make sure you got your auto tune and a huge sample library and your good to go.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
@FenderRhodes2 Ha!
ikeaaron 1 year ago
In the audiophile community, they'll compare the differences between a reference recording of a grand piano to the same piano in the room and see if they can tell the difference between the recording and a live musician. They get that anal.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
"it's music after all"????? that sounds like a statement one would make to try to validate commercialized music as something of quality that is equal to sophisticated music for audiophiles that appreciate classical, jazz, or other forms of predominately acoustic based music where the recording does make a difference.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
I wonder if wearing a baseball backwards is used for sonic reasons, or if it is just a fashion statement.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
Of course you can't tell the difference in conveters because your playback system isn't detailed enough. If you find out how good your mix is, are you going to listen to a 13 year old that uses earbuds and computer speakers playing mp3's or are you going to listen to an experienced audiophile using high end audio equipment in a good room that has trained ears? 13 years just want to bop go the tune, they could care less how good the recording is.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
I've read emails written by studio engineers that were comparing converters and they did tell a difference and yeah 192 takes up hard drive space, but HD space is cheap. Oh wait, Pro Tools has a limitation on file size whereas CAF under Logic doesn't, OOPS.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
I guess if one is spitting out commercialized MP3 content for 13 years, just get a sm57, run it through a mbox running pro tools lite, get auto tune on the vocals and add tons of signal processing and you'll a million copies while you only spent a couple thousand on gear,
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
adamskio123 there are monitors from the audiophile community that are uncolored, try a pair of Meridian DSP3100's for mini monitors. they are DSP digital speakers with class A amps, digital crossover, digital pre amp, 24/192, and one cannot hear the point source. Bryston amps are goods amps, but there are better amps on the audiophile world. But KRK aren't that good from an audiophile perspective. They are just prosumer grade speakers.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
@FenderRhodes2 I am no stranger to the "audiophile" world.There is also no such thing as an uncoloured speaker,some are flatter than others, but nothing is "totally transparent" nor is this necessarily a good thing. If you're using digital is your A/D not just as important? There is nothing wrong with KRK 9000b's, indeed with these we've had some of the best selling UK singles in the last decade.Perhaps you're confusing these with the lower end KRKs I admit I am not a fan of.It's my livelihood!
adamskio123 1 year ago
That's one groovy cap ^^
JEKAZOL 1 year ago
I wish engineers would use a high end audiophile grade playback system, rather than relying on NS10's which produces too much coloration. When I listen to mixes on an audiophile system, I find a lot of bad mixes because it exposes more detail. I am still trying to figure out why use $200 speakers when using millions of dollars worth of gear. Can someone explain why?
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
@FenderRhodes2 they're used for reference, we have KRK 9000's as mini 1 and NS10s as mini 2, the KRKs are incredible speakers and are the primary mixing speakers. NS10s allow you to get a real "vibe" going, and let you know how mixes translate to other systems. Bear in mind that we have bryston amplification for all speakers (other than the wall mounted genelecs)... All speakers are coloured, "audiophile" ones included, so it's important to use reference speakers to see how mixes translate.
adamskio123 1 year ago
@adamskio123 Reference? You mean reference for a cheap pair of speakers. The ns 10's sound like the average cheap pair of speakers running through a medium grade audiophile amp, using standard cabling. Now, Abbey Road, which does a lot of classical recordings use high end B&W speakers, Classe Power amps, high end cables, but those still have small amounts of x-over, pre amp distortion at high volumes, but Meridian uses digital x-over, pre amp, sonically dead cab, etc. Totally transparent.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
@adamskio123 Skywalker Ranch uses, I believe Wilson Audio speakers, MIt cables, and I am not sure what amps they are using currently. I guess some studios invest in audiophile systems, especially if they are creating more classical related content and they demand uncolored mixes. Unfortunately the film industry generally boosts the bottom end for a more dramatic mixes. From my perspective, comparisons suchas this should be using high end playback, high end ref mics to record acoustic inst.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
@adamskio123 In addition, you'll need to compare using a high end AD/DA converters such as iZ 24/192. The problem with comparisons of analog vs digital is not well conceived since one digital system is not the same as another, just like one analog system is not the same as another. In a comparison, one has to examine what is different in equipment and if the playback system can reproduce enough detail and to the listener and the listener must be trained to notice the difference.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
@FenderRhodes2 don't patronise me... There are so many factors in the chain that a little youtube comments page isn't going to cut it. I am happy with my mixes and as I am still in work I guess the labels I work with are too. I take it very seriously as it is my career, but come on mate - it's only music after all...!
adamskio123 1 year ago
@adamskio123 Also digital conversion is also a culprit since converters, settings, etc. iZ Corp 24/192 converters are going to sound different than Digi, Apogee, Lynx, etc, converters. I personally would love to use a console such as a SSL Duality, iZ 24/192 converters, with some Meridian speaks, and some nice mic's, cables and mastering grade OB gear like GML, SPL, etc., and eliminate cheap equipment unless I am going for a cheesy sounding track.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
@FenderRhodes2 I think you're missing the point...perhaps for classical music some MIGHT record at 192.I have never been able to hear the advantage of 192 however and the hard drive space it uses is outrageous, especially if you're working in a fast paced studio."Mastering grade" doesn't mean that it's necessarily ideal either.Sure I use the GML eq almost daily - but sometimes you need something with some grit and character. again, please don't try to patronise me, I use what works for my work.
adamskio123 1 year ago
@adamskio123. The problem with a Digi created comparison, is that they are going to slant the comparison to make the listener think that they can't hear the difference, Typical of corp sponsored comparisons because they are there to sell digidesign. But if you got some qualified non-biased engineers to develop a valid testing methodology, then it might be more fair, but it is possible to design a test to create whatever outcome you desire.
FenderRhodes2 1 year ago
Digital sucks!
GhostFace2k3 1 year ago
Where are the files? Have they been removed?
FrancisHooper 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
im really a fan of adobe audition 3.0 but im beginning to have problems with the mix down. when i try to mix down a music file normally when it's done it goes to the edit screen and show everything that I've mixed down. but now it's not working at all and it's not mixing down my songs. i need to know... am i making the right choice switching to pro tools??? and does pro tools have the great quality that adobe audition 3.0 has??? someone fill me in.
rashaud352 1 year ago
You guys must have very boring lives to be studying the syllables, but it's funny cuz I just used 25, wich in the vocabulary, there are 25 letters, maybe I used all of them, and maybe i just doubled the numbers of syllables by saying it.
tinsaovez 1 year ago
Thanks for posting!
IAmMr200 2 years ago
Excellent video and test. I listened closely to the tracks and couldn't reliably pick out one or the other. I guess I'll have to start blaming myself for bad mixes rather than my gear. Thanks so much, Digidesign
heypeaceman 2 years ago
I can still hear the difference.
Jaws5519 2 years ago
I'm still trying to figure out why everybody abbreviates the word "Equalizer" (eq) but not "Compressor." The word "Compressor" has more letters. Is everybody just really stupid and hasn't noticed that?
It just doesn't make any sense to me. You hear it all the time.
bluecafe69 2 years ago
Well, if you haven't noticed, the verb forms of equalizer: equalize and equalizer have 3 and 4 syllables, the verb forms of compressor: compress and compressing only have 2 and 3 syllables. Also, the noun equalizer has 4 syllables while the noun compressor only has 3. Therefore, it is much quicker to say compress, compressing, or compressor than it is to say equalize, equalizer, or equalizing. Hope this helps Einstein. :D
biescc 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
bluecafe69 2 years ago
It's not about syllables (My audio engineering instructor gave the same explanation), it's about letters! Especially if EQ is written on your Equalizers and the word Compressor is never abbreviated.
It's utterly ridiculous.
Moreover, at the end of the day they are "EQUALIZERS" not "EQs." People are just too lazy to say it... It's not hard.
bluecafe69 2 years ago
who gives a shit this isnt a spelling lesson its only a word fucking hell
danny4572 1 year ago
@bluecafe69 stop saying utterly .. you're not going to get late like that sir : )
checkabreak 1 year ago
@bluecafe69 I think it's because there is no other meaning for 'eq', but there is for comp. That could mean computer, compassion, compare (you finish the list). So it makes perfect sense that people won't use that word.
To the people who say they still hear the difference: Maybe. Just wondering what you think is better and why. Because if it is 'warmth', then you should realize that it's actually distortion you are talking about. And you got used to distortion, so it sounds more familiair
musician1971a 1 year ago
this is great ...i would love a test to put to rest all this crap about what DAW is the best or better than the other in my opinion they all do great and it really comes down to the operator IMPO ...
alkie2008 2 years ago
i have been waiting for a video like this
maltcus 2 years ago