Mixing in or out?

psyfi

psyfi

Pie Fly
Forum Fun-raiser
Messages
14,859
Reaction score
1,062
Location
Aldermaston
Hello chaps.

I use Logic 5.5 and of course love it but I have also played with Cubase SX3 and I have noticed that the sound of cubases resulting mix down sound better than than logics. What I want to know is that if you were to have all the outputs of your card running in to an external hardware mixing desk and thus bypassing the internal mixing would this sound better and also what should you look for in a mixer to insure that the results would be better than staying within the program?

I had a look at affordable mixers online and came across this http://www.dolphinmusic.co.uk/page/shop/flypage/product_id/3754

I would be saving my pennies for sometime but would a desk such as this have the quality I'm after? Also should I be looking at analogue or digital desks or is there not much difference these days?



Lot's of questions I know but if you have any answers I would be very greatfull.

Cheers


:ibiggrin:
 
even if you have all your outputs running out into a desk they signal will still be passing through the sequencers mixing bus

personally i would mix withing the sequencers environment
 
all this technical terminology can be soo confusing sometimes :wacko:
 
:ilol: hu huhuhu hu He said in the box hu huuhuuhur cool hu hu hu.:ilol:

So what we are saying is that there is no point getting a mixer for this specific task. Better to get a mixer for dealing with external hardware synths or VST you have running through external FX units, EQ's, comps and so on. In which case there is no need for a mixer with this high a number of inputs. At least I think that’s what we’re saying.
 
yes... or go rummaging round the back of your local supermarket, get yourself an old box and do your mix in that :iyes:
 
i suggest using one of these...very sturdy looking, and vintage !

mixboxM.jpg
 
makdaddy said:
i suggest using one of these...very sturdy looking, and vintage !

mixboxM.jpg
Click to expand...
Tried that already but got allot of tramp noise in the final mix.
 
My word we must be two of the funniest people on this forum?:ibiggrin:

Anywho I'll keep my eyes pealed for a nice little mixer rather than a monster monster one. Any suggestions as to what I should be looking for?
 
certainly not beringer (sp!) I think a smaller Mackie is more what you need, think of the noise ratio for instance, and the quality filters of course, maybe a 12, 14 ch or a 16 ch if you can afford it.

my 2p :Smile3:
 
its a good question actually, the main thing to remember is that everytime the sound goes in and out of your 'puter its getting converted from digtal to analogue (then maybe back to digital thru some external effects box and back to analogue thru the mixer) and back again to the computer. u generally want the sound to go thru the least amount of equipment as possible. everything piece of equipment adds or takes away something to the sound.

its nice to have a big fat mixing desk though, makes it look like a proper studio so u can impress yer mates innit :Smile3:
 
Cheers for the tips silky.



Just think I want a bit more connect ability for hardware in the future so I will be looking to upgrade my shameful 6 channel mixer with one broken stereo pair for something of quality but yet still financially humble.

I will also try to find a cheaper way to impress my friends than getting a 64 channel automobile analogue mixing environment. I might get a brightly coloured hat and they can all point at me singing "Where did you get that hat where did you get that hat?"

Also might be an idea to get something that would actually fit in my room.
 
makdaddy said:
even if you have all your outputs running out into a desk they signal will still be passing through the sequencers mixing bus
Click to expand...

Ah that's true only up to a point. If you send your sequencer's channel outputs to separate channels on a mixing desk (with a multi-out card, obviously), then the summing down to a stereo signal will be done in the hardware mixer, in the analogue domain, rather than doing fixed or floating point maths in the digital domain.

If you have a very good mixer (and it would have to be pretty good, not some cheap shit) then you may get preferable results. Whether they are better results is subjective.

I too have notice Cubase sounding more alive than Logic, even for the most basic of tracks that I haven't even mixed. (Because I can't.) Cubase uses 32-bit floating point maths - maybe this is superior to Logic, I don't know what Logic uses.

Mackie's Tracktion v2 has the option to use 64-bit floating point maths and therefore claims to be superior when it comes to doing things like summing. With 64-bit maths it ought to be perfect.

For some though, the arguably imperfect world of analogue summing, where all sorts of harmonic frequencies can get introduced along the way, frequencies well outside what is able to exist even in the 24/96 world, adds something magical that makes it worth opting out of digital summing altogether.

I'm buggered if I could tell the difference though.
 
Alternatively, get a card with multiple inputs, stick all your sound sources into that and mix in the (cardboard if you wish) box.

What I'm currently doing is: RME Multiface has 8 inputs, so I route my Voyager, NL3, Triton and Z1 straight into that card in stereo. If I fancy using a different source, I just unplug one of those units or use the SPDIF input in the Multiface.

Works for me!

For live performance I have a Mackie 1202Vlz-Pro. When I do live with Pascal (OVNI), we submix his 16 channel Spirit console into the Mackie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top