Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
Analog Summing Is Not The Answer - RecordingRevolution.com
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 08. 2019
- ►► Create radio-worthy songs from your bedroom. Download my FREE Radio Ready Guide and learn my 6 step process → RadioReadyGuide...
If you've ever wondered if analog summing or mixing with a hybrid approach is what your music needs, today's video is for you.
In case you didn't know there’s a big debate looming in the recording world and it revolves around analog summing.
People say that mixing “in the box” (i.e. just in with your software) will never sound as good as using analog summing via a console or summing mixer.
What is analog summing? Should you care? Will it help your mixes sound better?
Allow me to break it down for you simply...
I do use a summing mixer. I love my Neve 8816. It's also great that it handles my monitoring and foldback mix needs. I'm a great believer that it's possible to do awesome mixes in the box, but I just find that my best mixes have been done with a hybrid approach. I don't swear it's the sound of the gear, it may just be that I'm having more fun when I'm playing with knobs and faders.
I don’t have time to read all 292 comments at this point but I think you forgot one specific point on this. A lot of people who are mixing in the box don’t have high-quality Mic pre’s or consoles to run through. I Purchased an analog summing box to get a type of sound. So it wasn’t to make my mix sound like a better mix it was to bring characteristics to in that I felt would make it a better sounding mix. Some of the guys you mentioned are probably running through Boutique analog pres or consoles so they’re printing that nice audio analog signal in the box before they start mixing obviously. Just my two cents
Your right
@@Prodby_duke You are so right, and this was a waste of my time.don't use a summing box and just use stock plugins and buy my mix classes and your mixes will be better.Learn how to play and sing before you record & your mix will be better and that's at no cost, Just practice and when your ready I will mix it down with my SPL MixDream 2384 Summing Mixer
I am a dangerous 2bus+ owner and I’m not mad at what you are saying. I will say that mixing with analog gear seems to add something that I only slightly get from plugins. A lot of my music is created from very sterile sources so adding outboard gear sounds bigger quicker with less plugin. I could go on about what my opinion is but like you said it’s all subjective. I mix out the box and still a fan 😏👍🏾
Does the Dangerous bus really gives it more warmth, punch, and spacial depth? I'm thinking of purchasing one.
@@qemusicgroup9847 possibly but you can achieve all of that by mixing better
@@qemusicgroup9847 YES!...I own one, and it's ridiculous how quicker you mix your stuff, and with less plugins and far better results!
That sounds about right.
@@kehindea Its not a mix problem, emulation does not behave like actual hardware.
I wonder how it would feel, Graham, if Neve, SSL and/or Dangerous posted a video suggesting not to download 6 Steps to a Radio - Ready Song because the writer has limited credentials and "anything free can't be good"? My point is (and I'm a huge fan and love your work) that the advice to not buy gear because it's unnecessary is the wrong angle for you to be taking, I believe. I would find this video more credible with the awesome explanation on analog summing with the caveat that it is unlikely to improve on a bad mix. I totally agree that there are no quick fixes but I WILL say that there's a handful of purchases I've made that were game changers for me; hybrid summing was one of them. After years of mixing ITB and on consoles (including digital ones) my mixes gained strength with this process. They were not functionally better; they just gained a heartiness that clients noticed.
I met Andrew Scheps at NAMM in 2019 while working the Dynaudio booth. The new Core products start at over $5k for a pair. Should I have mentioned that he doesn't need high end studio monitors to get a great mix? I think that statement could be true for all of the reasons you suggested in this video. Apparently Mr. Scheps was still intrigued, and that's all I'm trying to point out. If buyers want high end monitors, we should encourage it. They are unlikely to be disappointed.
What I'm trying to say is that dismissing a process thinking that you're helping others might not be the right path. Explaining a process and letting the world decide has more credo.
Much respect. Still love you!
It's also possible your mix doesn't sound bad, but you think it does.
autobotsNdecepticons
True.
It is also possible that your mix does sound bad but you think it doesn’t.
@@2tonetony319 but then you wouldn't be asking Graham the question he's answering here.
yes particulary since you have listened to it so much through recording, arranging, mixing its very easy to lose perspective I find that very frustrating and sonething good can be dumped as a result.
It's possible but... No, because you can recognize when a mix is awesome. The main objetive here as Graham said is, work more, mix more and read what's inside his pdf, it's something about comparing your recordings, to have a professional and well mixed reference song and try to sound alike, that's possible, to get better by learning from the masters!
lardosian sometimes I just take all the plugins off and find it sounds better...so that’s fun 😅
I think analog summing can make a good mix BETTER, but not a bad mix good.
That's it. d= :) 1st prize. And I might add just a little bit better, so little that 95% of the people won't even be able to perceive it.
@@dddux Roger that
Absolutely agree
So it is better then...
The fact of the matter is this. Your physical body is energy. Your rock of an earth is energy. You see energy, your consciousness is energy. People dissociate from being animals and at mercy of this energetic universe quite too often. It’s not always about someone opinion on what they think sounds clean or not. It’s all about Sonics. Dogs can hear what you can’t hear and overall music affects us in ways we still don’t understand. If the mix is right, you know the mix is right. It’s what will engage the listener and create the vibe. People spend too long trying to be analytical when in reality the best mixes are spur in the moment mixes that they don’t overjudge. You will see this across the board in absolutely anything relative to a creative process. Drawing, editing videos, creating. Everything comes from a free flow state and when you try and force that state it’s unnatural. Everything you’ve ever used or seen man made has come from a stream of consciousness (someone imagined the idea and turned that energetic idea into a physical manifestation in our world) everything comes from a type of knowledge flow and if you’re doing music you’ll find the best work comes when you’re able to zone out and feel that state of flow. It’s essential when doing creative processes. Hell. A bunch of scientists get their theories after waking up from a state of sleep / different state of mind. They find it comes to them almost immediately after. Something to think about and my 2c
Agreed. Analog summing isn’t for everyone
However, there is one serious benefit to it: You can push up your group busses/Aux Out faders to higher levels and allow the analog circuits/transformers to take the heat and round out the transients so there is less work in the DAW for such tasks. Also, if you have a compressor post-summing, it’s a nice way to “break out”, Sum your stems and then hit an SSL clone (or whatever) and then monitor that return in your DAW. It’s great! I love mine; it has a convenience factor 😎 . Having said that, nothing is more important that getting it right @ the source. The source should be the focus point. A good mic, a solid preamp and a great performance go further than the argument of “ITB vs Summing”. Just fwiw, Analog summing is an option not a way of life. Some tracks don’t call for summing. Good video, Graham!
All those top mixing engineers you mentioned , yes they all have massive hits on the radio from 100 percent ITB mixing.. BUT !!! those mixes did not go straight to release. They went thru some lovely expensive pieces of analog equipment in mastering, and that is not to be overlooked, a lot of magic happens when audio passes thru analog at any stage, that computers/plugins just cant replicate.
There are some mastering studios that master entirely ITB too. Mastering does not always equal analog nowadays
having spent some time working with tony maserati's engineers. This is 100% true. ITB mixes were always finished off with some nice analogue gear in the mastering stage. If you have it, why not?
@@louiseisobelevans the other side of the story is, if loud enough and digital....you lose the perspective and the judges might be experienced professionals.....but they are not well educated on sound......and audio engineering in the applied field of it in Science....etc sure you can do ITB,,,if you do n o compare n loud you will never know
I submit that mixing really starts at the songwriting stage, progresses through arrangement, pre-production and tracking. If you start by making these things good first the mix tends to come together pretty easily, even with less than stellar gear. Conversely, if you have lackluster songs, awkward arrangements, sloppy performances, poorly recorded tracks, not committing to takes, etc., etc., and just overall not taking the time to create excellence at every step of the way, my experience has been that mixing can become a huge chore, and even the best gear in the world probably won't help you at that point. Good video Graham.
Thank you Graham. I appreciate you taking the time to teach us.
Hey my man- been watching your videos for a while now , and I have to say I’m a big fan of your ‘central concept’ that you always return to ...that it’s all about what and how you mix and not some hidden secret or magic piece of gear that makes the difference. It’s YOU ! Thanks for making things clear , plain, simple & encouraging 🖖🏾
I’ve seen first hand that Dave Pensado is a hybrid mixer and does use a summing mixer. He does his mixing in the box but everything runs through the board.
When solid state (silicon based vs tube) was first commercially adopted, it was harsh and grainy (mind you it was still analog). Then it got good and is now coveted. Likewise, PCM digital came out and was harsh and grainy but now is amazing with higher resolution and modeling. However, it is the electron flow (+heat) that is the mojo and culprit in this whole debate. Most people can't perceive it but even at high resolution, when you take the volume down to sub-whisper (inaudible) levels, that weird digital artifact of not being able to hear infinite decay (continuously variable signal) is still present. That infinite decay is also integral to getting infinite, inaudible and natural feedback characteristics (i.e. frequency nodes get locked into even harmonics more easily through-air and resonate continuously). Even with super high end digital processing, my guitar signal will not resonate right and needs that "breath". It sounds great but the more I want it to react acoustically and feedback in those inaudible realms, the digital won't let it. Digital can model it but it will be an approximation of the original electron flow. Think of summing as getting a tan from the sun vs a tan from an electric light. The tan is not appreciated until one sees an orange face.
ok noise floor......etc......harmonics in the frequency domain some analog equipment still not reproducible in the digital realm...so a Hybrid the best of both worlds.....analog = infinite.....digital resolution + limitations which eventually might be reachable....etc
Excellent commentary on analog vs digital summing. It all boils down to a tool is a tool = a means to an end. While honing my mixing skills I realized that whether I summed digitally or through analog gear it always comes down to the best tools you always have available, your brain and your ears. If you can just put aside any preconceived notions of which method is the “best” and always searching for a magic bullet or saying it’s the lack thereof that is the reason your mixes sound bad, then you can get out of your way mentally and just relax and listen, and mix mix mix until your mixes shine!
Producer/engineer for 20+ years. Was working on client mixes recently and could not figure out why the tracks were not coming together. The source material was quite old and lacked consistency and character. Using NLS for summing absolutely was the answer at multiple stages (summing drum stems, summed busses). It was almost magic. Glued everything together, shaved off the roughness in the low and high end and overall saturated the mix to a move consistent and pleasent listening experience. Part of the magic seems to be in the differential stereo processing. Was quite explicit when toggling between dual mono (default, analog style) and stereo link.
@dfasht lol. Exactly
@dfasht they want to keep you arrogant so they can have you depend on them for answers. BUY A MIXING CONCLE AND PRING ANALOG BACK INTO YOUR DAW
Thank you, as always, for a thoughtful and practical video with down-to-earth, useful advice. I have been mixing since the '80's and am a professional musician with a home studio I use for my own singer/songwriter recordings and pro work for others as well. I have a Dangerous D-Box and find it extremely helpful - as a monitor controller. Frankly, you can have the analog summing section of this box if you can figure out how to get it out of there without wrecking the unit!
I spent two decades recording to tape and the last two recording in the box and I have made lousy mixes and good ones on both setups. To my ears, the sonic difference between ITB (handled with proper gain staging) and analog summing amounts to less than half of a percent. There is 'something' about the quality of that sound, but getting the EQ right or using the right mic placement on a recording will get you a lot more than analog summing will ever add. To me, it's like arguing over whether table salt or Brittany sea salt makes a dish taste better! - My two cents :-)
I think it really depends on how you record and mix.
A lot of artists and engineers run their tracks through analog gear and it sounds three-dimensional before it's even mixed. Summing would likely make these mixes better but not summing in analog wouldn't break them either.
Also worth thinking about: if you make music that doesn't require analog warmth and depth to begin with, of course it would sound fine without it.
I happen to get good results both ways so I agree with you totally. I am in no way within a hundred miles of your league but I have done some albums with independent artists and half of those were done either in the box or with analogue summing through an analogue console, making use of the analogue EQs. I thank you for being here for us amateur and semi-pro engineers. I learned so much from your channel since 2014.
I used to track inside the box. I think the sound that you’re going for can also be a reason why maybe some don’t like their sound. I am not running my tracks into a summing box but that’s because of the analog sound. I dig it.
I take your point and agree with you 100%.. But!! Whats frustrating is the undertone of a bias towards being fully in the box here. And the lack of information about the truth of what analog summing and use of analog gear in general can do for your mixes as far as the beautiful saturation, harmonics, character, colour, warmth and the big thing for me is the depth and dimension you can get that you just cant get in the same way fully in the box. I saw this video a while back and went away thinking analog summing was snake oil, a myth even.. And I see a lot of people in the comments section taking on this same attitude. But then I heard a mix through a real tape machine and holly molly man what it did to the mix blew my mind ae. Yes its not the only way and THE thing that will make your mixes but the use of analog gear exists as an incredible beautiful sounding option out there for music creators, mixers and producers. And should not be encouraged to be down played or dismissed.
Hi Graham and thank you for what you do and share with us. I couldn't agree more that it's the person mixing as opposed to the gear. I mostly mix ITB these days however I still look back to the Tascam Portastudio 4-track days in rememberence of doing the best one can with what one has. Those days helped to realize that anything can be accomplished using creativity and will. My old 4 track mixes sounded good but when I moved to digital it was like starting over again. I did have a few years in the "gear obsession" trying to place the blame of my crappy mixes on my limitations in gear, however as soon as I realized it was me and not the gear my mixes improved 1000%. A big part of that improvement was because of the info you share on your channel. Still learning and getting better and having fun along the journey. Thank you again for all that you do!
NOPE it is both....like the chef and the ingredients...what you di not understand he meant was, you need the experience....a misunderstanding due to lack of common knowledge predominant in the music industry
I’ve been subscribed to your channel for quite some time now. And would like to let you know I appreciate the effort you put into teaching us all we need to know here on the platform. You’ve helped my music career tremendously! Keep it coming 🙏🏽💪🏽
Calvin Ross love your latest release! Did you do the mix yourself? It sounds very professional
Do you use analog summing on your songs ?
We recently started recording in our home studio and was looking for some helpful tips. Is this guy a good guide to run by ?
Shy Phoenix actually no, not on that song. A good friend of mine Chriz Beatz did
Big Bucks Entertainment no I do not
Don't forget to talk about how they recording with the best analog gear for the ones mixing in the box.
THAT right there is the difference. I have no problem mixing with plugins. But tracking with HW is where it’s at. Nothing replaces real transformers
Right. Good distinction. 👍
Captain Beefheart said "elllleccctttriiiccciitty"
I do love the smooth tone and the 5-7 dB headroom advantages on my Dangerous analog summing hardware.
I mix "in the box" but tend to use a lot of analog emulation, including running a tape machine emulator on the mix buss...I'm also a fan of Waves NLS for "summing emulation"...
I love waves NLS!
it doesnt work
so you are ITB DIGITAL ONLY
I’ve got a testimony for my recently birthed Memphis home studio. I have decent front end gear consisting mostly Neve and API strips into an Antelope into Cuba’s. I mixed my first record of covers ITB. I was extremely happy with my mixes although not perfect... but I was not particularly pleased with the comparative sound quality next to my favorite references such as Steely Dan, Police, Floyd, etc....However after adding the Neve Sum mixer along with API 5500 and finally the Neve MBP, my very next single was night and day sonically above the former. I’m not talking about the mix nor the performance. I’m talking about the sound quality. The drums as well as the other instruments had that “console” iron weight to the sound with gorgeous overtones as well separation in the sounds as if each had its own color..the sound was more 3 dimensionalized and felt as I was mixing in a holodeck!!...imaginatively speaking...lol
My setup runs super fast so with no audible latency. I always have the mixer setup on the back end and monitor everything running through it ...even when tracking. For me, it’s the competitive and ear pleasing canvas that I’ve been searching for!!
Thank you for taking the time to explain what analog summing is and how it isn't the most important investment people could be making at the time. Hope you are healthy, keep spreading knowledge and keeping accountability for the necessity of practice for good results
I am a rap artist who has chosen to pick up the skill of audio engineering. After watching several videos on the art, I understand it is a craft that requires time and practice to get good at. Through research, I've become aware of what an analog summing mixer can do for you. This video further clarified what I was already figuring. It's not a magic machine to a good mix. Do I still plan to get an analog summing mixer? Yes because I really dig the difference in sound it can produce versus in the box. However, my priority is learning how to mix in the box first. After I drop my next EP, I'm going hard in the paint with pro tools.
So true!!! I've been doing this since the 70's - all analog, and there has always been those who think they are "just one magical piece of gear away" from sounding great. Of course, you didn't mention - diplomatically - that it is partially the fault of the marketing done by gear and software manufacturers who are trying to sell product...
Amen, brother.
This video explains clearly a very important concept. It is the person, not the tools that achieve results. Use the tools that help you in your workflow. This concept extends to many fields beyond mixing and music.
Indeed but the person without the right tools ...not the same
Totally agree 100% but........ let us keep it real by saying yes great mixers mix only in the box and get fantastic results but...... the mixes are usually recorded in a upper end studio using analog gear.
Not...that's how it use to be yrs ago..stop believing & spreading bullshit.
@morenazo952 why should he?
@morenazo952 i agree with that...the dude who made this post acts like you just have to go to a big time studio to get a polished radio ready mix/song..which isn't true. Don't know why ppl are commenting to me like I'm saying something that's not true..and I'm pretty sure his electric bill isn't hitting his pockets hard.
@morenazo952 nobody wants it :)
I'm a fan. I come around every six or eight weeks, see what's new and then get busy doing what I'm supposed to be doing. Anyway I'm around enough to know that this small rant is part of your much larger position that you don't need a gazillion plugs or $160,000 in analogue gear to mix well. I agree. But you might well need a specific plug or chain of plugs in order to achieve a specific "sound". The confusion I think is between the word "better" and some phrase that describes or identifies some quality of sound that someone hears in their heart. I can give you a nice clean, warm, well spaced mix with about any rig you got. I can't make it sound like I want it to sound without some combination of plugs that are integral for getting the thing to sound the way I want to hear it.
Totally right...
I’ve been a producer living with my work for more than 10 years now, working with Sony Music, Universal, and some world famous artists. And the point is, I just did my best mixes (understand, the mixes that my clients earned the more money with) totally in the box.
I own a world-class recording facility with plenty of analog gears and a 12 channels Neve sidecar I use for summing, and I had a 48 channels SSL Duality SE in my previous configuration, and yes, I demonstrated several times that ProTools summing kills some parts of the mixes.
Even though, I earned more money with my in-the-box configuration than with my fully loaded hybrid recording studio, period.
Which doesn’t mean that analog summing is not good, but that it doesn’t fundamentally do a good mix.
What's a good mix ?
Are you TALKING guns n roses music or dj who eva? There's a big difference in the eq. I swear I mixed plug in after plug in for 6 months on a guitar track and it would not get thick. Pull it up on console bam perfect.
Yes that duality is obsolete. You should let me recycle it for you!
Kevin Giles haha! ^^ The Duality already round a new home :)
I never told that big analog consoles are obsolete, and will never do that. Just that as an objective finding, the console, the hardware LA-2A, Massive/Passive, you name it, don’t do the greatness of a mix. They can be part of it for sure, but the person that does the mix, well, makes it good or bad.
Kevin Giles I’ve been working on mostly modern Rock and Metal projects for the major part of my career, but also country music, instrumental soundtracks and also urban music.
I mean, real instruments tracked, then edited and mixed. Totally agree with you on the fact that certain tools help you do things faster, and that some of those tools can hardly be replaced by plugins for now. But you can see (or hear) the quality of those plugins rising every year, and yes, you can totally create great guitar mixes in-the-box nowadays. Because you know where you want to go, and what tools you should use to get to this point, to shape the sound. Give a great painter a entry level brush and he will still do a masterpiece: the same applies to artists and professional people. And in the field of Music, we find some people that are both professional sound engineers/producers/mixers and artists :)
Well it's really up to each individual what they choose to paint. I wouldn't say do not use red or blue. It all depends on what you want to create. If you are like me and happen to have a console in the room anyway there is absolutely no reason why you shouldn't use it either for summing or whatever. It's a tool. Mixerman just upgraded his rig to a dangerous system so obviously he agreed that tool help him to paint the paintings he invisions.
"A craftsman never blames his tools." -old saying that applies in a multitude of endeavors.... 😏👍 Yet, craftsmen tend to have good tools, right?
The box ii is a combo for summing and mixing...great tools
I think what people forget is how important time is. You can never gain more time. You can always make more money (it’s all fake anyway.) the point is, you can make a crappy piece of gear sound good and work, and sometimes you’ll have to do that, but there’s a reason high end studios are full of high end gear: because high end gear consistently sounds better and is easier to use, hence spending less time and crafting more efficiently. People shouldn’t go crazy and buy stuff they’re not ready for, but there’s a reason why good professionals generally upgrade their tools when they get a chance.
Good stuff. I mix completely in the box but used to use an SSL4k. I've had people tell me my "in the box" mixes had to be analog because they sounded so good. It's all you man.
I can cope with this. Totally mixing in the box. Just stock plugins. No fancy stuff. Keep up the good work!
After reading a lot of comments I think some viewers are confusing the context in which you use the terminology "in the box" vs "analog summing". I think it's fair to clarify that the "in the box" mixing engineers are also using a boat load of quality analog gear. The ITB mixers just happen to not use "actual analog summing" as part of their process.
Yeah I use UA plugins that sound great but might sound better with the actual analog gear so I'd at least like to incorporate actual analog summing if I didn't record the tracks with the physical gear just to get the best possible sound for the price.
@@RomanticAnalog plug in's are great and you also have easy recall. To be honest, my research has lead me to ditch the idea of summing as I don't think the cost is worth the benefit ratio.
Using analog gear doesn't have to be as expensive as most think though. You can start out with a Heritage Audio Successor 2bus compressor and just leave that on your mix bus. A lot of bang for your buck with that unit and is a great place to start if you were teetering. Used DBX 160's are cheap and functional compressors for individual tracks and I use my Kush Tweakers on everything, but more as a color/saturation box. Happy making music!
In the the box only means one thing: DIGiTAL.
NOPE ITB is purely digital, you use an analog box then it is a hybrid ...ITB + Analog summing NO LONGER ITB
Excellent presentation, thank you.
Here's what I know.
it's all you.
Stop relying on the gear, endless plugins, outboard gear, this, that, the other thing, pink noise, emulators, blah blah blah.
I threaded my first tape machine in 1961.
Mono.
One mic.
I learned.
And learned.
I see what youngsters are doing today and constantly adding a new plugin to solve some mysterious 'problem'.
Entire companies have sprung up catering to people who couldn't mix cake batter.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that I couldn't afford most gear so I learned how to build gear myself, so yeah, I know how an optical compressor works, because I BUILT one.
From scratch.
Yes, it's ALL you.
A new piece of gear won't save you, only experience will do that.
Once again, excellent presentation, thank you.
Completely in the box here and I would not change that. Any sound I want I can have. I have the luxury of a few things: first of all, I use Studio One, which has this great invention called "MixFX". For those who don't know what that is, it's like putting the mixer character across your mix. And that does not mean some eq, a little saturation on every channel or on the mix bus, it means everything, from the character, to crosstalk, to hiss, to saturation. So it even matters what order your tracks are in. And you can have it per group if you put it on a bus. So putting it on the drum bus and setting it to SSL means your drum tracks sound like being mixed on an SSL, and with crosstalk enabled and set correctly it glues everything together. Ok, so far about that. Then I got the Black Box HG-2 plugin. That little thing can truly get your mix from flat to having depth and color! With these two I don't need anything outboard. But having a good controller does make a difference.
My experience tells me that both of approaches are fine. I have Dangerous Music Bus LT (which is very good I think). Sometimes mixing through summing box helps creating right vibe that I want from my mix but sometimes it ruins it all - makes too muddy. I also recommend hybrid approach, when only few busses or tracks go through a summing equipment and all the rest remains digital.
Thank you for this calm and objective view on the subject Graham. I’m still mixing ITB but am using real/analogue sources like hardware synths and fx, guitar amps, and a very few choice analogue comps and EQ that I either track through or later process OTB through and back in. I think of it as ‘Hybrid-lite’ I utterly agree with you 100% about not blaming your gear and about looking to improve your skills as a mixer (and arranger and tracker too) first.
Some of the best ever studio purchases I made were subscriptions/fees for online or offline mixing tutorial courses. You can hear the shift in quality of my work after that far more than you can after a major gear purchase. And I still have so much to learn. It sure is a journey! :-)
7:34 Good on you brutha! Been a fan of you and your music for more than a minute. Always positive content and usable advice!
I’ve ended up thousands and thousands in debt because every time I thought my mix sucked I’d go out and buy a new piece of gear. Finally after realizing that my mixes weren’t improving in proportion to the amount I was spending i finally put the breaks on and focused only on mixing...Lo and behold a couple years later I’ve realized I didn’t need half the gear I bought if my focus had been properly directed...Though I’ll never trade my 1073 LOL
Thomas Ed channel Keep the 1073 for sure. It’ll only go up in value.
what were some common mistakes or sound errors you were experiencing?
Go to school with that money you will get a great deal more out of it
Jaquire King used to be in your "mixing in the box heroes" a while back but I guess he went back to outboard and console. wonder why...
Good call outs and like someone said the Pro Engineers are “usually” mixing audio files tracked with superb gear an awesome front end!
Love the vid, minus the part where u assumed all engineers watching should be referred to as "my man". Yeeeeeaaah! Girls mix too 😁
Btw... at my home studio I'm in the box. But at the studio I work at sometimes, it's all analog. Love em both. Sometimes I'll come dump my mix thru his equinox
Sharee Griffin whatever you use to make good music is the right thing for you to use. "My man", like "dude", is an expression. It has nothing to do with gender.
@@Lady_G007 I wonder do you understand the difference? What's the difference between doing it all analogue and doing it all ITB? I think there's a huge misconception about it, because people don't understand it. I see both as my friends, but in a different way. ;)
@@dddux their is nothing confusing about the difference between analog and ITB.
Sharee Griffin How does the Equinox sound?
Thank you for your direct explanation of the signal path and io needs involved in analog summing. I watched about 20 “tutorials” that did not include this basic information. Very helpful. I’ll be heading your way first thing from here on out.
In the box for me - there's plenty of nice analog emulation out there, the trick is to leave a bit of noise in your recordings if you want it to glue nicer and sound more vintage.
Reason most music is so sterile is due to the amount of edits and correcting of mistakes, not in the summing methods - think how the outro to Dire Straights - Sultans of Swing would sound if recorded today. They got everything as best as they could at source, nowadays we can make it inhumanly perfect - so we do... Almost as a hobby in itself.
Heck, even vast majority of youtubers are broadcasting a fake 'perfected' version of themselves - it's epidemic levels.
Respectfully, those emulations don't produce the warmth, punch, and spacial depth that analog consoles, transformers, valve compressors,etc. do that we've grown to love since we were children. But when its all said and done people care less about what was used to make the song as long as it inspires them.
A bunch of 1s and 0s manipulating a digital file cannot re create what an analog signal going through warm tubes can create. Sorry.
@@user-ij5rs7xq5y then what's the use of using analog tubes if digital media (Spotify etc) cannot play it back?
Digital is far more exact and higher fidelity than analog. Otherwise we'd all be back to recording to tape if analog was better.
But in truth analog quality is pretty poor in comparison, and why it's used as an effect.
If people want warmth then perform and record in such a manner and stop mixing so sterile and at such squashed dynamics.
The main advantage of using analog is that you have to commit to the mix much earlier and can't infinitely tweak unless you have a stack of analog gear routed to each sub group. But you can still take this same approach in the box too.
Skijumptoes Skijumptoes you’re making my point all the more. Analog gear is used as an effect, an effect everyone is so used to hearing for years and years before we changed over to the digital world of mixing, ie fully in the box. Almost no one, big time and small time mix engineers do full analog recordings, using tape etc due to budget and time, sure if they had the budget, time and talented enough musicians, I’m sure they’d love to do. Theres reasons why everyone that builds or upgrades studios it’s in the direction of analog, and it’s because that “sound” is what helps engineers create better mixes. Sure you can’t get any louder than the digital 0dbfs, but the analog components as the audio runs through it creates a perceived loudness that is much greater than what any plugin can do because it’s lack of physical components that can’t physically mould the audio into a dirty, phase shifted, coloured audio signal that analog gear creates.
@@user-ij5rs7xq5y then your experience differs greatly from mine. All the studio 'upgrades' I've seen over the years is obsoleting out the old analog gear and upgrading to digital gear. Meaning they can easily route through real-time high end DSP systems and be able to monitor control mix presets to each musician, becauss its way better quality vs analog setups.
Most modern studios have plenty of analog racks and mixing desks but rarely use them, it's mainly all for show nowadays. Which tempts bands to use studios vs doing it themselves.
A friend of mine specialises in an analog setup, bands pick him because of this and love the results, but he told me a while back that he feels its not the analog gear thats the secret it's that he doesnt use fundamentals like click tracks, instead he has the space to record bands playing together as if they were live. That's where the warmth and melding is formed, plus his experience applied.
If he mixed totally in the box they would still all believe it had analog processing. And you'd be fooled too. Any difference is just so slim its not even a factor in the final production.
We've done trials before and had digital replications sounding warmer than their real life counterparts. And analog gear sounding brighter, so it's all just in people's heads and the shame is that it's feeding ignorance that gear is the secret when it's in fact people's talent and ability to record and mix that counts.
Ultimately, I could send you hours and hours of proof where you couldn't tell whether analog gear was used or not. But you could hear a good mix engineer at work each time.
I have a stack of analog gear myself but honestly it's more a passion than real need for it. It just inspires me, rather than being objectively 'better'. Same as real guitar amps I play better with them cause they make me feel good.
Hi, I work ITB, but apart the importance to be a good mixer man (I agree with you for ALL the line), I think it is very important the objective point of the math of summing many bit words. To not be too much boring in technical descriptions, it easy test that typical rock production has problem of summing wit more tha 12-16 tracks; there is a loss of the microdynamic component of the song, for example the sense of space is less because there is virtually an "overdamping" of the reverb cues, the low volume part, and so on...
Three main factors responsable of this difference:
1) less significative bit truncation that happens for the mathematical laws of digital summing. => less headroom
2) less spacial imaging due the ITB panning law
3) the coloration of analog circuits that doesn't operate ONY a summing (gain saturation, trasformers influence,..)
So my cheap strategies I use is :
a) summing ITB via digital mixers included in the control sw of some audio card (foe example emu1820m, Motu, and so on) or using a physical digital mixer useful for other purpose too (Keyboards, live,..), this because these mixers have internal registry for accumulation and processing of the bits typically from 44 to 56 bit ! So no problems also with 32 tracks or more all at great volume, easy...They are TON cheaper of analogue summing box and MORE versatile.
b) for the same reason it is important to not force the level of every track to maximum volume, taking in the account your precious tips of your book, in particular for gain staging, attenuation of the gain control of every channel, good arrangement to minimize unuseful overlap of instrument and enrergy,..
c) overcame issues due the panning law with a customized LCR pan strategy and widening with mono compatible spacial processing.
d) using plugin simulating for the non linear behaviour of vintage consoles (Waves SNL, Slate,..) and the analougue saturation of tape decks.
Sorry for the length of my post, what do You think about it ? Thanks much
Have a Great Day ;-)
I have to agree Graham. Several years ago, I took 5 tracks to a facility here in Toronto which its main studios centre piece was a ‘70’s Neve console. (I forget the model). I had 15 to 20 stems per song to run through the console. I was very excited to see what results would Yield. To my surprise, I honestly could not hear a difference in depth, separation or colour. It was an expensive lesson. What I have learned over the years is that arrangement and attention to detail of sounds, timbre, is key to a good mix. Essentially production. I have been using Slate VCC and it does seem to impart more depth and colour in my mixes.
Hey Rob! If it’s Rev it was a Neve 80s series
Personally I prefer to analog sum stems through my SSL to achieve my final mix, however I also work completely ITB if the project requires it.
You talk about the analog mixing box, but those guys track in an analog domain too. The problem is the amount of time you go over the AD/DA converters I think or mixing analog and digital effects in a chain therefore adding more conversations.
In the box. When I found out Ken Andrews won the Paramore mix shoot out from working in the box, I decided to ditch all of the midgrade analog gear that was actually adding more unwanted sound than wanted sound. I streamlined my digi recording/mixing process. I use 1 ART MPAII on the way in to a Presounus Firewire Studio interface. I record and mix on Cubase 8 artist. I was a slate monthly subscription partner but I turned it off after 2 and 1/2 years. I now use some free plug ins and some Waves plugins. I really like the Omni Channel. So to summerize. Good song. Good performance. Good mics. Good personal gear. Good interface. Good mixing skills. Good final product. Please, if your new to the RR. Please, take the time to check out Grahams information on all of these phases of the making music process. Ive been here since the 30 days to a better mix season one aired. Thanks for the years man, it feels like i know you...lol Have a blessed week everyone!
It’s always going to be the things furthest away from the computer that make the most difference: performance/source on one end and engineer/listening environment on the other. Those are the most important and it’s easy to forget those. BUT that doesn’t mean the other things along the way aren’t important, they just don’t deserve as much focus as we tend to give them.
I agree with you on this. I prefer to use plugins as I mix completely in the box. I actually believe it sounds better & it's the best of both worlds. It's just different from analog but it's not better. 💯
All In The Box ! Thank u for this video, cheers from Argentina!
In my opinion all depends how the tracks are being recorded. For example, Andrew Scheps, as you mention mixes on the box but all the recorded tracks I can assure has been recorded through phenomenal analog gear so there is no need for analog summing but in the other hand, some artist will record only digitally (for a lack of analog gear) let's say using with virtual instruments, this kind of recordings could get some added benefit of using analog summing to add weight, roundness by eliminating some of the digital harshness and also more stereo imaging. I use a lot of virtual instruments on my arrangements, and I use analog summing hybrid mixing to add those characteristics mentioned above, my tracks sound better and warm.
I sum through a Midas analog console and I absolutely love the tone. All my prints are real time instead of exporting in my daw. I adopted this workflow because - and this may sound odd - but when I used to export in the daw the multitrack playback sounded different than when playing back the mix file. Not necessarily better or worse, just different. I can’t tell you why this is, nor can I recreate it, I don’t have the same rig anymore.
That being said, no piece of gear or software or whatever is the gateway to a great recording. It’s always the person and how they use the gear, not the gear itself. But just like you may prefer the sound of let’s say a u47 over a 414, you may prefer the analog summing sound over digital summing. Or maybe not. It’s a personal taste issue.
This is great advice. In the past, I noticed phase issues in multi-bus mixing. This really made a summing mixer desirable to me.
Lately, I notice less phase problems. Plugins have also really gotten good in the last 3-4 years.
Or...Did I just gain 3-4 years experience?
I’m 100% with ur thinking 🤔
I mix full in the box and I love my mixes and people and clients too...👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
i prefer Analog Summing + Analog EQ for the mastering process but i mix digitally .
You mean you're analogue-summing the stems and use analogue hardware to process the master? That usually shows, nicely. d= ;) Although, I must say the alternative process isn't bad, too - getting your tracks in right through the analogue gear, process them ITB, and then use outboard summing and hardware. Introducing the analogue mojo at some stage will make a bit of difference, always. Although not many people will be able to perceive it.
Been in big studios...They may not be summing through a console or summing box. But I promise you nothing digital wise sounds as good as running stuff through some original Puigtec EQs or a Chandler Compressor/API 2500 etc. Night and Day. Learn to mix first though.
I'll just say again what engineers told me many years ago in one way or another - "It ain't the gear, it's what you do with it," or another variation - "It ain't the gear, it's the ear." Now, in the age of plugin mania, I see so many conversations, arguments sometimes, about the "best" plugins, or the "best" DAW, or even now, the tired old Mac vs PC argument. When someone like Andrew Scheps mixes entirely "in the box," his "box" being a laptop (!), I think we can conclude that the digital "domain" does everything he needs it to, and that "it ain't the gear, it's the ear."
It is also the gear but it depends on the person that uses it.
I used to sum with alit of analogue gear now i mix primarily in the box wirh a few outboard pieces and i can recall much more quickly and mix on the go on my laptop as well and no one is the wiser! Granted it is fun to have and use analog gear but not too necessary these days!! Thanks for the channel!!
I think that the front end is more important crap in crap out!!!
Back in the 90's I found a major sonic improvement when summing in analog. Nowadays, not so. Leaving the box now is an artistic choice. Good topic.
Miss ya Graham. Used to love seeing your videos!
In the box and in the box only, you are right you must get better on your own to achieve better quality, like playing an instrument you can't get better if you don't practice. Thanks for your commitment. Cheers Bruce A.
What about when you drive the channels?
The best thing you can do is get it right at the source! ITB or OTB doesn't matter if it sounds good, it is good! Good stuff, Graham!
Hey Graham, there is just one inherent flaw in you statement about mixing all in the box and that is, and i know for a fact, a couple of the guys you mentioned are using outboard processing which in fact is running these sounds into analog gear. I get it, these are some of the greatest engineers and could probably get away with just using digital processing for there mixes, but i know they all do not. I love your work and rarely comment, i just watch and learn. However, outboard gear, compressors, Eq's, Shadow hills gear and really expensive reverbs are the reason, along with years of experience is the reason they can get away with saying "in the box". But , just because they are not running their mix through a summing amp or a SSL board. does not mean NO ANALOG processing. YOUR THOUGHTS?
I could not agree more. It is the mixer, not the format. Per your query at the end, I mix out of RADAR through an analog console. I do so because I both prefer the sound and the process... e.g. 6 hands on the faders making the moves, etc... That said, I have a good friend who works completely in the box and his mixes sound phenomenal.
I use a hybrid approach. I use a Cranborne 500R8 and the Cranborne 500ADAT which gives me 16 channels of summing and 16 500 series modules. I also have lots of analog pieces from Avalon, Universal Audio, Kush Audio, IGS, etc. I would say I use 70 percent analog and 30 percent plugins. That is just what I prefer. I like to run my signal a lil hotter and I like tubes. To each their own. It's all about enjoying the process :)
4 years after you posted this I just gotta say Mix:analog is offering something amazing. I've tried to mix and master my own material yet it always has lacked something. I don't think it's analog summing but analog gear, yes. I just ran a digital mix through a Fairchild 670 and it did something plugins could not (and I followed it with analog EQ). I can finally move forward to releasing an album and not worry about trying to come up with tons of money to pay a mastering engineer. While ITB mastering may work for some, it simply did not match my expectations. There's something special about real tubes and transformers.
Love your videos Man. In this digital age with so much available plugins to invest on Mixing in the box can give you that analog sound. Saturation plugins like Black box H20 , Waves NLS , VCC Channel, Decapitator, Radiator, UAD Studer a800, waves j37, SPL twintube, Slate Digital VTM, Kramer Taper and others can give you a fanastic mix. Developing your Mixing techniques should be the priority and audio ear training.
Great video and now that I actually know what I am doing I can say for certain that the actual equipment makes a lot less difference than musicianship and engineering abilities. As the owner of several recording studios who constantly listened through a $10k pair of Westlake Audio monitors I made some really great recordings on cheap equipment using only one Sure SM57 microphone to record every live instrument including the vocals. I have used analog summing with almost 100 percent of the album’s I have mixed. I typically use at least one analog tape machine with a digital system slaved to it. All 24 bit digital sounds really good to my ears. Even the crappy 16 bit digital sounded decent to record some tracks with when I had a rack of Tascam DA88s I always recorded live drums analog but things like vocals and keyboards were always just fine even with the 16 bit digital audio. I mixed down to 1/2inch analog tape and then sent the projects to the mastering engineer if there is a good signal going in then either format will sound better than a bad recording. Auto tune won’t polish a turd it will just change the pitch. Most people are listening to music on cellphones and mp3 players these days anyway. Analog summing sounds better to my ears listening through a high end monitoring system but probably not as drastic listening from a cellphone or car stereo.
I’’m an experience engineer and Struggle with mixing in Pro Tools.. Daws like Paris, Samplitude, Logic .Cubase mix Bus, I can mix (almost) like I do on a Analog board.
WORD! I learned a lot with Graham´s Mixing University course! I highly recommend doing a course like that!
I love u Graham! But I think the reason many ask this question is because we like the analog sound (the warmth, the spacial depth, the punch, etc) that we've been used to listening to our whole life and would like those sonic characteristics.
You sound like someone who knows whats up! Subbed!
Ps. I should develod a simulated analog summing mixer vst 🤣🤣
There is an analog summing emulation by Waves. NLS Channel and NLS Buss. It is great. Makes a difference! But first of all it sounds different, not necessarily better.
I mix in the box with headphones, but then again my mixes are not playing on the radio. Yet.
You make a good point. And also I think from a standpoint of a limited budget it seems to make more sense to invest in plugins (and in the box tools). But it is still very interesting to try to capture the character of analog summing. What is the typical sound character of a console mix? Maybe a tight low end, some pleasent harmonic distortion and a little bit more grit in the upper mids? On the masterbus I tend to use a puic tec EQP 1A eq und boost the 5000k area a little (broad) exactly for that reason. Also for analog feel I think the kush Omega 451 A preamp emu (Vox, Guitars) and the IK Multimedia EQ 73 (drums & bass) is fantastic. And also the Studio One console shaper does a very good job (crosstalk).
The issue with Analog Summing is that, to do it right, you need to run your whole mix out of DAC converters, and back into ADC converters (maybe even several times, if you sum busses too), and I find that any gain that comes from analog summing can be lost by low quality converters (passing your mix through mediocre converters, over and over, can actually ruin the overall quality of your sound).
The ideal situation for analog summing would be if you have mastering-grade converters (like Dangerous, Burl, etc), DAC *and* ADC, then run it through your summing mixer as much as you'd like. That way, you only gain, and don't lose.
If you have mediocre converters, you're better off using something like NLS.
@@380stroker Yep, exactly. But unfortunately people are passing their mixes through analog summing units over and over (through consumer-grade interfaces), only degrading the quality of their mixes, where just mastering ITB would probably have been better off.
@@380stroker Wut!?
@@kensmechanicalaffair lol
You are supposed to have quality converters and transparent before any analog equipment....:)
@@atta1798 What was transparent in the 70's hmph?
Graham you are right, are a lot of assumptions about the "magic" type of criteria when you are mixing, that some box or plugin or Daw are the ones that make your work sound professional. And is not true, many elements play their role to achieve this: time, experience, errors, creativity, vision, and hearing on top of them; helps to achieve professionalism. You said is the best moment to share and learn and this is through, but also a lot of CZcamsrs (not your case of course) confuse the people with the typical " learn in 5 minutes how to...." when they are beginning in this great path of making music. Master your tools till you know them, and then add new ones is my main advice
I use a lot of stock plugings from cubase. A lot of them work enought Well. If i would start over again, i would start only with stock plugings. It's better to know how to use all diferent parameters on a compresor and usong EQ properly than using the BEST gear. When you start knowing how to use the tools properly, you are ready to find your gear, you ear Will be more ready to notice if that peace of gear is what you need. I know from a top mixer in Spain that he was forced one time to use only stock plugings on a pro mix. And the mix went really well.
The engineers that mix in the box send their mix to mastering, thats when it gets ran through analog gear to give it a fuller sound. I have some great mixes but it still lacks some depth compared to other engineers i know that are hybrids.
You're right. The mix is either good or bad first. A summing mixer can make a good mix sound a bit more open and give it more depth. Doesn't mean the good mix going into the analog summer wasn't great as is, but the summing box can open up a mix just a bit more. It's almost like adding one last magical psycho acoustical plugin at the end of your mixbus. It's a very subtle enhancement. It's definitely not a "night & day" difference.
Let's think about that ....the real world is analog...and you just let your Mix touch that world .....: )
I'm new to the idea of Analog Summing (I just discovered it today) but I stumbled upon the concept because of an issue I've been running into with Adobe Audition. The newest iteration of Audition always mixes down a multitrack session -3db quieter and there used to be a way to edit the multitrack preferences so that it wouldn't do that - but no more. I've just noticed that my mixes sound good before mixdown but quieter and a bit less clear (especially in the low frequencies - kick drum and bass) once mixed down. One idea I have is to run cables from my stereo headphone jack into some kind of high-end preamp and back into my digital interface to create a stereo file of the mix that is more true to the original volume and clarity (in the low end) as what I hear in Audition's multitrack session. Looking into whether or not that's a thing, I stumbled upon Analog Summing. I remember back in 2018, before sending all the mixdowns of my last album off to the mastering engineer, I was in awe of how much headroom my mixes had and I wondered how it was I had mixed the songs so quiet. I only now have found out what Adobe Audition was doing to my mixes. They're definitely quieter after mixdown but I think they lack clarity in the low end too however that may be in my head.
Probably cuz you're not mixing down to 32 bit floating point and instead mixing down to 24 or 16 bit without dithering.
Thank you you just save me $2000…. Lol Just upgraded mic preamp to BAE Single channel desktop model…. May add another one later but I was thinking about getting a really decent compressor and later on a good EQ….. Would you get the EQ first or the compressor….. Want to run a hybrid system……
I been using the Mixcraft 6, and the lastest one, but, hard to tell on My misxes and masters, I guess the only way to tell is by some one else that maybe is better at hearing certain frequencies.
I think it's more along the lines of what you get out any favorite piece of gear, not without it it sounds "bad". Some "warmth" some dimension that it adds that they are hearing and they mix knowing that they will get that. Far more subtle than something which would be considered a major problem solver.
Thanks for the videos bro. As an artist who's now starting to record himself, these videos are great.
How can i reach out and get some question answered?.... please help... greetings dok from Germany
I can get a certain feeling about better sounding when it comes directly from the outputs of a mixer then to the interface. Maybe because dynamic range from analog mixers are quite good and yeah, I'm talking about ''better dynamic range'' from the perspective of output dBu and mixing /room space without clipping.
Obviously there are interfaces with such great pre's that you don't need more. That's what I think, and YES, you get better and better the more you mix and work, work, work and listen!!!
personally i record though some analog gear to first off get a good recording then i do all my mixing in the box with plugin alliance's ssl 4000 plugin. that's all I basically need,, it gets me pretty much where i wanna be sure ill use a few other Cubase stock plugs and some mcdsp stuff but thats it. im not saying im the best but i like what i make and like anyone i know i have room for improvement.
I was thinking of getting a summing box but now I have second thoughts....thanks
I used to think i needed equipment but i found myself needing to be best with what i had and my mixes with the krk rockit 5” sounded amazing now I’m buying equipment because i feel prepared to use high end equipment.
Never understood this till now. Is this related to using a dithering plugin? Would you still need to dither is you use a outboard summing rack?THank You!
Great advice Graham ... thanks for the video!
My father had a huge ass Tascam back in the 90s (when I was a child) now he drops the files to Logic and gets the results well done. As a producer who fell in love with analog sound I think it’s about personal taste, not results. You are real about this... Pensado and Lord Agle mix in the box because I guess they are eons ahead from us. To me you just mix your OWN songs they way you want and the rest do it how the client wants. Witty real video BTW.
I agree with you. Analog summing is not needed. The only thing I use hardware for is tracking.
Thanx much appreciated info.