Tech Heads: Mixing in the Box vs. Out of the Box
Tabnetic
206 Posts
http://www.digidesign.com/index.cfm?navid=49&langid=100&itemid=25669I took the test and can't break 60% on anything (at best). Maybe technology is improving....edit: smooth jazz was easier to tell 86%
Comments
That said mixing in the box has gotten a lot better overtime, and definately can sound decent if you do not fuck with the maximizing-brick-wall-limiting-sonic-exciting-make-my-mix-sound-like-the-radio plugins. But the thing is that digital mixing really needs to stop trying to emulate the analog domain. I'm sick of products that take some Urei/Neve/Massenberg outboard gear and try to mimic what it does down to the smallest detail, instead of being inventive and thinking up new digital solutions that might actually be innovative.
ive been doing my mixes in the box for a long while. just have good speakers to listen to the playback before you press "render mix" (headphones will lie about the bass levels), and as you narrow things down, burn lots of car CD's to make sure it sounds good out in the real world. make the adjustnemts, mixdown, burn, listen to cd, repeat.
i'd rather just save up and mix in the box and for the two bus before i send it to the master be able to
use the real deal
do any of you use outboard 2-bus compression or stay strictly ITB?
They're really simple, the only function is which of the 16 chs (8 groups) are mono or stereo, and then also an output trim. I think digital has not quite matched the stereo spread and depth of analog yet. The one time I mixed a beat on a neve, when the 808 dropped it was just a massive wave slapping you in the face, so fucking wide. Ive gotten pretty deep in Pro tools, but never that wide....