PDA

View Full Version : hits mixed "In The Box"?


scottgreiner
06-03-2002, 11:52 AM
I posted off-topic on a Charles Dye thread, and thought it would be more appropriate for it to have it's own heading
I too, heard Charles speak at Digiworld. He and Kenny Gioia seem to be the only visible "mix inside of ProTools" guys. By
visible, I mean you can go to the store, buy the cd and check out their work. Does anyone know of other commercially
available "popular" music (not obscure bedroom stuff) that was mixed INSIDE ProTools? Are there any other guys making
hits INSIDE of ProTools? How about hit records with a real rhythm section mixed INSIDE ProTools. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

Hardnox
06-04-2002, 12:33 AM
The stuff Producher mixes. I think he's worked with Mandy Moore, LFO, etc.

Gary Cirimelli...nominated for a grammy this year for his work on Neal Schon's record. Give our stuff some time, we're all in Pro Tools.

In my opinion, wait awhile. Let the next "Pro Tools Generation" of producers and artists hit the forefront. It's not Pro Tools, it's the person running it. I believe this even more after today, getting to watch a seasoned veteran work "In The Box." It can be done. People need to stop thinking "I can't" and start thinking "I will." I know some guys will rip me for this but, ohh well. Learn how to mix in Pro Tools. As you get better, the software/hardware will also. It's already good enough...are you?

Joris de Man
06-04-2002, 04:43 AM
Heya,

I read on Jeff Rona's site (www.jeffrona.com) that the moviescore for 'Black Hawk Down' by Hans Zimmer and Mediaventures was completely mixed inside of Protools. The mix was done by Alan Meyerson, imho one of the best score mixers out there.

Cheerio,

Joe

scottgreiner
06-05-2002, 11:01 AM
Hardnox,

Producher = Kenny Gioia. I like his work. Thanks for the Neil Schon/Gary Cirimelli tip. I'll check that out.

Who was the "seasoned veteran"? What style of music was it? What did he do that was new to you? As a "mix in the box" guy, I'm always searching for tips & techniques. Everytime I work with a "heavy hitter", I learn. I'm also finding that some styles fair better than others in the all ProTools enviornment. To me, modern is easy in ProTools, vintage is hard.

THETHRILLFACTOR
06-05-2002, 04:03 PM
What kind of music are we talking about? and "all in the box", does this mean no outboard analog gear/just plug ins? If its pop you are looking for, then you are likely to find many, but that doesn't mean that they sound great. The modern pop machine is based more on promotion than sound(case in point MP3's). If its modern rock, than you aren't likely to find many, because most of the top records are mixed by the same 5-6 guys:Andy Wallace,JJP,TLA and CLA, Brendan Obrien. All of these guys mix on SSL's. Its funny even though ProTools had alot of benefits for a busy mixer(Totall Recall,automation) it is still not embraced as a mixing medium.

Hardnox
06-06-2002, 09:37 AM
The "Seasoned Veteran" I was talking about was Gary Cirimelli. We get to go work with him on some mastering again today. It wasn't necessarily what he was using, it was how he was using it. It was HIM! His ears, knowledge and experince. That's my point with all these Pro Tools bashers. The system's good enough...are you?

By the way, I mentioned this post at PT show last night. Creed's first album was all in Pro Tools. I think they said Julio Eglesias was mixed in PT as well. New school baby! What If I don't want to sound like analog today?

snoopy
06-06-2002, 01:07 PM
It hasn't been embraced by the big mix engineers becase they are set in their ways (If their mixes aren't broken, why fix em?). Most of the ones listed earlier don't even use a J-9000, but still prefer the SSL 4000 because that's what they know and are most comfortable with. The next generation of mixers will probably rely only on PT to mix. And of course eventually something better will come along, but those guys will still stick to PT, despite something better (better being a loosely used term) beccause they want to use what they were raised on, etc etc.

I think I saw a special on Moby, where he showed where all his stuff is 'mixed' at home. It was a PT setup with a ProControl, which led me to believe his stuff is all mixed internally. This makes me also wonder if with the advent of DAWs, artists will begin to want to mix their music themselves.

Felix
06-06-2002, 01:29 PM
I agree mostly, but would the Radiohead albums, Amnesiac or Kid A have sounded so amazing if they were mixed inside PT instead of ran through a Helios console(i think that's what it was)?
images/icons/smile.gif

THETHRILLFACTOR
06-07-2002, 01:29 AM
"Most of the ones listed earlier don't even use a J-9000, but still prefer the SSL 4000 because that's what they know and are most comfortable with".

This statement is partially true(even though JJP works on a suped up Focusrite console). The 9000J and the 4000 series sound different. While the 9000J sounds cleaner, the 4000 is more of an agressive animal. When you push it, it doesn't close up as much as a 9000J. Plus most of the 4000 series that are around have been heavily modified to sound great. Certain styles of music sound better on each(and I mix on both). Pop,country and RnB favors the 9000J more(I think its because most of tracks are synths/samples and they usually sound great already, so you don't have to create the sounds as much, just blend. Also the automation is better suited for 1000 of passes). Rock,rap, and anything agressive favors the 4000(and sometimes the 6000). When you hit it hard it just crunches(as well as the EQ and compressors). So its used more for creating sounds in the mix. Even the VCA automation has a certain color to it. The ProTools thing is to me more of a sound thing than a getting used to thing. I've been using computers and midi since the mid 80's, and I've seen it all. While I love the automation and the the total recall of Pro Tools, I still can't get the mixes to "bang" like I can on a board.

DigiTechSupt
06-07-2002, 09:26 AM
Here are a few commercially available "mixed in Pro Tools" releases

- Larry Carlton Steve Lukather "No Substitutions Live in Osaka" Favored Nations Entertainment. This one won a Grammy. Mixed and mastered by Steve Vai and Neil Citron.

- Steve Vai Alive in an Utlra World. Epic. Mixed and Mastered by Steve Vai and Neil Citron.

- Jessica Simpson Irresistible "Forever in Your Eyes" This on went Gold. Mixed by Rhett Lawrence.

- 98 Degrees Revelation "You Should Be Mine", "Always You and I", "Dizzy". Universal. This one was multi-platinum. Mixed by Rhett Lawrence.

- Melanie C. (Sporty Spice & Lisa "Left Eye" Lopes) Northern Star "Never Be The Same Again" Virgin Records. Multi-Platinum. Mixed by Rhett Lawrence.

- Blackeyed Peas & Macy Gray Bridging The Gap "Request Line" Interscope. Mixed by Rhett Lawrence.

- Enrique Iglesias Enrique "Alabao" Interscope. Multi-Platinum. Mixed by Rhett Lawrence.

- Emma Bunton (Baby Spice) A Girl Like Me "Not Gonna Sleep Tonight" Virgin Records. Pokemon Soundtrack "(Hey You) Free Up Your Mind" Atlantic. Multi-Platinum. Mixed by Rhett Lawrence.

- Upcoming Toto release. Not totally sure on this one but I've heard it is being mixed inside Pro Tools by Simon Phillips.

Simon Phillips has done some other really good sounding projects all in Pro Tools. I believe they are total Pro Tools mixes but I'm not 100% sure. Jazz album "Vantage Point" and a recent Derek Sherinian CD.

- There's the Charles Dye mixes, Ricky Martin and I believe Julio Iglesias, etc. etc. but you might want to check his website for more info.

Jon Connolly
Digidesign Product Specialist

Robotnik
06-07-2002, 01:49 PM
To paraphrase the above:

No artist that means anything these days mixes in Pro Tools. images/icons/tongue.gif

Robotnik
06-07-2002, 01:53 PM
So far we got:

LFO
Mandy Moore
98 Degrees
Jessica Simpson
Ricky Martin
Enrique Iglesias
Toto
Macy Gray (tone deaf!!)
Melanie C.
Emma Bunton
Creed (see below)
The Strokes

And, you mean to tell me that people STILL question the sterility of Pro Tools mixing capabilities? How can they with such stellar artists! images/icons/tongue.gif

Extreme Mixing
06-07-2002, 01:53 PM
I remember Gary Cirimeli from our Kenny G/ Walter A days. Way to go Gary!

Steve

Robotnik
06-07-2002, 01:54 PM
Kenny G! images/icons/tongue.gif

Alécio Costa
06-07-2002, 11:39 PM
new release from TOTO? great!!!!!!!!!
just tell me their homepage!!!

Mike Tholen
06-08-2002, 07:46 AM
pretty funny ***** ! this thread is.
keep it up.
images/icons/wink.gif

Mark Haliday
06-08-2002, 07:52 AM
I think we shouldn't be all that categorical :

I would say : If you trust the mixer, let HIM choose the right mixing tool :

- Don't take an "Neve/SSL man" and force him into using PT.
- Don't take a Pro Tools man and put him in front of an Neve/SSL, thinking the mix will sound better just because you are using top end stuff

Mixing in Pro Tools can yield great results, IF and only IF, you master the details of the platform, the hardware issues (converters, clocks, bit depth, Protools mixer plugin etc) and the recording, and most important, you have the right plugins for the job AND the DSP to drive them !
In an Neve / SSL you have one great EQ, one pretty good gate /comp per channel, and often channels galore. Most current pop/rock/r&b mixes end up with eq and dynamics active on almost all channels. So the obvious question is : is your PT rig powerful enough to do that ?
If not, you need to print eq and dynamics and that makes things more complicated since tweaking these till the last minute is often necessary.
Using outboard AES/EBU reverbs like lexicon PCM91 can help a lot to regain horsepower for more basic plugins.
Personally, coming from a very analog background (12 years with an vintage neve console + 2", 10 more on SSL etc.), it took me two years getting it absolutly right with protools but I can now say that I have never been as satisfied as I am now.
But it took the combination of the Hi-res 24 bit opimized mixer plugin, McDsp, Sony, Waves etc plugins and an apogee AD8000 for recording to get there. The problem with the Hi-res mixer is that if you use a lot of plugs, then it will eat a LOT more DSP, but that is the price to pay for great sound. If you want to make some very serious mixing on a Mix system, prepare yourself to pack your system with mix farms ! (HD will give you a break, as long as you don't go for 88 or 96 khz !)

But all this does not stop me from liking music mixed 100% on SSL .

my 0.2c

Hardnox
06-09-2002, 01:19 AM
Robotnik,

According to digi rep at the last demo...you can add Creed to that list. I think their 1st album was all PT.

sdevino
06-09-2002, 07:33 AM
Robotnik,
I appreciate your humor but Toto has been a mix benchmark for many years. You may not like their music but you can't argue with their sound.

taiazeez
06-09-2002, 08:27 AM
Oh no here we go again, just because Mr Big producer uses and SSL and edits with protools etc but doesnt mix with protools doesnt mean protools isnt good to be used standalone. These same guys wont embrace any new technology for the sake of it anyway. Its the case of if it aint broke dont fixit. Most of us start from its damn broke so fix it.

Robotnik
06-09-2002, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by Hardnox:
Robotnik,

According to digi rep at the last demo...you can add Creed to that list. I think their 1st album was all PT.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Just when you thought the list couldn't get any worse! Creed!!! That tells you a lot. images/icons/grin.gif

Robotnik
06-09-2002, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by sdevino:
Robotnik,
I appreciate your humor but Toto has been a mix benchmark for many years. You may not like their music but you can't argue with their sound.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">A benchmark? Of what? For listening at the dentist's office? Easy listening sappy mush. images/icons/tongue.gif

Mike Tholen
06-09-2002, 08:24 PM
images/icons/shocked.gif images/icons/grin.gif images/icons/shocked.gif images/icons/grin.gif

Felix
06-09-2002, 09:05 PM
i'll have to admit, no really impressive acts/recordings have yet to be mentioned. big selling acts, sure. though, they aren't foremost selling because of the caliber of the recording or music. what about some artists with integrity. Creed?!? images/icons/blush.gif
Radiohead uses PT, but not to mix.
Massive Attack used PT, can't remember if for mixing.
Portishead?
come on! how about some examples that may provide inspiration for those who have no choice aside from going to a costly studio for the mix-down.
i think it's possible with the right mics and outboard gear going in. (and of course skills and experience.) i'd like to read about others who do this. (others who do it well, and of interesting music that doesn't suck.)

sdevino
06-10-2002, 06:56 AM
Wo its really too bad people can't separate their taste for the music from recognition of mix quality. While you may not like most of the bands sited so far it is actually possible that some of the mixes could be great despite the bubblegum nature of the source material. The studio musicians who play on these track are still pretty damn good.

My studio is doing all mixes 100% in the box. The alt/metal/whatever bands love it. I don't think our HD mixes are hurting for detail, balls or volume.

http://www.graniterocks.com/Files/Blist0222.mps

Some of you guys will become better mixers if you will learn to listen for technical quality even where you may not like the material. Would you call Les Paul a woos just because he did session work for Bing Crosby (famous dentist office musician). I am not a Toto fan either but their mixes and arrangements were outstanding.

sdevino
06-10-2002, 06:58 AM
Sorry the link is:
http://www.graniterocks.com/Files/Blist0222.mp3

scottgreiner
06-10-2002, 09:26 AM
I'm glad this topic has aroused some interest. I have yet to find any releases mixed in ProTools that capture the
sonics I enjoy within the musical style/genre I'm looking. Though, I admit, I haven't checked out the Toto, Neil
Schon, Steve Vai cd's yet. While they probably do contain a rhythm section, historically I don't enjoy any of their
music.

If its modern rock, than you aren't likely to find many, because most of the top records are mixed by the same 5-6
guys:Andy Wallace,JJP,TLA and CLA, Brendan Obrien. All of these guys mix on SSL's. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">These are the guys I keep coming back to for reference, though I know they don't mix in ProTools. I'm hoping to
find new benchmark/references that sound that good within that style, that were mix in ProTools. I believe it can
be done (or at least I want to believe). I hope I'm not just fooling myself with this belief only to justify my own
ProTools purchase. I mostly mix in ProTools and while I love the platform and the process, I'm not in love with
my results. Mixing SSL with Distressors/LA2A/1176/Quad Bus compressor/1/2" tape seems to get me closer. I
haven't yet had the opportunity to mix the same song both ways, so I'm kind of making an unfair comparison.

digimix
06-10-2002, 10:43 AM
just to ad to this thread, i mix now only in protools. i was a total neve/ssl mixer having mixed for many high profile clients and label's for the past 15 years i can say, that without a doubt protools can give you more punch!
it's all about the person behind the mix!

rick

Robotnik
06-10-2002, 02:05 PM
Originally posted by sdevino:
Wo its really too bad people can't separate their taste for the music from recognition of mix quality. While you may not like most of the bands sited so far it is actually possible that some of the mixes could be great despite the bubblegum nature of the source material. The studio musicians who play on these track are still pretty damn good.

My studio is doing all mixes 100% in the box. The alt/metal/whatever bands love it. I don't think our HD mixes are hurting for detail, balls or volume.

http://www.graniterocks.com/Files/Blist0222.mps (http://www.graniterocks.com/Files/Blist0222.mps)

Some of you guys will become better mixers if you will learn to listen for technical quality even where you may not like the material. Would you call Les Paul a woos just because he did session work for Bing Crosby (famous dentist office musician). I am not a Toto fan either but their mixes and arrangements were outstanding.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Have a listen to the latest release by Fu Manchu. My good friend Matt recorded them...all on 2" analog....transferred to Pro Tools for editing and then multi outs to a SSL 9k. Compare these mixes to yours.

Robotnik
06-10-2002, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by tom_mac:
Garbage ??
a perfect circle !!!!
NIN??
Incubus !!
KORN??-(new one)<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I know for a fact that Rave mixed the NIN tracks on an SSL 9k.

Perfect Circle was mixed in Pro Tools. But, it was a side project and their budget wasn't too big.

Garbage, Incubus and KORN don't mix in Pro Tools.

Robotnik
06-10-2002, 02:10 PM
Actually, there is a band that tracked and mixed almost entirely in Pro Tools: "The Strokes." Although, they did use a Mackie 32*8 for some mixing. Now you know why it sounds so lo-fi and grainy. images/icons/tongue.gif

Robotnik
06-10-2002, 02:12 PM
Also, a correction about the Creed recording. Creed originally paid $600 to track all of their songs on 2". Once they got signed, the tracks were dumped to Pro Tools for editing and later transferred to 3348 and mixed on SSL.

Felix
06-10-2002, 05:24 PM
Originally posted by sdevino:
Wo its really too bad people can't separate their taste for the music from recognition of mix quality. While you may not like most of the bands sited so far it is actually possible that some of the mixes could be great despite the bubblegum nature of the source material. The studio musicians who play on these track are still pretty damn good.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">i agree. in my quickly blurted rant i meant that i was longing to know of a recording that i love to listen to (or use as a reference) that was mixed in ProTools. i don't disagree that it can be done. it's just that every cd i listen to and really love was not to my knowledge done 100% ProTools.
how about Tortoise or Sea in Cake(pretty much one in the same). i think i may have read one or two of those were done PT.??

sdevino
06-10-2002, 07:07 PM
Originally posted by Robotnik:
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by sdevino:
Wo its really too bad people can't separate their taste for the music from recognition of mix quality. While you may not like most of the bands sited so far it is actually possible that some of the mixes could be great despite the bubblegum nature of the source material. The studio musicians who play on these track are still pretty damn good.

My studio is doing all mixes 100% in the box. The alt/metal/whatever bands love it. I don't think our HD mixes are hurting for detail, balls or volume.

http://www.graniterocks.com/Files/Blist0222.mps (http://www.graniterocks.com/Files/Blist0222.mps)

Some of you guys will become better mixers if you will learn to listen for technical quality even where you may not like the material. Would you call Les Paul a woos just because he did session work for Bing Crosby (famous dentist office musician). I am not a Toto fan either but their mixes and arrangements were outstanding.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Have a listen to the latest release by Fu Manchu. My good friend Matt recorded them...all on 2" analog....transferred to Pro Tools for editing and then multi outs to a SSL 9k. Compare these mixes to yours.<hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The newest Fu Manchu I found was "California" done in 2001, is that the one you mean? If so its pretty apples and oranges, since the styles are so different, I think I got more punch in the kick and a heavier guitar sound, he was going for ore of a retro guitar sound with a bit more middle. Beyond thaty its tough to compare using MP3's and his being mastered where mine are not yet. If you are refering to something newer send me a link or I will go buy the CD so I can compare something that hasn't been so (data) compressed.

tom_mac
06-11-2002, 12:54 AM
Garbage ??
a perfect circle !!!!
NIN??
Incubus !!
KORN??-(new one)

scottgreiner
06-11-2002, 09:38 AM
Have a listen to the latest release by Fu Manchu. My good friend Matt recorded them...all on 2" analog....transferred to Pro Tools for editing
and then multi outs to a SSL 9k. Compare these mixes to yours. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> I know for a fact that Rave mixed the NIN tracks on an SSL 9k.

Perfect Circle was mixed in Pro Tools. But, it was a side project and their budget wasn't too big.

Garbage, Incubus and KORN don't mix in Pro Tools. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Also, a correction about the Creed recording. Creed originally paid $600 to track all of their songs on 2". Once they got signed, the tracks
were dumped to Pro Tools for editing and later transferred to 3348 and mixed on SSL <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I'm seeing a pattern here. Maybe I will buy that Alan Smart C2 after all... images/icons/wink.gif

tom_mac
06-11-2002, 10:00 AM
Perfect Circle was mixed in Pro Tools. But, it was a side project and their budget wasn't too big.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">soooo.......hgmm...I mean... oh yeah, that record sounds like hell images/icons/rolleyes.gif

Garbage, Incubus and KORN don't mix in Pro Tools. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Didn't incubus mix "morning view" in protools??
if not, they didn't gain much on the mix down..
(this record sound like an ad for amp-farm.)

BTW.. Science is obviously an analog record (Intense, FAT, very percussive)

the NEW korn record, sounds like a PT mix (or DAW) as well.

as for garbage....
once again..sounds like a daw. (beautiful garbage)

the NIN does indeed sound like a console mix..

Man, I'm not trying to argue about this. (I don't care enough to defend my tools)

but i HEAR huge differences in these records..

Mike Tholen
06-11-2002, 10:26 AM
was the new Korn record recorded on Radar?
mixed on a Neve?
produced by Michael Beinhorn?
engineered/mixed by F. Fillepetti?
at The Village? images/icons/wink.gif

Mark Manela
06-11-2002, 11:33 AM
Originally posted by DigiTechSupt:
Here are a few commercially available "mixed in Pro Tools" releases

Jon Connolly
Digidesign Product Specialist<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Jon,
Who is using protools for classical work? The Users section mentions that many sections of Philip Glass' Symphony No. 5 were pre-mixed in Pro Tools, although the fader automation was done on the SSL.

Any others using protools?

snoopy
06-11-2002, 11:38 AM
I still think this is just history repeating itself again. In the future it will probably be more accepted for mixes to be done on a DAW and those who rely on SSL/Neve will be out of work because they never bothered to master mixing in a DAW. I'm sure many will laugh at that statement, as many laughed at the SSL, and even Neve when he first launched his consoles (which the pros said was too brittle sounding). I'm not particular to either way, but I am going to make sure I have DAW mixing mastered.

remote
06-11-2002, 11:55 AM
"He used Pro Tools", "no, he used an SSL." Who the hell cares (aside from studio geeks) It's all rock and roll.

gh10606
06-11-2002, 11:56 AM
sdevino wrote:

>>"Wo its really too bad people can't separate their taste for the music from recognition of mix quality."

AMEN!!! I've always liked to think of professional musicians as people with appreciation for good craftsmanship. I for one don't even have musical tastes in the same sense that a consumer would: "I like that...I hate that...this sucks...this is awesome." I appreciate the quality of the work, whatever the genre. When I write my own music, it's sort of a crossing of Alternative Rock and Jazz -- but when I work with clients, it's everything: hip hop, country, pop, jazz, metal, bluegrass gospel -- you name it. If I were as judgementally genre-specific as some of the people on this thread, I guess I'd just have to jump off the Big Mac bridge (here in beautiful Cincinnati)!

Just my $.08 (adjusted for inflation).

Glenn

slangification
06-11-2002, 06:04 PM
For whatever this is worth:

http://www.digidesign.com/news/credits/

It's a little cryptic, but still kind of interesting.

Renie
06-11-2002, 06:40 PM
Originally posted by Hardnox:
It's already good enough...are you?<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This is the question.
images/icons/smile.gif

ToolWeanie
06-11-2002, 08:08 PM
Andy Wallace mixed the new Korn record on an SSL.

DigiTechSupt
06-11-2002, 09:20 PM
Who is using protools for classical work? <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Not sure, but I do know that David Newman (Film Composer) and crew track, edit and mix his film scores in Pro Tools. Though it's not classical, these scores normally consist of a 100 to 150 piece Orchestra, chior (or not) and possibly some synths. All this is mixed in Pro Tools on a Pro Control to 5.1 stems where it is handed off to the dubbing stage.

Some of his Feature film scores include "Scooby Doo" released this weekend, "Ice Age", "Nutty Professor"'s, "Galaxy Quest", among others...

Jon Connolly
Digidesign Product Specialist

RMD
06-11-2002, 11:47 PM
"Who is using protools for classical work?"

Here in Toronto, there are a handful of engineers, myself included, that offer field recording services for classical ensembles. Besides myself and one other engineer at the CBC, everyone else is either using Sonic Solutions or the Sadie System. I now own an acoustic studio that's large enough to record orchestras and have recorded direct to PT. I have also just begun using PT at my remote recording sessions.

Robert M. DiVito
Montgomery Sound

Robotnik
06-12-2002, 12:55 AM
Originally posted by Mike Tholen:
was the new Korn record recorded on Radar?
mixed on a Neve?
produced by Michael Beinhorn?
engineered/mixed by F. Fillepetti?
at The Village? images/icons/wink.gif <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The KORN tracks were recorded on Euphonix R-1 at 96k. It mighta been mixed on Euphonix as well.

Robotnik
06-12-2002, 12:58 AM
Originally posted by remote:
"He used Pro Tools", "no, he used an SSL." Who the hell cares (aside from studio geeks) It's all rock and roll.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">It does matter if the final mix sounds like doodoo. images/icons/grin.gif

Mark Manela
06-12-2002, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by RMD:

Besides myself and one other engineer at the CBC, everyone else is either using Sonic Solutions or the Sadie System. I now own an acoustic studio that's large enough to record orchestras and have recorded direct to PT. I have also just begun using PT at my remote recording sessions.

Robert M. DiVito
Montgomery Sound<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Robert,
I have been trying to find out why there is a classical bias in favor of Sadie and Sonic.
What are your thoughts?

thanks,

RMD
06-12-2002, 07:00 PM
"I have been trying to find out why there is a classical bias in favor of Sadie and Sonic."

Hi Mark, my perception when i made the choice to go PT years ago was that most of the other engineers in town doing similar work felt Sonic was a superior, more transparent work station. Sadie sort of came into the picture as a way of achieving similar results on a less expenive PC based system. This attitude towards PT sonic transparency has changed even in the last couple of years but I find classical engineers still gravitate towards Sonic. The two reasons I went with PT was first, I thought the Development Partners program was key to the quality, continued R&D and ultimately the longevity of the product. Secondly, at the time, Sonic or Sadie were primarily developed as a comprehensive 2 track stereo editor and mastering work station. I've have always adopted multi-tracking my multi-stereo/mic pickups for critical mixing back at my studio. This required software capable of this work style. Most of the engineers I know using Sonic or Sadie commit a multi-mic set-up to two track dat (GEN-X) at location. My style of work is more labour intensive but I can retain greater control over the final product should the conductor/music director change his/her mind. And i'm sure you know, they always do.
In the audio world, I still think PT is widely considered as a commercial pop/rock musicians tool because of the multi-tracking environment with all the plugin support. My only critical criteria when choosing PT years ago was that it remained transparent throughout the signal path. For the most part I believe it has and I think DigiDesign is continuing to improve that aspect of its mixer design.

regards,

Robert M. DiVito
Montgomery Sound

scottgreiner
06-13-2002, 11:18 AM
OK. So, at the risk of looking like a weenie, I posted some mp3 clips of some of my ProTools mixes at http://www.juniorhifikit.com/newpages/mp3pag e.html (http://www.juniorhifikit.com/newpages/mp3page.html). Some have
a real rhythm section, some are a heavily processed & edited rhythm section, and some are programmed. None
have been professionally mastered, so levels will vary. My
involvement in the writing/content varied from project to project (except the commercial spots, which I'm
responsible for), so don't crucify me on song writing. Comments are encouraged. I'll be mixing my next few
projects on SSL. After that, I plan to remix them in ProTools and compare my results and overall experience.

scott@juniorhifikit.com

Jules
10-26-2002, 10:55 AM
Charles Dye will be Novembers guest moderator on gearslutz.com. So you can fire questions at him all month! Starts November 1st!

images/icons/smile.gif

Jeff Schmidt
10-26-2002, 03:03 PM
Interesting conversation.

Listening to the radio in a car going 60mph, are you sure anyone can tell that Perfect Circle is a PT mix and NIN was a large format mix?

Sometimes you need to get OUT of the studio and into the real world to regain a little perspective. images/icons/wink.gif

PTUser NYC
10-26-2002, 04:39 PM
Some folks, especially those who haven't bought their Pro Tools systems yet, need to see concrete examples that the system CAN work in the hands of a skilled operator. This is fine. Especially given all the rumours that surround the recording process.

Once you realize though that Pro Tools is a viable platform, the rest becomes kind of silly. Different people like to work different ways, and I have no doubt that for someone who has a lot of experience using platfor X or console Y and less with Pro Tools that mixing outside of Pro Tools will result in a better mix for those folks. I also think that people who have Pro Tools chops can do great work "in the box".

What this all boils down to is not that 'Pro Tools is inferior, but who can tell in a car at 60 MPH?', BUT rather that the most important piece of gear in the chain is the human beings involved in the process.

With the right song, and the right artist, and the right engineer and producer, the platform to use is more a matter of what they are comfortable with than anything else. Great results can and do come from Pro Tools systems, and people doing other things too.

The question "will Pro Tools hold me back" can be answered with a resounding "no". Pro Tools is a fine platform, and the most critical piece in the puzzle, the one which makes all the difference, is you.

zboy2854
10-26-2002, 06:14 PM
Pro Tools won't hold you back in terms of editing, recording, flexibility, etc., but its 2 buss will. Whether Digi will ever address this or not I don't know, but there is a definitive shortcoming of the 2 buss in the box. I don't know if it's DC offset, summing algorithms or what, but having tried mixing songs all in the box and then breaking out the same material to individual outputs through a large frame analog console with outboard gear and automation yielded significant differences in the overall punch, clarity and presence of the comparative mixes. It almost sounded like there was headroom missing, which would make the case for some form of DC offset being introduced.

That said, to augment the list of all "in the box" songs/artists, I recall reading that Jewel's "Standing Still" was recorded all to Pro Tools. I can't remember if they said it was mixed in the box as well.

TXDigi
10-27-2002, 08:50 AM
I don't think that's true on Jewel's "Standing Still". I was in volved in mix session for "Standing Still". The pres of Atlantic was in Dallas listening to the last 30 minutes of the mix session which was at Emerald in Nashville. The were mixing on a 9000j and the soource wasn't ProTools because i could here the 2" machines rewind and cuing up over the isdn feed. Jewel, producer "Dan", and the mix engineer were all at Emerald and Ron Shapiro and I were in Dallas. It was quite cool !!!!

Bob Olhsson
10-27-2002, 09:01 AM
One thing I think a lot of people miss is that most of the mixing rooms that people want to use for high-profile projects already have an SSL sitting there. They aren't choosing the studio because of the SSL, they are choosing it because of the monitoring environment and the overall services that are available.

The truth is that some things can be mixed perfectly well inside the box and others can't. Nobody really knows which will be the case until they get into it and anybody having a reasonable budget would be a fool to not have ALL options available since deadlines and a lot of pressure go hand in hand with most high profile projects.

vocalize
10-27-2002, 10:31 AM
I think the last two Faith Hill albums were done in Pro Tools.

It seems like a lot of newer country/pop country albums are being done on Pro Tools.

The two main consoles of choice are the Neve and SSL 9000j

Extreme Mixing
10-27-2002, 05:01 PM
I am good at mixing Pro Tools, so if you want me to mix it, that would be my choice. If you want Chris Lord Alge to mix it, then he should do it on his SSL. If you want Mick Guzauski, he'll be most comfortable on his Sony Oxford. Al ********will be most at home on the Neve at Capitol, I suppose. To each his own.

If you don't like Pro Tools mixing, don't use it. But don't think it sounds bad just because you can't make it laugh and sing.

If it doesn't work for you now try back in a couple of years. It gets better all the time.

Steve

Kenny Gioia
10-27-2002, 06:57 PM
I agree with Extreme Mixing.

In fact, I recently produced a track that was mixed by me, and remixed by one of the guys previously mentioned. (I won't say who)

Although you can argue whose mix was better (how do you think I feel) I don't think anyone would argue sonic quality.

It really came down to the balance of the instruments. My drums were much heavier while his had more guitars. Matter of taste.

It just takes a desire to make things sound great with the tools at hand.

I used to mix on SSL's using tons of outboard gear.

I readjusted. I use very few plugins where I used to have EQ on every channel.

I used to compress the hell out of drums to make them sound punchier, now I add samples. Sometimes replay them.

Just make music.

zboy2854
10-27-2002, 07:48 PM
How do you get away with using very few plugins in PT when you had to use EQ on every channel in the analog world? Because of the audio being digital and needing less top end compensation? And are you saying that there is a danger in using a lot of plugins? Also, how do you deal with plug in latency--by shifting the audio regions or using TimeAdjuster?

B-Grade
10-28-2002, 11:54 AM
Garbage Mixed their Album mostly on a Trident A-Range Console. Same one used for Houses of the Holy, Hotel California, and Super Freak. They use alot of proTools and love it for tracking and editing, but prefer the console sound. Oh yeah, drums are ALWAYS tracked 2". Always.

I used to do way more in digital, but then I did some 2" transfers for editing and I cried at what happened to the sound. Looking forwad to my first HD session next month. I wnet to the demo and had shivers.

I have actually done an album using both, and no one can tell which tunes were done analog and which ones on PT. Well, both sets had material recorded 2" which helps, and both had the same fantastic Mastering engineer.

I would say that the analog mixes took less time to get sonically correct. You can almost do it in PT, it just takes more listening, time and know how. Oh yeah, and don't skimp on the Mastering!

Jules
10-28-2002, 04:00 PM
Time adjuster

CFS
10-28-2002, 09:21 PM
I work in a mastering house and see what stuff comes in on here are something I know:
Perfect Circle,Strokes,and Radiohead was not mixed in the box
Strokes was done in logic in the first place

Seand Cake and tortoise were ssent out to a Neotek I did the interview with John Mcentire in Tape Op and I dont know where whoever got that from maybe wishful thinking

What was done in Pro Tools in the box was the first Papa Roach as well as the new Queens of the stone age,
Bad Wizard "Sophisticated Mouth" which got written up in the past 2 issues of rolling stone and spin which I mixed inside the box but to half inch from the pro tools mix buss
Finch's new record on Drive Thru was mixed all in the box by Mark Trombino(Jimmy Eat World) you can read about it in an upcoming Tape Op

Let me tell you the people who do great mixes inside the box arent on record that are huge. If you wanna hear a record I think sounds absolutly great but was mixed in the box and I know it for fact is a band called The Liars "They threw us..." its a great CD as well if you like the post punk thing. As well I dont know them as people and make no money from them.

Kenny Gioia
10-30-2002, 08:41 AM
Originally posted by zboy2854:
How do you get away with using very few plugins in PT when you had to use EQ on every channel in the analog world? Because of the audio being digital and needing less top end compensation? And are you saying that there is a danger in using a lot of plugins? Also, how do you deal with plug in latency--by shifting the audio regions or using TimeAdjuster?<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You just make more EQ adjustments on the way in.

I do believe that the less plugins you use the better.

Using Digital definately requires less adding of top end.

Although I add a bit of top end on the Master Fader.

Extreme Mixing
10-30-2002, 10:58 AM
Absolutly, Producher.

If you record the stuff right in the first place, then you don't have to do much later on to make it sound great.

Steve

terrydrums
10-31-2002, 01:50 PM
If I may....

There's nothing wrong with Toto. Great musicians, great sound, great mixes, great writing. Timeless. Just because the calendar has changed (anyone remember 1982?) doesn't mean they've forgotton how to play.

People assume that just because an artist is no longer in the pop-culture spotlight (and who would really want to be?) that they've run out of talent and they're now working the drive-thru at Burger King. Not so.

T. images/icons/cool.gif

Oh, and I mix everything "in the box," too.

PeeTee
10-31-2002, 02:08 PM
Pro Tools doesn't have a "sound." That's why nobody mixes big projects in it. SSL has it's own sound. Neve has it's own sound. Pro Tools doesn't. It's sound is whatever you put in the box. I mix on an analog console cause I want it's particular sound. It's all about the metal...the transformers.

Jules
10-31-2002, 04:43 PM
Charles Dye is hosting a forum all this November. If folks want to ask him stuff directly and be sure of a responce you can do it here

http://gearslutz.com/board/forumdisplay.php3?s=a740eb8ec719af9792cde6672179b5 a3&forumid=22

images/icons/smile.gif

tomhartman
10-31-2002, 10:43 PM
Originally posted by Robotnik:
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by sdevino:
Robotnik,
I appreciate your humor but Toto has been a mix benchmark for many years. You may not like their music but you can't argue with their sound.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">A benchmark? Of what? For listening at the dentist's office? Easy listening sappy mush. images/icons/tongue.gif <hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">A benchmark of great everything.

Next time you write, sing, play, record, or mix, a record even 1/4th as good as "Rosanna," "Pamela," or "Africa", we'll all be straining at the bit to hear it.

I heard The Beatles in a dentist's office the other day, using your critieria, I guess we were all wrong about them too.

Geez;)

picksail
10-31-2002, 11:09 PM
Isn't the objective to print the sounds of the instuments(and the musicians playing them) and not the console? I thought we were trying to achieve more transparency from our gear. Isn't it better that PT DOESN'T have a sound? Maybe, evolving along with technological advances is something audio engineering is lacking.

Extreme Mixing
11-01-2002, 09:57 AM
picksail,

I don't know about transparency as a sonic goal in recording...Using your logic a guitar player wouldn't care much about which guitar or amp he played through. Drummers wouldn't care about their kit or the sticks they use.

As mixers, we're musicians too, and it's all about the sound and the vibe we can pull out of two speakers. I have developed a good vocabulary of sounds in Pro Tools. I also have 15 years of great analog gear that I use on the way in because it sounds great.

There are several ways that I want to be totally transparent in my job. I don't want to leave punch marks in the vocals. I want the recording session to feel like nothing technical is going on. I want to make people think that what they are hearing is what really happened--even in the middle of a totally surrealistic effect. I want to take the listener somewhere. I just don't want them to know I'm driving the bus.

Steve

DesertDude
11-01-2002, 06:09 PM
I want to take the listener somewhere. I just don't want them to know I'm driving the bus. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I can second that images/icons/wink.gif

images/icons/cool.gif

picksail
11-01-2002, 11:17 PM
My intention was not to offend fellow engineers; as a matter of fact I couldn't agree more, but it appeared to me as though some were discounting the authenticity of music mixed within PT. " If they weren't mixed on a $750,000 SSL 9000J then it sucks." It's that mentality to which I am opposed. The point is not HOW you get the result, but THAT you get the result. It sounded dissparaging and more about nostalgia. I tend not to be to overly romantic about a peice of equipment.

The concensus should not be based upon a multitude of abyssmally disasterous mixes performed within a DAW. Because, there are just as many done via analogue.

Steve MacMillan
11-01-2002, 11:36 PM
As a matter of fact, I just mixed the new Toto album in ProTools. Good record.

sm

murph16
11-02-2002, 01:54 AM
Toto "Through The Looking Glass"...
comes out Tuesday (nov5) in U.S. Recorded and mixed entirely in ProTools. Simon mixing and the band producing.

Toto Website (http://www.toto99.com)

There are :30 mp3 samples of the new record on the site. From what I hear, the sound is AWESOME!

terrydrums
11-02-2002, 07:57 AM
Like I said, nothing wrong with Toto.

T. images/icons/cool.gif

Steve MacMillan
11-02-2002, 08:41 AM
Toto "Through The Looking Glass"...
comes out Tuesday (nov5) in U.S. Recorded and mixed entirely in ProTools. Simon mixing and the band producing.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Simon recorded the project, and did a beautiful job mixing one track. I mixed the rest.

sm

murph16
11-02-2002, 09:35 AM
A guy named Steve MacMillan did indeed mix the album except for one track that Simon did. Whether or not that's the same Steve MacMillan that's posting here....I can't confirm or deny.
If it is you, Steve...it's a pleasure to be "posting" with you. Those guys only surround themselves with greatness (ie: Clearmountain, Scheiner, Ladanyi, Knox, etc.) so I must say we are interacting with a real "pro" here!
I wasn't able to secure an advance of this one, but starting Tuesday, I'll be absorbing every note of that record for weeks like I have with every Toto release. They are my all-time favorite musicians and every record they have done has been a true work of art and the production is always top notch.
Those of you who made the "dentist's office" remarks quite obviously don't have any idea what you've been missing for the past fifteen years!

I suggest everyone here take a listen to it when it comes out. The work they do is definitely "benchmark" stuff.
(Whoever said benchmark was right on!)

Again, Steve if it IS you, forgive me for questioning your true identity...
images/icons/cool.gif
Murph

picksail
11-02-2002, 04:32 PM
So, I guess I wasn't completely wrong.
Thanks, Steve.

Extreme Mixing
11-02-2002, 08:26 PM
Originally posted by picksail:
My intention was not to offend fellow engineers; as a matter of fact I couldn't agree more, but it appeared to me as though some were discounting the authenticity of music mixed within PT. " If they weren't mixed on a $750,000 SSL 9000J then it sucks." It's that mentality to which I am opposed. The point is not HOW you get the result, but THAT you get the result. It sounded dissparaging and more about nostalgia. I tend not to be to overly romantic about a peice of equipment.

The concensus should not be based upon a multitude of abyssmally disasterous mixes performed within a DAW. Because, there are just as many done via analogue.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">picksail,

We are in agreement. I don't mix and record in PT because it's the only option. I mix there because I think I can get as good a result working in Pro Tools as can be gotten anywhere.

I am sentimental about about certain pieces of gear, because it sounds great. That's what I mean by a vocabulary of sounds. You get a feel for which pieces will bring out the color you're looking for. That's why guys don't like Pro Tools. When they sit down at their desk of choice, they start to move things and very quickly the mix comes together, without them having to think much at all. They know what they want and what they need to do to get it.

Pro Tools has a learning curve. Not just to navigate the system. You also have to learn all the sounds in the plugs at your disposal.

If you have an original Teletronix LA 2A that you're not feeling too sentimental about, I could make you an offer. I don't suppose you do, though. It's hard to own one of them without getting a little moist at the thought of selling it.

Steve

Giles Reaves
11-03-2002, 05:51 PM
I wasn't going to post on this thread, but I thought that more of us that DO mix IN THE BOX (no outboard whatsoever) should stand up and be counted! I'm a musician as much as an engineer, and as such, don't mix full time. But when some of my Pro Tools mixes have gone up against the Tom Lord-Alges (Patty Griffin-Flaming Red, and Rubyhorse-Rise) or Kevin Killens (Chantel Kreviazuk-Colour Moving and Still, Juno winner,and Abra Moore) and been chosen to appear on the final CD, it makes me wonder "why all the fuss"? It's about capturing the feel of the music. The gear used is secondary. The fact remains, you CAN mix in Pro Tools if you pay attention to the format. If you don't like the sound of these CDs, you have to blame SSLs, Oxfords, AND Pro Tools!!! (and analog tape) images/icons/wink.gif

Hsk
11-03-2002, 09:17 PM
I started on a Neve desk and 2"/24 Studers in the late 80's, which I enjoyed but hated the remixes (documenting to death, repatching, needing the same exact studio) as the client tried to decided what they finally wanted, which usually ended up being the first mix I gave them regardless. I have never had the experience of working on a project where we had budget to use a hi-end room for mixing without cutting the Artist short on tracking time or cutting short on mix time. I am of the opinion that ProTools HD sounds good enough (transparent), so I mix in the box.

To me it is all about the instrument, the amp, the mics, the pre, the musical parts, the performance, the editing, the plugins, total recall, minimal documentation, integration, being able to let it rest along the way, and the ease of tweaking the mix a few times after listening in several environments, all within a reasonable budget, without the complication of needing a certain studio's gear. Mixing in the box does this all for me. I wouldn't say I've had hits, I have never done work for a major label, but I have had indie projects that have crawled high up the major charts in my country and I only do this on evenings and weekends (which still ends up being about 800 billable hrs/yr).

Howard
-------------------------
The Groove Jungle
Winnipeg Canada

blairl
11-04-2002, 08:17 AM
Originally posted by murph16:
A guy named Steve MacMillan did indeed mix the album except for one track that Simon did. Whether or not that's the same Steve MacMillan that's posting here....I can't confirm or deny.
If it is you, Steve...it's a pleasure to be "posting" with you.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Yes, this is the Steve MacMIllan that mixed the new Toto CD. Steve has been posting here for a long time. This is also the same Steve MacMillan that has been working professionally for quite a while and has mixed songs for other well known people including Seal.

murph16
11-05-2002, 03:28 AM
That's way cool!

rsmith123
11-05-2002, 06:03 AM
Steve M.

Forgive for drilling you here but the chance to talk with someone with an identifiable project doesn't happen everyday.

When it is said that the album was mixed totally in the box, does this mean that after the initial recording chain, no outboard gear was used and that all processing was done internally? Also, if I may, did you buss in analog? Lastly, do you have any fav. plugins?

I hope this is not in bad taste.
Robert

octatonic
11-05-2002, 08:33 AM
Originally posted by Mike Tholen:
was the new Korn record recorded on Radar?
mixed on a Neve?
produced by Michael Beinhorn?
engineered/mixed by F. Fillepetti?
at The Village? images/icons/wink.gif <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The New Korn record was recorded onto a Euphonix R1. Dont know what desk though, but it was not ProTools according the the reviews I read.

JR

Steve MacMillan
11-05-2002, 09:24 AM
Forgive for drilling you here but the chance to talk with someone with an identifiable project doesn't happen everyday.
When it is said that the album was mixed totally in the box, does this mean that after the initial recording chain, no outboard gear was used and that all processing was done internally? Also, if I may, did you buss in analog? Lastly, do you have any fav. plugins?
I hope this is not in bad taste.
Robert
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Almost no outboard equipment was used mixing the Toto project (a SPL Transient Designer, comes to mind), and if I do, I usually print the effect so I can mix without it later. I like to mix in stages, and come back to a song a few days later.

The output was direct stereo AES digital to Alesis MasterLink. I will sometimes buss thru my Neve mixer, but in general I like staying virtual.

I have 90% of all the plug-ins available, but favorites would be McDSP, Waves, Bombfactory, Sony, & Wavemechanics. I use a lot of different plug ins. If I only had one EQ and compressor it would be the McDSP.

sm

rsmith123
11-05-2002, 10:28 AM
SM,
Thanks very much.

scottgreiner
11-05-2002, 11:03 AM
This is great! I'm glad this thread I started so long ago has resurfaced with so much helpful and tangible input. I hope some of the other heavy hitters mentioned here will chime in for the record. images/icons/grin.gif

Steve, can you tell me what you used the SPL Transient Designer on, and what effect it had compared to a regular compressor? I've been thinking about this piece and haven't tried it yet.

murph16
11-05-2002, 01:38 PM
Steve,
Just picked up the Toto CD a few hours ago, and it is amazing! Nice work, my man!
This is giving me a whole new attitude about mixing within "the box". Obviously, the guys paid close attention to the sounds as they were going in...the guitars and drums are absolutely huge!
If you're saying that all of those reverbs are plug-ins, hats off!! I am completely fooled. They sound so rich and pure!

I have another new incredibly inspiring reference in this album. Once again, the musicianship and slick production of Toto has given me new levels to shoot for.

I don't have any specific questions at this point as I am still ingesting this record, but it's great to know you are around if any technical questions should arise.

Keep up the great work!

Regards,

Bill Murphy
images/icons/cool.gif

murph16
11-05-2002, 01:41 PM
I didn't kiss his ass TOO much in that last post, did I? images/icons/rolleyes.gif

Jules
11-05-2002, 06:35 PM
Hi Steve, what size rig was it mixed on?

Mix + or HD?

How many cards?

Exp chassis?

Bryan_Golder
11-05-2002, 07:47 PM
Here's a cool little indie record I tracked and mixed entirely in Pro Tools.

Danny Blitz / Hollywood

We put a lot of time and effort into it, got major distribution, and a track on MTV. I think it turned out to be a great sounding record, much punchier and clearer than a lot of other "mixed in the box" projects I've heard recently. But I'm biased. Judge for yourself. images/icons/smile.gif

You can find it at Amazon/Tower/Wherehouse/Best Buy, or email me at bryan@goldermedia.com and I'll get you a copy.

Also, the Steve Macmillan posting above is the one and only. Definitely check out his stuff. Steve does a lot of projects entirely in Pro Tools. His mixes are always very punchy and dynamic, which is something I'm always striving to achieve in this day and age where you've gotta be brutally loud to compete with all the square wave mastering jobs out there, but do it without flattening your mix and sucking all the life out of it. I've picked up a lot of great advice and mix techniques from Steve over the years.

Steve MacMillan
11-05-2002, 10:13 PM
Steve, can you tell me what you used the SPL Transient Designer on, and what effect it had compared to a regular compressor? I've been thinking about this piece and haven't tried it yet. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The SPL Transient Designer is a one trick pony that can easily add or take away the thwack on the leading edge of drums and perc., similar to a compressor. But the real cool thing is the way it can lengthen the tail of the hit bringing out the tone and overtones. Very expensive. I used it on snr and drum room tracks.

Hi Steve, what size rig was it mixed on?
Mix + or HD?
How many cards?
Exp chassis?
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Hi Jules, My rig is a G4/800 with 5 mix cards, 3 DSP farms, & SampleCell in a 13 slot Magma. 3x 888|24 and an Apogee PSX-100. I bet yours is bigger than mine. I'm enjoying working on HD systems but I haven't bought yet.

Thanks murph16 for the kind words.

Bryan Golder did a great job with the Danny Blitz CD. It is well worth picking up, if just to hear "I Wish Ozzy was my Dad".

sm

Jotown
11-06-2002, 01:17 AM
Wow. What a way cool thread. You have restored my faith in humanity, and the Internet.

To have the privilege and honor to pick the brains of Steve MacMillan, Bryan Golder and Charles Dye over at Jules place, all in one week, is just the #hit.

I have been struggling to get my mixing chops in Pro Tools up to a level that is acceptable to me. I am not an engineer. I am a producer, songwriter, singer and multi-instrumentalist.

Thanks to Pro Tools, and DAW's in general, for the first time in my life I own good tools that I can use to work on my music. Now I am paying my dues (and credit card bills) between the speakers

There is so much digital bigotry, (platforms, format even styles) on these boards. It is so hip to be able to hear from real pro's, who are not trying to sell you something.

I am sure that there will still be people out there who will continue to swear that you can't make a hit without an SSL console.

I have known, and heard for a while what could be done in a DAW. But not in Mix, or EQ or any other audio rag have I gotten such inspiration as I have here.

Thank you Steve, and Brian, and Charles. You are showing everyone with ears to hear that it is all about the person who running the gear, not the other way around.

To everyone out there in Digital Audio land, (myself included) stop blaming the tools and start learning how to use them. Most of the questions asked on this forum are not about Pro Tools, but about engineering issues. Pro Tools or Nuendo will not make your music sound better. Only you can do that. Become a better engineer. Or hire one, and your #hit will stop sounding like #hit.

Amen brothers.

Thanks again.

Jotown:)

Jules
11-06-2002, 04:05 AM
"Hi Jules, My rig is a G4/800 with 5 mix cards, 3 DSP farms, & SampleCell in a 13 slot Magma. 3x 888|24 and an Apogee PSX-100. I bet yours is bigger than mine. "

Nope! I still have room for 2 more mix farms in my 7 slot chassis (if I ditch one DSP farm). I want to do that and get a computer like yours soon, I'm still on a beige G3!!!

Thanks for the info! Most encouraging.

Hats off to you Steve!

images/icons/smile.gif

Jotown
11-06-2002, 04:10 AM
Hey Jules,

I forgot to thank you also.

I have been really digging the Charles Dye forum at Gearslutz.com

I am just trying to absorb all that I have read thus far. I have a #hitload of questions that I will be posting for Mr. Dye.

I will have to look you up when I am across the pond next year.

Thanks again. images/icons/smile.gif

Jotown:)

woodywho
11-06-2002, 05:20 AM
Almost no outboard equipment was used mixing .....
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">ALMOST!?!?!
What does this mean, either you do or you don't

i don't care...somewhere in the chain analog is being used. I'm even going to say that there are some undercover outboard(analog) users that mix outside the box(somehow)! Whether it be tracked on 2" then bounced to PT, tracked thru boards w/ $3K per channel (compression,eqs, etc) or thru some high end outboard gear or while mixing, put it thru a piece of gear to get results that a plugin couldn't or wouldn't never give you orrrrrrrrrr just simply mixed in the box down to too two tracks of analog.......somwhere in your chain you are using analog!
IT'S TIME TOO COME OUT OF THE CLOSET!!??

doug_hti
11-06-2002, 09:59 AM
woodywho,
No one is saying that any of these projects weren't tracked with traditional outboard gear...the issue is whether it was mixed in the box once everything was recorded and in.

Jules
11-06-2002, 03:10 PM
I find this discourse inspirational. I am rather wishy washy on how to proceed - I can mix in the box or out - with or without a lot of outboard....

images/icons/smile.gif

blairl
11-07-2002, 11:04 AM
Originally posted by Steve MacMillan:
Simon recorded the project, and did a beautiful job mixing one track. I mixed the rest.

sm<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Hi Steve. I just picked up the new Toto CD that you mixed in Pro Tools. It sounds absolutely fabulous. Congratulations.

I've got a couple of questions about actually mixing in Pro Tools, if you're still following this thread.

Where do you set your fader levels to start a mix? In other words, when you bring up the Kick drum etc., where do you end up setting the fader? -6, -3, 0? And related to this question, where are your levels generally when you have finished a mix? Do you end up trimming the faders quite a bit to fit it all within the dynamic range of the mix bus? Do you adjust the master fader at all, or do you just leave that at 0?

Did you use plug-in reverbs on the Toto mix? Any outboard reverbs?

Again, congratulations on a job well done. If anyone has any questions whatsover about the quality of a mix done in Pro Tools, they need to check out this CD and put their fears to rest.

fourthtunz
11-07-2002, 04:06 PM
Ah, religion, the haves and have nots :-) Alot of this is about economics right? How many guys that use analog studers and ssl's can own them? Yeah, I'll record and mix on that stuff if someone else buys them and maintains them! What about 2" tape? 1 reel lasts about 16 minutes at 30 ips?So if you want 48 tracks you need to lock up 2 machines(or send 24 tracks to Protools!!) Ok so maybe your using 15 ips, so it's still 10 reels for an album? So 2K for tape?
Hey as long as I'm not paying for it! I worked with analog for 14 years loved the sound but didn't like the hasssle.

I don't have any work in the bigs but I do get to work in music full time. Protools allows me
to spend more on mics,outboard and ultimately larger recording spaces.I think having a recording setup in my house allows me to spend more time with my gear and makes me a better engineer. This would be tough to do with a studer-ssl rig even if I could afford it.
Wait til I tell my wife about the 1million I saved by not buying studers and SSL's!!
I can even load my 192 and a laptop into my car and do a remote!

Hey analog does sound good but I wonder how many people have tried HD?
Fact is people are making albums using Protools and Nuendo and even adats(nooo!)
In my experience a great song and a great band are the most important items in a great recording. Seems that this is what is really lacking from most modern recordings:-(
Daniel
images/icons/confused.gif

woodywho
11-08-2002, 07:10 AM
Originally posted by fourthtunz:
In my experience a great song and a great band are the most important items in a great recording. Seems that this is what is really lacking from most modern recordings:-(
Daniel<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I can highly agree!! images/icons/blush.gif

Steve MacMillan
11-08-2002, 08:37 AM
Originally posted by blairl:

Where do you set your fader levels to start a mix? In other words, when you bring up the Kick drum etc., where do you end up setting the fader? -6, -3, 0? And related to this question, where are your levels generally when you have finished a mix? Do you end up trimming the faders quite a bit to fit it all within the dynamic range of the mix bus? Do you adjust the master fader at all, or do you just leave that at 0?

Did you use plug-in reverbs on the Toto mix? Any outboard reverbs?
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Where to set levels is a hard one to answer. I don't mind the master fader being down a little, but I try to have it close to zero by the end of a mix. I will usually set up a special trim group of all the tracks and subgroup auxes that feed the final buss, minus effects returns and tracks that feed subgroups. Then as early on as I can get away with I will pull back the mix to reasonable levels. As the faders are pulled back, shared reverbs and effect are hit less hard and the mix changes character, so it always takes a little work to make myself happy again. As I progress towards a finished mix, I'll be more inclined to pull back the master fader a little.

On the Toto project, all reverbs were plug-ins.

sm

Allbaldo
11-08-2002, 09:07 AM
I know the new Bad Astronaut (Joey Cape from Lagwagon's other band's) disk is mixed in the box, and while they aren't a huge hit band, they sell quite a few copies of their disks...

It seems like a lot of different music is starting to be mixed in PT. It's got to be workable as a mix format, but I think most of us out here aren't able to afford the kind of PT setup that would allow us to mix the way we're used to in the out of the box world....tons of plugs, huge dsp, and all that. I know I'm going to start trying to mix in PT as soon as I can.

murph16
11-08-2002, 01:30 PM
On the Toto project, all reverbs were plug-ins.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Wow! Impressive!

rtcstudio
11-09-2002, 09:55 AM
Steve,

You are a classic example of a guy who has taken the time to learn how to use his (Pro) tools. Congrats on a great record, and hushing some of the ProTools "in the box" nay-sayers.

ProTools gets blamed for a lot of operator error, with it being in the hands of so many, especially some from the analog world who are used to nailing the meters all the time. The TOTO record is a great argument for hiring a real engineer to mix albums.

The pulling the faders back thing and its effect on the overall mix is definitely true. The frustrating thing is I've had a couple of ProTools gurus say there is no reason that this should make a difference because (insert a lot of math here). I've never been able to explain what goes on there in scientific terms, I don't know, so I can't argue in their language, it just sounds really different (better) when you do it.

Anyway, thanks for being one of the guys who will end up making "in-the-box" more the rule and not the exception. It's great to have a definitive commercial example to point people to to show what is possible.

thraxman
11-12-2002, 11:28 PM
Originally posted by Hardnox:
Robotnik,

According to digi rep at the last demo...you can add Creed to that list. I think their 1st album was all PT.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

thraxman
11-13-2002, 12:04 AM
Originally posted by Hardnox:
Robotnik,

According to digi rep at the last demo...you can add Creed to that list. I think their 1st album was all PT.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I am glad to be back to the DUC as I have not been here in a while (my name is Daniel Spitz):

And the following for Robotnik:

As I was just with my friend Mark Trumonte the Guitarist and songwriter for Creed last week, I will gladly ask him directly if the first album was mixed entirely in PT. I will report back ASAP.

I can say my first new music in seven years will be entirely mixed by me on the Pro Control surface.

Band is:
Drummer: Nicko McBrain from the band Iron Maiden
Guitarist: Daniel Spitz from the band Anthrax
Bassist: Dave Ellefson from the band Megadeth
Singer: to be announced shortly

I have done two albums(maybe more) on the Focusrite at Electric Ladyland (with Steve Thompson and Michael Barbiero), Tracked on the Neves everywhere including Conway (with Dave Jerden), and mixed on SSL's all the way to Compass Point Bahamas with Eddie Kramer along with me,(some API's in there to fill the gaps too).

Pro Tools needs the ProControl and a six month lock out in your own room to make it do things you can't due on aformentioned boards. It is called new ground.

Be prepared as our new generation of mixers is just around the corner. Your already hearing them on the radio, television, and movie soundtracks.

Don't bother fighting technology and thirteen year old mini mixers already at work at home NOW! They are NOT going to wait for a reel of tape to rewind ten years from now, or pay for a few SSL channel replacement's per week. There Sony Playstations and Sega DreamCast systems don't due that rewind stuff.

Over and Out,
Daniel Spitz

: : The Fisher of men is Alway's Fishin' for More.

Jotown
11-13-2002, 09:17 AM
Congrats on the new band Thraxman.

Sounds like there will be some headbangin' goin on!

Good luck.

Chris Townsend
11-14-2002, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by thraxman:

Singer: to be announced shortly
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Daniel, a friend of mine recently saw Sebastian Bach (from Skid Row of course) playing the lead part at a local production of Jesus Christ Superstar, so I bet he's available as a lead singer for your band. For more info you can check out his website at http://www.sebastianbach.com. All joking aside, as a teenager Iron Maiden, Megadeth and Anthrax were probably my favorite bands. It'll be interesting to hear what you guys come up with.

thraxman
11-14-2002, 08:42 PM
Originally posted by Chris Townsend:

All joking aside, as a teenager Iron Maiden, Megadeth and Anthrax were probably my favorite bands. It'll be interesting to hear what you guys come up with.[/QB]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Hey Chris,

Since you are hard at work at Digi designing my next Pro Control surface, can you make it look something like this: http://www.fairlightesp.com.au/resources/downloads/Console.jpg

Please include EQ knobs, Gate Knobs, and Compressor knobs for each channel tied to my plugs of choice.

All joking aside, LOL!
Thank you much for the info on sebastion, he is quite the talented artist.

Over and Out,
Daniel Spitz
:The Fisher of men is alway's looking for another Fish.

Chris Townsend
11-15-2002, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by thraxman:
Since you are hard at work at Digi designing my next Pro Control surface, can you make it look something like this: http://www.fairlightesp.com.au/r esources/downloads/Console.jpg (http://www.fairlightesp.com.au/resources/downloads/Console.jpg)

Please include EQ knobs, Gate Knobs, and Compressor knobs for each channel tied to my plugs of choice.
[QB]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I forwarded you post to our Control Surface Product Manager.

Esteban
11-15-2002, 11:48 AM
What a great thread. I think I'm impressed most by everyone's willingness to share info. We truely are in this all together.

Daniel. Good to know you're out there creating. Oh, the hours I spent with ankle weights on pounding two kick drums because of ya'll!!

I've been very curious as to Charlie's where-abouts. Any info would be appriciated.
Congrats on the new project.

Evan Jones
truckerspeed72@hotmail.com

johnwhynot
11-15-2002, 05:34 PM
Time for me to chime in...

i have a project coming out that was mixed 100% in the box -
It's out in Canada now but will be coming out on Rounder in the US soon.

Click here for Kathleen Edwards: "Failer" on Maple Music (http://www.maplemusic.com/artists/ked/default.asp?band_id=695)

Here's a link for Kathleen at Rounder, but I don't think they've released this yet. (http://www.rounder.com/Album.asp?catalog_id=6428)

Anyway, it was recorded on 16-track 2" and then shipped down to me in LA, I transferred into 24-bit 48k Protools, using AD8000SEs, and mixed it all in the box.

And a very nice-sounding project it is.

Cheers
JW

div32
11-16-2002, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by THETHRILLFACTOR:
the 4000 is more of an agressive animal. Rock,rap, and anything agressive favors the 4000(and sometimes the 6000). When you hit it hard it just crunches(as well as the EQ and compressors). While I love the automation and the the total recall of Pro Tools, I still can't get the mixes to "bang" like I can on a board.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">As soon as they come out with the "4000 crunch" plugin it will be all out audio war.
images/icons/grin.gif

thraxman
11-16-2002, 05:14 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by scottgreiner:

Does anyone know of other commercially
available "popular" music (not obscure bedroom stuff) that was mixed INSIDE ProTools? \

Mixed entirely in ProTools, what a wonderful topic!

I can tell you that Charles Dye is recording AND mixing a friend of mines band all in Pro Tools HD right now.

I can preety much guarantee you it will be all over the radio.

I have heard the ruffs, my friend is quite the songwriter, as Charles is quite the mixer in Pro Tools. The band is Awsome!

I think Digi should keep a tally of the hits solely Mixed in the box, verify there authenticity,and keep a running post.

Our new generation of mixers have arrived for a long stay, and this list is only going to get longer.

What do you think?

Daniel Spitz

:The Fisher of Men is Alway's looking for more Fish.

thraxman
11-16-2002, 05:23 PM
Originally posted by Chris Townsend:
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by thraxman:
Since you are hard at work at Digi designing my next Pro Control surface, can you make it look something like this: http://www.fairlightesp.com.au/r esources/downloads/Console.jpg (http://www.fairlightesp.com.au/resources/downloads/Console.jpg)

Please include EQ knobs, Gate Knobs, and Compressor knobs for each channel tied to my plugs of choice.

[QB]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I forwarded you post to our Control Surface Product Manager.<hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Thanx Chris. You are a scholar and a gentlemen.

I know the next generation ProControl will be Awsome.

I can't wait!

Up to 100K is cool, just make it affordable to get into, and upgradable to the 100k mark for larger studio's and you have a winner.

All my best to you and your work at Digi,

Daniel Spitz

:The Fisher of Men is Alway's looking for more Fish.

johnwhynot
11-16-2002, 09:58 PM
Hey daniel I hope you'll keep everyone posted on the new project.

I know a few singers too, but they usually insist on playing something while they do it...

I'm sure you're getting plenty of leads at this point.

I for one severely enjoy mixing on my PT system - it took a while but you can't beat 100% total recall and mixing 20 feet from where I sleep.

All my studios from about 1996 on will be PT based, or based on some evolutionary descendent of PT.

If I want a big desk with hot lamps and skittering faders (not to mention rusty plastic) I have lots of friends who own those things...

I really like the APC mixes - most of them anyway.

I'm sure there are others, beyond what has been listed here ...

JW

Bob Brockman
11-25-2002, 06:08 PM
As for "mixing inside the Box", I've done plenty of it, despite the greif I've gotten for the MIX artice about mixing in a Pro Tools world.. I'm a studio owner, and we have two huge HD rigs, one 64 outputs, and the other 32 out, with every available plug in out so far. My partner, Yaron Fuchs and I are Alpha testers for Waves, and use them copiously on all our mixes... To set the record straight, I am not "anti" Pro Tools.. I mixed most of a Grammy award winning record for Christina Aguilera entirely "In the BOX", on a 16 bit system 3 years ago... i also tracked many records, including Faith Hill's "There you'll Be", (which I worked on with Steve Mcmillan), entirely in PRO TOOLS. Since we have the ability at our studio to mix IN and OUT of the box... I usually choose OUT , because I love my NEVES, API's, DISTRESSORS, and MANLEY Eq's and Compressors.
They're not necesarily better than plugs, I use plenty, but I like the sound of them and think they're musical, which is the point in the end. As to my lack of PRO Tools experience, I use it 14 hours a day....Obviously it is the current industry standard... Does HD sound better, yes, much much better... At the time of the MIX article we hadn't upgraded... Both my partner and I are very happy we did... The music sounds and feels better.

NY909
11-26-2002, 10:32 PM
This thread has definitely become encouraging. One thing I noticed over the years is that every once in awhile PT users need the reassurance that their investment can (under proper circumstances) produce chart topping quality. This was the case for as far back as I remember (PT III - 16bit).

The question used to be "who is using PT for hits?" It is now "who is mixing in the box for hits?". It will no doubt become "who is NOT using PT entirely for hits?" For those that doubt this, give it time. You will see.

As I was reading the beginning posts in this thread about why there aren't alot of hits mixed in the box, I couldn't help but think back to my college days & my psych 101 class. Confounding variables comes to mind. For those of you that don't know what I mean, short definition:

When it appears as though X is caused by Y, when in fact Y is the result of some other factor - Z, the variables are said to be confounding. How does this apply....

Why don't we see alot of hits mixed in PT yet? Well, start with the label. First of all a record that stands a chance on the charts because the label is dumping tons of $ into, will most likely get produced by an established, reputable producer. As this producer, try telling the VP of A&R that it will sound as good or better mixed in PT. Not many A&R are willing to accept that a few thousand $ system can do what a million $ board can do. That's if the established producer is even willing to risk his reputation by suggesting it. Or maybe he doesn't have the time to change his working methods anyway. Or time to learn how to make it hum. Or maybe if it's in the budget and if it's working for him already, why bother? The artist will just recoup it anyway.

The point being that we don't see alot of chart topping mixes in PT at this point, not because it's impossible to do, but because of other variables holding it back. Over time though, these tired, old, ignorant players will realize that they will save some time/money and still come out with a banging sound with the benefit of features they never dreamed of. Then they will ask...how can you NOT use it? Guaranteed.

THETHRILLFACTOR
11-27-2002, 01:19 AM
"Over time though, these tired, old, ignorant players will realize that they will save some time/money and still come out with a banging sound with the benefit of features they never dreamed of. Then they will ask...how can you NOT use it? Guaranteed."

This maybe a good or bad thing. The more a label thinks it can save money, the less they will likely spend. In turn that means less money for us...the lab coat,egg head,computer monkeys(and every other name the labels have used)engineers!!!

We are always last on the totem pole. We are just a bunch of knob turners. So why should we get paid if they can get any other computer geek to do the same thing.

I think right now the whole music business is at a crossroads. People have stopped buying music(why should they if they can downloaded for free,copy it, or just buy a bootleg). Part of this dissatisfaction with the public(besides the price of CDs) is the so called "terrible thin sound" which for some reason has been associated to PT. I think until the CD itself is upgraded, the labels will still do the majority of their major stuff on SSL's and Neves, that way in their minds they can avoid the so called "thin sound".

So the battle will continue.

NY909
11-27-2002, 09:32 AM
I think right now the whole music business is at a crossroads. People have stopped buying music(why should they if they can downloaded for free,copy it, or just buy a bootleg). <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I agree. I see the record industry moving toward selling more than just music. One way this is happening already is with bonus DVDs of concert footage or multimedia CD's that have bonus material for your computer. Don't be surprised to see bonus DVD's of an artists music video soon. Compressed video still sucks and sharing and storing is not yet an option.

The record industry is slow to adapt to change though - ("record" industry). Most recording contracts still deem CDs as new technology and thus subject to lower royalty rates. But eventually the change will come probably from smaller labels - which will of course will be part of the conglomorates. I just wonder how creative the labels will get. I can think of lots of ideas that the labels should stuff into a CD package in order to sell it. After changes like that happen, downloading MP3's would be more tolerated, because the label will know that consumers would buy the CD anyway for the bonus stuff. MP3s will just be the preview.

audioworks
11-27-2002, 11:03 AM
DANNY FRYE AND THE D-DOLLS mixed entirely in pro tools- voted #15 in the top 20 new artists in the u.k.(danny frye is from cleveland ,ohio!!)cheers

Shan
03-21-2004, 11:43 PM
Well, it's been some time so I'd thought I'd bring this thread back to life. I'm sure there are more in the box albums out now. Here is a recent one.

Barbra Streisand's last album, "The Movie Album", entirely in the box using only 1 external digital reverb and no control surface. Mixed by Dave Reitzas. The external reverb was the Eventide Orville and the speakers he used for this project were the Genelec 1031's (Barbra's) and the 1032's (his).

Shan

lukeyy
03-22-2004, 02:17 AM
www.lunik.com (http://www.lunik.com)

entirely mixed in protools by tore johannsson

Shan
03-22-2004, 02:41 PM
Wow. I didnt even see this one. Here is one long list. http://www.digidesign.com/news/credits/

Shan

s2n
03-24-2004, 10:40 AM
That list only shows that PT was used as a "Mix medium." Which is what EVERYBODY practically uses it for....a playback box with recording, editing and some plugin FX. Or, do you honestly think that Outkast was mixed inside of PT while they were at Larrabee or Hit Factory?!

Shan
03-24-2004, 01:19 PM
Ya your right. I know for sure that some of these acts were mixed on an SSL.

Shan

s2n
03-24-2004, 05:09 PM
Ya your right. I know for sure that some of these acts were mixed on an SSL.

Shan



Yeah. Me too. DUH!

TLmix
03-25-2004, 10:57 AM
You'd be surprised hom much of Outkast was PT submixes on a 9k...

Dan Pinder
03-26-2004, 10:32 AM
I don't really care what "hits" were mixed in the box, I'm more interested to know what really good sounding music was mixed in the box. What sounds amazing having been mixed "in the box"?

s2n
03-27-2004, 12:31 PM
I don't really care what "hits" were mixed in the box, I'm more interested to know what really good sounding music was mixed in the box. You can mix a "hit" on anything and I have never equated the commercial value of a song to be proportional to the sound quality. These days, it's almost mutually exclusive as 5 minutes listen to commercial radio will tell you. What sounds amazing having been mixed "in the box"?



NOTHING!

Dan Pinder
03-28-2004, 12:02 PM
NOTHING!



LOL!

I can offer a few that are commercially available (but not "commercial") that I'm pretty happy with the sound of:

James Carney - Thread (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00006AFKQ/qid=1080506588/sr=1-3/ref=sr_1_3/103-0720172-0311069?v=glance&s=music)

We only had the help of a TC M3000. It was mixed in a real studio control room for the quality of monitoring. Recorded in Cello studio 2.

__________________

Azam Ali — "Portals of Grace" — (world) (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000069JJN/qid=1080506699/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-0720172-0311069?v=glance&s=music)

Entirely in the box except for an external reverb.

_________________

Greg Ellis — "Kala Rupa" — (lots and lots of perc) (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00005Q3CY/qid=1080506767/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/103-0720172-0311069?v=glance&s=music&n=507846)

100% in the box. Reverbs are all Reverb One.

s2n
03-28-2004, 10:25 PM
What sounds amazing having been mixed "in the box"?



Still NOTHING.

CWHumphrey
03-29-2004, 02:22 AM
It's been a long time since I've visited the DUC...

All the Mixes I did for Rod Stewart's "American Songbook" Vol. I and II were mixed in the box. No outboard processing, and I bounced to disc. On Vol. II, all of the tracks we did were recorded directly into Pro Tools, and I believe the other producers also recorded into Pro Tools.

Cheers,

Carter William Humphrey

Steve MacMillan
03-29-2004, 09:04 AM
Hi CWHumphrey,

Good job on the American Songbook stuff. I mixed for Rod Stewart for years (Forever Young, Lost in You, My Heart Can't Tell You No, Downtown Train, Rhythm of My Heart, Motown Song, etc.).

I just finished mixing the new Corrs album in the box, it should do very well.

Steve

Dan Pinder
03-29-2004, 10:10 PM
Still NOTHING.



Damn, S2N, you must really have your finger on the pulse. If it's still "nothing" tomorrow, please let us know!

Jules
04-03-2004, 03:28 AM
Charles Dye - a bix exponent of 'mixing in the box" will be here

http://gearslutz.com/board/forumdisplay.php3?s=36a823fbb944104e45727bd1a4feca 57&forumid=36

For a month answering questions and giving tips on how he does it.

medievil
04-12-2004, 08:23 AM
I don't really care what "hits" were mixed in the box, I'm more interested to know what really good sounding music was mixed in the box. You can mix a "hit" on anything and I have never equated the commercial value of a song to be proportional to the sound quality. These days, it's almost mutually exclusive as 5 minutes listen to commercial radio will tell you. What sounds amazing having been mixed "in the box"?



NOTHING!



Blackhawk Down OST Album

Dr. J
04-20-2004, 04:24 PM
Hardnox had it right in the beginning. All the high end systems are good enough. If your an average listener where do you hear music. in the car or in the living room. A great SSL mix sounds no better than a great Pro Tools mix in those environments to an amature. Possibly a professional engineer could pick out differences in those environments, possibly.

We are in the middle of a project with Charles Dye. We have worked with a lot of engineers both analog and digital. And Hardnox said it in the beginning of this thread andhe was dead on, it's not the equipment that makes the mix sound good "it's a given that we're dealing with pro gear" It really is the engineer.

Charles has one of the best sets of ears i've ever seen. He took us on a tour of Cresant Moon and Criteria, and we checked out his analog and Pro Tools mixes before working with him and it all his mixes sound great.

Work with a pro, in HIS favorite envoronment and you'll get a great sound.

Howardk
04-21-2004, 12:26 AM
Exactly, at this point it ain't about Analog vrs Digital, ProTools-mix-bus vrs an SSL, Ford vrs Chevy, it is all about who's driving.

I still see so many people hitting ProTools busses red hard and wondering why it sounds grainy compared to analog. Leave a little headroom, please!

Steve MacMillan
04-21-2004, 02:43 AM
I've been mixing a fair amount of surround lately. First the stereo mix, then the 5.1 using much of the same mix. This would be a major pain in the rear on a conventional console. You could only get close to this functionality on a megabuck Oxford at 3k a day.

sm

Shan
04-21-2004, 10:14 AM
I've been mixing a fair amount of surround lately. First the stereo mix, then the 5.1 using much of the same mix. This would be a major pain in the rear on a conventional console. You could only get close to this functionality on a megabuck Oxford at 3k a day.

sm



Hi Steve, I recently wrote you an email regarding writing a column for a mag. My email didnt go through. Could you send me an email and I will give you more details. Thanks.

Shan

Dan Pinder
04-21-2004, 01:26 PM
Work with a pro, in HIS favorite envoronment and you'll get a great sound.




Dr. J, that rather sums it up.

PeeTee
04-21-2004, 03:12 PM
Hardnox had it right in the beginning. All the high end systems are good enough. If your an average listener where do you hear music. in the car or in the living room. A great SSL mix sounds no better than a great Pro Tools mix in those environments to an amature. Possibly a professional engineer could pick out differences in those environments, possibly.

We are in the middle of a project with Charles Dye. We have worked with a lot of engineers both analog and digital. And Hardnox said it in the beginning of this thread andhe was dead on, it's not the equipment that makes the mix sound good "it's a given that we're dealing with pro gear" It really is the engineer.



8ULL*****

If this where the case, then we'd all be using Mackie mixers and 4-tracks out of the basements of our homes.

If you can't hear the difference, then you never will. Maybe you should find another job.

Howardk
04-21-2004, 07:23 PM
Hmmm. . . Do you thing PeeTee is a little harsh?

Even those of us that believe ProTools gets the job done are smart enough to know that using a 4 track will not do the trick. I think one of the points is many of use would rather use a computer graphical interface with everything integrated and total recall, not a mixer. Not sure why a Mackie got dragged into the response above.

For my ears ProTools HD sounds good-enough ( but we are all looking forward to the 48bit mix bus). I am not one of those people that claims to heard the difference from gold plated cables or an improvement to the transient response of a hi-end stereo amplifer after changing to a low oxygen A/C power cable with 30 minutes between listening tests. I guess my ears are just not that good besides I'd rather work on music in an environment that can afford time to be creative as well as make a few mistakes that I can fix the next day or week without breaking the project's budget. ProTools HD provides for that. If you do a good job of collecting the right sounds, including the right analog distortions for color and character along the way, it works out just fine.

Dan Pinder
04-23-2004, 04:33 PM
The next LA Pro Tools users group mtg is focusing on MITB on May 6th at RSPE.