Why does consolidation &or bouncing tracks=loss of sound quality

[zboy2854]

Orbital and John,

You both referred to something else not having to do with consolidation of an individual track itself, but rather the issues pertaining to Pro Tools' summing/mix bus. I myself have contended for some time that the algorithms and math used to sum multiple tracks to a stereo output in PT is inferior to that used in other programs like Cubase SX and Logic (at least those are two I've used and heard). Every time a fader is moved away from unity gain, a pan is moved from center, or more tracks are added to the mix, the math required to process it jumps substantially, and I have witnessed a degradation in sound quality in PT when mixing many tracks to a stereo bus as opposed to mixes consisting of only a few tracks. In fact, when mixing in PT, I now almost always send all my tracks out to individual outputs and mix through an analog console.

Having done the consolidation test myself, I can say that I found no audible or technical difference on a track by track basis. So I think the whole audio quality issue you guys have noted is in fact not related to consolidation, but rather related to the actual mix bus in PT.

[Kahuna]

Why did I know this conversation would eventually work it's way to the never ending "mix buss issue"..... [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

Here's a link to some interesting mix buss testing put together by Lynn Fuston involving multiple DAW's. Get the CD, listen blind, and form your own opinions...

http://www.3daudioinc.com/cgi-bin/ul...ubb=forum&f=19

[Alex Rodriguez]

Yeah, I agree with Zach. I haven't done specific tests with consolidating tracks, only with bouncing because bounced mixed from a stereo bus sounded different to me. The best thing is to have as many separate outouts as you can and mix on an analog console; a really good one, of course.
Even in a Internal PT mix, I notice a difference between a BTD file and a stereo file I record back to PT (digital out-digital in).

[6X 2]

Originally posted by orbital:
John, i recently worked on a project using Logic Audio, i did all my midi programming and then tracked the results into Logic 24 bit, 44.1, it was all synth based music, i liked the sound i was getting in Logic but i the wanted to try mix in Protools, so as to make it easier to import, i bounced each track from a common start point ,ie bounce starts at bar 1 ends bar 150, then i imported the the bounces into Protools, the results where a suprise, the track seemed to loose definition in the bottom end, the mix using bounces sounded "thinner" to my original Logic Audio work mix using first generation tracking, i know exactly what you are saying regarding the whole bouncing issue.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Same here, but in the end the result was a million times better cause I could concentrate on the mix instead of having to tear my hair off trying to make sense of (il)Logic... [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

6x2

[John Kurzweg]

I just wanted to clarify that I'm not talking about the mix buss per se but actually using any one of the busses(1 thru 64etc.) that you might use to print a file with a plug in(or no plug-in)I've done this test with the mix buss too and that seems to produce yet even different results than the other buss sends(mix buss=high end seems almost the same but there's a loss in low end clarity----buss sends=slight loss of highs but lows seem closer to original)As far as the mix buss goes,I don't know why the mix buss would treat consolidated files differently than original files(I print mixes of both and they always sound different)-I get the same effect even when I break out individual outs to a console.

[TiPo]

Originally posted by Alex Rodriguez:
Yeah, I agree with Zach. I haven't done specific tests with consolidating tracks, only with bouncing because bounced mixed from a stereo bus sounded different to me. The best thing is to have as many separate outouts as you can and mix on an analog console; a really good one, of course.
Even in a Internal PT mix, I notice a difference between a BTD file and a stereo file I record back to PT (digital out-digital in).

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Mixing in the box and bouncing isn't really an issue nor a problem at all with Pro Tools HD!!!

[koko]

hell, even a lightpiped 02r96 mix print back to pt (masterlink would be optimal) is better than bounce. dont bus in pt, use it as a recorder/editing station. use minimum plugs (oxford eq and dynamics, process at 96k). also, slave pt to a good clock. the less tracks, the better. careful with dither.
bounce commercials, not music

[zboy2854]

Just curious, when you want to consolidate a track, why don't you just use Option-Shift-3 rather than re-record to a new track, and take the busing part out of the equation?

[John Kurzweg]

That is the way I consolidate tracks(option-shift-3-I love shortcuts) But after I noticed the sound difference I started to do tests for bussing(since there are times when I have to print things too-especially if some one else is mixing--mixers like Andy Wallace insist on all tracks being consolidated and all effects being printed)Don't get me wrong-consolidating is way more subtle and superior than bussing-not to mention the 10 sample delay from bussing and the real time it takes to print a track.I should mention the bussing test I did recently with analog channel 2 was on a distorted guitar.

[thin ice]

I wouldn't worry too much about all this. It still sounds many times better than my 16 bit ADATs I was working on until a coupe of years ago. Also after using beat detective it takes way too long to load a session without consolidating. I think there are more gains to be made by concentrating on other factors.