pro tools summing or digital board summing

[kingz]

Anyone have any opinion on summing in a digital mixer, as opposed to analog or "bounce to disk". I know analog summing is the best, but will summing in an 01V96 be comparable, concidering how awful "bounce to disk" sounds?

kingz9

[Howardk]

I must have no ears because I don't hear awful on my HD system and don't agree with your assumptions. However there are many that agree with you, see other posts on this topic, so I am not going to try and argue which sounds better. However I believe that even if mixing externally sounds better (whatever 'better' happens to mean?), for repeatability and convenience I would say mixing within ProTools completely(mixing-in-the-box), without an external board (analog or digital), and minimal external processing (none in my case), provides a more repeatable process. This allows for quicker revisits, more experimentation, etc. . . This resulting flexibility yields better overall results in my opinion. For example, I never have to say, "Sorry I can't bring up the BGs by 1 db because I can't get the SSL mix room back until next week" or "Sure I can do it, but it is going to cost $200 to recall everything and get the mix right again". Now my response is, "Sure I can try that and have ready in 15 minutes!"

[kingz]

you seem to have missed the point. this wasn't about total recall, and ease of use. I dont mind taking the extra step for the sound I want to achieve. Sure I can use nothing but ampfarm, but I'll spend the time micing up my mesa to get a desired tone from my guitar.

I'm really trying to get opinions on digital summing. There is no doubt there is a difference between analog and digital, and probably (hopefully) a difference between summing in the box, and through a digital board.

If anyone has heard the differences, please let me know

[1150Post]

I prefer in the box as well on my HD rig. I'd try both and see which one you prefer. Otherwise, I'm afraid you are just going to get a different opinion from each person who posts. It's a hot topic.

Or...

Do a search on "Mixing in the Box" and find a very long thread on just this topic.

FWIW.

Brad McIlvaine
Sr. Mixer/Designer
Henninger Media Services
Washington, DC 20036

[Howardk]

Kingz - I didn't miss your point, just sharing mine (which is keep it simple by MITB). My guess is using an 01V96 would not yield advantages. . . I have not tried it though. . . maybe someone else has. . . good luck. Not sure how Ampfarm versus mic'ing your Mesa has to do with your mixing/summing choices.

How did you conclude HD sounds "Awful" when using "Bounce to Disk"?

What type of ProTools rig do you have?

[picksail]

I would be interested in hearing about your conclusion, as well. BTD may not be the absolute cream-of-the-crop, but I think awful is a bit dramatic. Of course, this is purely subjective. I don't think that summing to an 02R96 will yield superior advantages over BTD. Try and see.

In answer to your question: No. There is nothing aesthetically comparable regarding analog vs. digital summing. Ecspecially, with an 02R96.

[Chris Cavell]

digital summing in-the-box vs. digital summing out of the box really depends on the summing algorithms which should be so darn close as to yield absolutely no difference on the final 16 bit master (i.e. it doesn't matter if the algorithm is written on a chip or written in a software app...the algorithms should be nearly mathematically identical) You may find some differences in a digital mixer that could give you a better feel over your mix, like a different pan law on the panners. The only thing that would probably have a noticed affect on the sound-quality is the converters used if you're going to an analog recorder for final mixdown. (the same could be said about ITB mixing if you've got any external voices from midi coming in through auxes during btd...i think you can still consider that ITB mixing )

[Matt_G]

The goal with any digital device should be 'accuracy' If the Yamaha digital mixer is designed properly it should'nt offer any sonic benefits over a BTD in Protools. If your description of 'BTD' is 'Awful' then maybe your mix is the problem? Because Protools just bounces exactly what you are hearing when you play the mix back, unless you are applying a SRC or truncation to 16bit without dither, it shouldn't sound different. You should read the Tech Talk article 'Mixing in the box' to understand the differences in the way protools handles this & why people prefer to mix through a good quality analog board.

Basically it's the charachter & inaccuracies of summing through an analog board that people prefer the sound of, not the fact that Protools BTD is flawed. I prefer to mix in the box for convenience adding the charachter I like using tape or valve outboard gear for that analog flavour & sense of depth. But if I had a spare SSL in the closet I would be very happy to sum through that.

[Alécio Costa]

I´ve been mastering for a few local studios that do all inside the box with a mix/mix plus system. I have compared to my own mixes, done with my PT Mix plus bi-lightpiped to an 02R V2 and seems stereo image is slighlty better. Sound seems also deeper.
Ok, it might depend on everyone´s individual talent/experience with ITB techniques but a few other people still insist on doing their stuff with d8b´s, 02Rs.
However, I have been taking some stuff done in PT HD3 and I felt the stereo image is better, no need to eq as much as with a legacy mix system, highs seem more "natural".So, now maybe no need for an external digital board?
I have even considered upgrading my 02R to an 02R V2 96k, may is arriving and software version 2 has just been released by Yamaha.
I would be curious to know if the Dm2000 or the 02R 96k would be a giant leap if connected to a mix plus or an HD Accel set-up in terms of stereo image, depth.

[Matt_G]

I would be curious to know if the Dm2000 or the 02R 96k would be a giant leap if connected to a mix plus or an HD Accel set-up in terms of stereo image, depth.

I seriously doubt it.. save the money & upgrading to HD would be money better spent. Or upgrade your converters these will have a more noticeable effect on stereo image & depth then summing through a digital desk. My guess why you may have been hearing a better sound stage through the O2R is the clocking or jitter in the O2R is better (not brilliant) then the clocking/jitter from the 888 D/A.