mix opinions: in the box vs. through the board

[mechanic]

I know I've seen threads similar before, but I was interested in group opinions for my particular setup...

my setup:
digi001 + alesis ai3
Soundcraft K1 16 channel (live board, but with direct outs)
rnc compressor
dbx266
lexicon m100 reverb unit.

music: 'textured guitar indie-rock with pop sensibilities" (think Built To Spill crossbred with Weezer).. two guitars (usually fenders through a twin, or a music man 210... 57 close micd).. bass di'd, drums recorded in a very dry room (ie I plan on adding considerable effect to them)... vocals are not the bands highlight, although they are there...

so... I really like the idea of mixing through my board. If I do this, I'm coming 8 out the digi, 8 out the ai3, into the board and then probably back into digi (for mixdown... although I've toyed with the idea of using a S-VHS deck)... many of the tunes have more than 16 tracks, so I may have to mix tracks in PT before sending them out ...

I like this idea... I like being able the manipulate the eq's on the board (I can look at all of them at once, as oppossed to one at a time plugin style... I like how I can try to make things 'fit' by tweaking two different channels at once)... but, I will inevitably be using some plugins before stuff comes out to the board...

but, I hear things like "the D->A's on the ai3 aren't that great" not to mention people's low opinion of the digi's converters... or things like "you're resampling, and it's not like your board is so nice that it's worth the extra noise your introducing". on the other hand, I've gotten "mixes in PTLE always come out small, mix through your board"

What do you folks think?

If I had much more time, I would put alot of effort into mixing one song both ways and see what I thought, but mixing takes me a really long time, and I'm not so trusting of myself that if I found one sounding better I could determine it was because of a better process. so I wouldn't mind some authoratative opinions...

First post, BTW...

cheers.

oh, also.... I'm really trying not to buy anything right now, so if you can refrain from responses like "do it through the board, but get a sweet 2-track!", my wallet would appreciate it...

thanks!

[joel hamilton]

I always mix on a console. It simply sounds better.

My 2cents...

[magritte]

link me to your band. i'm in nj and play similar stuff (dinosaur jr, pavement, bts, gbv all huge influences)

[tiger vomitt]

try it and see how you like it. thats really the only advice worth mentioning.

oh, and SVHS can be very cool. i used to do that back in the day and i like it, it sounds like a super cassette. not quite like 1/4" tape tho. you can also mix to a stereo track in your DAW.

[heylow]

I always mix on a console. It simply sounds better.

My 2cents...

Though life would be easier if it weren't so, I'd have to concur with Joel on this...besides...there's something still VERY cool about hands on the hardware.

Jeez....how can you say that without....hmmmm.

I wanted to say "knobs at your fingertips". Of course we know I could not do THAT...not here....no way. Some of you slobs would get WAY too HOT!

Hands OFF the hardware, Gentlemen...



heylow

[joel hamilton]

Optimum: mix on a console to 2 track analog(and DAT), then back into protools if you need to make CD's. Master from tape if it is going to mastering ,let them do the last conversion...

Still great: mix on a console with a good buss comp back into Protools along side the session. Bounce.

Still great, but less great: mix on a console back into protools along side the session.Bounce.

Not so great: bounce to disk.

That is My opinion....

[chriss]

I always mix on a console. It simply sounds better.
My 2cents...

Sorry I can't agree with you on this one. I mix %100 on my DAW now and I would NEVER go back to a console!!

[inverseroom]

there's something still VERY cool about hands on the hardware. Jeez....how can you say that without....hmmmm.

Paws on the pots?
Digits on the dials?
Phalanges on the phaders?

Nah.

[joel hamilton]

Chriss are you serious?

I would love to know what you are doing to get good results, because my console is NOT automated, so I would save time and energy patching equipment, and getting a mix up for each song before doing vocals...
Seriously, if there is something I havent figured out I would love to know what it is.

I just cant seem to make it sound right. I have gotten close, and done entire albums for people that way, but it was never my best work for sure.

I thought it was the wave of the future like 5 years ago, but I am back on a console these days.

There is something to be said for transformers. I could almost see myself bouncing to disk with a transformer inserted on every channel of protools....

[Poncival]

I've had some real good luck calibrating all my console faders to "0" using the signal generator in Protools. Go through each pair of channels on the console (mute the others as you're going) and set the signal generator to 0dB at 1kHz and then adjust the trim and fader levels so that your meters look nice. I used to do it so that 0 dB at 1k coming out of protools made my meters read 0 db but it seemed a little too hot after awhile so now I have been setting them so that 0 dB at 1k coming out of Protools makes my meters read -7 and everything has been smooth sailing ever since. So the point here is, we're shooting for an 8 Stereo input unity mixer with no EQ's, no auxes, no inserts (at least to start) and then splitting up the mix in protools to make the most of your 8 pairs. This is more effective with a Neve and 4 Apogee 8000's but it works for LE and a Mackie or whatever. But if you resist the temptation to turn knobs on your mixer (really reducing it to what the Dangerous audio guys are offering- a box with 8 stereo ins and one stereo out and fixed levels) then you do have the "total recall" concept happening because if you set up all your songs like that then you can switch back and forth between songs without having to write any settings down or anything. Of all the ways I have tried to use Protools in conjunction with a non-automated console, this has been the most successful for me, sonically as well as ergonomically. As much as I want to use the console EQ, I can usually get what I need with a waves REQ2 or if not I can mess with the EQ's and then print them into Protools on a new playlist and then turn them back off.. Or, after you get the mix really happening this way and you want to get some outboard in on the action, use your console inserts to patch in EQ's and compressors if you want, and then use the track comments in Protools to save the settings. This is the least amount of work for a quickly recallable mix (And no hand cramps from writing it all down on templates or whatever!) and you do get the full benefit of the analog summing bus. Don't let the "your crappy mixer is too noisy to make this worthwhile" camp get you down, I have tried this with a bunch of different crappy mixers and is has the same relative effect that it has on a Neve or an SSL, albeit there are some intrinsic value differences at work there.... Somebody mentioned bouncing to disk with a transformer inserted on every channel of protools. How about a tape deck? You can use a 2" to do it but you could also turn your 2-track 1/4" or even (here I go with the VCR thing again) your VCR into a virtual multitrack by running each track individually (or 2 at a time) out of Protools and onto the tape and then back in off the repro head (or use a sync point and dump them right back in) and then do it again for all your tracks, makes for a nice illusion that maybe your tracks went down onto 2" at some point. Then mix down to that deck through your console like this and you'll be the envy of all the other Protools LE'ers on your side of the street. Let's see, if you have a 1/4" 2-track running at 30 IPS, and you have a 32 track LE session which you have transferred onto tape and back into the computer, isn't that the equivalent of about a 4" 32 track analog deck? Well, the illusion is there at least, and this kind of thing will freak some analog people out when you tell them what they just listened to. How about using different types of tape and different speeds, different tape decks, etc. during this process. As if you had a reel of tape which allowed you to have your Kick, snare and bass running at 7.5 IPS on 456 on a Studer, and your vocals and guitars running at 30 ips on GP9 on a Tascam while the keyboardist is in his own world at 15 Ips onto 900 on an Otari? I think there was an article in Tape Op about this kind of thing a while back.

Less is more- use your console anyway

[jspartz]

I have a co-worker who likes to stay in the box. I prefer to mix on a board. We both can get good sounding end products. It came down to how we prefer to work. Personal habits I guess. What ever works for you.

Jason