-
Welcome to the General Discussion forum for UAD users! Please note that this forum is user-run, although we're thrilled to have so much contribution from Drew, Will, and other UA folks! Feel free to discuss both UAD and non-UAD related subjects! 1) Please do not post technical issues here. Please use our UAD Support Forums instead. 2) Please do not post complaints here. Use the Unrest Forum instead. They have no place in the the General Discussion forum. Threads posted in the wrong forum will be moved, so if you don't see your thread here anymore, please look in the correct forum. Lastly, please be respectful.
summing
- Thread starter e-are
- Start date
uebermann303
Member
The summing itself makes no difference at all. But it sounds different because of the sound added by the analog circuit (not the summing sounds different!).
Nuendo f.e. makes the summing very clean and very neutral sounding. A analog summing device sounds analog. Thats all. No mystery.
Nuendo f.e. makes the summing very clean and very neutral sounding. A analog summing device sounds analog. Thats all. No mystery.
saemskin
Established Member
February 06's EM mag has an article on summing boxes, 3 summing setups and several pro's opinons on them.
http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_sum_tracks/index.html
Good article imo. I was interested to read it, and the conclusion by all the audio guys was that analog summing is not better or worse, just different.
I think we all know there are always going to be irrational people out there who are unwilling to aceept any solution to recording other than an analog one, thus they will advocate summing.
There are a few threads in this very forum where summing is discussed. Very informative as well.
http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_sum_tracks/index.html
Good article imo. I was interested to read it, and the conclusion by all the audio guys was that analog summing is not better or worse, just different.
I think we all know there are always going to be irrational people out there who are unwilling to aceept any solution to recording other than an analog one, thus they will advocate summing.
There are a few threads in this very forum where summing is discussed. Very informative as well.
well heres what it does to my ears, and i have to say that its the first summing box ive ever listened to, that ive never been in big bucks studio with a expensive desk before, and that ive only had it for a day so far..
first of its very neutural, transients come thru really nice and clear, and it seems to me that low freqs are firm and nicely rounded, depending on how much u push it..i love the functionality of the 2bus, each pair of 8 has +6db
switch and a mono switch..in over all its a really nice box, but then again im not overly excited..this isnt a thing that colors the sound in a certain way or \"enhances\" the sound either..it just makes it sound really nice..and it certainly is a box that i have to explore more ..my friend has a tube tech summing unit that im gonna check out real soon which is known to ad a decent amount of colour
first of its very neutural, transients come thru really nice and clear, and it seems to me that low freqs are firm and nicely rounded, depending on how much u push it..i love the functionality of the 2bus, each pair of 8 has +6db
switch and a mono switch..in over all its a really nice box, but then again im not overly excited..this isnt a thing that colors the sound in a certain way or \"enhances\" the sound either..it just makes it sound really nice..and it certainly is a box that i have to explore more ..my friend has a tube tech summing unit that im gonna check out real soon which is known to ad a decent amount of colour
JuergenW
Active Member
Analog summing definitly makes a difference.
We have a lot of customers for stem-mastering and stem-mixing, and
they always bring a ITB summed 2-Track together with the stems.
Even doing nothing but sending the stems thru our analog desk
(ADT Juenger C-Series), summed by 8 stereo-channels, sound
way better than nuendo or logic summing (and yes, also better
than PT).
Wider and sharper stereo image, better impact in transients and
clearer and deeper in general.
And no: I don´t say in general that analog is better. But just
compare a ITB Mix with a analog summed one and judge yourself!
We have a lot of customers for stem-mastering and stem-mixing, and
they always bring a ITB summed 2-Track together with the stems.
Even doing nothing but sending the stems thru our analog desk
(ADT Juenger C-Series), summed by 8 stereo-channels, sound
way better than nuendo or logic summing (and yes, also better
than PT).
Wider and sharper stereo image, better impact in transients and
clearer and deeper in general.
And no: I don´t say in general that analog is better. But just
compare a ITB Mix with a analog summed one and judge yourself!
saemskin
Established Member
obviously anything you pass the signal through will make a difference. The question should be... is it better?
Obectively speaking, no.
I would go so far as to say most people wouldnt hear the difference anyway. When I say most poeple I mean the general populace.... I think a much larger %-age of us would certainly hear it.
Before you invest in an analog summing box, which can be expensive. Get someone with a quality analog mixer to let you bus your mix through it. Viola, analog summing.
Also, there is a very interesting read on this forum about 2 bus and multi buss summing boxes.
Obectively speaking, no.
I would go so far as to say most people wouldnt hear the difference anyway. When I say most poeple I mean the general populace.... I think a much larger %-age of us would certainly hear it.
Before you invest in an analog summing box, which can be expensive. Get someone with a quality analog mixer to let you bus your mix through it. Viola, analog summing.
Also, there is a very interesting read on this forum about 2 bus and multi buss summing boxes.
\"Wider and sharper stereo image, better impact in transients and
clearer and deeper in general.\"
I can achieve this with hooking up a bigben to a DAW.
If you want analog noise and some tubes here and there because you like the sound... go ahead
it sounds different but not better
there has been various listening tests including protools against an ssl...
on any stereo system hardly anyone can hear the difference.
most analog console mixers know how their console works and how to hook it up.
well if you look into the digital world most digital mixers don't know how it works ! that's the main difference (and shitty plugins)
clearer and deeper in general.\"
I can achieve this with hooking up a bigben to a DAW.
If you want analog noise and some tubes here and there because you like the sound... go ahead
it sounds different but not better
there has been various listening tests including protools against an ssl...
on any stereo system hardly anyone can hear the difference.
most analog console mixers know how their console works and how to hook it up.
well if you look into the digital world most digital mixers don't know how it works ! that's the main difference (and shitty plugins)
http://www.apogeedigital.com/products/bigben.phppony down said:
morpheuzrecords
Member
it would be interesting to do a shoot out between HW summing boxes and mcdsp AC1 or colortone pro (with various IR's) to see the difference.
I think a DAW clocked to a good source (eg bigben) with a good D/A and with one of those plus inserted on the master fader (multi mono) could hold up to it's HW counterparts.
I think a DAW clocked to a good source (eg bigben) with a good D/A and with one of those plus inserted on the master fader (multi mono) could hold up to it's HW counterparts.
JuergenW
Active Member
Good points bugstar.bugsstar said:
But I don´t agree at all - even that I´m aware of the technical side that
analog summing is a compromise (double D/A A/D conversion, colouring...):
If you have a BigBen it´ll only sound in your environment (D/A)
different ("better") - not on a consumer CD-player . Of course, if you´re
recording A/D it is a benefit - as is the ability to enhance your monitoring
situation during D/A with a good clock at mixing.
I believe for samplerates of 44.1/48 KHz (didn´t check right now ith 88/96)
it makes a lot of difference!
i think somehow this whole discussion about summing is misunderstood..eh its NOT about coloring or warmth in the first place..if u want coloring and warmth then get a FATSO from empirical labs they rock your grannys balls like dingdongwhammy.morpheuzrecords said:
Its about headroom and space. The coloring u get from the (which in the case of the Dangerous is like zip) various summing units is just the added "side effect"
\"If you have a BigBen it´ll only sound in your environment (D/A)
different (\"better\") - not on a consumer CD-player . Of course, if you´re
recording A/D it is a benefit - as is the ability to enhance your monitoring
situation during D/A with a good clock at mixing. \"
why wouldn't you hear the difference on a cd-player ???
Adding a bigben is not just for me for getting a better sound but for the overall digital summing.
Mix a track bounce it and than add a bigben (or a better good clock) to that mix and bounce it again you'll hear a difference.
If someone is complaining about headroom in digital ?
take down your tracks !!! peaking at -18 or -3 isn't a different sound on a digital summing.
hitting your plugins at -1 is just screwing your mix so you've got to or record your tracks less loud or ad a trim plugin. (screwing your mixes because of undetected peaks for your meters and bad plugin code)
remember -18fs (digital metering) = 0dbVU (analog style) but digital won't go over 0 !
Shitty digital summing is because of bad plugins or too loud of levels in the plugins.
and not all analog devices have the same headroom, i wish i even didn't have to mix on certain live consoles which headroom was just stupid.
i can't believe you're even bringing it up, headroom ???
you've got 32bits of headroom you want to do the math ??
take down your faders !
and space ? .......... good clock and good gear (including good plugins)
a 150k$ console and a 1k$ daw with 20$ plugins , i can not get a good sound out of this crappy daw ! as if.
I really don't see a need to just get an analog summing device except for what it changes to my overal sound (but not improving just changing/emulating/transforming analog malfunctions). You can still discuss if that can or not be dealt with a good 'analog' emulation plugin
mixing on a console is different, because you might like those onboard 'plugins' effects like eq or compressor...
but please do a test and don't rephrase guys who read on this or that forum that analog summing rocks , because there's a lot of crap out there in the analog world as the digital.
from all the guys who've been on this topic who actually did a test or investigated to get a better DAW internally ???
if you don't know how digital works get a tascam 4 track.
because most people who start with this analog \"you've got to get it\" summing , have a daw which can be compaired to a tascam 4track against an otari hooked to a ssl machine.
i would like to see some setups of your daws
i'll start maybe:
BigBen is clocking all digital gear.
-Amek Purepath CIB -> apogee converter mini-me soon to be replaced with an ensemble.
-Amek Purepath dual micpre/compressor , has digital outs
-TLA tube PA-1 into apogee converters or amek converters.
That's what's going into the daw
in my daw
-Logic 7.2
-Sonalksis, Tritone digital, Ozone, 2xUAD plugins
- Tascam FW1884 as my controller for faders etc...
out of my daw:
Apogee mini-dac -> Bose speakers, ns-10, various other smaller speakers
That is a protools HD1 system in price ! and it even sounds better because i have more \"space\" in my mixes because of the better preamps and the better clock and converters ! I won't have 48bit mixing buss but i don't overload the summing anyway.
Oh and it sure beats out the analog crap i could afford 8 years ago.
also before the preamps there's a nice mic above 800$.
now for those who think you need all that expensive mic crap or preamps , not always you can make nice sounding records without it but just don't compair why it's not the same as a commercial album.
But do have attention for your recording medium and invest in that medium so that you will know what goes in like i hear it also comes out like that
different (\"better\") - not on a consumer CD-player . Of course, if you´re
recording A/D it is a benefit - as is the ability to enhance your monitoring
situation during D/A with a good clock at mixing. \"
why wouldn't you hear the difference on a cd-player ???
Adding a bigben is not just for me for getting a better sound but for the overall digital summing.
Mix a track bounce it and than add a bigben (or a better good clock) to that mix and bounce it again you'll hear a difference.
If someone is complaining about headroom in digital ?
take down your tracks !!! peaking at -18 or -3 isn't a different sound on a digital summing.
hitting your plugins at -1 is just screwing your mix so you've got to or record your tracks less loud or ad a trim plugin. (screwing your mixes because of undetected peaks for your meters and bad plugin code)
remember -18fs (digital metering) = 0dbVU (analog style) but digital won't go over 0 !
Shitty digital summing is because of bad plugins or too loud of levels in the plugins.
and not all analog devices have the same headroom, i wish i even didn't have to mix on certain live consoles which headroom was just stupid.
i can't believe you're even bringing it up, headroom ???
you've got 32bits of headroom you want to do the math ??
take down your faders !
and space ? .......... good clock and good gear (including good plugins)
a 150k$ console and a 1k$ daw with 20$ plugins , i can not get a good sound out of this crappy daw ! as if.
I really don't see a need to just get an analog summing device except for what it changes to my overal sound (but not improving just changing/emulating/transforming analog malfunctions). You can still discuss if that can or not be dealt with a good 'analog' emulation plugin
mixing on a console is different, because you might like those onboard 'plugins' effects like eq or compressor...
but please do a test and don't rephrase guys who read on this or that forum that analog summing rocks , because there's a lot of crap out there in the analog world as the digital.
from all the guys who've been on this topic who actually did a test or investigated to get a better DAW internally ???
if you don't know how digital works get a tascam 4 track.
because most people who start with this analog \"you've got to get it\" summing , have a daw which can be compaired to a tascam 4track against an otari hooked to a ssl machine.
i would like to see some setups of your daws
i'll start maybe:
BigBen is clocking all digital gear.
-Amek Purepath CIB -> apogee converter mini-me soon to be replaced with an ensemble.
-Amek Purepath dual micpre/compressor , has digital outs
-TLA tube PA-1 into apogee converters or amek converters.
That's what's going into the daw
in my daw
-Logic 7.2
-Sonalksis, Tritone digital, Ozone, 2xUAD plugins
- Tascam FW1884 as my controller for faders etc...
out of my daw:
Apogee mini-dac -> Bose speakers, ns-10, various other smaller speakers
That is a protools HD1 system in price ! and it even sounds better because i have more \"space\" in my mixes because of the better preamps and the better clock and converters ! I won't have 48bit mixing buss but i don't overload the summing anyway.
Oh and it sure beats out the analog crap i could afford 8 years ago.
also before the preamps there's a nice mic above 800$.
now for those who think you need all that expensive mic crap or preamps , not always you can make nice sounding records without it but just don't compair why it's not the same as a commercial album.
But do have attention for your recording medium and invest in that medium so that you will know what goes in like i hear it also comes out like that
JuergenW
Active Member
Sorry, but this is not true. It makes absolutly NO digital difference.bugsstar said:
Clocking only affects A/D and D/A quality due to a more precise conversion.
In the digital domain the samples are processed in a row (state processing) one after another...
even the worst jitter wouldn´t change the digital result.
Absolutly.bugsstar said:
You can use a DAW more effective and correct, but you can´t improve it internally...bugsstar said:
BTW: Did you compare analog summing against DAW? :wink:
i want to believe you as audio on a computer is just data but why does it play slower at a wrong clock or when video is hooked up it can fluctuate for example etc ? The clock can not be neglected when it's on the computer.
So i guess having a crap d/a isn't so bad because your digital bounces will sound better on cd.
I'll try to find that out , i'll ask some people who'll know as i don't know you and germany has some cool bands but still. I believ epart of it but all processes ?
I haven't tested it yet because i make my bounces differently not internally.
and yes i tried analog and digital summing
my main concerns about analog summing:
1. it's not worth the extra cash as you can achieve al those aspects with a different daw setup, that you know , mix and how you mix
2. there is alot of analog summing crap
3. there's alot of analog coloring crap , which one too choose
4. If i do want to \"real analog\" color i can still send it out thru a tube, or even record in different stems possibly, which actually sometimes sounds better than the summing on the many crap analog summers which are just plain BS.
5. Having a 600$ 8 channel d/a and people telling you to get a summing mixer is just plain wrong.
everybody thinks because it's digital it's gonna be easy (the garageband generation) if you know how to mix on analog and you know how to mix on digital than there's no way someone can tell the difference, unless you want it as an effect like tapecompression and besides even for that there are digital solutions
a good recording starts at the mic and from there on you won't know if it was recorded digitally or analog when all is recorded good.
But with good converters and a good clock.
Also by meaning making your DAW better and investigate internally starts with the converters. A DAW starts at the preamps/audio interface and ends at the D/A. A DAW is not just a computer. Also look at your plugs.
So i guess having a crap d/a isn't so bad because your digital bounces will sound better on cd.
I'll try to find that out , i'll ask some people who'll know as i don't know you and germany has some cool bands but still. I believ epart of it but all processes ?
I haven't tested it yet because i make my bounces differently not internally.
and yes i tried analog and digital summing
my main concerns about analog summing:
1. it's not worth the extra cash as you can achieve al those aspects with a different daw setup, that you know , mix and how you mix
2. there is alot of analog summing crap
3. there's alot of analog coloring crap , which one too choose
4. If i do want to \"real analog\" color i can still send it out thru a tube, or even record in different stems possibly, which actually sometimes sounds better than the summing on the many crap analog summers which are just plain BS.
5. Having a 600$ 8 channel d/a and people telling you to get a summing mixer is just plain wrong.
everybody thinks because it's digital it's gonna be easy (the garageband generation) if you know how to mix on analog and you know how to mix on digital than there's no way someone can tell the difference, unless you want it as an effect like tapecompression and besides even for that there are digital solutions
a good recording starts at the mic and from there on you won't know if it was recorded digitally or analog when all is recorded good.
But with good converters and a good clock.
Also by meaning making your DAW better and investigate internally starts with the converters. A DAW starts at the preamps/audio interface and ends at the D/A. A DAW is not just a computer. Also look at your plugs.
JuergenW
Active Member
It´s not at all about colouring with analog summing. But yes you´re
right it doesn´t make sense to use cheap converters, cheap cables
and hook it up to an old noisy desk - but that wasn´t the topic.
We´re talking about good clocked systems with nice A/D
and D/A-C´s at a quality desk or summing device.
Of course, no one can say wheter it´s mixed digitaly or analog -
but to me the analog summing in a good setup HAS more depth
and impact from start - I use much less EQ and compression.
And of course you can mix either good or bad with both setups!
it´s only for your monitoring situation - because bouncing it even wrong
clocked will run right on a valid clokced system.
How could offline bounce otherwise be possible - it´s never clocked! :wink:
right it doesn´t make sense to use cheap converters, cheap cables
and hook it up to an old noisy desk - but that wasn´t the topic.
We´re talking about good clocked systems with nice A/D
and D/A-C´s at a quality desk or summing device.
Of course, no one can say wheter it´s mixed digitaly or analog -
but to me the analog summing in a good setup HAS more depth
and impact from start - I use much less EQ and compression.
And of course you can mix either good or bad with both setups!
When you have a bad clock, and it plays slower and then faster (flutter)
it´s only for your monitoring situation - because bouncing it even wrong
clocked will run right on a valid clokced system.
How could offline bounce otherwise be possible - it´s never clocked! :wink: