You are here

Summing vs. mixing "in the box"

All about the tools and techniques involved in capturing sound, in the studio or on location.

Re: Summing vs. mixing "in the box"

Postby forumuser646589 » Wed May 07, 2008 5:17 am

Hugh Robjohns wrote:
-=@(*_*)@=- wrote:Now, to summarize, here is quote from - Eddy Schreyer of Oasis Mastering, taken from the UAD website (current article):
Basically a mic to tape was, in a lot of respects, a cleaner process. Obviously the digital world is trying to capture a sine wave, digitize it as best it can, with many, many, many layers of overtones, and sub harmonics and things. It's very, very complex, in the digital world, to achieve accuracy.

I don't know him personally, but I am glad to know that there are still people out there, who understand the principle.


Hugh Robjohns wrote:If the principle you refer to is the idea of recording a mic more or less straight to tape (as opposed to lots of processing en-route or in post, lots of overdubbing and comping etc), then yes, I'd agree entirely.


Absolutely.

Hugh Robjohns wrote:On the other hand if the 'principle' is that digital audio systems struggle to record sine waves without overtones and sub harmonics... then the guy doesn't have much idea of what is involved!

Hugh


Well, I think that he is having difficulties expressing himself or making himself understood on this one.
Every 'mastering' engineers know that DSP can capture overtones and sub harmonics etc...
Otherwise people wouldn't be selling or listening to CDs or MP3s!

The question should be, how much of it can be extracted accurately from the source, via DSP.

Saying that, there are gifted people out there, who don't have a clue about what is 'truly involved,' in a 'scientific' way, yet, they produce some extremely high quality recordings, final mixes, masters... These people have THE special EARS.
On the other hand there are many people who know what is partially involved in the process, because they read a lot...

Well, basically, my friends are the kind who can hear that analog processing is still sonically superior to DSP, wether they know how to explain it or not. And the rest, will be the type who struggle to come up with numbers, drawing, pictures... and smell! LOL ;) As far as music is concerned...

Wanted to add a couple of real life experience situations, and this is a analog vs DSP one...

1) we have an old Technics analog tuner, it's about nearly 30 years old, the music on a radio sounds amazing through it,
when compared with the newer Sony DSP tuner, it's day and night. The sony sounds THIN, the Technics sounds FAT, and yes, we are talking about tuners, yes, it's funny, and you know what? The Technics tuner is big and heavy, the Sony one is well... a DSP, that would fit inside an iPod...

2) when the first CD recorders came out we bought one, and recorded a first mix and compared it with the one we taped...
Well, same as the tuners story, even the Misses couldn't believe it, it was another day and night thing, tape was full, punchy, fat... whatever name, words you want to hear or use... and the CD, well, it was thin and tiny... but cheaper than tapes and more convenient, and less noisy...
The tape sounded much better musically , not just fatter or whatever you name it... We sold the CD recorder a week later through the Loot - it went real fast.

Today?

CDs are still available in the trade, but they found a way to shrink it further with MP3 format, and more to come...
Ok, I hear you in the background, DSP is getting better, some CDs sound better than they used too... We start with high quality DSP and we dither so we don't loose much... Well, you know what? Good for you. Enjoy DSP and forget analog, and forget that it ever existed.
From vinyl to MP3
From Moog to DSP
From Ampeg to IK
From big sealed cabinet to bookshelf... (you know why sealed then vented? because size... Yes, sealed need bigger cabinet for same same bass response, but sealed better to my ears... Oh, it's funny actually, this guy mentioned his got sealed boxes in the studio, and no, I don't know him I don't support him either)
From heavy hardware to well... DSP
From big consoles to... nothing.
From big rooms, proper rooms, natural sounding rooms to heavily treated + dry sounding rooms...
And so on...
Oh the Piano! Now multi-sampled... on a DVD for you...
Virtual bass + guitar player...
Acoustic drum kit to electronic drum kits (DSP...!)
From 1 drum machine with 2 kicks inside, to 10000000 kicks in you library - which one to choose lol! well, make your own - it's faster!

Ok, have fun guys;) and... mmm a nice acoustic guitar, recorded with a nice tape machine, with a new tape... were you can hear the resonance of wood talking to you! and you can even hear the strings!
User avatar
forumuser646589
Poster
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 1:00 am

Re: Summing vs. mixing "in the box"

Postby Guy Johnson » Wed May 07, 2008 10:15 am

So can I when I record with 'digits'! But only with a good guitar, player, room, mic...

So can I when I recorded with tape. Plus some hiss. Actually, noise in analogue (analogue :tongue:) adds a certain 'je ne sais quois' for sure ... but I don't know what it is...
User avatar
Guy Johnson
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1343
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:00 am
Location: North Pembrokeshire
This is my few words.

Re: Summing vs. mixing "in the box"

Postby Guy Johnson » Wed May 07, 2008 10:16 am

So can I when I record with 'digits'! But only with a good guitar, player, room, mic...

So can I when I recorded with tape. Plus some hiss. Actually, noise in analogue (analoge :tongue:) adds a certain 'je ne sais quois' for sure ... but I don't know what it is...
User avatar
Guy Johnson
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1343
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:00 am
Location: North Pembrokeshire
This is my few words.

Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users