Hybrid studios with MOTU gear: does anyone use a mixer?

[billgers]

I've been working "in the box" for the past 3 years on a power mac. However, I miss my old lexicon hardware reverb and I sometimes think it might be nice to use my physical board for mixdown. Accoring to MOTU, using my lex with my 828 mk. III would require some sort of crazy kludge job whereby I would route audio into the Lex and back into the 828 and then I would have to create one fully wet mix and one fully dry mix and then merge the two mixes together for my final stereo mix. I tried this sort of thing a few years ago with the 828 internal verb (just before they released proverb) and it was a real pain. Does anyone know a better way to do that and also does anyone here use an external mixer together with a MOTU audio interface? Any recommendations on how to do this? FYI - my mixeer is a Mackie 1604 VLZ, so maybe I shouldn't be trying to rout through that thing anyway. It's just that I miss the simplicity and tactile nature of doing it that way.

-Bill

[sparkyboyo]

Hullo Bill,

I'm fresh in this racket and have been plodding along on the DA7/2408/G5 thread. Right now, I'm bringing tracks into the DA7 and fudging with an SPX90 and a couple of disgusting noise boxes. Does get me a little tactility but no way near able to dance on the knobs like I used to BITD !! I keep seeing these automation mixers that you can assign functions to a button/knob/fader via MIDI and automation etc, could be the next adventure. Still having lots of fun learning the Audiodesk set up, but do hit the wall that mixing is such a one thing at a time activity. 10 fingers, 10 toes and a nose have been replaced by a mouse !!

Will be interesting to see where this thread gets to.

Jack

[billgers]

Thanks Jack (aka Sparky)-

I haven't come across a DA-7 in a while. Do you bring the mix into the DA-7 and back into your 2408 for the final stereo mix? I used to have a setup like that with the original 2408 and my Mackie 1604vlz. I liked working with it a lot except for the fact that I had to be real careful with signal flow, otherwise I might zap myself with a really harsh digital audio feedback loop. I lost some hearing in my right ear about ten years ago because I enabled recording on a rack in DP and somehow created a loop. DP now seems to have some built-in warnings that come up when you create a feedback loop, but I'm not sure those would help once you take it out to a mixer and back in again.

I too would be curious if anyone else has some experience working with these newer mixers that are part mixer/part MIDI controller. Has most everyone on here gone to working entirely "in the box"? I always see and hear about major composers wowrking with physical mixing boards, but I'm not sure how they are routing stuff or what their reasons are for working with a physical board.

[HCMarkus]

No crazy kludge required to integrate Lexicon hardware with 828 (mkII in my case) and DP.

I generally use the Lex for a tracking 'verb. The send amount is controlled via one of the bus layers in CueMix, which is physically routed to the bus feeding the Lexicon input, and the return on whatever bus the talent is monitoring.

Although I don't use it much (I like Altiverb a lot), I have DP set up so I can send from any channel by routing to a Bus assigned to the physcial output that feed the Lex input, which returns via the "Mix" bus in the 828mkII. Just make sure you mute any 828 inputs you are not using, as they will be included in the mix.

[Gravity Jim]

I have always used a mixer and DP... A couple of analog Tascams in my early days, but 12 years ago I bought a Yamaha 02R interfaced to a 2408 via LightPipe, and I just recently replaced that with a Tascam DM3200 with built-in FireWire interface. The point of this recent upgrade was to be able to track at higher resolutions and to get a better sounding and more streamlined studio. To that end, I looked hard at the idea of mixing ITB using the Euphonix control surfaces. But I just couldn't give up the flexibility of being able to use all my analog sources and all the virtual sources in any combination. I've been working this way too long to stop now.

So I use my digital console as the front end for the studio, as a mixer, and as a control surface for DP... my mixes are patchworks of ITB and console automation, plug-ins and outboard, VIs and hardware synths, and I like having everything plugged in and ready to go because I tend to write, track, arrange and pre-mix all at the same time.

BTW, I am really getting into the Tascam... It sounds great and the feature set is deep and powerful.

[Kubi]

Don't know the Tascam and haven't listened to the O2R in years, but in principle I agree with Jim: I would def only consider using a (good) digital board if you use a 828, 2408 or similar. The converters on the MOTU interfaces are not that stellar, but of course if you use the digital outs you lose no quality at all.

No slight intended here against these MOTU interfaces, considering what they cost per channel they're phenomenal, but sonically you are much better off staying in the box unless you have great AD/DA on every channel that you use to go back out into the analog world.

And for a 1604 I would def not go out into analog. Again, nothing wrong with the Mackie, great little mixer for the money, but most certainly not worth sacrificing a DA/AD generation for, especially not using an 828.

If you miss the tactility, maybe worth looking into control surfaces? Good AD/DA and good analog are expensive.


Just my 2 cents.

[amplidood]

A local producer (Tommy Sims) and I worked on a DP/DM 2000 system for a number of years. Prior to that it was dual 02R's. We had 72 channels (TDIF/ADAT) from three 2408 mkIII's into the DM, then fed its AES/BEU into a MOTU 308(!) for mixdown. We also fed a hardware L2/Finalizer combination for our own "mastering" setup. There was a sound with this setup that people were always amazed with. One record mixed and overdubbed with this system was Israel Houghton's "Power of One", which I still get props and questions about today.

Tommy had spent *years* using RADAR and loved the sound, but got fed up with the hassle of moving between multiple projects/backing up/offloading to Pro Tools for real editing. He had used DP forever to program with, and was very comfortable with its environment. We did a A/B shootout between the DP setup and RADAR at the very beginning... he couldn't tell the difference. He was pretty damn excited to get into the whole DAW world and learned quickly. Let me tell you he fell deeply in love with editing in DP as opposed to Pro Tools.

[billgers]

Guys-

thanks for all the great and informative responses. It's really helpful to hear about how other people are working. I'll take the comments about maintaining the audio quality throughout the signal flow to heart. It sounds like I should probably sell my Mackie if I'm unlikely to go through it again at some point. It will be a shame - I scored a ton of stuff through that thing back in the day.

Sounds like I need a digital board or a Euphonix-type solution if I want to go out of the box. Does anyone know of anything like the Euphonix that is decent sounding and less expensive?

Thanks again,

Bill

[billgers]

No crazy kludge required to integrate Lexicon hardware with 828 (mkII in my case) and DP.

I generally use the Lex for a tracking 'verb. The send amount is controlled via one of the bus layers in CueMix, which is physically routed to the bus feeding the Lexicon input, and the return on whatever bus the talent is monitoring.

Although I don't use it much (I like Altiverb a lot), I have DP set up so I can send from any channel by routing to a Bus assigned to the physcial output that feed the Lex input, which returns via the "Mix" bus in the 828mkII. Just make sure you mute any 828 inputs you are not using, as they will be included in the mix.

Marcus- you don't have to do this thing where you track one fully dry mix and one fully wet mix and then blend them together for a final mix? That's what the MOTU help line and the MOTU website both say you have to do for either the built-in 828 reverb or to use a hardware verb. Are they just spreading bad information or are they clueless about the capabilities of their own gear? Regardless, thanks for your tip and I will look into it.