Mixing in the analog domain

[TwilightOdyssey]

I am seriously thinking about mixing my next album in the analog domain.

Why?

Not entirely sure! Part of it is the immediacy of moving actual faders, the lack of recall, the knowledge that each pass will be slightly different, using outboard effects, the colourations added from the desk and cables, and working within its limitations instead of each mix being viewed as a temporary, erasable, reversible process.

Does anyone else here mix in the analog domain? Did you used to and have since switched to ITB? Why did you make the switch?

As soon as I graduated out of analog portastudios I did all of my mixing ITB. I have always wanted to just route the buses to a desk, loop the song, and fiddle in real time til I got it right.

 

[Brow]

Re: Mixing in the analog domain

When I was working at the studio all of my mixing was done analogue with outboard and only the odd plugin here and there.

Since I haven't worked there for a while, and I don't have the space or need at home, everything I do now is all digital/PC mixing.

I've never been a huge fan of using mixing to correct issues made during recording, extensive use of EQs etc, or a big user of effects (unless the song called for it) but I always liked having the rows of faders etc infront of me so that I could more quickly and effectively make any changes.

I just always found it easier and preferred it to having to scroll around the screen to find the fader or control etc

 

[PFDarkside]

Re: Mixing in the analog domain

As a side topic, can someone give me the rundown of the mixing and mastering process if done analog? Example, you've got a 2 inch, 24 track tape... Now what?

 

[TwilightOdyssey]

Re: Mixing in the analog domain

As a side topic, can someone give me the rundown of the mixing and mastering process if done analog? Example, you've got a 2 inch, 24 track tape... Now what?

Well, you have to turn those 24 tracks to 2 tracks of stereo information ... some ppl mix down to 2 ch tape and then transfer that to digital. Some just mix down straight to digital. I am not sure how many mastering houses will accept tape format these days ... most require either digital or lacquer.

 

[PFDarkside]

Re: Mixing in the analog domain

Yes, but the process is what I'm wondering about. I'm familiar with the digital version, but in the analog domain are you just flipping sliders and bringing reverb up and down live as its tracking onto stereo tape?

 

[TwilightOdyssey]

Re: Mixing in the analog domain

It doesn't have to be 2 channel tape. You can mix it down to digital. For example, I will be going out from my interface into the desk ... Adding outboard effects ... Then back into the interface. From there I will record onto a single stereo track.

But otherwise, yes. You are doing all of the rides, panning, and effects manipulation in real time, as the song is playing. The results of your efforts are recorded (until you Press Stop).

 

[TwilightOdyssey]

Re: Mixing in the analog domain

Oops, just realized this is in the wrong sub forum! Doh!

 

[GoldenVulture]

Re: Mixing in the analog domain

24 Track > desk > routing to and from FX via sends and returns and other desk channels/EQueing [ Sends may be switchable between pre and post EQ ] > Sub groups [ If the desk has them ] > Master out [ Stereo pair ]
The better the desk the more features it will have.


aaaaand
Your only one room away from where it should be.

 

[zenmindbeginner]

Re: Mixing in the analog domain

As a side topic, can someone give me the rundown of the mixing and mastering process if done analog? Example, you've got a 2 inch, 24 track tape... Now what?

You'd have to use outboard analog gear that is very expensive. Plug-ins and software suites are dirt cheap compared to what racks of tube compressors, limiters, EQs, expanders etc will cost you.

You'd also need a decent mixing desk and those aren't cheap either. It basically entails booking studio time because 99% of humans won't be able to scrape up the money that they'd need to invest in all of that gear.

The best most people can do is scrape up enough money to rent studio B or C somewhere.

There will be no fixing anything because you have to get it right in the studio while the clock is ticking... usually only the pros can do great work while watching the clock and the stress of paying gobs of money to rent studio time and watching your investment slide away minute by minute is enough to derail most musicians.

The short answer is that it's incredibly difficult and capital intensive but the results can be quite spectacular. You'll benefit from that natural compression and exciting that analog tape can impart to the soundscape.

 

[TwilightOdyssey]

Re: Mixing in the analog domain

Like microphone preamps, there is a lot of mysticism surrounding mixing desks. Thanks to the digital revolution, analog consoles have been driven down in price.

I would say now is the ideal time to get an analog console, before either market demands or boutique mentality drive the prices back up.

As for outboard gear, it also does not have to be crazy expensive, unless you insist on having the same amount of choice you have in the digital domain, which defeats the point in this case.

I plan on using a combination of certain plugins strapped across the tracks as well as outboard gear.

For me the purpose is to force a decision in real time, not view the mix as a mutable, temporary, can-be-fixed-later scenario which in my case leads to endless tinkering.

 

[James Rock]

Re: Mixing in the analog domain

Depends on your mix and what you need to do to it, for say a modern rock mix, mixing on analog sounds great ... if you have a few decent outboard compressors and EQ's, some nice digital outboard units and a good sounding desk. I think the best way if you want the pressure of mixing in real time is to do all your edits in your DAW, set up some sends to your DAW from the analog desk (for Reverbs and Delays), buss things like multiple guitar mics and such to its own track that will be one fader on the desk (with maybe EQ, filters and compression if needed) then mix say with 24 tracks on the desk in real-time thats what alot of the big boys do like Chris Lord-Alge (although he uses all outboard gear I think except for samples). I (while not anywhere near the stage of being able to buy a desk) do love the tactile feel of faders and the fact I can balance all the drums at once not click on each one at a time.

 

[wahwah]

Re: Mixing in the analog domain

I still have my Allen & Heath 24 channel recording console (GS3000). It sits in storage at a buddy's place, along with the rack of outboard gear I used to use, including the budget end Lexicon reverbs and 16 channels of compression. I would mix from 24 tracks of Fostex HDR, because analog tape was out of the question for me. It was fun to commit to a mix, but I took full advantage of being able to automate the mutes from a track from an Akai MPC. Ultimately, the move to an apartment meant downsizing to an iMac and a Metric Halo ULN-2 interface, but I did bring along my outboard tube mic pre and compressor for an alternative front end.

I don't think it's any secret why engineers started hankering for the recall and automation of the first SSLs. It can be quite punishing to get to the end of a long mixing session to think you have nailed the primo mix, only to realise that you missed that one vital drop in that made the mid 8 extra special, or missed the mute of that fugly bv that hurt the last chorus. Rewind...start again. And again. It's a romantic notion that it's a fun process after hours, or days of that.

There is nothing to say that we can't treat a DAW as a simple recorder, it simply takes the discipline to resist the endless tweaking. I think the most important thing is to maintain a realistic view of what is actually being achieved. Are we actually producing a work with a view to global broadcast, or are we simply having fun 'playing producer?' If it's the former, then no expense should be spared, nor should have to be, because there is either already plenty of funds available, or somebody else is bankrolling the project. If it's the latter, it is all too easy to get carried away with ideals that will be fraught with compromises, and corners are bound to be cut at vital points in the chain. It could be fun, for a while, but there will be no guarantees that the end result will reflect the efforts. The scenario in which I could imagine it really working is with an excellent band with a great internal dynamic, recorded live. With a band of average musicians with average songs, editing and the ability to tweak is our best friend. I think most producers and engineers would agree.




Cheers........................................ wahwah