As you will see from my other threads, when people ask me to suggest a desk that looks like a major player (SSL/Neve), sounds like a major player, works like a major player; but is easy maintenance, easy on electric, and keeps itself going - I ALWAYS say the Raindirk symphony.
But you can't use that as the epitome. The Raindirk power supply is a few units in a rack. An SSL power supply and patchbay system consists of not 1 but TWO full size floor-ceiling racks of kit. That's why it uses so much electric.
This thread is odd, a lot of people seem to think there is something great about just owning an analogue console. And there isn't. I work with a nicely sized, nice sounding Amek Einstein board. It eats electric all day (we reckon about £3,500 a year - so £10 a day), it makes the room HOT (like, the live room and control room share an A/C circuit, there is a drastic change when you go one to the other). It needs servicing. You can't put a cup of tea on it. Etc.
When you find yourself mixing everything in the box, because, in reality, it really does make NO difference to do so (in terms of earning a living off your work), you really start to wonder why it's there. It's just a big lump of metal whirring away all day to give you a monitor controller, which you could get on a Mackie Big Knob for a fraction of the cost, less space consumed and less power consumed.
The only reason ours hasn't been sold is because if we took it away, we'd become a project studio like the rest of them. Keeping it in the room is purely eye candy for the artist coming into the studio. If we take it away, they can't tell the difference between us, and the studio down the road charging half as much.
That is the reality of analogue consoles in the modern studio, run by professionals making a wage, not by hobbyists looking to enjoy themselves. That's not an insult to the hobbyists here by the way - just making the point that when the studio represents your full time wage, your ability to pay the mortgage and bills and occasionally go out for a beer with your mates; the boundaries change.
a lot of people who are always raving about how great their ITB mixes are are defending it because ITB is all they have.
kats - I'll answer for me. Yes. I have a LFAC. (120 input D&R AUTOMATED OrionX) My keyboard is sitting on it as I type this. It gets used, but not to mix. But then, you knew that already I suspect.
Different people hear things differently. What's "BETTER" to person A is "WORSE" to person B. We do NOT all do the same style of music, like the same speakers, choose the same mics, want the same verb, and we do NOT all mix the same. Why the "mine is better than yours" or "you're only doing it because it's cheaper" banter all the time?
To continually hammer that analog sounds BETTER than digital is missing the point I think. I'd agree that it sounds DIFFERENT. Better? That's in the ear of the beholder. If you WANT an analog sound, then analog _probably_ sounds better. If you WANT a more transparent, digital sound, then Analog most likely sounds WORSE. If my budgets change radically (and I doubt they will, but hey, why not dream big), I'll still be working digital I think.
Because I am MORE CREATIVE there. And creativity trumps sonics EVERY time in my book.
These analog vs. digital discussions are so tedius. One would think they would just die, but they never seem to until the thread gets shut down because people can't afford other people a different work flow than they personally choose.
I would say those kids are just regurgitating stuff they read online and are enamored with the machinery of analog and big studio experience because they never worked on it before. Biases aside we all know digital doesn't sound bad, it's just different. With that said, genres like rock have not taken as well to ITB as have hip hop/r&b/dance/pop.
.............."who is buying those new Genesys, Neves whatever?....."
Stock brokers who are doing okay with bets against the economy, kids being hired at any number of high profile companies for huge upfront salaries, insurance guys who are selling lots of policies and doing great, car salesmen on great commisions, people flipping low cost housing in this econmy and doing it the right way to make millions, bank officials with their year-end bonuses, software engineers with their year-end bonuses and stock options, guys selling out their companies to larger companies, McDonalds franchise owners, guys who have developed successful mind-numbing apps for iPhones (non music), lawyers winning small claims judgments all day long.
That's the list. Every single one of those guys a hobby guitar player with lots of cash to spend from their real jobs and buying their new homes, complete with hobby recording studio built in. First class all the way.
You didn't think actual musicians were purchasing this high-ticket stuff did you ? Ha ha ha ha ... that was only the norm in the past century.
if itb sounds so much better, why is it that every plug in out there is an emulation of an analog processor or even a tape machine?
Digital get's better but it will never reach the standard that analog set.
The fact is, the sound I get from my ENTIRELY ITB setup is above and beyond the minimum standard I'd accept from myself before sending to a client. I rely on my mixing to mix, not on what gadgets I use. And if something doesn't sound 'warm' enough, or 'dirty' enough, I'm confident that I've got the knowledge, experience, creativity, and equipment in my setup to modulate the sound however I want it. Honestly.
The Amek is a monitor controller and headphone controller. And a rack of pre-amps (but we could sell it for far more than the cost of replacing the 24 which we use with Focusrite 828s), and a stand for the keyboard and mouse. I do everything in the box. And the mixes which I churn out never fail to make return clients.
It's just a ridiculous argument. How many people on writer's forums do you think sit there all night saying "If money was no object, and I could afford the ink, and the servicing, I would rather use typewriters than computers'? Maybe those who've never used them. But those who have, know the convenience, speed and comfort of using a computer instead of a typewriter. And I feel that's the same here. Many of us who did their time on consoles and tape machines and have gone ITB realise how little a difference it makes in reality, and how the convenience, speed and comfort of a DAW just dfegad all over the tape machine equivalent. But those who have grown up on DAW and occasionally laid hands on a big desk will always maintain that their mixes lack because they don't own a huge console and tape machines. Wake up and smell the coffee - engineers make records, not mixing desks.
I'm sure if people applied the caring, strict and truly professional process, workflow and ethics of tape and console recording to the way in which they apply themselves to DAW recording, people would realise that it has nothing to do with analogue circuits, transformers, tubes and magnetic tape; and in fact the only negative thing which has happened in the advent of DAW recording is the way in which people have treated it.
Because all the things that you need to do to a signal were realised, and processors invented, before Plug-ins.
So they have to emulate them. You can't re-invent the compressor just to look good on DAWs. You can however, use the computer element to achieve things that an analogue processor cannot do. See the Steven Slate FG-X - the nature of the algorithms mean it cannot be done with an analogue signal. So yes, every plug-in begins with an analogue processor, but there are several examples of plugins out there which use their computer element to go beyond the capabilities of their analogue counterparts.
digital might get better than analog ever was if it stopped trying to emulate analog.
why want better sound? is there better sound? -> no, as long as not everybody is listening on a sony/strauss speaker system.
+1. If one enters computer based recording holding to paradigms, those beliefs very likely will self-fulfill. If one considers it a lesser format, it will be at the end of the day, by the very nature of the lesser attention to detail it deserves.
Like I said, we keep the Amek because without it we'll look like a project studio. That's all really! (And it does look quite cool).
to the original post ...9K!!! that would be a deal that would hurt to pass on..but I bet we see a lot more of that in the near future ...for a number of reasons .. Personally I would rather have 9K worth of lunchbox goodies..
At some point in the near you will not be able to give a SSL away. I would not want a SSL now.
See my first post. I was offered a free one and turned it down.
Seems silly to complain about a thread . . . ask them to close it . . then jump in and post more! . . Now if I did what you do for a living . . . maybe ITB and two channels on a console would appease me (though I doubt it seriously) . . but for those of us who do a lot of rock bands / blues bands etc . . and who like a console sound / and who don't want to screw w/ a mouse / computer etc . . . ITB mixing just doesn't cut it. I have never heard an ITB mix that would compare (front to back depth / left to right width or punch (a different kind then ITB)) . . or fullness of an old 80 series Neve or API for certain kinds of music. Yes, some of us don't care about the more sterile sound of all ITB. Even if it's recorded ITB, I got to come out to a console. Of course no one else has to feel the same.
It's always funny to me how people post endlessly about the 'sound' of a mic, the 'sound' of a compressor, the 'sound' of mic pres etc . . . yet they will say the sound differences of ITB or OTB don't make a difference. Like saying a water color or an enamel painting are the same thing. There are different ways to capture a scene or a sound . . but there are differences.
I've never tried to suggest (and I don't think that drBill has) that OTB and ITB sound the same. We've both just suggested that perhaps the electrical structure of each isn't what actually causes the large shift in sound, or simply that the difference doesn't matter!
I do not think one should confine oneself to concrete thinking.
For me I love the DAW and ITB automation and ability to use good reverbs and good plugs (eq's) for minor finnessing.
But ITB to me does not give me the headroom and gain structures and transformer saturation that OTB compressors/eq's do.
I do not want an old large console with huge power consumption, maintanence nightmare, huge space commitments.
So for me I am aiming for a setup to me that uses the best of both- still using the DAW but then running through a small footprint mixer (mixmaster 20) and then setting up 500 series racks of eq's and compressors (plan on 2 11 space BAE racks - 1 eq's and 1 compressors) and combine with other rack eq/compressors.
For me ITB I cannot get the gain/headroom/saturation advantage that good outboard brings to the party- I am sure other ITB boffins can approximate it- but for me I am getting better and better sound combining the best of DAW with best of modules of selected outboard.
Only time will tell whether my vision will produce tangible sonic and workflow benefits that I am hoping for.
But I really think it is narrow minded to say one is in one or the other camp. I think with the explosion of 500 series of very good units and really high end mini mixer consoles like the great river mixmaster 20 times are exciting.
is otb/desk better than itb?
Reminds me of a story from the early 80s. I went to a prominent keyboardist's studio and he had a whole wall of Oberheim synthesizers, maybe 10-15. I was really impressed but come to find that they were only empty shells with no internal parts! He had them there just to impress clients.
I wonder, these days, if some enterprising project studio has an SSL frame with no internals, just to impress clients?
Seems silly to complain about a thread . . . ask them to close it . . then jump in and post more! . .
but for those of us who do a lot of rock bands / blues bands etc . . and who like a console sound / and who don't want to screw w/ a mouse / computer etc . . . ITB mixing just doesn't cut it. I have never heard an ITB mix that would compare (front to back depth / left to right width or punch (a different kind then ITB)) . . or fullness of an old 80 series Neve or API for certain kinds of music. Yes, some of us don't care about the more sterile sound of all ITB. Even if it's recorded ITB, I got to come out to a console. Of course no one else has to feel the same.
I bolded a few of your thoughts. I completely agree with you on those BTW except for your obviously analog-biased comment about sterile digital mixes. They need not be sterile, and if they are, it's on the engineer, not the medium. I'm 100% good with it because they are your OPINIONS about how you like/prefer to work. And EVERYONE has an opinion and prefered way of working and by virtue of their preference, cannot be "wrong". thumbsupthumbsup It's the belligerent one sided "analog is ALWAYS better" comments that are lame.
Certainly. Anyone who can't hear it on some sort of level probably shouldn't be in the biz. But to say one is right, the other wrong, one is better, the other worse, than anyone working analog is a dinosaur and anyone working digital is a sellout, that one is GOD, the other SATAN. It's just foolishness, and shows a lack of professional courtesy and short sightedness IMO.
I work for a small company building boutique audio gear for people - 1176s, Pultecs, 1073s, etc.
One of our most popular products is a 4 rack unit containing 8 VU metres, with an 'attack' , 'release' and 'gain' knobs under each VU. The attack and release meters do exactly that, just control the amount of time before and after the VU responds. The gain knob adjusts the brightness of the bulb in the metre.
They have a true bypass inside for the signal path, and the VUs are triggered from a parallel circuit.
Result - buy 3 units for about $500 and you have 24 channels of VU meters that can move slowly (like bus compression) or slam back and forth (like hard drum compression), with adjustable lights to give them that 'used' look where they're not all the same brightness and one or 2 out, or the 'we keep our gear tip-top' look with all the lights on full.
Sure come in handy when the guitar player asks you to turn up the guitar. "Oh Yeah!! Now it's rockin'!!"
is otb/desk different to itb?
For christ's sake, neither is better or worse, every single plug-in and analogue unit has it's own character, and the best engineer knows which piece of kit, hard or soft, does what!
I feel that I can achieve any sound that I want using my plugins and DAW. Some people feel that they need outboard. Some feel they need desks. Some feel they need tape machines.
DOES IT ACTUALLY MATTER? NO.
There is not a shortage of either types of kit. So buy what you want to buy, buy what you enjoy using, buy what gets you the best sound, and just recognise it's a personal choice and respect what each other uses. There is no better or worse, there's only DIFFERENT.
You say console EQ is better than plug-in? I say my Sonnox EQ sounds better than my Mackie Desk EQ. Thus you are wrong. I don't think anyone would argue about that. But my Free-VST EQ is not as good as an SSL G-Series EQ. So you'd be right. I don't think anybody would argue about that.
There is no hard fast and straight line rule about what is better or worse. Everything is different, and the whole wonderful thing about the huge range of gear nowadays, beit Hard or Soft, is that you choose exactly what you want, because you like it, you have fun with it, and you get the best sound with it. And anybody who says "it's no good because it's a plug-in" or "It's not economical because it's a console" is probably just insecure about their own setup.
WHAT ON EARTH IS THE ISSUE HERE?
It's like 5 year olds arguing about whether red or green is a better colour!
oops . something just went goofy with my reply and posted the same reply as before . . .
now Bill, you know you have been bashing analog for years here. Doing exactly what you are talking about in your last paragraph. I feel the same. We all have likes and dislikes. What I always here from ITB people is that people with my preferences "are living in the past' / 'don't l=know what we are doing' etc etc . . . so check your last paragraph and put yourself in our shoes.
For me this is directionally correct and points out the answer to the question of the OP. Not sure about the year and the percentages, but IMHO provides the right answer.
now Bill, you know you have been bashing analog for years here.
Your above post causes me concern. Either I have not been communicating well (quite possible), on the defensive against analog zealots (most probably), or you just didn't get my intent (unlikely but possible). I do not hate analog. My intent in those heated discussions was most likely to defend digital as a prefered medium, but against the pig-headed "analog or the highway" type guys, it may come across as bashing analog. That was not my intent. IMO, BOTH are viable and workable mediums.
I just choose to work digital because I can make better more creative music with it. thumbsup And to me, that's the only reason I walk into the studio every day.
(Now, there are MANY analog zealots here that make NO BONES about hating digital and go to the ends of the earth to persecute and malign it.) I have no doubts that they hear something they LIKE with analog and something they dis-like with digital. But still, I have no problem with any of them UNTIL they tell me that I'm selling out, I can't hear worth $#@!, or that I only use digital because of the money. Them's fighting words - and that may be where you got caught in the crossfire. I have a difficult time understanding their hate, because I worked with analog for much longer than I've worked with digital. I understand the differences - believe me I do. But I would never pretend to tell them they can't hear print thru, biasing issues, noise, THD, or wow and flutter like they presume I can't hear the differences between digital and superior analog formats. I figure they CAN hear those things, and it's STILL a better medium for their applications. Why can't that favor be returned? I guess I'm more of a live and let live guy. Maybe I'm just deluded because I still believe this is more about ART than SCIENCE.