Hello,
Is the 32C emulation made in such a way that there is tonal EQ coloration by default just by the signal passing through the emulation of the EQ circuitry ? I'd say there is, but would like to know your view on this.
I recall a thread about this way back. The net was that in neutral, a track was neutral. But that was MB3, not MB32C.
I did find this comment in the code (introduced since the last MB build), which is hardly definitive, but is indicative:
"Mixbus channelstrip always dithers the signal, cut above dither level" - there are a few places where MB assumes -90dB to be "infinitely quiet", while Ardour assumes a true "infinite".
But that doesn't mean there isn't some setting (most likely neutral) where MB32C doesn't introduce anything extra. It does imply that whatever is being introduced is minimal, however.
And after all that, I might as well not have answered - as I didn't have a definitive answer.
In both products, the channelstrip EQ is "always in circuit" ... meaning the signal is always passing through the math, ( bypass simply means that the gain for the EQs is set to "0" ). In practice, if the EQs are both set flat or bypassed, the difference should be vanishingly small: similar to the magnitude of dither. But some people ascribe a huge difference to dither; so yes, the sound of the mixers will be fundamentally different to a discriminating user.
Much more important, I think, is the sound of the EQs when they are "in use".
Harrison has a huge advantage in this regard, because we made analog consoles and then later introduced "digitally controlled analog" consoles in the late 80's. So we have a 30-year history of console 'setup' files which show exactly what EQ and compressor settings were used on many projects.
Mixbus implements a mix of modern & vintage behaviors that we determined would meet 90% of use-cases that we found in those setup files, but using the minimum number of controls. This means you can do 90% of a professional-scale project without having to add a plugin EQ or compressor.
32C is a more exact replica of the 32C EQ, which has more features and probably meets 99% of the need for EQing.
Best Regards,
-Ben
I can fully agree with the percentages of native EQ used. mine are close to a 100%
I also notice that in Mixbus many channels do not have EQ on. and just a bit on the mixbus
Quote: So we have a 30-year history of console 'setup' files which show exactly what EQ and compressor settings were used on many projects.
Does this mean that in the future we might get presets? Secrets of the engineer : a set of EQ presets from Bruce ?
regards
@Frank:
In *my* opinion, no. The settings for "kick" vary widely. Every kick is different, and the fix for one kick might be completely different for another kick, or another mix, or whatever.
However, we can 'aggregate' all of the different EQ settings, and see what got used: Our opinion is that a combination of a high-pass filter, 2 shelves and a peaking mid would have met 90% of the needs of our users. That's how the original Mixbus EQ was designed.
-Ben
(01-04-2017, 11:06 AM)Ben@Harrison Wrote: [ -> ]@Frank:
In *my* opinion, no. The settings for "kick" vary widely. Every kick is different, and the fix for one kick might be completely different for another kick, or another mix, or whatever.
However, we can 'aggregate' all of the different EQ settings, and see what got used: Our opinion is that a combination of a high-pass filter, 2 shelves and a peaking mid would have met 90% of the needs of our users. That's how the original Mixbus EQ was designed.
-Ben
100 % agree ! sounds odd: but i do not consider using presets at all: also my own. But i thought commercially i might be interesting.
and true : lets just consider the kick. I remember the law for the kick mike was an AKG D-12. I did not like it: boom, no high no real bottom. I replaced it with a AKG 451. For me a revelation. For many drummers if they did not see the D-12 the kick was bad. So i invented the placebo D12. adding a broken or Not connected D12 improved the sound, except if you do not wire it into nothing.
Great the fact you use statistical analyses to determine why i like MB3 most for life !
regards
"placebo D-12", I love it
There could be a use for being able to save and recall 32C EQ presets. One could be when working with a set of limited instruments towards an EP or such and wanting to have a sonic coherence between tracks at mixdown, or at least to start from a common basis. Granted, a piece of paper and a pencil also works. Or screenshots.
Yes, there's nothing wrong with presets. My only point was that we didn't analyze our data with the intent of creating presets.
A grand strategy to allow exchange of mixer-strip settings, across different sessions, is something that we are working on.
-Ben
Great. That would be saving the EQ settings on a per-track basis, so that they can be recalled for any other individual track, as opposed to only on a per session basis where a bunch of tracks must be loaded at once (more like a session template thing anyways).
Another thing that could be useful is if the 'frame' holding every plugin could store A/B sets of plugin parameters. But then I reckon that if this is done for plugins, then people will want A/B for EQ strips, and for the built-in compressors and tape saturation devices. And why not for all faders while at it ?
A/B for all faders could be inbteresting after all. One set of faders where the bass and drums (maybe 10 tracks just for them) are more upfront while guitars and keys more in the background, and a B set with the gutars and keys more upfront and, with the capability to quickly switch between the two to feel how they're different and help decide which one suits best the piece. No need to print to make comparisons. Heck, why not A/B/C/D ? If I'm not mistaken storing those presets is cheap.