Working with Other DAWs

[doncolga]

Hey everybody,

I'm curious how many of you regularly import tracks from other DAWs and do the final mix on Mixbus. The reason I ask is I did two versions of a mix, the first on Mixbus and the second on my other DAW. The first one sounds better to me than the second, but they are two different mixes from the ground up, so it's not a fair comparison and maybe my ears were better on the first one, or I just got lucky. I'm going to import the busses from the other mix later today and render them from Mixbus and compare.

Donny

[SimonGreen]

I've mixed mostly in Reaper in the past but have started to work in 32C now for a number of reasons. I'm still bringing recorded/edited audio into MB from Reaper as my MB editing chops ain't there yet.

This whole 'mix in one DAW sounds better than the other' is a subjective nightmare. I reckon that with the right plugins I can get similar results in both but the key thing for me is that I seem to be able to get there quicker in MB. I also find it a bit more fun!

Si

[doncolga]

I’ve gotten null tests before between StudioOne and Sonar with the exact same files, but of course these are distinctly different mixes. This is the first time I’ve mixed a song in Mixbus, then a few days later, did a different mix in StudioOne. I actually wanted and expected the second to be better because of some mix techniques I was learning. I was very happy with the results of the second mix when referencing to commercial tracks, but not so much when I compared to my own first mix in Mixbus. And it’s not subtle. The first mix is definitely more “full”. I’ll investigate further this evening.

[rods]

I mix in Mixbus 32c and Samplitude. I love both. I work a lot faster in Samplitude and can do "more complex" mixes in Samplitude also but my mixs in Mixbus sound better to me. Mixbus is less stable (I think) but I'm looking forward to some upgrades and also improve my workflow in Mixbus.

[Studio Saturn]

I only use it for other musician work. when I do mine If I start in logic I know what I'm looking for so Mixbus will not add anything for me. I already committed when I choose my bass to sound the way I want it to sound. My producing and mixing go hand in hand in any DAW that I use. So, Mixbus will remain my mixing tool for other musician not for my own song. I start in logic I remain in logic. I start in Reaper I remain in Reaper for for example.

[Gary]

In my studio, I typically track and edit in Cubase. Then, depending on the project, I can stay in Cubase to mix, or take the tracks to MB or 32C for mixing. I find Cubase a bit easier and faster for editing, but I've been using Cubase for much longer than I have MB/32C, so it's not exactly a fair comparison. The primary reason I don't track and edit with MB/32C products is because they don't always play nice with third-party plugins (and early on were very lacking in the MIDI and VSTI areas), and I've also had some syncing inconsistencies with MB/32C. For mobile recording, I use Reaper, and then typically take the tracks into Cubase for editing, then to MB/32C for mixing. All of that being said, in my opinion, the Harrison products have three distinct advantages in the mixing stage. First, they have a sound all their own. Harrison has found a way to get the old analog sound into the box. Second, I find it quicker and easier to dial in a mix with Harrison (probably because I'm an old analog guy, and the flow in the Harrison products mirrors the old analog stuff). Third...Did I mention I'm an old analog guy? Mixing on MB/32C is just plain fun, particularly if you're an old analog guy!

[Studio Saturn]

Age is a blessing. You have seen and will continue to see and witness of the ever changing music industry and life in general. That means you have a lot to share in your disposal. In addition in my humble opinion, even if you were not old, Mixbus is a joy to use for mixing. Everything is I front of you. You will not be distracted. You will jump from one to the other really quick. It makes it easy to decide. All of a sudden you are half way. What else do we need. Enjoy!

[jonetsu]

All of you guys are professionals. I am not. Nevertheless, I create everything in Bitwig then export tracks to Mixbus32C for mixing and mastering. Bitwig allows a lot of creative expression, I find.

With details: when creating I can sketch acoustic guitars and bass in Bitwig although the final tracking of anything acoustic will be in Mixbus32C. Also, when some plugin becomes an integral part of the sound at the creation level, it stays in for the export. Otherwise all FX that were added during creation for sweetening purposes are disabled for export and added back when mixing, many times not exactly in the same way.

Subjectively I find that the tracks in Bitwig have more punch and that the same tracks freshly imported in Mixbus32C are smoother but also of greater warmth and integration.

Cheers.

[amsmarle]

Subjectively I find that the tracks in Bitwig have more punch and that the same tracks [i]freshly imported in Mixbus32C are smoother but also of greater warmth and integration.[/i]

Hi Jonetsu, I've been interested to read your post re Bitwig so I downloaded a demo and I found that recording my two mono tracks vocal/acoustic guitar were indeed just as you said punchier and somehow louder yet pleasing to record with, yet still recording at -18/16 dB's my acoustic guitar sound was much clearer too... unfortunately the Bitwig demo does not allow you to save your recording. Paying $400.00 to compare it with MB 32C is beyond my hobbyist budget... shame really.

I usually only record vocals and acoustic guitar, two maybe three mono tracks at the most and now with 32C and tempo mapping I am able to add some drums to my recording.

Bitwig did have a different, pleasing dynamic to the recording process, disappointing about the demo limitations..

Regards

Alan

[Klaus]

If you can play the recording in Bitwig, you could patch a digital output of your interface into a digital input of an interface connected to Mixbus...
Sorry to sound 'smart' ;-)
Best

Klaus