32C EQ

[dustinnr]

I believe this was mentioned above, but I think (I'm in the "definitely not professional" group) the 32C EQ is really good at gently adjusting a track.
I would like it more if the mixbusses also had that same EQ on them.
It is not so good at a surgical, narrow cut, where I'll usually use one a few other EQs before the 32C EQ.
I almost always engage the hi/low cut filters and adjust.

[jonetsu]

I would like it more if the mixbusses also had that same EQ on them.

I started paying attention to the tone controls. As rudimentary they seem, they do provide a little extra all-around touch. At first I thought I would not be using tone controls, come on ! I'm a sophisticated guy. Turns out I find they really have their place.

[doncolga]

I would like it more if the mixbusses also had that same EQ on them.

I started paying attention to the tone controls. As rudimentary they seem, they do provide a little extra all-around touch. At first I thought I would not be using tone controls, come on ! I'm a sophisticated guy. Turns out I find they really have their place.

I believe this is surprising to users who see MixBus for the first time, after their experience with other software tools. It's easy to equate more options with better results, and that's just not the case. Take the EQ on Ozone, for example. The way I use it the vast majority of the time, it's a big, fancy tone control where I do 2-3 broad moves. Very rarely is anything surgical needed there. Sometimes tools with additional options are necessary, but not as often as you may think. I think many DAW users today like complexity for its own sake, when often a more "fundamentals" approach would yield the same or better end results.

Donny

[superb]

You don't need a Neve or an SSL and either could be used interchangeably for recording or mixing. So could many other consoles. I don't have any official stats, but I think it's reasonable to assume that throughout the history of recording most records were not made on a Neve or an SSL.

Most of us here (and everywhere else online), including myself, did not learn the craft of recording and mixing by being mentored in a professional studio. When I started out, I learned by reading books and participating in online forums and of course my own adventures in recording. As I gained experience and even ran a pro studio for a time, I learned that much of what I had learned from reading simply was not and could not be true.

All gear in some way imparts varying degrees of character to the sound, but I think that often what is giving character to a sound is attributed to the wrong aspect of the gear. Our ears hear everything but there are certain changes to sound that we perceive more than others. For example, take so called "vintage" compression - we obsess over how the tubes and transformers impart a quality to the sound, and of course they do, but what we really hear the most is the slow time constants and ratio of the compressor for signals above the threshold. The most noticeable part of the "sound" could be replicated in a plugin with out any transformer/tube/saturation stages. Don't get me started on tape saturation which I always use in Mixbus, but not in the way people who have never used tape think it should be used.

What I like about Mixbus is they've cut through the crap and given us all the tools to get you where you want to go, most if not all of the way, most of the time.

There are ALOT of ideas that continually get regurgitated by the online community that are purely myth. How the sound of a particular console/tape deck/compressor made the sound of the album, when it wasn't even used on that album! I think it's great that we can almost instantly have access to information, but unfortunately most of it is crap and it's hard to know at first who really knows what they are talking about. Over the years I've learned to pay attention to certain people because the results I get when I've tried what they preach are consistent with what they preach.

Don't believe me because I claim I am an expert (which I am not..). In absence of the opportunity to intern at a pro studio, best thing you can do is to learn by doing, learn to listen (train your ear), and experiment. Don't worry about other gear and plugins right now, there is enough to explore in Mixbus to keep you learning for a while.

[doncolga]

What I like about Mixbus is they've cut through the crap and given us all the tools to get you where you want to go, most if not all of the way, most of the time.

+100

[jonetsu]

Not to forget that it's also a marketing world. With products to sell and profit objectives to attain yearly. Sales are music to the ears of plugin companies.

[Boydbob]

I use the Strip EQs mostly for low or high end roll-off. Other than that, I may use the Character Plug-ins or Ozone 8 if needed.

But like Charlie Chaplain said, "We're all amateurs. None of us live long enough to be more than that."

[sunrat]

...
what I believe is :
Neve for recording and SSL for mixing....

Some people even use Harrison consoles for that!

[Dingo]

...
what I believe is :
Neve for recording and SSL for mixing....

Some people even use Harrison consoles for that!

Harrison and Neve are both wonderful recording consoles, for mixing however nothing comes close to Harrison.
I started on Quad 8, then Auditronics moved to Neve, unfortunately I had an SSL... but then found the light and have been Harrison ever since: MR4, S10, S12 & MPC 4D.
I would love to own a vintage 32C but... we got the next best thing.

[BruceGA]

Ian, I was in Memphis in the '70s, and visited a studio that had built a desk from Auditronics schematics. It looked pretty crude, but sounded nice. They didn't have many channels built up...

Bruce