I also think the real gem here is in that statement that your ears will always compensate and I agree 100%. Over the years I’ve gotten to know a lot of talented mix engineers and I’m always amazed by great sounding mixes that were just done on headphones and a portable laptop at an airport or in a coffee shop or in a studio they didn’t normally work out of so they were at a disadvantage. Like “ I love the mix on X song, what did you use on that?”. “Oh I did that at my in-laws in the living room with some headphones when we were on vacation” lol It’s like the old saying ‘It’s the ears, not the gear’. I’ve heard mixes done on $30,000 worth of gear that sucks, and I’ve heard mixes with a $200 focusrite that sound amazing.
Funny, I too was at that Philly studio for the vintage king shootout. I also found that there wasn’t hardly any difference. The api & shadow hills I noticed some differences from the pro tools mix. After further investigation I found the api was about 1/2 db louder, recalibrated and sounded the same. Then the shadow hills sounded warmer, I asked to run a sine sweep through it, turned out it started rolling off at 8k. Not sure what was wrong with that unit, but point was they all sounded very similar. After this test I lost interest in analogue summing. However After many years later I decided to demo a few more summing units in my own studio set up and working condition. What I found is the test that vintage king had set up and any other test that simply sums out stems from a mix done in the box doesn’t really give one an idea of what a summing mixer can do. When you start a mix on a summing mixer and push into it that’s when it will show its colour. So I thought hmm maybe it’s just the summing amp that’s giving em the sound, so I tried some mic pres on the master buss of a daw mix. Sadly, that didn’t work the same at all. It’s something about the channels being mixed via analogue and hitting the summing amp that totally changes the sound and depth. Now, once you start add outboard processing to the equation things start really shine! I’ve tried inserts before and that still doesn’t sound as good as running outboard into a summing mixer. Today I have an SSL sigma and building outboard around it and never been happier. The difference between itb mixes are a world apart.
Jeff Chestec and Paul Hammond were the techs that setup the demo at Elm Street Studio in Conshohocken PA. Their work is impeccable . Also Peter Kehoe who was working for Vintage King at the time was over seeing everything and he is very detail oriented. The techs did find that the Shadow Hill summing mixer needed a load on every input for it to work properly so no detail was over looked. I personally was there from beginning to end as I did this as a favor to Vintage king. I sat down next to just about everyone and was gaging their reactions as they were listening and there was no reactions. I asked just about everyone if this is something they would be interested in in the future. No one was interested and no sales happened. Also when you start to add outboard processing gear to a summing mixer it is not a summing mixer anymore. If your setup works for you and you are happy with your results then you are good. I do not think summing mixers should be sold as a way to enhance your mix as I feel it is not worth the expense for the small or no difference in your mix.
Yes they did a great job setting things up, but the api was not calibrated correctly and I had them re do it. When I got there most people were saying the api and shadow hills sounded better, but once I had found the faults and it was corrected then their opinions changed. What I’m saying is after that day for many years I was in the same boat as you and thought they were pointless. But this kind of test is flawed. It wasn’t until I started doing lots of mixing on them that I found out. Look at it this way, no one mixes at unity! No one! And when you have signals coming into the unit at unity you would expect a very clean output. I’ve even done this on an SSL 4K console and it’s hard to tell the difference. And dam right you would want a console of that cost to sound neutral. These things come alive when you start to push and pull the mix around. I’m not here to change anyone’s mind, just to share my opinion. Trust me I’ve wanted more than anything for itb mixing to work for me and have tried for decades to do so, because, hey! It’s so cheap and accessible, digital is fantastic for that easy of use and recall-ability But for me, it doesn’t sound how I want my music to sound. Everyone has a different taste ;)
I have been in a direct shootout where we used ITB summing in PT HD vs. a Mackie 1604, and an SSL 5000 series G using the same source material. The biggest difference was between ITB and the cheap Mackie. The jump to the SSL was a bit more pleasing but not as big a difference as the ITB to the Mackie. There is a difference due to the nonlinearities. I did this shootout with one of the biggest producer/engineers in the business. It’s not snake oil. This guy knows what he’s doing in the shootout.
I agree with you that you cant reproduce non-linearities digitally, it can sound very close but not quite, the uncertainties of an analog signal is what makes it organic to the ear and pleasant, its more of a FEEL than a SOUND, although it could also add it's own sonic signature whether noticeable or not it's more of the feel. if the mix is good enough it'll make it better giving you depth, clarity, separation between the elements and great stereo field and other things analog is known for.
This is why i believe my ears and test things for myself. I'm sure there's no ill will. But lots of people like to believe things sound better and so it does to them. Placebo is powerful. I absolutely love and own hardware but i have never heard a summing mixer have enough of an impact to warrant even a fraction of the cost.
I started ITB back in the late 90's and did it for years due the great recall, a while back got the SSL SIGMA and the difference is for me is that I can get the GTRS up and a bit wider without overtaking the drums whereas ITB it sounds different. I do rock and metal which needs that separation, plus the mixes sound different, bascially you need to mix into it and not do a simple A/B port. Its a small difference but enough that I hear it
Really great perspective. I guess it really does solve a problem that doesn't exist anymore. With today's DSP there really isn't much of a need for expensive gear other than for tracking and monitoring - this is evident from all the great engineers going fully in the box.
On my end, summing has changed my mixing in a big way. The box, when used like a console with inserts and additional equipment, really shines. If you utilize the box, you may gain stereo image, low-end extension, mid-range cleaning, and a bit more top end. If you only use the summing mixer itself, it's not a big game changer. However, if you use it like an analog console-inserting EQs, compressors, effects, you name it-you're in the analog domain with many positive sonic benefits. The summing mixer is just a small part of the chain, like having an expensive atomic clock that gives you a more stable sample rate. I paid close to $7,000 for that thing. This is my perspective, a bit long-I respect your opinion. Here's mine, which no one asked for.
When you take a summing mixer and start adding insert points and eq and dynamics and routing option it's not really a summing mixer anymore - what you have is a small console. I am talking about summing mixers that just do that - bunch of inputs and a couple outputs. I think your post was very well written and I welcome people's opinions. Thanks for posting.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391you should have put that part in the video as well because you come off as all are bad ,this statement seems like your back peddling ,how you choose to use the summing mixer/summing console is a big part of the results All on the Engineer Much respect !!!
I recently mixed a highly prominent rapper’s album and used the dangerous 2 bus+ as the summing mixer. But when I folded the mix back down to just stereo output it sounded the same if not better… now I’m pissed 😂
no surprises here! Asking what gear somebody uses is as irrelevant as the brand of toilet they choose to put in the rec-room. Either they have taste and skills - in which case they will consistently deliver excellent results using a püair of Airpods and stock plugins - or they don't.
I got a neve orbit mixer for a couple weeks, can't say it really made a difference for my mixes. What it did do was interrupt my workflow and create a routing nightmare! I ended up getting rid of it just because it was such a hassle
Right? No reason for owning a summing mixer now. Some people are personally offended that I pointed this out but I think people who spent the money don't want to admit that they could have done without. Bottom line if you are happy with your mix it doesn't matter how you got there but without a summing mixer you could get there with less money out of your pocket. Just my 2 cents ;-)
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 I agree, and unfortunately this is probably right around the time where the "audiophile" snake oil mentality really started infiltrating the audio engineering industry in full-swing haha. I've been victim to it many times
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 The power cord thing was *specifically what I was thinking of when I wrote that haha! I didn't get sucked into buying any, but I worked at Circuit City in the late 90s and it was another haven for that kind of stuff. One of my favorite Techmoan videos is about a device that shaves off some of the plastic around the edge of a CD, for better sound quality - if you haven't seen it yet, you'll definitely get a kick out of it
Yeah I agree 100%. I bought into this hype too for a while when I first started, and used an SSL X desk. Everyone on gearsl*tz used to say “if you don’t mix on a summing mixer or console, your mixes will be bad!!” (Clearly wrong - but I didn’t know any better at the time). I hated the fact that I had to now record my mixes back in, instead of easier and faster bouncing down. Revision? Have to re-record. Changes? Have to re- record. Plus recall was a pain since the X desk doesn’t have stepped knobs. I eventually sold off all of my hardware and never looked back. I’ve been all ITB for about 5 years now and I love the fact that I’m not tethered to any hardware. I can pick up my laptop and mix anywhere in the world and get the sound I hear in my head. The fact that plugins are coming out now that really do the thing an my hardware pieces did is even better too. So yeah, sold off my x desk summing mixer and never looked back. Also, a word to anyone who spends TONS of money of cabling. You can’t sell that stuff off for Pennies on the dollar. I sold off like $2000 worth of cabling for like $150
Trust only your ears but also dealers should not be pushing product that they know is not going to make a huge difference. And you are right trying to get money for used cables is impossible.Also advice from Gearspace should be carefully considered as most of it is worthless.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 yeah thankfully I eventually realized that gearspace was a cesspool (for lack of better word) 90% of the time. The sad reality is a large chunk of the people on gear space are people who prefer to talk about mixing rather than actually spend their time mixing (not all of course, but an unsettling majority). So thankfully since then I’ve known to take what’s on there with a grain of salt and my mixing skills have exponentially increased since then. I just wish I would have made this realization when I first started as opposed to a few years later after spinning my wheels and being discouraged about not having the latest $20,000 speakers, $20,000 of vintage mics, $20,000 of outboard gear 😁
@@danthegeetarmanThis 🙌🏽-- same experience here too!! So much time, money, and effort (along with research on GearSl***z/space), just to figure out it was more about my ears & experience!
I totally get where you're coming from. I personally own an SSL Sigma Delta. I use it kind of bring my whole mix together, but I use it more of a color box if anything. Would my mix suck without it? Absolutely not. But I don't have $130,000 for an AWS console and this thing gets me the sound of that master section for the $3k I spent on it used. I purposely push my mix through it hot so I get that SSL "pushed" sound I like. It's just a flavor I enjoy and grew up listening to. So, in summation, I agree that summing boxes do not fix a mix or make them better inherently. But depending on the unit, it can give you the flavor you're looking for. But very few of them offer that in my opinion.
That's the first thing I was thinking of "What if you pushed it hard" for that sound, would there be a difference that made it worth it. I use the SSL 4KE plugin and "push" into that (because you can) but was wondering about if getting the SSL Sigma would sound any better. I'd love to see a comparison video on that.
I remember back in audio school one of the lecturers decided to test one of the summing mixers to see if it was worth doing. The test was Avid heat, vs Avid HD, vs a Neve Summing mixer. I noticed very little difference between all three unless I was right in front of the speakers sweet spot and even then there was not much in it, but I did not like AVID heat. To hear more of a difference, we pushed the Neve really hard to really get the transformers to break down, and yes there was a big difference, in a slightly distorted, creative kind of way, but it definitely wouldn't be suitable for most regular mixes. Maybe a super crunchy, bluesy rock track would suit it if the song was right. It was that day I decided that summing wasn't from me. The Pro Tools rig was old, so its definitely possible that it was one of the early ones that supposedly didn't sound as "wide". Interesting stuff!
I have to wonder about you ears or your ability to to route with the right gain through a summing mixer. I wan't thrilled with the Neve 8816 but preferred it over the PT bus. I even created the same bussing system in the box using 16 ST buses and it was a difference that mattered being able to push through on analog guts. Plus, each summing mixer I have used, in varying degrees of headroom, had better separation, depth, greater stereo width, and equally important, an imparted tone and natural compression from pushing the master. I haven't tried the SPL or the Heritage butI have used the Chandler and the Rupert Neve Orbit on more than a few mixes and absolutely loved both. It was as close to having a solid master bus on a good console as I could get and I typically require less processing when summing. I haven't tried the SPL or the Heritage but would be interested to check out either. That said, not every mix I have done externally via analog vs in the box has been a winner every time. You can make a great mix in the box no question that could be better than an analog source as I have experienced especially with the exponential improvement in plug in processing. However, it is nice to have the option and worth the investment. I will in the least be buying the Orbit.
I did a video on my channel about why you don't need a summing mixer anymore and I got a lot of hate for it but I stand by it. They might have made a difference in 2002 but not anymore. There's just no need. DAW's have come a long way, as have converters and all that business. Definitely not worth the cost of entry. I originally bought one because I wanted to get close to that console sound without owning a console. They don't do that. Not even close haha
I got into the dangerous music summing last year, and had to buy all the cabling and extra symphony mk ii I/o channels to go with it. Dangerous d-box+ and 2-bus LT, and a 16x16 symphony card in addition to the 8x8 card that I already had for 24 channels total. It may be the converters, idk, but mixing this way changed everything. I sold 10k worth of bus gear that I used on the mix bus before because I simply didn't need it anymore, so I got my money back right right there and really couldn't be happier. I can also really hear what my dangerous bax eq is doing now, and can tell that dangerous stuff was made to work very well together. If I were to do it all over again I would've went all in on the dangerous gear with the convert + and compressor and just good preamps, etc. Anyway, just my 2 cents, and I'm not exaggerating or justifying a purchase. If I wasn't using a lot of analog gear anyway, I would just go the Jeff Ellis route and get a pair of Kali's and be done
If you are happy with your setup and getting the results you want then you are good shape. I once was looking to become a dangerous dealer but the requirement is I had to stock summing mixers - I passed on the dealership. You have to believe in what you are selling to be successful. Also customers can pick up that you are not into a product.
I understand the concept but I have never done it. I did have producers ask to have all woofers replaced on main monitors before session as they wanted to make sure they had fresh drivers.
I think a summing mixer still have reason to exist. But mainly for hybrid mixing setups. When you utilise a summing mixer, you dont have to worry about the output of analog mixing gear, since there is no more clipping at 0 basically. Also you get one round of analog to digital conversion less if you want to use something on the master bus like an ssl bus compressor. Also, the neve summing mixier has recall and sends so it can basically work like a recallable modular console, which i think is verry nice. Some they when i win the lottery i will build a setup using only neve equipment and build myself a mini "console" by utlising all this recallable neve gear.
I feel ya in that I don't know that you need it to make an excellent mix, as is evident by Serban's work. I gotta say though, I definitely know extremely knowledgeable audio developers/manufacturers who would argue otherwise, and mix engineers who are as skilled as Serban in their own right who use it as part of their process. I've developed a summing chain let's call it, and there's a very immediate and clear difference for me that I like about it. One aspect of my chain seems to pull out more perceived range in the very high and low end, the other adds a bit of saturation warmth/punch in the low-mid to high-mid range. It'd certainly be possible to achieve what I hear through other means, but I think of it as part of what shapes my mixes as I go along and gives the mix a certain character. The shaping aspect I was actually inspired by through researching Serban's methods mixing through a mix bus, I just took that philosophy a step further.
As long as it works for you and you are getting the results you want that is great. My point is I do not think it is worth the investment for the small if any difference in sound.
I too bought a $5k Summing Mixer chain back when they first came out thinking it would improve my mixes, it didn’t!! My mixes sounded the same, they equally sucked before and after :) I could have saved $5k! At least now I have my own personal experience with Summing. My Conclusion: If you know what you’re doing and can mix, you don’t need it.
100% of the time its a panning law difference people hear that makes them think its wider and has more space. Just like running a mix through 2 different consoles the panning law on some consoles will be +3 and other consoles will be +6. The only summing mixer that really imparts anything of merit to audio is the Rupert Neve Designs Satellite models since you have control over the type and amount of distortion you are adding from the transformer which is called Silk. But you can achieve this same thing with a couple Rupert Neve Designs 500 series modules. But I agree its a ton of money to sell you a half built mixer. A simple line mixer will give you the same outcome. If you want a console get a full console that can do something like EQ and has mic preamps. Instead these gear companies have figured out a way to sell you a VERY expensive Line mixer with nothing of value. No faders for "hand automation (I'm that old) and balancing", no EQ for tone shaping, and No Mic preamp for tracking or overdubbing and No routing. So yea summing mixers are glorified line mixers!
1:05 I respect your opinion, but I think it’s not only the summing what gives more sonics, but doing the audio processing (comps eqs) through the summing mixer. Why, because in the summing mixer you are on analog domain and therefore you have more room than in Pro Tools directly. Also, 16 channels is not much... 32 and above would be ideal to see more change. A summing mixer that has inserts for each track and the master is the MixDream 2384. Just sharing my opinion experience here ✌️
The SSL SIGMA can make a difference when the line amps & stereo bus are pushed hard. I'm using hardware w/parallel compression & the SIGMA simplifies things. Plugins are great but there is hardware that hasn't been emulated that well just yet. That said, we have the tech to make the best sounding recordings of all time. The D/A, studio monitors & room treatment will yield more results than summing an ITB mix into a pair of transformers.
You need transformer tubes or both on each input and output trasformers on the 2 track for it to make a difference. It is very noticible then. If it's just a trnsparent mixer it's not adding a lot even though it can saturate some components. Some summinng mixers are just summing and not adding anything to the color.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 over a mix it does for me. ITB mixes sound sterile in comparison. There is a gluing effect as well. I’ve null tested this as well. It’s really not that big of a deal for something to be routed for summing. I get your point, depending on application. but I’d rather have it than make myself believe it makes no difference. Especially when the artist recorded source material directly to an interface and I need to give it more mojo. Tape, summing, hardware inserts all help then.
I use them when I want to use a lot of analog stuff on mix down. Great for taking stems, inserting analog processing, and a analog chain on the master and getting quick mixes and parallel processing, pushing into a mic preamp for final mix. I've never wanted one just to sum the busses from my DAW dry as a replacement for the DAW mix. Very useful as little consoles though. Great if you are a hybrid setup. Def a waste of money if you are ONLY summing with it.
Pushing into a mic pre for final mix...any line level signal going into a mic pre will be overloaded. Maybe that is not what you wanted to say ;-) Also inserting analog gear you can do without a summing mixer - get a patchbay and bring up the i/o of your converters and all your analog gear. There are a lot of ways you can use a summing mixer but do you need a summing mixer is the point I am trying to make. sure you could plug in a direct box and go into a mic pre but I don't see the point. Bottom line if you are happy with your mix in the end it doesn't matter how you got to that point ;-)
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 Using a passive mixer with passive buss with no gain make up, you can very much push into a padded mic pre or into a pre with a line input. I know you can set up your outboard on your IO but setting up chains on the inserts of a passive mixer and a chain on the main buss to mix stems is a fantastic way to work fast, without goofing with IO. It's not asubstitution for your Daw bus, its an optional sound/workflow.
Running a line level signal into a mic pre even if it is padded is never going to sound good as you are overloading the mic pre. A mic pre with line level in is not a mic pre - it can take a line level input but it is not going through the mic pre - it is bypassing it. A patchbay will do what you are doing will a summing mixer and give you more flexibility. Trust your ears. I hope you find this info useful.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 You are using A LOT of absolutes in your response., like "Never sound good" and that preamps with line inputs bypass amplification stage. This is totally untrue. A lot of mic preamps line input is just a padded (usually 30ish dB) path of the mic input. Allen Heath console pres behave like that. for example. A lot of Passive summing mixers (Folcrom RMS216 for instance) are intended to be used into a mic preamp for makeup gain. It;s in the manual. I know a lot of people using summing mixers this way. I don't know what else to say about it. People do it all the time.
@@kniferideaudio This happens every often when a client tells me they are doing something that doesn't make sense. I usually take a trip out to their studio and have them show me what they are doing. Just about every time what they are telling is not what they are doing. They are using the wrong terms to explain what is happening - honest mistake and all is good in the end.
The point of summing on an analog device is to bypass the computer from creating it's own mixdown/bounce. You have to understand what is actually going on in the computer code durring a bounce of an entire song. Basically the code makes a best guess of whats needed from the data and it drops what's not needed. This is a computer automated process and you have no control of the bounce itself. When you stem out your tracks to individual outputs of your audio interface the computer only streams the audio and it makes no guesses, it just plays the tracks back. So the summing unit will do the final work of preserving the integrity of the raw tracks in the final mix. Null tests don't work here because null testing does not show the differences in the dynamic range of the two mixes. It's this dynamic range that is the difference you hear when comparing the two. If all that is needed in a recording studio control room is a computer/software/audio interface and two speakers, every studio in the world would only have these items as why would they spend big money when it's not needed.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 Looks like you didn’t get the point of my reply. They spend the money ion gear because it’s needed or they simply wouldn’t.
I spent $11k in 2002 on a Manley16 channel mixer. I had them do a custom mod to 8 of the channels before delivery. I think the guys name was Hutch. I was amazed that they were able to make the changes I needed. Now I'm 100% in the box...lol
@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 Wow! You know a lot of people. I can relate to many of your stories. I worked part time at Guitar Center in San Jose back in the mid 90s. It was a great way to fill your studio with gear at a discount. They sent me to Dididesign training at the factory...lol. I remember watching them literally packaging up the digi 002s on site....not china.
Networking is the key in pro audio sales. If you do great work the word gets around and by word of mouth you are getting involved with more clients. In the end they all become friends.
I've spent much time on this topic..... I think you're right in that over the years the code in Protools particularly has improved... Hell the Aux busses used to be like 8 bit or something (less then a track output) back in the 90s... These days I feel like in any artform, it's just about committing to your materials.. I mean I still find ITB mixes somewhat flat, but with someone as skilled as Surban... He could probably make a masterpiece on an iPad DAW ....
What annoys me is other dealers telling me I did not know what I was talking about. If you get a chance to hear what a summing mixer does it is not worth the money. I think it is wrong to sell summing mixers - it is taking advantage of a customer.
Recording and mixing is all about tiny and incremental improvements which on their own don't mean much but when combined are what make music sound good. It's just like every other aspect of mixing. People pay a ton for the last 2% improvement. I definitely hear a difference, but whatever. It also depends on the material, obviously. In my experience, if you're using virtual instruments that never leave the box, you need all the help you can get, whereas if you're recording live instruments with great preamps, properly placed mics, a good room, etc., you have everything you need to get a good ITB mix and can probably skip blowing a ton of money on a summing mixer. I'm an amateur though and I don't make my living doing this, so you can take what I'm saying with a grain of salt, I guess.
From a work flow point of view I can see where getting out of the box can have some advantages even if the summing box itself doesn't provide noticeable sonic benefit. Like adding outboard processing etc. Thoughts?
But is it worth the money? I say no. You could spend that money in other places in your recording system and made a huge difference. Voodoo I tell you...
I do not know, I mean my Dangerous 2Bus+ gives a 3D feel to the sound, it is hard to describe it, there is a also a type of fatness that you just cant replicate with plugins, that is not to say one is better than the other, it is down to taste, again, I am a nobody, do not class myself as a professional....
As long as it works for you and you are getting the results you are happy with then you are good. I do not think they are worth the investment for the small to no difference in the sound.
coming from a series of summing mixers (tubetch ssa2a, dangerous 2bus, chandler mini mixer, cadac j series) before jumping itb confidently (thx to Andrew Scheps), I am not going back to a summing box.
When I was an engineer with Prince on Musicology in 2003, the Dangerous people loaned as one of their summing mixers. We tested it and gave it back. Unnecessary.
Personally all summing mixers aren't created equal. I do agree that theres isnt much improvement over itb to justify the large cost which i think is the primary point here. The real change in sonics happen when you use a good quality summing mixer with alot of outputs and additional outboard. For me ive tried all setups and nothing to this day still beats me using the console. The sound im looking for is just theres and the mix comes together way faster than anything itb. Everyone definitely cannot commit to a console so i could understand the conundrum of wanting that sound and trying to get close without the full commitment. As recommended use your ears and try different setups as often as possible and find out what works best for you.
Summing mixer definitely didn't make you mix sound better, but for me - I mix much faster and make more clear decisions, when I mix and even produce the tracks via summing mixer. It gives better separation, more headroom, cleaner sound and if you overdrive the inputs it can add some magical dust to your mix. In simple words, when you mix without summing mixer, your tracks are kids in the kindergarten, and you need to tell them all the things.. like where to go, how to behave, what to do etc. Speaking sound engineer language - you need to use more dynamic processing and spend more time mixing. When You use summing mixer during mixing process you deal with adults. Your tracks already know what to do and where to go, again speaking Sound engineer language - you need to use less processing, because sound is already there. I wonder if in your comparison process, Serban used the same plugins and same processing with and without summing. I doubt that he did not! So again, for me after I incorporate Summing mixer into my mixing process, I started to work 2x, 3x or maybe even 10x time faster.
The end result is what is important. If you are happy then do what you do. My point is that I do not think it is worth the expense for the small return on the enhancement to the final mix.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 read my reply more carefully, I wasn’t talking only about enhancement, but about speed of workflow. You work more effectively, faster, which saves a lot of time. Without a summing mixer I was doing like 3 mixes a week, with it - much more now. The quality and the sound stays the same. I just do more spending less time. Time is money, so it’s absolutely worth the investment
I think they're only good for what the name says, to sum some sources together, I use one in tracking to mix guitar mics together or bus the toms to stereo pair. I have a friend that mixes for big artists that uses it to clip the stereo bus in analog before it hits the master converters, but that's clipping, not summing.
For me there is no reason to go from digital to analog without a reason! Only if i go to an analog processor! Until i discover the Kahayan epsilon 32! Try it and maybe you change your mind!
If I EVER got one, it would be one that professes to add color and dimension and NOT one that promises clean and the truth. My 64 bit digital resolution summing engine objectively is perfectly accurate. If the analog box adds lovely euphonic distortions, then that's a thing that would be desirable. Not some BS promise of MORE accuracy!
So he mixed the song 2 separate times and they sounded the exact same?? Thats really weird. I mean i do agree that summing mixers are more of a flavor type of thing. Its not something you will hear in the final bounced down mix but you should definitely hear the difference while mixing, which for some people make mixing easier. Its the same thing with converters. Some people saying buying expensive converters dont make a difference. Maybe not something youll hear in the final mix, but definitely a difference i can hear while mixing and it definitely helps me.
Wondering if this is in response to another video that recently came out about this 😂 but really your story kind of puts a nail in the coffin. If the top guys have no need for these.. that kind of tells the truth right there.
I always thought it was a band aide from industry knowing they screwed up after every one got rid of their consoles when I had my studio I had a large desk an nothing really sounds better then it coming out of the stereo bus from pro tools just my opinion though
Really...Never heard the 3d sound you speak of. I demoed the chandler, Aurora, Shadow Hill,SPL and a bunch more and I don't hear the 3D sound and I trust MY ears. I never let people tell me what I am hearing.
I've been making music since 1990 and started off in the analog world. I switched over to hard disk recording with my first DAW in 1999 and used it exclusively for 20yrs. 5yrs ago I switched to analog summing. There IS a difference. I've taken my own mixes and compared the ITB sum mix to the analog sum mix and there is a noticeable difference. For me, the biggest difference is in the high end where the more delicate instruments are like hi-hats, cymbals, strings, synths, etc. They're clearer and have space to live in the mix. It just sounds like the ITB mixes are bottle necked and it squeezes the life out of the top end. The difference might be negligible to most people, but even if it's just a 10% improvement, it's still better. I'll never go back to digital summing.
As long as it works for you and you are getting the results you want then you are good. 10% improvement is a huge difference. As a dealer I will not recommend a summing mixer. I do not think it is worth the expense.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 Yes, but what is happening during analogue summing at red is a stochastic process. In short: Overdrive an analogue mixbus and it cries (in a beautiful and unique way). Overdrive a digital mixbus and it dies (and that sound is as we all know ugly and horrible to the extreme). I would reccomend the Fat Bustard 2 for those beautiful Red VU-experiments 👌
theyre all literally just boxes full of transformers... It doesnt take a seasoned engineer to understand this, but for some reason people have serious buyers placebo
Does any of this over priced gear really even matter? Especially now when 98% of all music gets listened to on speakers the size of a pencil eraser? The average listener couldn't even come close to hearing any difference that thousands of dollars were spent trying to achieve !
Why would mix the same song twice? Your brain and ears will compensate and produce the same sounding mix, 2 different processing paths. Just use the same mix!
I own a summing mixer and there is a big difference. My mixes are wider and my tracks are more dimensional and don't sound flat. I can tell you are lying about your experience because you wouldn't forget the exact unit that was used unless you were exaggerating.
Thanks, at least I'm not the only one.... Euh ya there is a difference here and I have a setup that allows me to A B the 2 mixes in realtime and there's a very notable difference in imaging, depth..... Ithe ITB same mix sounds flat and 2 dimensional compared to the 32 channels of summing in my SSL sigma delta. I had the 2 Bus+ before the SSL and in fact found the 2bus+ added too much..... It's not night and day of course, but in realtime A B? Very notable difference and worth every penny. Yes I'm gonna trust my ears on this one.
@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 Anything mixed in the box will sound flat because it's processed via 1s and 0s and not voltage. Anything with voltage will elevate the dimensions and sonics. Why do you think a tape machine stretches the dynamics of a sound? It's the voltage that created the saturation and imagine. You can't replicate that in the box and the tones from voltage also varies. I don't know where you get your reasoning from but its flawed. Your mixes will be lifeless in a club and will never compete with an analog summed mix. Never!!!!!
Ill make it simple they are usless and a waste of money full stop. Enough said ! U are not a real engineer if u "need" something like this to get a good mix smh
![Наследники. Как живут сыновья Путина и Кабаевой | Фильм центра «Досье» | Putin's kids [English subs]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5Xrskn6lo7k/mqdefault.jpg)
Nice to learn where the concept of summing mixers originated from 👍🏼
Glad it was helpful!
I also think the real gem here is in that statement that your ears will always compensate and I agree 100%. Over the years I’ve gotten to know a lot of talented mix engineers and I’m always amazed by great sounding mixes that were just done on headphones and a portable laptop at an airport or in a coffee shop or in a studio they didn’t normally work out of so they were at a disadvantage. Like “ I love the mix on X song, what did you use on that?”. “Oh I did that at my in-laws in the living room with some headphones when we were on vacation” lol It’s like the old saying ‘It’s the ears, not the gear’. I’ve heard mixes done on $30,000 worth of gear that sucks, and I’ve heard mixes with a $200 focusrite that sound amazing.
It truly boils down to your ears.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 💯💯
Funny, I too was at that Philly studio for the vintage king shootout. I also found that there wasn’t hardly any difference. The api & shadow hills I noticed some differences from the pro tools mix. After further investigation I found the api was about 1/2 db louder, recalibrated and sounded the same. Then the shadow hills sounded warmer, I asked to run a sine sweep through it, turned out it started rolling off at 8k. Not sure what was wrong with that unit, but point was they all sounded very similar. After this test I lost interest in analogue summing. However After many years later I decided to demo a few more summing units in my own studio set up and working condition. What I found is the test that vintage king had set up and any other test that simply sums out stems from a mix done in the box doesn’t really give one an idea of what a summing mixer can do. When you start a mix on a summing mixer and push into it that’s when it will show its colour. So I thought hmm maybe it’s just the summing amp that’s giving em the sound, so I tried some mic pres on the master buss of a daw mix. Sadly, that didn’t work the same at all. It’s something about the channels being mixed via analogue and hitting the summing amp that totally changes the sound and depth. Now, once you start add outboard processing to the equation things start really shine! I’ve tried inserts before and that still doesn’t sound as good as running outboard into a summing mixer. Today I have an SSL sigma and building outboard around it and never been happier. The difference between itb mixes are a world apart.
Jeff Chestec and Paul Hammond were the techs that setup the demo at Elm Street Studio in Conshohocken PA. Their work is impeccable . Also Peter Kehoe who was working for Vintage King at the time was over seeing everything and he is very detail oriented. The techs did find that the Shadow Hill summing mixer needed a load on every input for it to work properly so no detail was over looked. I personally was there from beginning to end as I did this as a favor to Vintage king. I sat down next to just about everyone and was gaging their reactions as they were listening and there was no reactions. I asked just about everyone if this is something they would be interested in in the future. No one was interested and no sales happened. Also when you start to add outboard processing gear to a summing mixer it is not a summing mixer anymore. If your setup works for you and you are happy with your results then you are good. I do not think summing mixers should be sold as a way to enhance your mix as I feel it is not worth the expense for the small or no difference in your mix.
Yes they did a great job setting things up, but the api was not calibrated correctly and I had them re do it. When I got there most people were saying the api and shadow hills sounded better, but once I had found the faults and it was corrected then their opinions changed. What I’m saying is after that day for many years I was in the same boat as you and thought they were pointless. But this kind of test is flawed. It wasn’t until I started doing lots of mixing on them that I found out. Look at it this way, no one mixes at unity! No one! And when you have signals coming into the unit at unity you would expect a very clean output. I’ve even done this on an SSL 4K console and it’s hard to tell the difference. And dam right you would want a console of that cost to sound neutral. These things come alive when you start to push and pull the mix around. I’m not here to change anyone’s mind, just to share my opinion. Trust me I’ve wanted more than anything for itb mixing to work for me and have tried for decades to do so, because, hey! It’s so cheap and accessible, digital is fantastic for that easy of use and recall-ability But for me, it doesn’t sound how I want my music to sound. Everyone has a different taste ;)
Hmm
Glad to know that my lack of money saved me a lot of money 😂
;-)
I have been in a direct shootout where we used ITB summing in PT HD vs. a Mackie 1604, and an SSL 5000 series G using the same source material. The biggest difference was between ITB and the cheap Mackie. The jump to the SSL was a bit more pleasing but not as big a difference as the ITB to the Mackie. There is a difference due to the nonlinearities. I did this shootout with one of the biggest producer/engineers in the business. It’s not snake oil. This guy knows what he’s doing in the shootout.
Good for you, nice to know. Thanks
I agree with you that you cant reproduce non-linearities digitally, it can sound very close but not quite, the uncertainties of an analog signal is what makes it organic to the ear and pleasant, its more of a FEEL than a SOUND, although it could also add it's own sonic signature whether noticeable or not it's more of the feel. if the mix is good enough it'll make it better giving you depth, clarity, separation between the elements and great stereo field and other things analog is known for.
This is why i believe my ears and test things for myself. I'm sure there's no ill will. But lots of people like to believe things sound better and so it does to them. Placebo is powerful.
I absolutely love and own hardware but i have never heard a summing mixer have enough of an impact to warrant even a fraction of the cost.
That is what I am talking about!
I started ITB back in the late 90's and did it for years due the great recall, a while back got the SSL SIGMA and the difference is for me is that I can get the GTRS up and a bit wider without overtaking the drums whereas ITB it sounds different. I do rock and metal which needs that separation, plus the mixes sound different, bascially you need to mix into it and not do a simple A/B port. Its a small difference but enough that I hear it
As long as you hear a difference and it makes a difference to you ;-)
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 haha
Really great perspective. I guess it really does solve a problem that doesn't exist anymore. With today's DSP there really isn't much of a need for expensive gear other than for tracking and monitoring - this is evident from all the great engineers going fully in the box.
Agreed
On my end, summing has changed my mixing in a big way. The box, when used like a console with inserts and additional equipment, really shines. If you utilize the box, you may gain stereo image, low-end extension, mid-range cleaning, and a bit more top end.
If you only use the summing mixer itself, it's not a big game changer. However, if you use it like an analog console-inserting EQs, compressors, effects, you name it-you're in the analog domain with many positive sonic benefits.
The summing mixer is just a small part of the chain, like having an expensive atomic clock that gives you a more stable sample rate. I paid close to $7,000 for that thing.
This is my perspective, a bit long-I respect your opinion. Here's mine, which no one asked for.
When you take a summing mixer and start adding insert points and eq and dynamics and routing option it's not really a summing mixer anymore - what you have is a small console. I am talking about summing mixers that just do that - bunch of inputs and a couple outputs. I think your post was very well written and I welcome people's opinions. Thanks for posting.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391you should have put that part in the video as well because you come off as all are bad ,this statement seems like your back peddling ,how you choose to use the summing mixer/summing console is a big part of the results
All on the Engineer
Much respect !!!
I agree💯💯💯
I recently mixed a highly prominent rapper’s album and used the dangerous 2 bus+ as the summing mixer. But when I folded the mix back down to just stereo output it sounded the same if not better… now I’m pissed 😂
Hmm
no surprises here! Asking what gear somebody uses is as irrelevant as the brand of toilet they choose to put in the rec-room. Either they have taste and skills - in which case they will consistently deliver excellent results using a püair of Airpods and stock plugins - or they don't.
@GingerDrums😂😂😂
Nice!!!
I got a neve orbit mixer for a couple weeks, can't say it really made a difference for my mixes. What it did do was interrupt my workflow and create a routing nightmare! I ended up getting rid of it just because it was such a hassle
That is what I am talking about
Well said! These are like having an analog mixer, but paying extra for the privilege of having them strip all the pres and EQs out 🤣
Right? No reason for owning a summing mixer now. Some people are personally offended that I pointed this out but I think people who spent the money don't want to admit that they could have done without. Bottom line if you are happy with your mix it doesn't matter how you got there but without a summing mixer you could get there with less money out of your pocket. Just my 2 cents ;-)
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 I agree, and unfortunately this is probably right around the time where the "audiophile" snake oil mentality really started infiltrating the audio engineering industry in full-swing haha. I've been victim to it many times
Did you get sucked into buying better power cords? That was another way of wasting money but some people bought in...
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 The power cord thing was *specifically what I was thinking of when I wrote that haha! I didn't get sucked into buying any, but I worked at Circuit City in the late 90s and it was another haven for that kind of stuff.
One of my favorite Techmoan videos is about a device that shaves off some of the plastic around the edge of a CD, for better sound quality - if you haven't seen it yet, you'll definitely get a kick out of it
Yeah I agree 100%. I bought into this hype too for a while when I first started, and used an SSL X desk. Everyone on gearsl*tz used to say “if you don’t mix on a summing mixer or console, your mixes will be bad!!” (Clearly wrong - but I didn’t know any better at the time). I hated the fact that I had to now record my mixes back in, instead of easier and faster bouncing down. Revision? Have to re-record. Changes? Have to re- record. Plus recall was a pain since the X desk doesn’t have stepped knobs. I eventually sold off all of my hardware and never looked back. I’ve been all ITB for about 5 years now and I love the fact that I’m not tethered to any hardware. I can pick up my laptop and mix anywhere in the world and get the sound I hear in my head. The fact that plugins are coming out now that really do the thing an my hardware pieces did is even better too. So yeah, sold off my x desk summing mixer and never looked back. Also, a word to anyone who spends TONS of money of cabling. You can’t sell that stuff off for Pennies on the dollar. I sold off like $2000 worth of cabling for like $150
Trust only your ears but also dealers should not be pushing product that they know is not going to make a huge difference. And you are right trying to get money for used cables is impossible.Also advice from Gearspace should be carefully considered as most of it is worthless.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 yeah thankfully I eventually realized that gearspace was a cesspool (for lack of better word) 90% of the time. The sad reality is a large chunk of the people on gear space are people who prefer to talk about mixing rather than actually spend their time mixing (not all of course, but an unsettling majority). So thankfully since then I’ve known to take what’s on there with a grain of salt and my mixing skills have exponentially increased since then. I just wish I would have made this realization when I first started as opposed to a few years later after spinning my wheels and being discouraged about not having the latest $20,000 speakers, $20,000 of vintage mics, $20,000 of outboard gear 😁
@@danthegeetarmanThis 🙌🏽-- same experience here too!! So much time, money, and effort (along with research on GearSl***z/space), just to figure out it was more about my ears & experience!
In ABX i consistently prefer ITB summing, and so does my friend who subsequently sold his SSL summing mixer.
Yep
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 Mathematically perfect summing turns out to be good enough for me XD
I totally get where you're coming from. I personally own an SSL Sigma Delta. I use it kind of bring my whole mix together, but I use it more of a color box if anything. Would my mix suck without it? Absolutely not. But I don't have $130,000 for an AWS console and this thing gets me the sound of that master section for the $3k I spent on it used. I purposely push my mix through it hot so I get that SSL "pushed" sound I like. It's just a flavor I enjoy and grew up listening to. So, in summation, I agree that summing boxes do not fix a mix or make them better inherently. But depending on the unit, it can give you the flavor you're looking for. But very few of them offer that in my opinion.
As long as you are happy with the end result.
same here…the sigma’s color & the A & B bus with inserts make my ears smile 👍
Isn't that all we want in the end - to have our ears smile ;-)
That's the first thing I was thinking of "What if you pushed it hard" for that sound, would there be a difference that made it worth it. I use the SSL 4KE plugin and "push" into that (because you can) but was wondering about if getting the SSL Sigma would sound any better. I'd love to see a comparison video on that.
If one of the best in the mixing game has no need to use one, we should neither!!!
Agreed
I remember back in audio school one of the lecturers decided to test one of the summing mixers to see if it was worth doing. The test was Avid heat, vs Avid HD, vs a Neve Summing mixer. I noticed very little difference between all three unless I was right in front of the speakers sweet spot and even then there was not much in it, but I did not like AVID heat. To hear more of a difference, we pushed the Neve really hard to really get the transformers to break down, and yes there was a big difference, in a slightly distorted, creative kind of way, but it definitely wouldn't be suitable for most regular mixes. Maybe a super crunchy, bluesy rock track would suit it if the song was right. It was that day I decided that summing wasn't from me.
The Pro Tools rig was old, so its definitely possible that it was one of the early ones that supposedly didn't sound as "wide".
Interesting stuff!
Thanks for the thoughtful comment.
I have to wonder about you ears or your ability to to route with the right gain through a summing mixer. I wan't thrilled with the Neve 8816 but preferred it over the PT bus. I even created the same bussing system in the box using 16 ST buses and it was a difference that mattered being able to push through on analog guts. Plus, each summing mixer I have used, in varying degrees of headroom, had better separation, depth, greater stereo width, and equally important, an imparted tone and natural compression from pushing the master. I haven't tried the SPL or the Heritage butI have used the Chandler and the Rupert Neve Orbit on more than a few mixes and absolutely loved both. It was as close to having a solid master bus on a good console as I could get and I typically require less processing when summing. I haven't tried the SPL or the Heritage but would be interested to check out either. That said, not every mix I have done externally via analog vs in the box has been a winner every time. You can make a great mix in the box no question that could be better than an analog source as I have experienced especially with the exponential improvement in plug in processing. However, it is nice to have the option and worth the investment. I will in the least be buying the Orbit.
Good for you
I did a video on my channel about why you don't need a summing mixer anymore and I got a lot of hate for it but I stand by it. They might have made a difference in 2002 but not anymore. There's just no need. DAW's have come a long way, as have converters and all that business. Definitely not worth the cost of entry. I originally bought one because I wanted to get close to that console sound without owning a console. They don't do that. Not even close haha
That's what I'm talking about.
I got into the dangerous music summing last year, and had to buy all the cabling and extra symphony mk ii I/o channels to go with it. Dangerous d-box+ and 2-bus LT, and a 16x16 symphony card in addition to the 8x8 card that I already had for 24 channels total. It may be the converters, idk, but mixing this way changed everything. I sold 10k worth of bus gear that I used on the mix bus before because I simply didn't need it anymore, so I got my money back right right there and really couldn't be happier. I can also really hear what my dangerous bax eq is doing now, and can tell that dangerous stuff was made to work very well together. If I were to do it all over again I would've went all in on the dangerous gear with the convert + and compressor and just good preamps, etc. Anyway, just my 2 cents, and I'm not exaggerating or justifying a purchase. If I wasn't using a lot of analog gear anyway, I would just go the Jeff Ellis route and get a pair of Kali's and be done
If you are happy with your setup and getting the results you want then you are good shape. I once was looking to become a dangerous dealer but the requirement is I had to stock summing mixers - I passed on the dealership. You have to believe in what you are selling to be successful. Also customers can pick up that you are not into a product.
You and serban just saved me thousands!
Your welcome!
Hey George, would love to hear your thoughts on speaker burn in.
I understand the concept but I have never done it. I did have producers ask to have all woofers replaced on main monitors before session as they wanted to make sure they had fresh drivers.
Great video, thanks for sharing your perspective
Thanks for watching!
I think a summing mixer still have reason to exist. But mainly for hybrid mixing setups. When you utilise a summing mixer, you dont have to worry about the output of analog mixing gear, since there is no more clipping at 0 basically. Also you get one round of analog to digital conversion less if you want to use something on the master bus like an ssl bus compressor. Also, the neve summing mixier has recall and sends so it can basically work like a recallable modular console, which i think is verry nice. Some they when i win the lottery i will build a setup using only neve equipment and build myself a mini "console" by utlising all this recallable neve gear.
Everyone needs to win the lottery
I feel ya in that I don't know that you need it to make an excellent mix, as is evident by Serban's work. I gotta say though, I definitely know extremely knowledgeable audio developers/manufacturers who would argue otherwise, and mix engineers who are as skilled as Serban in their own right who use it as part of their process. I've developed a summing chain let's call it, and there's a very immediate and clear difference for me that I like about it. One aspect of my chain seems to pull out more perceived range in the very high and low end, the other adds a bit of saturation warmth/punch in the low-mid to high-mid range. It'd certainly be possible to achieve what I hear through other means, but I think of it as part of what shapes my mixes as I go along and gives the mix a certain character. The shaping aspect I was actually inspired by through researching Serban's methods mixing through a mix bus, I just took that philosophy a step further.
As long as it works for you and you are getting the results you want that is great. My point is I do not think it is worth the investment for the small if any difference in sound.
I agree it is worth to use hybrid system on your protools or cubase bus on a good converter.
OK
I too bought a $5k Summing Mixer chain back when they first came out thinking it would improve my mixes, it didn’t!! My mixes sounded the same, they equally sucked before and after :) I could have saved $5k! At least now I have my own personal experience with Summing. My Conclusion: If you know what you’re doing and can mix, you don’t need it.
That is what I am talking about! Sorry you lost the 5k...
100% of the time its a panning law difference people hear that makes them think its wider and has more space. Just like running a mix through 2 different consoles the panning law on some consoles will be +3 and other consoles will be +6. The only summing mixer that really imparts anything of merit to audio is the Rupert Neve Designs Satellite models since you have control over the type and amount of distortion you are adding from the transformer which is called Silk. But you can achieve this same thing with a couple Rupert Neve Designs 500 series modules. But I agree its a ton of money to sell you a half built mixer. A simple line mixer will give you the same outcome. If you want a console get a full console that can do something like EQ and has mic preamps. Instead these gear companies have figured out a way to sell you a VERY expensive Line mixer with nothing of value. No faders for "hand automation (I'm that old) and balancing", no EQ for tone shaping, and No Mic preamp for tracking or overdubbing and No routing. So yea summing mixers are glorified line mixers!
Agreed
1:05 I respect your opinion, but I think it’s not only the summing what gives more sonics, but doing the audio processing (comps eqs) through the summing mixer. Why, because in the summing mixer you are on analog domain and therefore you have more room than in Pro Tools directly. Also, 16 channels is not much... 32 and above would be ideal to see more change. A summing mixer that has inserts for each track and the master is the MixDream 2384. Just sharing my opinion experience here ✌️
Thanks for sharing
The SSL SIGMA can make a difference when the line amps & stereo bus are pushed hard. I'm using hardware w/parallel compression & the SIGMA simplifies things. Plugins are great but there is hardware that hasn't been emulated that well just yet. That said, we have the tech to make the best sounding recordings of all time. The D/A, studio monitors & room treatment will yield more results than summing an ITB mix into a pair of transformers.
"The D/A, studio monitors & room treatment will yield more results than summing an ITB mix into a pair of transformers." Agreed
You need transformer tubes or both on each input and output trasformers on the 2 track for it to make a difference. It is very noticible then. If it's just a trnsparent mixer it's not adding a lot even though it can saturate some components. Some summinng mixers are just summing and not adding anything to the color.
Transformers and tube do make a difference but I question if it is worth the effort for the minimum return.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 over a mix it does for me. ITB mixes sound sterile in comparison. There is a gluing effect as well. I’ve null tested this as well. It’s really not that big of a deal for something to be routed for summing. I get your point, depending on application. but I’d rather have it than make myself believe it makes no difference. Especially when the artist recorded source material directly to an interface and I need to give it more mojo. Tape, summing, hardware inserts all help then.
Yep. Have been telling people this for years. Don’t get me started on audiophile nonsense either.
Thank you for spreading the word.
You are very welcome! Someone had to say something. Dealers were gaslighting the public with this nonsense...
I use them when I want to use a lot of analog stuff on mix down. Great for taking stems, inserting analog processing, and a analog chain on the master and getting quick mixes and parallel processing, pushing into a mic preamp for final mix. I've never wanted one just to sum the busses from my DAW dry as a replacement for the DAW mix. Very useful as little consoles though. Great if you are a hybrid setup. Def a waste of money if you are ONLY summing with it.
Pushing into a mic pre for final mix...any line level signal going into a mic pre will be overloaded. Maybe that is not what you wanted to say ;-) Also inserting analog gear you can do without a summing mixer - get a patchbay and bring up the i/o of your converters and all your analog gear. There are a lot of ways you can use a summing mixer but do you need a summing mixer is the point I am trying to make. sure you could plug in a direct box and go into a mic pre but I don't see the point. Bottom line if you are happy with your mix in the end it doesn't matter how you got to that point ;-)
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 Using a passive mixer with passive buss with no gain make up, you can very much push into a padded mic pre or into a pre with a line input. I know you can set up your outboard on your IO but setting up chains on the inserts of a passive mixer and a chain on the main buss to mix stems is a fantastic way to work fast, without goofing with IO. It's not asubstitution for your Daw bus, its an optional sound/workflow.
Running a line level signal into a mic pre even if it is padded is never going to sound good as you are overloading the mic pre. A mic pre with line level in is not a mic pre - it can take a line level input but it is not going through the mic pre - it is bypassing it. A patchbay will do what you are doing will a summing mixer and give you more flexibility. Trust your ears. I hope you find this info useful.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 You are using A LOT of absolutes in your response., like "Never sound good" and that preamps with line inputs bypass amplification stage. This is totally untrue. A lot of mic preamps line input is just a padded (usually 30ish dB) path of the mic input. Allen Heath console pres behave like that. for example. A lot of Passive summing mixers (Folcrom RMS216 for instance) are intended to be used into a mic preamp for makeup gain. It;s in the manual. I know a lot of people using summing mixers this way. I don't know what else to say about it. People do it all the time.
@@kniferideaudio This happens every often when a client tells me they are doing something that doesn't make sense. I usually take a trip out to their studio and have them show me what they are doing. Just about every time what they are telling is not what they are doing. They are using the wrong terms to explain what is happening - honest mistake and all is good in the end.
The point of summing on an analog device is to bypass the computer from creating it's own mixdown/bounce. You have to understand what is actually going on in the computer code durring a bounce of an entire song. Basically the code makes a best guess of whats needed from the data and it drops what's not needed. This is a computer automated process and you have no control of the bounce itself. When you stem out your tracks to individual outputs of your audio interface the computer only streams the audio and it makes no guesses, it just plays the tracks back. So the summing unit will do the final work of preserving the integrity of the raw tracks in the final mix. Null tests don't work here because null testing does not show the differences in the dynamic range of the two mixes. It's this dynamic range that is the difference you hear when comparing the two. If all that is needed in a recording studio control room is a computer/software/audio interface and two speakers, every studio in the world would only have these items as why would they spend big money when it's not needed.
And that is the question - why spend the money if it is not needed. That is my point ;-)
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 Looks like you didn’t get the point of my reply. They spend the money ion gear because it’s needed or they simply wouldn’t.
OR a dealer has convinced them if they spend the money it will be good for their mix and then they find out it was money wasted.
This is very high quality content, thanks so much
You're very welcome
I spent $11k in 2002 on a Manley16 channel mixer. I had them do a custom mod to 8 of the channels before delivery. I think the guys name was Hutch. I was amazed that they were able to make the changes I needed. Now I'm 100% in the box...lol
I know Hutch. He worked for Fredenstein for a while. He is a brilliant tech.
@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 Wow! You know a lot of people. I can relate to many of your stories. I worked part time at Guitar Center in San Jose back in the mid 90s. It was a great way to fill your studio with gear at a discount. They sent me to Dididesign training at the factory...lol. I remember watching them literally packaging up the digi 002s on site....not china.
Networking is the key in pro audio sales. If you do great work the word gets around and by word of mouth you are getting involved with more clients. In the end they all become friends.
I've spent much time on this topic..... I think you're right in that over the years the code in Protools particularly has improved... Hell the Aux busses used to be like 8 bit or something (less then a track output) back in the 90s... These days I feel like in any artform, it's just about committing to your materials.. I mean I still find ITB mixes somewhat flat, but with someone as skilled as Surban... He could probably make a masterpiece on an iPad DAW ....
What annoys me is other dealers telling me I did not know what I was talking about. If you get a chance to hear what a summing mixer does it is not worth the money. I think it is wrong to sell summing mixers - it is taking advantage of a customer.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 IDK... I do think if you're gonna buy an analog mixer, it may as well have pre amps on it... and a mic drawer..
Recording and mixing is all about tiny and incremental improvements which on their own don't mean much but when combined are what make music sound good. It's just like every other aspect of mixing. People pay a ton for the last 2% improvement. I definitely hear a difference, but whatever. It also depends on the material, obviously. In my experience, if you're using virtual instruments that never leave the box, you need all the help you can get, whereas if you're recording live instruments with great preamps, properly placed mics, a good room, etc., you have everything you need to get a good ITB mix and can probably skip blowing a ton of money on a summing mixer. I'm an amateur though and I don't make my living doing this, so you can take what I'm saying with a grain of salt, I guess.
Well said!
From a work flow point of view I can see where getting out of the box can have some advantages even if the summing box itself doesn't provide noticeable sonic benefit. Like adding outboard processing etc. Thoughts?
But is it worth the money? I say no. You could spend that money in other places in your recording system and made a huge difference. Voodoo I tell you...
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391what stuff would you recommend that makes a bigger impact for that kind of money?
I do not know, I mean my Dangerous 2Bus+ gives a 3D feel to the sound, it is hard to describe it, there is a also a type of fatness that you just cant replicate with plugins, that is not to say one is better than the other, it is down to taste, again, I am a nobody, do not class myself as a professional....
As long as it works for you and you are getting the results you are happy with then you are good. I do not think they are worth the investment for the small to no difference in the sound.
coming from a series of summing mixers (tubetch ssa2a, dangerous 2bus, chandler mini mixer, cadac j series) before jumping itb confidently (thx to Andrew Scheps), I am not going back to a summing box.
Good and you saved money.
Thank you for sharing! Great content:]
Thanks for watching!
When I was an engineer with Prince on Musicology in 2003, the Dangerous people loaned as one of their summing mixers. We tested it and gave it back. Unnecessary.
That is what I am talking about. No reason for this piece of equipment now.
Wow. Appreciate this!
Glad you enjoyed it!
How many summing mixer plugins are there, good point now that I'm thinking of it
Glad you find this helpful
Personally all summing mixers aren't created equal. I do agree that theres isnt much improvement over itb to justify the large cost which i think is the primary point here. The real change in sonics happen when you use a good quality summing mixer with alot of outputs and additional outboard. For me ive tried all setups and nothing to this day still beats me using the console. The sound im looking for is just theres and the mix comes together way faster than anything itb. Everyone definitely cannot commit to a console so i could understand the conundrum of wanting that sound and trying to get close without the full commitment. As recommended use your ears and try different setups as often as possible and find out what works best for you.
I agree - use your ears
Summing mixer definitely didn't make you mix sound better, but for me - I mix much faster and make more clear decisions, when I mix and even produce the tracks via summing mixer. It gives better separation, more headroom, cleaner sound and if you overdrive the inputs it can add some magical dust to your mix. In simple words, when you mix without summing mixer, your tracks are kids in the kindergarten, and you need to tell them all the things.. like where to go, how to behave, what to do etc. Speaking sound engineer language - you need to use more dynamic processing and spend more time mixing. When You use summing mixer during mixing process you deal with adults. Your tracks already know what to do and where to go, again speaking Sound engineer language - you need to use less processing, because sound is already there. I wonder if in your comparison process, Serban used the same plugins and same processing with and without summing. I doubt that he did not! So again, for me after I incorporate Summing mixer into my mixing process, I started to work 2x, 3x or maybe even 10x time faster.
The end result is what is important. If you are happy then do what you do. My point is that I do not think it is worth the expense for the small return on the enhancement to the final mix.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 read my reply more carefully, I wasn’t talking only about enhancement, but about speed of workflow. You work more effectively, faster, which saves a lot of time. Without a summing mixer I was doing like 3 mixes a week, with it - much more now. The quality and the sound stays the same. I just do more spending less time. Time is money, so it’s absolutely worth the investment
Good for you
I think they're only good for what the name says, to sum some sources together, I use one in tracking to mix guitar mics together or bus the toms to stereo pair. I have a friend that mixes for big artists that uses it to clip the stereo bus in analog before it hits the master converters, but that's clipping, not summing.
There is a lot you can do with them - the question is do you need them and are they worth the expense.
What was the issue that caused protools mixes to collapse, and how was this fixed with protools hd cards?
First Digidesign denied it was a thing then said they fixed it with the HD cards but never was mention the actual cause of the problem.
For me there is no reason to go from digital to analog without a reason! Only if i go to an analog processor! Until i discover the Kahayan epsilon 32! Try it and maybe you change your mind!
Hmm
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 *ghost glue (fast typing sorry)
Thanks. Info came a little too late though for me😂
Im so sorry
i think a "tube" based summing mixer will do!
Hmm
Why? I’m honestly curious..😊🤘
If I EVER got one, it would be one that professes to add color and dimension and NOT one that promises clean and the truth. My 64 bit digital resolution summing engine objectively is perfectly accurate. If the analog box adds lovely euphonic distortions, then that's a thing that would be desirable. Not some BS promise of MORE accuracy!
Trust your ears
Dan Worrell showed summing in and out of the box nulling out. The End.
Makes you think...hey!
that saves me time
Good for you ;-)
So he mixed the song 2 separate times and they sounded the exact same?? Thats really weird. I mean i do agree that summing mixers are more of a flavor type of thing. Its not something you will hear in the final bounced down mix but you should definitely hear the difference while mixing, which for some people make mixing easier. Its the same thing with converters. Some people saying buying expensive converters dont make a difference. Maybe not something youll hear in the final mix, but definitely a difference i can hear while mixing and it definitely helps me.
Serban knows a thing or two about mixing songs. I hope you find some value in this.
Wondering if this is in response to another video that recently came out about this 😂 but really your story kind of puts a nail in the coffin. If the top guys have no need for these.. that kind of tells the truth right there.
No not a response just my thoughts on the matter.
wow only 366 subs but you got 60 comments in 22 hours for this video lol nice work
Thank you. Seems like a popular topic.
Summing mixers are great... as keyboard sub-mixers.
Right!
I always thought it was a band aide from industry knowing they screwed up after every one got rid of their consoles when I had my studio I had a large desk an nothing really sounds better then it coming out of the stereo bus from pro tools just my opinion though
Thanks for sharing
What do you know about Serban’s mix bus chain? 😏
I know nothing about that - it never comes up in conversation.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 man, I would pay money to know his mix bus chain 🤣
CAPI Sum Bus, tho
Hmm
Analog summing is real life 3d sound, in the Box is 2d animated cartoon
Really...Never heard the 3d sound you speak of. I demoed the chandler, Aurora, Shadow Hill,SPL and a bunch more and I don't hear the 3D sound and I trust MY ears. I never let people tell me what I am hearing.
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 there are ears and ears and more important brains and brains
As long as it works for you.
I've been making music since 1990 and started off in the analog world. I switched over to hard disk recording with my first DAW in 1999 and used it exclusively for 20yrs. 5yrs ago I switched to analog summing. There IS a difference. I've taken my own mixes and compared the ITB sum mix to the analog sum mix and there is a noticeable difference. For me, the biggest difference is in the high end where the more delicate instruments are like hi-hats, cymbals, strings, synths, etc. They're clearer and have space to live in the mix. It just sounds like the ITB mixes are bottle necked and it squeezes the life out of the top end. The difference might be negligible to most people, but even if it's just a 10% improvement, it's still better. I'll never go back to digital summing.
As long as it works for you and you are getting the results you want then you are good. 10% improvement is a huge difference. As a dealer I will not recommend a summing mixer. I do not think it is worth the expense.
Digidesign are as shady as f***
Hmm...
You have to press the mixer to get it to sweat.
As long as you get the mix you want it doesn't matter how you get there
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 I know but the analogue summing is only unique to its sound if you press the analogue circuit. That was my point 😐
So by pressing you mean overdriving to create some kind of saturation
@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 Yes, but what is happening during analogue summing at red is a stochastic process.
In short: Overdrive an analogue mixbus and it cries (in a beautiful and unique way).
Overdrive a digital mixbus and it dies (and that sound is as we all know ugly and horrible to the extreme).
I would reccomend the Fat Bustard 2 for those beautiful Red VU-experiments 👌
theyre all literally just boxes full of transformers... It doesnt take a seasoned engineer to understand this, but for some reason people have serious buyers placebo
agreed
Does any of this over priced gear really even matter? Especially now when 98% of all music gets listened to on speakers the size of a pencil eraser? The average listener couldn't even come close to hearing any difference that thousands of dollars were spent trying to achieve !
It makes difference to the artist that strives to get the best always. Never apply logic to music production - it is a passion for some people ;-)
Well said!!!@@fantastictalesofproaudio2391
Why would mix the same song twice? Your brain and ears will compensate and produce the same sounding mix, 2 different processing paths. Just use the same mix!
It was to compare the mix going through a summing mixer and a mix without a summing mixer. The end result no difference.
And then Michael Brauer sold all his gear and….
;-)
I own a summing mixer and there is a big difference. My mixes are wider and my tracks are more dimensional and don't sound flat. I can tell you are lying about your experience because you wouldn't forget the exact unit that was used unless you were exaggerating.
Trust your ears. Thanks for your feedback.
Thanks, at least I'm not the only one....
Euh ya there is a difference here and I have a setup that allows me to A B the 2 mixes in realtime and there's a very notable difference in imaging, depth..... Ithe ITB same mix sounds flat and 2 dimensional compared to the 32 channels of summing in my SSL sigma delta. I had the 2 Bus+ before the SSL and in fact found the 2bus+ added too much.....
It's not night and day of course, but in realtime A B? Very notable difference and worth every penny.
Yes I'm gonna trust my ears on this one.
@fantastictalesofproaudio2391 Anything mixed in the box will sound flat because it's processed via 1s and 0s and not voltage. Anything with voltage will elevate the dimensions and sonics. Why do you think a tape machine stretches the dynamics of a sound? It's the voltage that created the saturation and imagine. You can't replicate that in the box and the tones from voltage also varies. I don't know where you get your reasoning from but its flawed. Your mixes will be lifeless in a club and will never compete with an analog summed mix. Never!!!!!
@RicardoTolbert Dude I'm A1 certified in audio engineering smh. Your music and mixes. Keep yours sounding thin and flat lol
SMH...just new music business robbery....wowwwww......
I hope you found this helpful.
SMH
SMH indeed
Ill make it simple they are usless and a waste of money full stop. Enough said ! U are not a real engineer if u "need" something like this to get a good mix smh
That sums it up nicely ;-)