Mix levels in MPC or DAW?

I also like the sound of analog mixing...

Some people these days are into "analog summing" which is an interesting technique of setting levels in the daw but pushing the tracks or groups out individual d/a outputs then 'mixing' those outputs together with an analog device, then thru a final a/d to your stereo digital master.

That way you get the warmer analog sound, apparently.. makes sense to me.

I mean to experiment with this soon by using all 8 outs on my soundcard back into my mixer and just setting the channels at unity gain. And maybe I'll do a non-scientific comparison of which summing sounds better... my mixer atm is crap tho so I'm not expecting miracles.

And I confess I don't know as much about this technique so feel free to correct me, anybody .

Another suggestion that has not been mentioned (I think) is to never record a midi device to your DAW or recorder. I've been using this method exclusively since the late 80's. Essentially you just send your MPC (or whatever) to your mixer and from there to your 2 track mastering recorder. This is a great way to go if you have limited hard disk space or processing power, or just prefer the sound of your MPC right out of the box. I record vox, guitars etc to tape (or DAW) but I see no reason to record MIDI devices because they can be left to run in SYNC with everything else. This was especially useful when tape was the only game in town because an MPC could eat up 8 tracks quickly that could be used for something else. You can also mix in your MPC if you are limited with mixer inputs and send a stereo mix to your board. As long as that stereo signal is hot, you won't lose sound quality due to this but you will be limited in your ability to tweak individual samples. I mention these options because many on these boards are working with limited budgets and as a result are using 8 track ADATS or 16 track DAWS (like the VS stuff) or even tape. This allows you to build a much bigger mix than normally would be possible with an 8 track machine. Now you are only limited by the number of inputs on your mixer. For example, with an 8 track recorder, SYNC, and say, a Mackie 24 / 8, you can send 56 independant signals to your mastering device. That gives you 8 tracks of acoustic signals recorded to tape, 8 channels of MPC, and another 40 inputs from keyboards or midi modules. Note: a 24 track 8 bus board has the 8 busses, 24 inputs, and 24 monitor inputs for a total of 56....

These are all great tips I'm reading here! I'm glad I brought up the topic. Currently, I run all my outboard great into a Mackie 1202VLZ Pro which goes into the analog inputs on my Creamware Pulsar II. I solo each track and record it into my DAW, where I do the arranging, mixing, and mixdown. I just ordered a Behringer ADA8000 to take advantage of the Pulsar's ADAT inputs. I'm starting with one just to see how it works and may eventually get another one since the Pulsar has two connections. I plan on keeping all the outboard gear plugged into the Mackie and sending the separate outputs into the ADA8000 for recording into the DAW at once. I'll still have the main outs of the Mackie going into the analog input on the Pulsar. I also ordered a SPDIF cable for my Boss GS-10 which currently is also going into the Mackie. I use the GS-10 for recording vocals/guitar/bass, but it also has an aux. input which will allow me to run one more device into the Pulsar through the SPDIF output on the GS-10. Hopefully everything will sync up correctly (analog, SPDIF, and ADAT). Since the Mackie 1202VLZ Pro doesn't have separate outputs for each channel, analog mixing of the MPC is not possible with my setup. Does this sound like a logical setup?

Thanks & Peace \/
Chisel
www.soundclick.com/chisel316

engineer wrote:Mixing inside the MPC is difficult if not downright impossible. If you want to do a real mix, then track it into your DAW no questions asked.

I disagree. Granted, its not the same as mixing with a daw or mixer, but it is definately a neccesary thing to do during the creative processes. If you are not mixing while you are building the track, how the **** are you gonna figure out if if you should use a particular sound, or get a groove right, etc. You gotta do it to alteast get a general idea and so you dont hurt your ears with hihats or snares.

Also on the mpc4000 its alot easier because of qlink knobs, i think the mpc2500 has the qlink workin too.

some cats dont have the 8 outs. Plus its better to get things bangin right out the box. I do a general mix in the mpc, even after im done doing the arrangement, When i track it out, i get the signal as hot as possible.

If you are not mixing while you are building the track, how the **** are you gonna figure out if if you should use a particular sound, or get a groove right, etc. You gotta do it to alteast get a general idea and so you dont hurt your ears with hihats or snares.

What? How do you figure you need to be mixing while I'm creating to find out if the sounds and track are working. Either it's working or it's not. Mixing can enhance what you got, but if you can't hear whether it's there or not, then that's a whole 'nother bag of beans.

As far as analog summing, it's either/or. Some people say it adds considerably, others say it doesn't. Check out the latest issue of EM with K1Mil (Kwame) on the cover. They did a test in it. It was a good read. I've love to check it out, but if I'm going to do it, I want to get a box that's really good.
Peace

Sleeper sorry your post was a bit confusing. Jfierce there's no reason to be a douche about me giving some advice. Maybe your man Sleeper should learn how to formulate a coherent statement. And you need to learn how to not be an a$$wipe.

As far as mixing into an analog board straight to two track... Sure that works, but I usually have more than the number of tracks my MPC allows. Also, unless you're mixing on a nice board you're wasting your time. The little Mackie 8 channel shits are garbage. First you only have a limited number of EQs to deal with, no reverb, delay, compressors etc. On top of that the live mixdown you do is the one you're stuck with, no saving automation etc. Of course in the end, what sounds good is good, so if you can make your shit sound better on a 8 channel mackie live mixer than I can make mine sound using tube preamps, compressors, eqs, and a wealth of plug-ins, then more power to you.

All in all you're better off with the freedom a DAW provides. The mixing process is a creative one, and sound is very important in hip-hop. Don't take the mixing lightly. I've had artists take my beats over more "talented" producers beats because the sound is correct.

Hip-hop is something that's been around during a digital age so listeners ears aren't necessarily used to the "fat analog" sound. Don't think that because some kinds of music demand as much analog signal path as possible for "warmth" that hip-hop is the same. I prefer to keep hip-hop mixes inside the box once they've been tracked.

Once sound is digital you have to go through an analog to digital conversion to get the sound out of the speakers. This conversion is innacurate to some degree and the more times you have to make this conversion the more sound quality suffers. So analog summing out of a DAW is not necessarily a good thing. Professionals, not weekend warriors, or bedroom beatmakers, agree that you should get as much analog fatness on the way into the DAW, but once you get there you're better off staying inside the box than making conversions back to analog (then back to digital again for the master recording).

aliengroover wrote:

If you are not mixing while you are building the track, how the **** are you gonna figure out if if you should use a particular sound, or get a groove right, etc. You gotta do it to alteast get a general idea and so you dont hurt your ears with hihats or snares.

What? How do you figure you need to be mixing while I'm creating to find out if the sounds and track are working. Either it's working or it's not. Mixing can enhance what you got, but if you can't hear whether it's there or not, then that's a whole 'nother bag of beans.

As far as analog summing, it's either/or. Some people say it adds considerably, others say it doesn't. Check out the latest issue of EM with K1Mil (Kwame) on the cover. They did a test in it. It was a good read. I've love to check it out, but if I'm going to do it, I want to get a box that's really good.
Peace

you guys are nuts. I dont know anybody who doesnt adjust the volume of thier hihats, kicks, and snares, samples, etc. while they are making the track. And if the bass drum and bassline arent working together, sometimes you dont just switch the samples, you might shape those sounds so they fit together. If you are filtering samples, you might have to take it into soundforge and cut some frequencies cause the mpc filter dont do a complete job. If you are using modules youll be adjusting volumes, panning, eqing etc. Im talking about basic mixing here, and sound shaping. Its a must. Im not waiting until im done with the beat to make my shit bang! Otherwise your nuts. Maybe our definitions of mixing are differant? but for me its not a onestep process.

We'll just have to agree to disagree then.

I'll adjust the volume for reference, sure, but I don't need to pan or EQ anything to find out if the track "bangs". I can hear and envision it. I'm also about getting the sound I want from the source, which means no EQ. You over compress or EQ the sample, then you're done. I'm not saying don't mess around to get an ideal, I'm saying don't commit. If you need that, cool. I don't, and I know plenty of others who don't, either.
Peace

^^^

it depends....

for ease of use I would recommend just going direct from mpc to daw high source, low destination on the signal.....ie as hot as possible b4 it hits the soundcard....

as far as using a board to 'warm' up a signal.....yes and no

you will intoduce noise especially with a lower end mixer...
personally I would only go this route if I was using a good (sorry mackie doesnt cut it here for me) mixer with nice EQ

this question can be difficult bcuz I have even noticed lots of inaccuracies in mixing in the DAW, in fact lately I mix the beat in the sequencer (mpc/eps, depending on the track) and 2 track it into Digi Performer, all of this is done after I track vox......

there is a lot of $hit going on with mixing in a DAW, thats why u see alot of pro studios using a summing box and avioding the digital summing......

aliengroover wrote:We'll just have to agree to disagree then.

I'll adjust the volume for reference, sure, but I don't need to pan or EQ anything to find out if the track "bangs". I can hear and envision it. I'm also about getting the sound I want from the source, which means no EQ. You over compress or EQ the sample, then you're done. I'm not saying don't mess around to get an ideal, I'm saying don't commit. If you need that, cool. I don't, and I know plenty of others who don't, either.
Peace

I'm constantly building a mix from note one...with automated mixing widely available, it's a great time saver and a very standard practise in some pro studios. Not to mention, while the mix dosent make most songs, it does some. Imagine "Dead of Night" by Phil Collins without the big drum gates, delays and reverbs....

fader-pro wrote:Another suggestion that has not been mentioned (I think) is to never record a midi device to your DAW or recorder. I've been using this method exclusively since the late 80's. Essentially you just send your MPC (or whatever) to your mixer and from there to your 2 track mastering recorder. This is a great way to go if you have limited hard disk space or processing power, or just prefer the sound of your MPC right out of the box.

HA!!!

I didnt even see the 2nd page of posts after I posted

but well put FP, this is what I was getting at

Lots of pro studios aren't using summing boxes, they're using actual high quality consoles.

I know of engineers that will submix alot as they go along, and if it works, they keep it. It usually has more to do with limited resources than anything else. If it sounds great two-tracked from the door, then cool. I just prefer to worry about the mix after everything is recorded, most importantly the vocals. The majority of the time, hardly anything has to be done to the actual sounds from the gear. At that point, it's more leveling and making sure everything works. Like I said, I think about the mix, but I have enough resources to where I don't have to get it right before it's recorded. YMMV.

I also like the mention of having the hardware sync'ed, but it's not a legit solution for everybody. Too many people think that cassettes equal "THE analog sound". They also think that having a little Yamaha or Behringer mixer equates to having a proper mixer. Granted, it can work and may do something for you, but if you REALLY want that sound,and improve it in that way, it's gonna take more than that. Good thing is, solutions are available for less than a grand. But getting one is basically useless unless your interface supports multiple outputs. I'd say a more practical solution is a standalone burner and a really good sounding 2 channel tube or SS pre.
Peace

aliengroover wrote:Lots of pro studios aren't using summing boxes, they're using actual high quality consoles.

I've seen both and more and more are converting to the summing boxes due to lack of maintenece involved

personally i'd rather use a high quality console, and treat the DAW like a tape machine......unfortunately this method isnt as efficent as the summing box

True. I'm moreso talking about the bigger commercial studios. But for sure many of the mid-level commercial spots and project studios are exploring more affordable options like the summing boxes.
Peace

Don't think I'd be happy without my mixing desks....I a fader freak....make that fader pro...