Nebula is weak as fuck

[Mikaël-ange]

You're right. Some of the biggest transatlantic hits have been done ITB. This is all esoteric stuff to make us feel better as engineers. End listeners don't care in the least. Don't let the marketing departments of plug-in companies let you hear that blasphemy though!

I wouldn't say that...

But long story short, what happened to pop/urban genre also happened to metal music.

Dave Pensado for exemple was one of the first to go more ITB (started with PT in 95). And some of this clients requested ITB mix because of the more modern sound (and Dave Pensado worked at Enterprice studio C with a 106 inputs J, and now at Larrabee 3 with a 80 inputs 9000xl in front of him).
I told recently on an Avid interview that since the last years, peoples was kinda used to ear mix done ITB.
And if you ask several peoples coming from different times period, you will get really oposite answer to the question analog vs digital.
For peoples coming from the 70/80, analog still reign. But for the 14 years old people today, analog don't exist at all.

Now for the metal scene, most mix are done ITB now. And that mostly because great engineer/mixer like Andy for example have re shaped the scene during many years using this tool.
Look at the metalcore/deathcore scene, how this scene sound like now. Upcoming engineer will work mostly ITB because that what they grew up listening too.

Just take a look at this thread from 2005.

 

[drew_drummer]

Just take a look at this thread from 2005.

Some very interesting comments there. Particularly the one on the first page about hands on control:

As the world of controll surfaces evolves I think that the hands on aproach issue will disappear (if it isn't dissappearing already).

It must've seemed like anything was possible back then. That was around the same time I started getting heavily into guitar and production (using Addictive Drums at the time!)

But not a lot has changed in the realm of "control" - sure we've got iPads now, Ableton controllers, Maschine, etc... but there really isn't anything out there that fully replaces a real world tactile control experience when it comes to mixing. So I've never bothered in my own work - I just ride my mouse and keyboard. (and I'm no big time engineer, just an enthusiast!)

Can't be bothered with midi controllers, and you can move it all to the iPad or other tablets - same problems really. Lack of tactile control, lack of workflow, lack of connection and parameter feedback.

The Softube 'Console' looks interesting, but I'm not really convinced by their marketing just yet.

 

[JeffTD]

Personally, I think VCC is just as unnecessary as Nebula. I don't want or need any extra colorization or dirtying up of my tracks. Sounding ever so slightly different =/= sounding better. COME AT ME, FORUM.

I'd come at you but I've literally never heard a mix you've done; have you ever posted one?

 

[Mikaël-ange]

Some very interesting comments there. Particularly the one on the first page about hands on control:



It must've seemed like anything was possible back then. That was around the same time I started getting heavily into guitar and production (using Addictive Drums at the time!)

But not a lot has changed in the realm of "control" - sure we've got iPads now, Ableton controllers, Maschine, etc... but there really isn't anything out there that fully replaces a real world tactile control experience when it comes to mixing. So I've never bothered in my own work - I just ride my mouse and keyboard. (and I'm no big time engineer, just an enthusiast!)

Can't be bothered with midi controllers, and you can move it all to the iPad or other tablets - same problems really. Lack of tactile control, lack of workflow, lack of connection and parameter feedback.

The Softube 'Console' looks interesting, but I'm not really convinced by their marketing just yet.

What I find kinda funny is when PT first came out, almost everybody was convinced that PT will never replace tape. 15 years latter PT is king in pro studio.

I'm with you on the lake of control thing. To me it's more natural to work with a console. I can grab a fader and eq at the same time, or eq 2 tracks at the same time...etc.

I bough a command8, and at first I tough this would be killing my world working on an hybrid situation (itb with hardware insert).
Now, the only thing I use the command 8 for is fader and mute.
But 9 times out of 10, I still feel the need trim my fader automation using my mouse because it's not exactly where I want to put thing.

 

[Josh Burgess]

I'd come at you but I've literally never heard a mix you've done; have you ever posted one?

I don't think I have. Not metal, but here's one: https://soundcloud.com/joshua-logan-burgess/days-on-juno-colours-space

 

[JeffTD]

I don't think I have. Not metal, but here's one: https://soundcloud.com/joshua-logan-burgess/days-on-juno-colours-space

I can honestly say that I wholeheartedly believe this mix would have benefitted from way more color and vibe (among other things); basically exactly what VCC/VTM would've done.

 

[SoundsLikeFog]

You're right. Some of the biggest transatlantic hits have been done ITB. This is all esoteric stuff to make us feel better as engineers. End listeners don't care in the least. Don't let the marketing departments of plug-in companies let you hear that blasphemy though!

To me, this statement is a grade-A cop-out.

Great records and mixes are being / have been made IN SPITE of lesser gear. There is nothing esoteric ego bullshit in the consept of choosing gear that helps you to get your job done faster and better. Naturally, with skill and taste you can overcome obsticles created by lesser gear.. But there is no reason to go Jean Calvin on your own ass, if it isn't necessary.

We might as well start recording with sound blasters and cheap-ass chinese mics straight to mp3. And yet we don't and we all know why. It's art.. But it's also a craft. Every craftsman who says that their tools don't matter are full of shit.

Just realised that Ermz might have made that comment tongue firmly in cheeck and I'm flailing just because my sarcasm filters suck. Has happened before.

 

[Ermz]

Was mostly hoping to get a rise out of some folks. My real view is somewhere in between though. I think when we talk about the bare essentials - the tools that we need in order to create a quality end product - console and tape saturation don't exactly rate among the Top 5. I do think it's esoteric. Console manufacturers spent years trying to get away from the coloration of console, and when it was finally completely eliminated (DAWs) people decided to look back and romanticize about a sound that most were trying to minimize back in the day.

That's not to say those colorations don't have their place. Of course they do, but they are by no means necessary in this day and age to get a passable mix. They make the mix different - not always 'better' by an objective stretch. I've yet to hear a casual listener say 'hey, I think the transients in that mix are too pokey, and there isn't enough back-to-front'. There are some bloody awful mixes going around now, being praised left right and center simply because they manage to achieve a high RMS. You'll be lucky if the listener can even identify half of the balances you intended with your mix on their playback systems, much less how much 'vibe' they're losing from your tracks not 'bending' when they exceed a certain level.

Many of us do care, hence why we spend thousands on outboard compressors and EQs when the digital equivalents can do a perfectly passable job at a fraction of the cost, and much higher utility. I like the way my DBA160 grabs my snare much more than any ITB compressor, but in the past I'd managed to use ITB compression on snares fine, all without breaking someone's enjoyment of a record. My only point is that these are nice options to have, but by no means essential.

 

[Matt-Steele]

I can honestly say that I wholeheartedly believe this mix would have benefitted from way more color and vibe (among other things); basically exactly what VCC/VTM would've done.

Listening now, I completely agree with Jeff here. Sounds good, but would have more life and benefit from color and vibe. It probably would end up going from a good mix to a great mix.

 

[LeSedna]

I do believe the future is ITB, but I do not think it will make hand-on interfaces disappear. As cool as it looks like (take it with a grain of salt because I haven't tried it myself) the slate's Raven interface is not what I would expect from the future. A screen gives no feedback to your hand/fingers, you have to look at what you are doing, you can not do anything without your eyes guiding you at least to the point where you know you are doing what you intended to do (then you can use your ears). In my cockpit, eventhough it is 2013, and that the tactile world was not already there when the engineers were designing it, everything is real life buttons controlling actual systems... or even computer inputs, screen selections etc. In the very new boeing 787, which is basically a full computerized plane, this is still true, and the cockpit has basically been designed in the iphone/ipad era. Still, even with their nice screens, the tactile route has not been chosen by the ergonomy engineers, because it gives no feedback back to the user. It might be used for some second grade functions (say, the cabin temperature controls given to the flight attendants) but the operational and vital ones will probably always be controlled with buttons you can touch and feel to know in which position they are.

My point is : I think the future is ITB processing (with whatever simulated flavour you want) with hybrid controllers which controls them as a midi-whatever protocole interface, and not touchscreens. The only advantage of a touchscreen, is that you can do whatever you want of the real estate including changing the information displayed as opposed to sacrificing a tremendous area to the buttons. The thing is, in the case of a controller, you will eventually end up using the same things anyway : track faders + pan, EQ controls, dynamics controls, aux/send, etc (that's even the case with the Raven). The company that will sell a 8/16/32/64 tracks controller where you can chose which EQ and dynamics plugin is used for the buttons you have under your hand, + a convincing set of rotary controllers to add and control any plugin on top of those, + the usuals will probably sell a tremendous lot of units. A touchscreen would be nice say for a screen dedicated to loading your plugins interface (since they are all very different and their controls are displayed in exotic ways sometimes). Unless the general ergonomics of PT/daws don't change, translating them on a touchscreen seem unproductive to me, just like those touchscreen all in one windows computers that are basically W7 loaded on a touchscreen, they are unbelievably tiring and frustrating after a few minutes !

 

[Mikaël-ange]

Console manufacturers spent years trying to get away from the coloration of console, and when it was finally completely eliminated (DAWs) people decided to look back and romanticize about a sound that most were trying to minimize back in the day.

Exactly

The thing is, in the case of a controller, you will eventually end up using the same things anyway : track faders + pan, EQ controls, dynamics controls, aux/send, etc (that's even the case with the Raven). The company that will sell a 8/16/32/64 tracks controller where you can chose which EQ and dynamics plugin is used for the buttons you have under your hand, + a convincing set of rotary controllers to add and control any plugin on top of those, + the usuals will probably sell a tremendous lot of units.

What you describe is already here since many years. Cost new what a 9080J cost used and can be find on most post house around the world: an Avid Icon.

 

[LeSedna]

How is the integration made, is it by transparently loading a plugin of your choice, or inserting it ? In any case it seems like a pretty awesome solution.

 

[PhilTheBeard]

vcc+vtm= I could not live without either of those plugins now

 

[Josh Burgess]

Hey, I wasn't putting that forward as one of my best works or anything. I was just throwing out an example mix for Jeff. I don't think it's a great mix, but I also didn't spend much time on it. It sounds fairly good but there's a lot I don't like about it. I was lazy with automation. The snare is too smacky/fake for my liking. I'd rather it be more natural. The vocals could have more interesting panning. The guitars could be more warm. I'm not usually a fan of the Axe-FX and wasn't super impressed with the guitar sound given here but it actually was very usable. Nolly has pulled some of the best Axe-FX sounds out of it that I've heard. I made them more bright and cutting than warm and vibey though. And I agree overall it has a synthetic vibe that isn't that appealing to me. I had fun with it for the small amount of effort I put in though.

I still think you can get a lot of the way there just with the character you give each instrument. Using a lot of busses and eqing them a certain way, or putting on some subtle compression. You can do a lot with just that. You can still use really warm sounds, digital doesn't have to mean super clean and pristine and bright...

 

[JeffTD]

I'm not disagreeing with any of that, Josh, but I know that if you just put a VCC/VTM combo on each track that you would've immediately gotten a less synthetic, more vibey, more colorful/interesting mix out of it. That's why we love these plugins so much - they take zero effort other than gain staging to instantly make your mixes sound better.

 

[Matt-Steele]

I'm not disagreeing with any of that, Josh, but I know that if you just put a VCC/VTM combo on each track that you would've immediately gotten a less synthetic, more vibey, more colorful/interesting mix out of it. That's why we love these plugins so much - they take zero effort other than gain staging to instantly make your mixes sound better.

^This

 

[Mikaël-ange]

How is the integration made, is it by transparently loading a plugin of your choice, or inserting it ? In any case it seems like a pretty awesome solution.

I don't get this part sorry, can you explain a bit about it?
I mean, an Icon work the same way as any controller (so with every plugin), except you have dedicated control for all parameters.

 

[LeSedna]

I mean, can you dedicate the controls in the channel strip to control a specific plugin, all accross the icon ? What would be neat is that you could chose a specific EQ and a speicifc dynamics plugin and dedicate your channelstrip controls to them, so that virtually your desk gets a flavour of whatever eq you chose to use, and more importantly, ergonomically you forget about using the vst and just use the icon for mixing. Then if you want more plugins you add them in inserts. Would this be possible ? Since this is just a controller, could it be possible to automatically load one or two vst that would be added to all tracks and that the icon could control ?

 

[Mikaël-ange]

I mean, can you dedicate the controls in the channel strip to control a specific plugin, all accross the icon ? What would be neat is that you could chose a specific EQ and a speicifc dynamics plugin and dedicate your channelstrip controls to them, so that virtually your desk gets a flavour of whatever eq you chose to use, and more importantly, ergonomically you forget about using the vst and just use the icon for mixing. Then if you want more plugins you add them in inserts. Would this be possible ? Since this is just a controller, could it be possible to automatically load one or two vst that would be added to all tracks and that the icon could control ?

What you describe is what every controler do...
But with the Icon you get one control for each parameter.

In PT (and with probably any other daw I think) you can choose to have an eq and comp loaded by default on each track.

 

[LeSedna]

No it's not what every controler do (or maybe we don't understand each other), I mean it would set say a default EQ (say your favourite SSL vst) available right away on your controls without any programming from your part (which would be the difference with every other controller which still need you to load vsts and map them or have presets of mapping ready for you to use them), just like it would be an SSL desk. If you favour a Neve, then just change the default vst to your favourite neve emulation, and now your desk is a neve. It would have default Eq controls (say a 4 band eq + comp strip) Now, if the icon can understand that the eq and comp loaded by default in PT are those supposed to be mapped to its channelstrip physical controls, then it's amazing !