Synth-DIY Yahoo! Groups Archives

analog desk to digital desk. wha the hell?

2005-08-14 by darkstr1746@comcast.net

This question could generate some long winded answers i'm sure ,so just keep responses as non technical as possible.

Who here has made the switch from straight up analog desk to a digital desk?. . like the Sony or Yamaha O2R. What were your first impressions about the learning curve and the difference in sonic quality? I say "first" impressions because i'm sure attitudes changed during the learning curve process.

How hard was it to learn how to record and mix useing sub menues and multiple layers? What about choices of I/O cards?

Who uses ADATS? or is that too old school?

When the O2r came out years ago, i thought about trading my mackie for one. But after taking the manual home for a weekend i determined that this method of mixing might be about as enjoyable as going to the dentist. It's years later and i'm approaching this paradigm again. My attitude is that it's still jive but i would like to cut down on the amount of workspace i'm taking up and and at the same time improve sonic quality so the digital mixer thingy is rearing it's ugly head again. So i'm soliciting opinions. I would especially like to hear from people who were (or still are) die hard analog desk fans who bit the bullet and made the change. I myself have a Soundcraft Spirit Ghost LE (32x8)

One last thing. The issue of master clock. What are the solutions to the master clock problem? or is there a problem at all anymore. Specificaly, i have more effects boxes than channel returns on a digital desk, so inputs will have to be by digital I/O. this requires that some device be the master. . . correct? I have a friend that uses a stand alone box that supplies the whole studio with master clock. Is this the way to go?

Keep your answers simple as possible. I'm an idiot.

kind regards

john duval

Re: analog desk to digital desk. wha the hell?

2005-08-14 by James Coplin

I went from an analog desk to digital to straight computer i/o. While I don’t miss the digital desk as compared to computer i/o, it was vastly superior to the analog desk. Don’t overlook the Panasonic/Rams DA7. That’s what I ended up with after test driving all the reasonable desks at the time like the 02r and the Mackie. The DA7 was thought out perfectly and worked in a more familiar “analog” mode than the others. The digital i/o options at the time gave you plenty of options to config.

As far as master clock, the DA7 had really solid timing so I just used that as word clock through all my external stuff and it worked perfectly. You also can chain DA7’s together if you need more i/o. I can’t recommend you check it out enough!

Feel free to contact me with any questions you might have as I’ve suffered through the step you are about to take and lived to talk about it!

James

From: SergeModular@yahoogroups.com [mailto: SergeModular@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of darkstr1746@...
Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2005 5:56 PM
To: list; serge; list
Cc: synthsights
Subject: [SergeModular] analog desk to digital desk. wha the hell?

This question could generate some long winded answers i'm sure ,so just keep responses as non technical as possible.

Who here has made the switch from straight up analog desk to a digital desk?. . like the Sony or Yamaha O2R. What were your first impressions about the learning curve and the difference in sonic quality? I say "first" impressions because i'm sure attitudes changed during the learning curve process.

How hard was it to learn how to record and mix useing sub menues and multiple layers? What about choices of I/O cards?

Who uses ADATS? or is that too old school?

When the O2r came out years ago, i thought about trading my mackie for one. But after taking the manual home for a weekend i determined that this method of mixing might be about as enjoyable as going to the dentist. It's years later and i'm approaching this paradigm again. My attitude is that it's still jive but i would like to cut down on the amount of workspace i'm taking up and and at the same time improve sonic quality so the digital mixer thingy is rearing it's ugly head again. So i'm soliciting opinions. I would especially like to hear from people who were (or still are) die hard analog desk fans who bit the bullet and made the change. I myself have a Soundcraft Spirit Ghost LE (32x8)

One last thing. The issue of master clock. What are the solutions to the master clock problem? or is there a problem at all anymore. Specificaly, i have more effects boxes than channel returns on a digital desk, so inputs will have to be by digital I/O. this requires that some device be the master. . . correct? I have a friend that uses a stand alone box that supplies the whole studio with master clock. Is this the way to go?

Keep your answers simple as possible. I'm an idiot.

kind regards

john duval

Re: analog desk to digital desk. wha the hell?

2005-08-15 by Peter Grenader

darkstr1746@... wrote:

This question could generate some long winded answers i'm sure ,so just keep responses as non technical as possible.
Who here has made the switch from straight up analog desk to a digital desk?. . like the Sony or Yamaha O2R. What were your first impressions about the learning curve and the difference in sonic quality? I say "first" impressions because i'm sure attitudes changed during the learning curve process.

They're trade-offs with every technology. While tape may have a certain warmth, the stock is impossible to find, a mutlitrack machine and automated desk is still quite cost prohibitive and editing capabilities are not close to being in the same league as modern digital offerings.

As an example, go here:

http://www.buzzclick-music.com/picture_motu.jpg

This is a 26 channel submix of something that started off as 96 channels. Each channel has loads of automation (levels, panning, even automation of effects like reverb, etc.), as well as independent limiters on several of the channels. I couldn't conceive of the cash outlay required to do this with tape and a mixing desk, nor could I afford to rent the space needed to house all of it. And the beauty of it is, everything can be changed. I can drag sound events to wherever I need them, I can duplicate them and paste in in other sections, I can bring in samples from other sessions. It makes writing music fun!

Submixes were all digital, no D to A's involved and if you design the session right, you can keep it all in the digital domain until the final transfer to CD. This keep things very very quiet.

How hard was it to learn how to record and mix useing sub menues and multiple layers? What about choices of I/O cards?

It's like anything else, takes a bit of time. I'm sure Outlook was confusing at first for all of us. But in time, instead kicking the shit out of us, we turned that around. Most of the digital audio s/w packages emulate the look, feel and terminology of the modern recording studio - so it's not like you're dealing with a completely foreign environment. It's quickly adapted. SIx months tops and you're there.

Who uses ADATS? or is that too old school?

Skip the middle man! Try out the free demo of Protools. Play around with it and see if it's for you.

As far as sound cards, I've been happy with my digi001, but that's relatively old technolgy at this point. There are some great new firewire boxes out there like the MOTU 828 which can handle 10 channels of 96k. They're cheap and reliable.

<<One last thing. The issue of master clock. What are the solutions to the master clock problem? or is there a problem at all anymore. Specificaly, i have more effects boxes than channel returns on a digital desk, so inputs will have to be by digital I/O. this requires that some device be the master. . . correct? I have a friend that uses a stand alone box that supplies the whole studio with master clock. Is this the way to go?>>

In my experience it's not a problem. There are many affordable choices out there.

Keep your answers simple as possible. I'm an idiot.
kind regards
john duval

Keep on Patchin'!

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

Visit your group "SergeModular <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SergeModular> " on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <mailto:SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

Re: analog desk to digital desk. wha the hell?

2005-08-15 by don hassler

Agreed, a computer based daw, with maybe a control
surface if you need to maintain the physicality of a
conventional mixing board seems to be an effective way
to go. The digital mixing boards seem to add some
extra, and very possibly unneeded learning curves.
The debate as to which computer based daw, on what
platform is far more involved.
And of course since I need to make things more
complicated, I'm going to point out that some of the
very best electronic music in my opinion has been made

Show quoted textHide quoted text

on reel to reels and ADATs, etc. In other words, I
don't know how much alot of these details matter,
really.

--- Peter Grenader <peter@...> wrote:

> darkstr1746@... wrote:
>
> This question could generate some long winded
> answers i'm sure ,so just keep
> responses as non technical as possible.
> Who here has made the switch from straight up analog
> desk to a digital
> desk?. . like the Sony or Yamaha O2R. What were
> your first impressions
> about the learning curve and the difference in sonic
> quality? I say "first"
> impressions because i'm sure attitudes changed
> during the learning curve
> process.
>
> They're trade-offs with every technology. While
> tape may have a certain
> warmth, the stock is impossible to find, a
> mutlitrack machine and automated
> desk is still quite cost prohibitive and editing
> capabilities are not close
> to being in the same league as modern digital
> offerings.
>
> As an example, go here:
>
> http://www.buzzclick-music.com/picture_motu.jpg
>
> This is a 26 channel submix of something that
> started off as 96 channels.
> Each channel has loads of automation (levels,
> panning, even automation of
> effects like reverb, etc.), as well as independent
> limiters on several of
> the channels. I couldn't conceive of the cash
> outlay required to do this
> with tape and a mixing desk, nor could I afford to
> rent the space needed to
> house all of it. And the beauty of it is,
> everything can be changed. I can
> drag sound events to wherever I need them, I can
> duplicate them and paste in
> in other sections, I can bring in samples from other
> sessions. It makes
> writing music fun!
>
> Submixes were all digital, no D to A's involved and
> if you design the
> session right, you can keep it all in the digital
> domain until the final
> transfer to CD. This keep things very very quiet.
>
>
> How hard was it to learn how to record and mix
> useing sub menues and
> multiple layers? What about choices of I/O cards?
>
> It's like anything else, takes a bit of time. I'm
> sure Outlook was
> confusing at first for all of us. But in time,
> instead kicking the shit out
> of us, we turned that around. Most of the digital
> audio s/w packages
> emulate the look, feel and terminology of the modern
> recording studio - so
> it's not like you're dealing with a completely
> foreign environment. It's
> quickly adapted. SIx months tops and you're there.
>
> Who uses ADATS? or is that too old school?
>
> Skip the middle man! Try out the free demo of
> Protools. Play around with
> it and see if it's for you.
>
> As far as sound cards, I've been happy with my
> digi001, but that's
> relatively old technolgy at this point. There are
> some great new firewire
> boxes out there like the MOTU 828 which can handle
> 10 channels of 96k.
> They're cheap and reliable.
>
> <<One last thing. The issue of master clock. What
> are the solutions to the
> master clock problem? or is there a problem at all
> anymore. Specificaly, i
> have more effects boxes than channel returns on a
> digital desk, so inputs
> will have to be by digital I/O. this requires that
> some device be the
> master. . . correct? I have a friend that uses a
> stand alone box that
> supplies the whole studio with master clock. Is this
> the way to go?>>
>
> In my experience it's not a problem. There are many
> affordable choices out
> there.
>
> Keep your answers simple as possible. I'm an idiot.
> kind regards
> john duval
>
>
> Keep on Patchin'!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> Visit your group "SergeModular
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SergeModular>
> " on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>

<mailto:SergeModular-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com