Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-21-2013, 09:06 AM   #1
The Telenator
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Oud West, NL
Posts: 2,335
Default Harrison Mixbus as Mixer for Reaper

As a relatively new owner/user of the awesome Harrison Mixbus, I've been wondering how other Reaper users who bought Mixbus recently are doing and if they are liking it. I must admit, I haven't had as much time so far to concentrate on using it a whole lot. Part of the reason is I'm currently at work on a large batch of new tunes and none has approached any real mixdown stage yet.

But, so far, I have set up several very workable mix templates both large and small project size, and I have to say that I have barely had any issues at all with using Mixbus. I'm on a very standard setup in Win 7 64-bit, 500 gig drive, 2.4 gighz CPU, running all my audio stuff in my preferred 32-bit mode (I have no need for 64-bit now or ever, as I dislike sampling or plugin VSTi that have huge memory appetites).

Yeah, so not even a crash. I'm wondering ... where are all the problems and things wrong that people always complained about in regard to Ardour and Mixbus? It's supposed to crash a lot and not like all these plugins, etc., etc. Not crashing here, scanned and likes all plugs except about 3 out of the 200 I threw at it to test. No real issues, aside from my basic inexperience with this system. Fast learning curve, though, with this I'm seeing.

And yes, the mixer abilities are awesome, and I intend this as my regular go-to way of mixing out of Reaper and Podium some as well. THIS mixer is more like the real consoles I learned on. I always knew something was missing and fundamentally wrong with the normal plugin and DAW approach we are all forced to use these days. Very funny that I couldn't figure it out before, since it's as plain as the nose on our faces. DAWs don't act enough like real desk situations. Love Reaper and Podium, but they only take you halfway there!

Here's what Harrison has to say, in part, about it and I fully concur:

'What are the "well known flaws" of other workstations? It is our opinion that the "gross" defects in many workstations include internal clipping, lacking dither stages in the DSP processing, multiple format conversions, out-of-control gain stages causing plugins to work outside their intended range, routing choices that cause latency/timing errors, Inability to see meters such as compressor gain reduction without opening the plugin dialog, bad ramping of plugin coefficients, and poor user-interface integration.

Of course different workstations will exhibit these problems to different degrees. Our goal was to design a mixer using the "best practices" that we have developed over the course of 30 years. Multiple subtle design decisions, accumulated over a long history, are required to make a truly world-class mixing engine.'


Yup.

So ... I know several or many jumped on Mixbus during that outrageously low sale price and offer very recently. Care to share your experiences and progress, those of you who are now having the Harrison experience? I'm digging this. I've tested enough, and this is gonna work ... it's gonna be a serious improvement to my entire mindset and workflow. How is it for the rest of you who have it now?

Cheers!
--Tele
The Telenator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 09:17 AM   #2
Andy Hamm
Human being with feelings
 
Andy Hamm's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,371
Default

I was seriously considering purchasing it but the fact that it doesn't support control surfaces in Windows really put me off. Having to mix with 1 finger (the mouse) is definately not the way I've been mixing all these years.

To read through all the hype about it and how it emulates the old analog style of console and then find out that you couldn't use physical faders with it kind of washed out all of the quoted points that you listed.
Andy Hamm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 09:43 AM   #3
dobro
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: abroad
Posts: 671
Default

1 "...making it the most powerful, best-sounding, most versatile digital audio workstation you can use today."

2 "Q: Does Mixbus support MIDI sequencing or virtual instruments?

A: No, Mixbus does not currently support MIDI sequencing or MIDI instruments. MIDI sequencing is underway for a future release."

If it doesn't do MIDI, then it's not the most powerful or most versatile. It might be the best-sounding, though. But is it?
__________________
I use those extra 12 seconds to admire myself in the mirror.

Last edited by dobro; 07-21-2013 at 09:53 AM.
dobro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 09:48 AM   #4
Sambo Rouge
Human being with feelings
 
Sambo Rouge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posts: 1,965
Default

I do like their $9/£6 per month subscription option for students -- what a great idea.
Sambo Rouge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 11:31 AM   #5
chronocepter
Human being with feelings
 
chronocepter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 232
Default

"True Analog Mixing"™
"pedigree in world-class recording facilitie"
"the golden age of albums"

--- Price

Mixbus $149/$49+9(month)
-
GVerb+ reverb plugin + 3D Triple Delay plugin $ 69
-
XT-ME Mastering Equalizer $109
-
XT-MC Multiband Compresso $109
-
XT-EQ Equalizer Plugin $49

= $485/385+9(month)
________________________________________
My concluson: (relative to "no pedigree" REAPER + Plugins)

sry bro...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1372866164360.jpg (33.9 KB, 5357 views)
__________________
"Another pointless experiment in synthetic stupidity." - Piz
chronocepter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 12:11 PM   #6
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

I got it on sale, and love it as an additional process for my work. I did have many plugins that it could not use (Nebula, which is a huge deal for me), but I use it for buss stem mix-downs, and don't need any plugins other than the "on-board" subtle eq's and compressor/limiters and light tape saturation. I love the specific color it can add, even without using the saturation. Finally there is an app that is not trying so hard to be "transparent" and has it's own color. It won't replace Reaper for me, but I only spent $49 dollars, so it's like a very affordable complex plugin for me.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 12:38 PM   #7
dobro
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: abroad
Posts: 671
Default

So, you can run it in Reaper as a plugin?
__________________
I use those extra 12 seconds to admire myself in the mirror.
dobro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 01:25 PM   #8
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dobro View Post
So, you can run it in Reaper as a plugin?
No, I was just making a comparison. Harrison is a full-fledged DAW software, not a vst. I have been told people have been able to route audio from one to the other, but I haven't even tried it. I just meant that I use MixBus similar to a very complex plugin- I do a separate dedicated processing of buss stems with MixBus, then import that stereo file back into Reaper for the final premaster.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 01:34 PM   #9
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Telenator View Post
scanned and likes all plugs except about 3 out of the 200 I threw at it to test.
Plugins that won't necessarily work in MixBus will still show up in the fx list. Have you tried loading them all to see? I had quite a bit of communication with the main dev about this, and it has to do with MixBus not being able to utilize plugins that have more than 2 inputs. I assume that means any plugin that is "hard-coded" to accept side-chaining, and these plugins can not be altered, they either work or don't. I have many compressors, a few reverbs, even some eq's that are in the list but won't work. Check out the screenshots.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.

Last edited by richie43; 11-25-2013 at 12:26 AM.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 02:01 PM   #10
The Telenator
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Oud West, NL
Posts: 2,335
Default

Plugin acceptance -- yes, Mixbus cannot handle anything more than mono and 1/2 channel stereo. Does not understand sidechain 3/4-type plugins or, for example Bittersweet's 8-channel version. And no VSTi support at all, which didn't concern me since I'm only mixing -- in fact, it's good discipline for me at this point: no more 'fix that riff' or 'fix it in the mix' monkey business anymore for me there.

Sadly, though, this rules out a couple of my favourite compressors for now. But Harrison vows many good things in ver. 3, and Ardour 3 is already out. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that Mixbus 3 will be out by the end of this year. All suggestions seem to point in that time frame. There are a few other features that would be very nice if added in 3 also.
The Telenator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 02:46 PM   #11
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Telenator View Post
in fact, it's good discipline for me at this point: no more 'fix that riff' or 'fix it in the mix' monkey business anymore for me there.
This is exactly why I am liking integrating MixBus into my process.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 04:01 PM   #12
The Telenator
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Oud West, NL
Posts: 2,335
Default

richie -- you got ears. Isn't this Harrison mixer deluxe? Not only so much like a real desk, but their choice of frequencies on all the EQs are so perfect. I guess 30 years of designing hardware, then about 12 in software shows here. And the compression -- so easy to use. I am seriously digging this thing. Not bad as a simple DAW either. really, but oh, the mixer. Going to keep my subscription for at least a year. Love this with Reaper for the whole process. Going to do final mastering back in Reaper and/or Podium 3.20. Cheers!
The Telenator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 04:09 PM   #13
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Telenator View Post
richie -- you got ears. Isn't this Harrison mixer deluxe? Not only so much like a real desk, but their choice of frequencies on all the EQs are so perfect. I guess 30 years of designing hardware, then about 12 in software shows here. And the compression -- so easy to use. I am seriously digging this thing. Not bad as a simple DAW either. really, but oh, the mixer. Going to keep my subscription for at least a year. Love this with Reaper for the whole process. Going to do final mastering back in Reaper and/or Podium 3.20. Cheers!
Indeed sir. It is really an interesting piece of software. Like I keep saying, it's refreshing to have a reputable company like Harrison be brave enough to release this and not even attempt to claim that oh-so-annoying supposed transparency that people always want. I import buss stem mixes into Mixbus for a final flavoring, sometimes with very little tweaking in Mixbus. But if I do want to tweak, you are right about the "console" eq's- very very tasty and usable. I have even done some 5-6db boosts and been amazed at how NOT harsh it was. I am very glad that I stumbled onto this.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 05:12 PM   #14
The Telenator
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Oud West, NL
Posts: 2,335
Default

I can see from a few points made and Q's asked by current non-owners that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of what this Mixbus is all about -- which is understandable completely and was my previous condition too.

Although it is a full DAW underneath -- it's Ardour -- and is not heavy on many features of the leading DAWs, it will be adding features rather soon, now that the money is coming in and the interest has picked up. They are going to add VSTi support and better support for VST plugins after that. They have vowed to add MIDI at some point as well.

But, if I may be so bold, these features are more to make prospective customers feel more 'at home' than what this software is really meant and designed for. I suggest you basically forget it is a DAW underneath and think of it as a Virtual Desk or Console. This darn thing mimics so many of their console features and structures that it's almost scary. Now, the Cubase 7 tried in some ways to do this in their totally revamped mixer, and I call their efforts genuine but the results a real FAIL. Leave it to Harrison, designer of many desk models, many of which I greatly prefer over Neve and the MCI I first learned on, to bring the true console feel to the DAW environment.

I further suggest that, instead of worrying oneself over the standard iteration of top DAW features, or any lack thereof, one might do better to attempt to understand what has been achieved here. You know, I truly can say that I actually LOVE both Reaper and Podium, the two I have carefully picked after Cubase refugee status and a brief love affair with Live 8 and one-night stands with a few others. BUT ... Mixbus is a different sort of lady all together. The 'complicated plugin' analogy richie used is probably closest, even though most simply drag files and stems in for rendering mixes and a few do route in. It functions more as a very powerful standalone plugin.

More than this, or to add to my comments, it brings to our DAW World what has been missing in every DAW. It's as close to a hardware mixer as one can get without actually being one. More, the limiter, compressors, several EQ setups, saturation on every buss and channel are already THERE, loaded, stable, super easy to finely tweak. I would like control automation added at some point I think, too, and I fully expect they will, but as the mixer is right now, everything is so nearby and well-arranged that using a mouse or track pad is just as easy.

I don't know how well this explains all, but I hardly think of it as a DAW -- it's more a mixer/pre-master unit. Don't know if there is a demo, but a few minutes of hands-on would help in understanding its virtues.
The Telenator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 05:24 PM   #15
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Telenator View Post
I can see from a few points made and Q's asked by current non-owners that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of what this Mixbus is all about -- which is understandable completely and was my previous condition too.

Although it is a full DAW underneath -- it's Ardour -- and is not heavy on many features of the leading DAWs, it will be adding features rather soon, now that the money is coming in and the interest has picked up. They are going to add VSTi support and better support for VST plugins after that. They have vowed to add MIDI at some point as well.

But, if I may be so bold, these features are more to make prospective customers feel more 'at home' than what this software is really meant and designed for. I suggest you basically forget it is a DAW underneath and think of it as a Virtual Desk or Console. This darn thing mimics so many of their console features and structures that it's almost scary. Now, the Cubase 7 tried in some ways to do this in their totally revamped mixer, and I call their efforts genuine but the results a real FAIL. Leave it to Harrison, designer of many desk models, many of which I greatly prefer over Neve and the MCI I first learned on, to bring the true console feel to the DAW environment.

I further suggest that, instead of worrying oneself over the standard iteration of top DAW features, or any lack thereof, one might do better to attempt to understand what has been achieved here. You know, I truly can say that I actually LOVE both Reaper and Podium, the two I have carefully picked after Cubase refugee status and a brief love affair with Live 8 and one-night stands with a few others. BUT ... Mixbus is a different sort of lady all together. The 'complicated plugin' analogy richie used is probably closest, even though most simply drag files and stems in for rendering mixes and a few do route in. It functions more as a very powerful standalone plugin.

More than this, or to add to my comments, it brings to our DAW World what has been missing in every DAW. It's as close to a hardware mixer as one can get without actually being one. More, the limiter, compressors, several EQ setups, saturation on every buss and channel are already THERE, loaded, stable, super easy to finely tweak. I would like control automation added at some point I think, too, and I fully expect they will, but as the mixer is right now, everything is so nearby and well-arranged that using a mouse or track pad is just as easy.

I don't know how well this explains all, but I hardly think of it as a DAW -- it's more a mixer/pre-master unit. Don't know if there is a demo, but a few minutes of hands-on would help in understanding its virtues.
Well put, I hope more people read this. Oh yeah, there is no demo according to the website.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 09:03 PM   #16
dobro
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: abroad
Posts: 671
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Telenator View Post
It's as close to a hardware mixer as one can get without actually being one. More, the limiter, compressors, several EQ setups, saturation on every buss and channel are already THERE, loaded, stable, super easy to finely tweak.
Okay, this pulls everything into focus for me. See, I checked out the website and watched the first two training videos, and the impression I had was that it was a software emulation of a mixing desk, and the question that sparked is the same one I'll ask you:

What's the advantage of having software that's an emulation of a hardware mixer, when we've had people happily mousing their way through DAWS for about 15 years now? What's the advantage of having their EQ and compressor on every channel when I've got that already in the two DAWS I'm presently using? Whether I use the built-in EQs and compressors in my two DAWS or whether I use third party plugins, they're all easy to use and stable as well. I don't see what Mixbus offers that I haven't already got.

My main impression watching the training videos was that they've emulated a hardware mixer really successfully and they're trying to now sell that idea to a generation of mousers who are way used to other approaches.

Maybe I would change my mind if I used it. Maybe. Or maybe it would just be hundreds of dollars and a new learning curve to achieve what I can already do with the resources I've already got. I know I'm coming across as sceptical and maybe even cynical, but I honestly don't see the advantage that Mixbus offers.
__________________
I use those extra 12 seconds to admire myself in the mirror.
dobro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 09:16 PM   #17
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dobro View Post
Okay, this pulls everything into focus for me. See, I checked out the website and watched the first two training videos, and the impression I had was that it was a software emulation of a mixing desk, and the question that sparked is the same one I'll ask you:

What's the advantage of having software that's an emulation of a hardware mixer, when we've had people happily mousing their way through DAWS for about 15 years now? What's the advantage of having their EQ and compressor on every channel when I've got that already in the two DAWS I'm presently using? Whether I use the built-in EQs and compressors in my two DAWS or whether I use third party plugins, they're all easy to use and stable as well. I don't see what Mixbus offers that I haven't already got.

My main impression watching the training videos was that they've emulated a hardware mixer really successfully and they're trying to now sell that idea to a generation of mousers who are way used to other approaches.

Maybe I would change my mind if I used it. Maybe. Or maybe it would just be hundreds of dollars and a new learning curve to achieve what I can already do with the resources I've already got. I know I'm coming across as sceptical and maybe even cynical, but I honestly don't see the advantage that Mixbus offers.
The advantage is is a different tool that is very good at what it seems good at (lol), so if it fits your style, then it will serve you well. Will it be radical and earth-shattering? No, but neither is a different preamp, or changing tube styles in an amp or mic pre. But those things can certainly provide a different flavor otherwise not stumbled onto. My work was extremely satisfying before I discovered MixBus. But it was before I bought my most recent ribbon mic too.... I am so glad for both purchases too.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 09:30 PM   #18
Smurf
Human being with feelings
 
Smurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,173
Default

The advantage of Mixbus over every other DAW is simple, the SOUND.

Yes, every DAW has it's own sound, no amount of arguing will ever convince some folks otherwise, and if the ones who claim that DAW's DON'T after listening to tracks run thru Mixbus...well.....no comment.

Here Mixbus is my "summing mixer / last 90%". I do most of my mixing in "the other DAW", and then render the Stems out, load them into Mixbus, and finish there using all it's great effects & TONE!

I can not stand Ardour. It is 1000 times better in Linux, but it STILL has a workflow I don't like.

Using Ardour 2.x (the underlying DAW for Mixbus) in Win7 x64 is slow, clunky, freezes, locks up, and generally reminds me of a few other "name" DAW's I wasted my $$ on over the years....ON MY SYSTEM.

The last week or so I have even been doing mixes in Reaper without Satson....and have been very happy.

I like Mixbus.....alot.....
__________________
Yep's First 3 Years in PDF's
HP Z600 w/3GHz 12 Core, 48GB Memory, nVidia Quadro 5800, 240GB SSD OS drive, 3 480GB SSD Sample/Storage drives, 18TB External Storage, Dual 27" Monitors
Smurf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 10:10 PM   #19
Doughboy
Human being with feelings
 
Doughboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Gaylord Michigan
Posts: 1,696
Default

Yeah....I love Harrison Mix Buss. Howthefuckever....I wouldn't even bother trying to record with it. Reaper all the way. Big waste of time recording with it. Unless everything is recorded exactly the way you want it with an amp and all. I use Guitar Rig. Sooo, I add it after it's recorded....you can't do that with Harrison. I've found very few plugins that work with it. But....after it's recorded and the file is rendered and added to Harrison. There's very little it needs. The sound is so freakin' good. Much fuller, deeper, richer...all of those words. It's got the sound that I've been trying to get with a zillion plugins in Reaper. I still love Reaper...but for mixing...I'm really into Harrison now.
__________________
---------------
Doughboy
http://www.reverbnation.com/GregPillsbury
Doughboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 03:48 AM   #20
The Telenator
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Oud West, NL
Posts: 2,335
Default

dobro: 'What's the advantage of having software that's an emulation of a hardware mixer ...?'

Excellent question.

Answer: Because it's not like having software that's an emulation of a hardware mixer. No, it's like having a freaking multi-thousand-dollar REAL Harrison console on your PC. I'm not exactly saying it's a $1/4 million sound, but it's much much more than a 16-channel (etc.) mixing box with channels and sliders. It's really a Harrison. It's a freaking miniature console! These guys have been at it for decades. They know what they're doing, unlike some of these half-baked DAWs we joke about on this board. Hard to explain if you've never heard one. (Actually, you have -- on many, many classic albums.)

Last edited by The Telenator; 07-22-2013 at 03:54 AM.
The Telenator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 05:32 AM   #21
kindafishy
Human being with feelings
 
kindafishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,025
Default

I dunno guys...

I thought about picking this up when it was on sale, but I decided not to get it because I think that someone has to be a far better mixer than I am to use this. I can't imagine moving stems between two different DAW's to do a mix.

The way I mix requires all of REAPER's routing capabilities and all my VST's right up until the very end.

The latest mix that I am working on for example, I thought that I had gotten 90% of the way there and I noticed that I needed to do an edit on a track. If I was in MixBus, I'd have to go back to REAPER, make the change, and then re-export the track over to MixBus again?

Maybe it's just not right for everyone?

No matter. Knowing that people paid $39 or whatever at one time for it, I would never pay full price now, so I'll never know.
kindafishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 09:29 AM   #22
The Telenator
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Oud West, NL
Posts: 2,335
Default

Yeah, that sale price was irresistible. $39? That was the final factor for me.

Even without the next round of upgrades, when I went to make up some mixing templates, I found that Mixbus accepted enough and I was able to load all the plugs I needed for any proper mix -- delays, reverb, extra meters, extra dither, fave buss comp, and more EQ than I'll ever need. I haven't had time to set up a routing for files, so I'm just clicking out of the explorer-type thingie it has till then.

Someone mentioned recording, too, and I don't have any plans to record with it, but I think if I was just recording some simple vocals/acoustic or simple trio stuff I might give it a go. It appears to be a nice, solid little DAW under the the full-sized mixdown window. I'm kind of curious how things might sound. They claim the engine is as good as any. Still, I prefer Reaper for audio, usually Podium for MIDI-heavy messing about and didn't go into this to record much.
The Telenator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 09:36 AM   #23
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

I made that same point a couple of times. The Harrison EQ and comps have their own sound, a nice sound. I typically don't get caught up in the differences between digital EQ's, just give me one and I'll use it, but pushing up the high end on that one on things like vocals sounds.... better.

The DSP across the board is a home run imo.

I quite literally hate Ardour though. Subjectively speaking, maybe one of the clumsiest UI's I've ever used, but it's still v2, and I pretty much avoid arrange as mich as possible when using MixBus to mix stems.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 11:11 AM   #24
Doughboy
Human being with feelings
 
Doughboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Gaylord Michigan
Posts: 1,696
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kindafishy View Post
I dunno guys...

I thought about picking this up when it was on sale, but I decided not to get it because I think that someone has to be a far better mixer than I am to use this. I can't imagine moving stems between two different DAW's to do a mix.

The way I mix requires all of REAPER's routing capabilities and all my VST's right up until the very end.

The latest mix that I am working on for example, I thought that I had gotten 90% of the way there and I noticed that I needed to do an edit on a track. If I was in MixBus, I'd have to go back to REAPER, make the change, and then re-export the track over to MixBus again?

Maybe it's just not right for everyone?

No matter. Knowing that people paid $39 or whatever at one time for it, I would never pay full price now, so I'll never know.
Well....howaboutthis. I had a few songs that I decided were mixed right in Reaper and mastered by myself and finished. Then I got Harrison. Well....the new song I was working on I did the stem renders and ended up mixing it on Harrison, but....then I wanted the other songs to sound as good. I opted to just take the Master of the song and import that into Harrison.....that's it nothing else. Since it already had compression and such, I just rendered it right back out. IT STILL SOUNDS FAR SUPERIOR .... TO ME. AND IT DOESN'T REALLY SOUND ANY DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE I MIXED IN HARRISON FROM STEMS. heh....

The "improved" sound isn't earth shattering....it FEEEEEELS way better though. You can really tell from a drum loop track. You can hear the diff in the kick drum.

But...this method of running the Master thru Harrison is kind of like that one missing plug in a Mastering chain, or like putting the master on tape.

Lastly...as far as extra purchases to go with Harrison. I haven't bought anything besides the original $39 deal. I am considering the essentials which is a verb and an echo....because they seem to sound pretty good. But....there not "essential". If the price ever comes down to $40ish for them I'll grab em. For $69 I'll use what I have. Which is just as good.
__________________
---------------
Doughboy
http://www.reverbnation.com/GregPillsbury
Doughboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 11:45 AM   #25
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

In fairness, it's audio editing isn't actually bad at all, it's very PT like, but for sure, if you have additional editing to do there you'll probably need to learn the key commands and the arrange UI a little to speed it up. As far as I can tell - even though I didn't go very deep with editing - it seems to be very much a PT clone in some ways.

As far as stemming, I just consolidate tracks, quit the other daw, then import those into MixBus and spend the next two hours there mixing or whatever. Not all that hard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kindafishy View Post
I dunno guys...

I thought about picking this up when it was on sale, but I decided not to get it because I think that someone has to be a far better mixer than I am to use this. I can't imagine moving stems between two different DAW's to do a mix.

The way I mix requires all of REAPER's routing capabilities and all my VST's right up until the very end.

The latest mix that I am working on for example, I thought that I had gotten 90% of the way there and I noticed that I needed to do an edit on a track. If I was in MixBus, I'd have to go back to REAPER, make the change, and then re-export the track over to MixBus again?

Maybe it's just not right for everyone?

No matter. Knowing that people paid $39 or whatever at one time for it, I would never pay full price now, so I'll never know.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 11:56 AM   #26
pipelineaudio
Mortal
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smurf View Post
The advantage of Mixbus over every other DAW is simple, the SOUND.

Yes, every DAW has it's own sound, no amount of arguing will ever convince some folks otherwise, and if the ones who claim that DAW's DON'T after listening to tracks run thru Mixbus...well.....no comment.
This would be an EXTREMELY easy thing to prove

For a quick and dirty stick a 1khz sine wave in it, render it and see if its different than the original
pipelineaudio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 12:01 PM   #27
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
This would be an EXTREMELY easy thing to prove

For a quick and dirty stick a 1khz sine wave in it, render it and see if its different than the original
We'll its programmed and created to emulate a certain analog result. I highly doubt it would null, that's one if its primary functions.

I do like that it is mixer centric, I have a hard time making Reaper "mixer only" when it's mix time (will explain later) but when I can I prefer to record/edit/mix with the later being only the mixer and not even meters if I can help it.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 12:02 PM   #28
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

MixBus is pretty obviously affecting the sound in some way. It's not a pure digital signal path, they did something to those channels to try to emulate their consoles.

The EQ and comps aside, it's not a pure signal path, there's some console emulation or something in all of the summing and/or channels. They said as much, that they couldn't even really make that dsp as stand alone plugs because they modified the summing code in Ardour, changed it, and it all kinda works together.

As far as other daws (with no plugs engaged inline changing the sound) sounding different... well... I'm staying out of that recurring debate.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 12:04 PM   #29
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
MixBus is pretty obviously affecting the sound in some way.
For anyone else wondering, there are like 13 videos on their site explaining this, even simpler than null tests.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 12:08 PM   #30
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

Like I keep saying, that's one of the things that impressed me about MixBus just reading about it before trying it- They never claim that it is transparent, and quite the opposite of that! They sell MixBuis on the premise of it being full of color and character (like choosing a console-you either like it or not).
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 12:09 PM   #31
pipelineaudio
Mortal
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
Default

Ill take a null test before a video please
pipelineaudio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 12:11 PM   #32
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
Ill take a null test before a video please
I am curious what you will derive from a null test for this particular topic. I can assume that it won't null, but from whatever does not null, what will that tell you?
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 12:13 PM   #33
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

I asked the guy from Harrison because I wanted the channel strip as standalone VST, and I also asked him about maybe teaming up with some other hosts, since Ardour and I don't really see eye to eye. His response was.... (paraphrased). ...

"It's difficult to work out all of the legalities of who owns what code bits and all that, since we have to modify the summing code, which is why we went with Ardour, because it's open source."

He even said they had some discussions with Cockos about that but it didn't work out.

There are, I'm pretty sure, some non-linear audio properties in there that try to emulate their consolesl so if you do a null test, maybe do it with multiple different gain levels.

But I heard it right away. Bright vocal stems I was very familiar with got toned down, rounded off, less sibilant, taking high end eq much better with no de-essing. It was a pretty obvious difference.

Probably not much different from people strapping "analog" emulations across every mix channel, it's just (apparently) hardwired.

Last edited by Lawrence; 07-22-2013 at 12:25 PM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 12:37 PM   #34
pipelineaudio
Mortal
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
I am curious what you will derive from a null test for this particular topic. I can assume that it won't null, but from whatever does not null, what will that tell you?
First of all, that there is a phenomenon to be accounted for

After that we can move on to what sort of nonlinearity could always and I mean always, be "better"
pipelineaudio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 12:40 PM   #35
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
First of all, that there is a phenomenon to be accounted for

After that we can move on to what sort of nonlinearity could always and I mean always, be "better"
Which phenomenon is this? That MixBus is not transparent? Maybe I am just missing something, but I have never used a null test for anything besides phase issues. If it tells you something useful, do share. Good luck.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 01:02 PM   #36
dsomer
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 29
Default MixBus works for me

I did the $39 deal as well as the Essentials plugins Verb and Delay.

I must admit I was going to do as others and mix in Reaper as I have been doing and just sum the mix in MixBus due to the learning curve for MixBus BUT after reading a post about how one mixer found he did not use ANY VST plugins other than the stock ones with MixBus including Verb and Delay it seemed with a try.

Well, I cannot believe how much easier it was to get a great sounding mix using the stock EQ, Compression, Tape Sat and Essentials Verbs/Delays quickly! I did not have to use ANY VST plugins at all! I found I was not in my head thinking about what plugins to use in chains etc as I normally would and just used my ears and gut until I got the sound I wanted. It was so much more intuitive. I compared my mix I did on one song I did on Reaper against one I just mixed in MixBus today and there is NO comparison. The MixBus mix was much wider, warmer and just plain sounded better. I could hear the instruments better in the mix and the Tape Sat added a punchiness I could not get no matter what plugins I used in Reaper.

I totally recommend anyone try MixBus mixing with NO VST added and experience how quickly you can get a good sounding mix

Cheers for Mixbus. I have been working in a studio with a SSL Matrix board recently and I have to say that mix I did in MixBus compares to the mix that was done on the 25K Matrix SSL board. I am not kidding!

OH as well, I am still going to track, edit and do VSTIs in Reaper and export unFX'd tracks into MixBUs

Last edited by dsomer; 07-22-2013 at 01:10 PM.
dsomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 01:08 PM   #37
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
I am curious what you will derive from a null test for this particular topic. I can assume that it won't null, but from whatever does not null, what will that tell you?
Nothing of real value other than the remaining difference and we could already guess what that difference would be if we studied up on the product. I don't know of any argument that it doesn't actually massage the audio and nobody expects it it to null. If it did, OK but in this rare exception, it doesn't fall into the does it null category IMHO because its the entire point of the application (especially the busses with the built in saturation meter). That would be like adding an analog saturation VST and expecting it to null :P

That being said, it comes down to whether someone likes it or not; the video isn't supposed to be proof, it is to shed light on the subject matter for that product before this turns into the thread it shouldn't be because no one is actually paying attention. They purposely added algorithms to modify the signal; its why AFAIK it even exists.

Btw, I don't own it or have it but hearing about it prompted me to go to the site and actually spend a few minutes to refresh myself as to what it is supposed to do.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.

Last edited by karbomusic; 07-22-2013 at 01:17 PM.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 01:24 PM   #38
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
After that we can move on to what sort of nonlinearity could always and I mean always, be "better"
Can't speak for anyone else but I don't personally think it always sounds better, just different. If it always sounded better I'd only mix in MixBus. Different isn't always better, but sometimes it is. I don't own any of those "analog emulation / saturation" plugs people strap on all their mix channels, but if I did I probably wouldn't always do that.

One thing for sure, you can smash the hell out of those comps (something I don't realy ever do) before they start sounding bad.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 01:34 PM   #39
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Can't speak for anyone else but I don't personally think it always sounds better, just different.
Though I haven't used HMB, I'd tend to agree with the better is subjective part. I'm only a little analog loving. Meaning the occasional track that seems too clean I might do something "saturatory" with but 99% of my tracks I prefer non-emulated.

Don't know why but most likely its the stuff that I lose that bugs me more than what is added. That's my main issue with Nebula... as much as I like it, it always removes stuff I wanted to keep in the process of doing its magic.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 01:43 PM   #40
dsomer
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 29
Default Good point

Good point about not always wanting that overall warm sound, depending on the type of music you are mixing. It can be like the BASS BOOST that first appeared on stereo systems we over used it because it sounded soo good on everything.

That said, as mixing is so subjective what is better sounding to me is just that my take on it. If I can get great mixes quicker and with more intuitive workflow its a bonus. I for me I get in my head mixing at times.

I suspect I will get "Tired" of that warm sound at some point and want to do as you mentioned a hybrid use of it on some tracks or just summing
dsomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.