The Big Calculator in the Sky

politcat · 09-26-2010, 11:53 AM

"Remember, your DAW is not a mixer. It's a big calculator. The more processing you do, the less coherency remains from the original source you recorded." --John Vestman

oi

pbk · 09-26-2010, 01:35 PM

chriscomfort · 09-26-2010, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by politcat

"Remember, your DAW is not a mixer. It's a big calculator. The more processing you do, the less coherency remains from the original source you recorded." --John Vestman

oi

Well, I've made "calculations" that have moved people to tears. There's something to be said for that I suppose.

Jim Roseberry · 09-26-2010, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by politcat

"Remember, your DAW is not a mixer. It's a big calculator. The more processing you do, the less coherency remains from the original source you recorded." --John Vestman

oi

With irony...

"The more processing you do with outboard electronics, the less coherency remains from the original source you recorded."

Geoff-h3o · 09-26-2010, 02:08 PM

Well I'm not really much of a mixer either but i know that the more processing i do the more processing i do an that can't be bad! - a sort of blessing in 'de skies'- what's so good about natural???. ...... just thought I'd add a bit of dither etc.

toggle · 09-26-2010, 04:48 PM

...and remember, that mixing board is a big calculator, too!

brainwreck · 09-26-2010, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toggle

...and remember, that mixing board is a big calculator, too!

how so? analog = electrical signals, digital = numbers which represent those signals.

lxm · 09-26-2010, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by politcat

"Remember, your DAW is not a mixer. It's a big calculator. The more processing you do, the less coherency remains from the original source you recorded." --John Vestman

oi

ermmmm whatever dood.

run, megalodon · 09-26-2010, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by politcat

"Remember, your DAW is not a mixer. It's a big calculator. The more processing you do, the less coherency remains from the original source you recorded." --John Vestman

oi

What does this even mean? What do you mean by "processing?" What do you mean by "coherency?" How do you lose it? What's bad about it?

musicbynumbers · 09-26-2010, 06:07 PM

Even voltages have to deal with quantum energy states it is not infinite it's digital

hee hee.

Also, compared to the noise level in analogue studios a 32bit or 64bit system still has a long way to go, that said without the benefits of oversampling etc some processes do make your argument of "less is more" valid in some situations.

I just think your statement can cause a lot of damage via misconceptions.

toggle · 09-26-2010, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brainwreck

how so? analog = electrical signals, digital = numbers which represent those signals.

Yes, one is analog and the other is digital, but both are calculators in essence, and in purpose. Summing signals is supposed to mean "summing" signals, literally.

Another example: when an electrical signal encounters a potentiometer, the output voltage is the result of the input voltage multiplied by the ratio of the top and bottom of the voltage divider (created by the pot). A calculation, no?

pbk · 09-26-2010, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by musicbynumbers

I just think your statement can cause a lot of damage via misconceptions.

Well, even the man himself appears to be heavy on the digital side of things...

http://www.johnvestman.com/equipment_list.htm

BTW, the original quote appears here too, with more context:

http://www.johnvestman.com/secrets_of_mixing.htm

hopi · 09-26-2010, 08:52 PM

Hey total BS... "my DAW IS a mixer..." I've used it mix martini's quite often and it works fine... Of course you will the SWS extensions for that... you can read in the manual how to get'er'dun.

musicbynumbers · 09-27-2010, 05:17 AM

I've just wasted time reading through his website and he mixes in helpful proven tips with sonic witchcraft, the stuff about different hard drives sounding better or worse is a little disturbing as for CDs. Do these people know what a null file is or is he just a plain snake oil salesman who glams up the myths to get in the clients.

henge · 09-27-2010, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Roseberry

With irony...

"The more processing you do with outboard electronics, the less coherency remains from the original source you recorded."

So true.If it sounds good...

xpander · 09-27-2010, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toggle

Yes, one is analog and the other is digital, but both are calculators in essence, and in purpose.

In essence analog signal is varying voltage levels as is digital signal too. Difference being that analog signal stays in its basic voltage varying essence within the limits built into the (analog) system. Signal transferred to digital has been calculated from that and is then presented in the same voltage varying form but within limits of digital system, applied by constant calculations. Signal born in digital world is a straight result of calculations.

Theres no need to calculate the analog signal itself, it was done to the system while building it to transfer and edit the signal. But there is a need to constantly calculate the digital signal to do the same.

Quote:

Another example: when an electrical signal encounters a potentiometer, the output voltage is the result of the input voltage multiplied by the ratio of the top and bottom of the voltage divider (created by the pot). A calculation, no?

Again, calculations by the designers of said system when it was built. But they don't have to sit there on guard and constantly do these calculations again and again (rebuilding the signal) every instance the voltage varies. Digital by the very nature of it has to do these calculations all the time.

It is this very lack of constant (active) calculations which makes analog more unpredictable, less precise in a way, whereas digital calculations should always bring the same results...both within the limits of given systems, of course. Which is better is another matter.

Serenitynow · 09-27-2010, 12:22 PM

One thing I read on his site that maybe you guys can help me understand...under "levels of improvement to DAW sound" #5 is

"Loop-back file vs. internal bounce

7%" improvement.

What exactly does he mean? Does he actually mean taking a recorded track and going through a physical output and then back into an input to record? Why would that be an improvement running through the AD/DA converters like that? Why is that better than a typical ITB bounce? I hope I'm making sense here!

DVDdoug · 09-27-2010, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Remember, your DAW is not a mixer.

A silly thing to say... Clearly, mixing is one of the many things you can do with a DAW! And, there's nothing "wrong" with the way a DAW mixes... Perhaps he doesn't know what a mixer is...

Quote:

Originally Posted by toggle

Yes, one is analog and the other is digital, but both are calculators in essence, and in purpose. Summing signals is supposed to mean "summing" signals, literally.

Another example: when an electrical signal encounters a potentiometer, the output voltage is the result of the input voltage multiplied by the ratio of the top and bottom of the voltage divider (created by the pot). A calculation, no?

RIGHT!!!

Analog mixers are built with Summing Amplifiers. If you put 1 Volt into 3 mixer inputs, you get 3 Volts out (assuming the signals are in-phase, etc., so they mathematically sum to 3V).

An amplifier (or preamp) is an analog multiplication device. If you have an amp with a gain of 2 and you feed-in 1 Volt, you get 2 Volts out... If you feed-in 2 Volts, you get 4 Volts out. For attenuation, you can multiply by a fraction, or use a resistor network or pot as a voltage divider. Yes, this is regular 'ol mathematical division!

mse · 09-27-2010, 06:22 PM

If you write "nubers" over a "machine" to understand what will be altered on audio signal and if you say it's only a "mixer", you have to admit it as a calculator.

GermanFafian · 09-28-2010, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by musicbynumbers

I've just wasted time reading through his website and he mixes in helpful proven tips with sonic witchcraft, the stuff about different hard drives sounding better or worse is a little disturbing as for CDs. Do these people know what a null file is or is he just a plain snake oil salesman who glams up the myths to get in the clients.

Exactly my thoughts after reading thru his page too.
How 1s and 0s be different from one disc to another?
He just has got to get off drugs or share them with the rest

Mich · 09-28-2010, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GermanFafian

How 1s and 0s be different from one disc to another?

A 1 on one disk might be warmer than a 1 on another disk.
It is a proven fact ... I once measured temperatures on a Seagate drive and it differed from that of a Western Digital drive.
After finding out about that fact I now also only record in the summer because it's warmer in general.

Jim Roseberry · 09-28-2010, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mich

A 1 on one disk might be warmer than a 1 on another disk.
It is a proven fact ... I once measured temperatures on a Seagate drive and it differed from that of a Western Digital drive.
After finding out about that fact I now also only record in the summer because it's warmer in general.

I'd think you'd want to try and maintain consitent temps when mixing.
To preserve the optimum balance of warmth vs. detail.

Winter = use Seagate
Spring = use Samsung
Summer = use WD
Fall = use Samsung