When I got my summing mixer, Neve 5059, That immediately had a massive impact on the quality of my mixes. With silk engaged, I was able to get rid of 50% of the saturation plugins I was using on my mixes and was able to get more width and depth instantly. It is indispensable to me. I consider it the most important piece of gear in my studio.
Exactly, silk. The transformer inside. That's what you like. Exactly the same you find in all the other pieces in their line, in my tape 542's etc.. not about "summing"
@@mixbustv like with everything it depends on your goals. The 5059 is amazing for creating a hybrid workflow with all of the analog inserts on each channel, it's great for summing multiple mics as I record in, it sounds awesome to track and mix monitoring through it the entire time, it has two different mix busses for creative routing etc. its not just a silk box
The biggest change I noticed to improve the signal quality in the most pleasant way for the ear, more than any analog machine like a compressor or equalizer or saturator, was passing my stems through the crane song egret.
@@mixbustvonly cause it’s neve transformers. The added harmonics from their transformers saturates the signal and gives it character and presence. It’s all about adding added color and depth in stages in your mix same as how people stage compression.
I've been making music for 33 years. I finally switched to a 32 channel summing setup a few years ago and noticed an immediate difference in the sonic clarity and depth of my mixes. I did A/B comparisons with numerous digital sum mixes and found the analog sum mix versions to be superior on every one. The biggest difference I noticed was the clarity in the high end and how the hi-hats, shakers, and other high end sounds sounded much more alive and had their own space to live, whereas on the digital versions the high end sounds sounded flatter and pushed to the back. I'll never go back to digital summing and there are many top mix engineers that swear by analog summing as well. Some people can't hear or appreciate the difference. I can, and it sounds amazing! 🤷♂️
I want to believe that with your "some people can't hear the difference" you're no backhand referring to me lol because your golden ears and your years of experience shold tell you that someone who runs an excess of 50 channels of hand selected analog on a regular basis drags your 32channels of summing by the leash and let it sit on command. It should also tell you that for that "analog mojo that makes everything more alive and bla bla bla" a setup with a collection of the best gear in the world, tubes, xformers, and units that ACTUALLY do something other than a shade of color puts a summing mixer to absolute shame. But I know you're smarter than that and you wouldn't poke a bear.
@@mixbustv No offense intended, sir! You know as well as I do though that many people can't hear the subtle differences and nuances of quality sound, whether it be mics, preamps, AD/DA, etc. I think the real argument is whether or not the cost can be justified to get that extra bit of quality sound. For many people, especially those that are not pros, probably not. I'm glad I did it though and am very pleased with the results.
the biggest complaint about most summing mixers I have is, that there is no individual level control AFTER you hit stuff on your inserts. every level change is changing the level going into a specific piece of gear and that would drive me nuts. there are a few with faders, but then why not use a console in the first place?
@@DSane206 a very good point you bring up, I've talked to some pros that have wondered whether that 6000 dollar Atomic Clock really made such a huge noticeable difference in their sound after all, or whether that money should've been invested somewhere else on something more noticeably effective. This is, of course, a question that only certain people can really answer- as you've noticed. Speaking of Hearing... I'd also like to point out that there have been some folks, especially during Covid, who were able to successfully place their music in films, and win Grammy's in untreated rooms. I have friends who are currently in school for Audio Engineering, and I showed them pictures of some of these rooms, and their big complaint was that neither of these rooms were even treated. They argued adamantly how the engineer or musician couldn't really hear what was being referenced. I then told them these people were pros, who in these very rooms, made music that went into film and mastered a Grammy winning album. The only thing I'd like to encourage you to do is to follow your instincts, always keep developing that ear, and realize that many people may say Some Thing... but that Some Thing may not actually be correct 100% of the time. Do what you feel is right DSane, trust your Instincts.
1. The idea of summing box is not things you add into your mix as "soundgoodizer", but a tool that you used while mixing and mix into it so you'll get the analog headroom while you are working in the box. Think of it when a track that already hit the ceiling in your DAW converted out of DAW into the summing box, you still be able to push it or do stuff to it because the headroom in the analog is unlimited until the signal get distorted/broken whatever before they are all summed and converted back to digital to you DAW to a proper volume, sometimes you get even more headroom when they are summed together because of the soft clipping that happens along the way in the circuitry for certain summing box that have all that. You will be able to do it the console way where sometimes mixers like to get that "pushed" sound and push it for how the analog gear handle the transient and volume. Not saying you have to do that or you can't do that in digital with clipper etc, but some people already familiar with working like that, and summing box will give that option and experience. All of this happens without you even noticing it, because you are busy mixing, which making it more cool. Does it improve the sound ? sometimes if done correctly. 2. The most obvious one is natural summing like how it was done in the consoles day, audio signals that were converted to electrical voltage summed together. It's an alternative to DAW summing where it is as perfect as we know it. When electrical voltage interact into each other and summed, there are natural phenomenon that happens caused by a lot of factor, tolerance of the component, temperature around you etc which will give a different result. Whatever that is, how small it could be, it's there and the DAW summing doesn't have it and it all happens while you mixing without you ever noticing it too. The result by no means is good or better, it's just different. Some people like it that way, that sounds are better merged together naturally like how it is in the real world instead of perfect math of DAW summing. It's just preference. 3. Testing mix with and without analog summing is just... weird. You use the summing box while mixing for the whole experience, you make mixing decision along the way. You don't add analog summing after you done with mixing, that's just another weird way to use it. A lot of engineers agree that there's no definite way to test the analog summing box because you can't just do it. Comparing mixes that done through analog summing, when all the decision made through it then put it out of the chain and compare the mix without it and says it's more 3D whatever is just dumb IMO. You would've made a different decision mixing without it. duh 4. Do we all need analog summing ? NO. Will it improves the mix drastically ? NO. Will it improves the mix slightly ? NO. Will it improves the mix at all ? Fucking NO. The only one that can improve the mix is you the mixer! As for now summing box is just different workflow and maybe another cool stuff to have and play around to make our everyday work more fun and cool. Different workflow sometimes give different result that can be good or bad depends on the mixer himself. That's just it.
Thanks so very much for pausing to answer this, David. You (and your team) are and have continued to be an integral part of my learning process. I appreciate you, Alex, and Bella immensely. Be well, Brother.
@@thegoodgeneral Thank you for your reply. Sometimes I begin to wonder if i'm losing my mind down all of the little rabbit-holes which audio leads me down... it's great to share this @MixbusTV community with people who are also excited and curious to learn from our generous (yet humble) proprietor of information, his team, and his guests. :-)
Analog summing is on another level of quality - it's expensive but totally worth it. No chances for reproducing this sound using any plugins. Each instrument have own 'track' in a mix... everything sound more natural...wider, deeper - more like during live performance - each instrument have own space and they are not interrupting eachother. SSL Sigma is best analog summing device in my opinion and worth every pence. After hearing what analog summing does it's really hard to go back ITB.
You're describing analog. Not analog summing. Summing is not an issue ITB. Have as many pieces of analog as a summing mixer has channels and you'll have a much superior system
@@mixbustv just curious which sort of units would you be referring to? because I was looking at the Fatso but I read somewhere on your videos that for electronic music the fatso might be too soft in terms of colouring/clipping
After watching Michael Brauer's masterclass on the Pure Mix platform, and the way his assistant has recreated the brauerizer template completely in the box (summing mixers included), now I'm totally convinced that you don't need any real analog process in the mix. Although it can be fun and creative, it's not a MUST anymore.
lol.... yeah ok.. when you use Plugin doctor and look at what these plugins are doing especially the emulations.... they don't match. but like you said "you're conviced" but the science says nope.
@@risingphoenix1484 I don't think is about matching analog gear scientifically accurate. That won't happen. It's more about getting close, or creating something different but with analog flavor. Developing a template with what you had experimented its crucial to save your time and have that analog workflow and vibe. Trying to match analog gear with their plugin version is nonsense.
@@aureliosilvaStop it... when UAD or any company sells an emulation like a tube-tech CL1B.....they sell the expectation and market that plugin is doing the same thing as the analog Hardware. You are completely moving the goal post and being completely disingenuous when you say "getting close or creating something different but with analog flavor". or " Trying to match analog gear with their plugin version is nonsense." They wouldn't be making any money if that is how it was marketed. Are there some good plugins yeah but what you're saying hear makes no sense because that is what people are paying for.
@@risingphoenix1484 You name it...marketing has always served that purpose and will never change. The only thing one can do is learn and form strong criteria in this regard so as not to continue falling into the trap. Good luck.
I truly love my Neve Orbit summing Mixer. I think its the saturation and color it brings to my mixes. But totally agree that digital summing is far more perfect! Too perfect for my own likings so i guess thats why i love Analog summing more in a musical way. Cheers
People love the sound of distortion, noise, and crosstalk. It makes the audio sound more natural because too perfect is unnatural. I'm sure the hardware sounds really nice but plugins recently have caught up. Not all but a few have.
@@vigilantestylez Hi, yea plugins getting better and better but so far I haven’t found the same or better sounds as my Neve Orbit, but ofcourse its also about personal taste. Altho Air windows Console 8 lite is amazing! Cheers
@@owlmuso I have compared a 1073 hardware unit to the Lindell 80 series and it's a perfect match to my ears. Can't hear even a slight difference between the 2.
Going from just summing in the daw, to a dangerous music box, to now a ssl six mixer. I must say summing mixers are still better for me. Much more headroom and everything fits into place easier like glue 😎 And you’re right analog gear chains are a better option Vs summing mixer. I’m Lucky to have my heritage successor and wa273 in the chain 💯
@@mixbustvhen goin out of your DA with 1 DA channel for each instrument of your track (which are summed after in the analog domain ) , you consequently have more headroom for every channel : indeed, you have way less instruments per DA channel
@@mixbustvthe headroom is going to get re converted into the daw so it will be limited. But if you run your busses into your summing mixer I’m sure the added 2db of headroom while Eqing helps catch certain things we might not normally catch. Idk I might be wrong
Hi, David and everybody! It feels like in such a question there are many details missed. What is the person plans to sum? If there are tracks running from a computer, let's say 96khz 24bit without any processing, so technically better to sum them in a computer. Because anyway they are converted already. If there are a lot of plugins on them, so even more technical sence to sum them ITB, because plugins work at 32 or 64 bit floating point, and the converter will reduce them to 24. So there will be less information to sum OTB. If you have a console, or run on those track an analog processing, there is a sence to sum them OTB. The analog processing could be much more detailed, then digital. It's like working on a much higher samplerate. So you want to keep it analog, when you sum them up. If after the summing you have an analog devices running - so there's even more sence to sum OTB - less conversion rounds. This is my opinion of course. Especially the comparison to "higher sample rate" is arguable - depends which device. But that what I saw on analog oscilloscope - there are much more details running, and more "resolution", when you apply analog processing.
Your plugins PROCESS at 32 or 64 or even higher, summing will have NO EFFECT, zero, nada on those (already happened) processes. None. I'd go thru the rest but it's been a long day.
@@mixbustv Yeah, long day is always a factor. Thanks for your answer ( - :. So! - Summing? Which summing do you mean? Digital? Right - won't. Analog - also won't. But your DA converter in case of analog summing definitely will. It will convert every single track from 64bit fp to 24 bit. Maybe only if you have converter that can playback at 32bit, then no. But if you loose info on every single track and not planning to do with those tracks in analog domain anything - just to sum - THEN it's probably worthless from a technical point of view (musically - who knows?) to sum them in Analog.
I love my 2BUS+ too but how does the team go out of their way? I have never been able to contact anyone of them. What HW unit do you use for the insert button if any at all?
@@riktascale4 The way I use it, 16 channels from the Appollo x16 into the 2bus then return into the Appollo (Cubase 12). As for support I had several back and forths with Mickey Cushing and he was beyond helpful.
You are totally right about the mathematical part of a summing network. But there are a the transformers, a proper amplifier, and again transformers. They add harmonics, a minuscule amount of compression and group delays. These are the good parts. Add some tiny fraction of noise and some crosstalk from the resistors in a real mixer and you have the bad parts. If you don’t believe in the good parts, don’t buy an ORAM mixer, because except for the transformers nowadays it’s exactly his selling point - not perfect but perfect for music.
Yeah 2k for a summing mixer is allot for me but I would go for something like a new mic or 500 series collection instead. Unless Im looking for something like that ssl fusion 😍. All sorts of gear is just so cool and have their purposes.
Hello, I'm using a Dangerous 2bus+. I connected everything as it should be from/to my Orion Studio (it's pretty much a common sense setup). However, for some reason, I keep getting feedback when I go Main Outs from the 2Bus+ into any inputs on my interface. I'm sure it's something simple being overlooked. Any idea on what it could be?
After i realise that saturation is the key ingredient of audio summing mixers is a thing of the past when there is a very cheap saturation hardware out there that just as good or even better than most big name summing mixers . The secret weapon is APHEX AURA EXCITER WITH BIG BOTTOM
Are you familiar with the Shadow Hills Equinox summing box? I find it somehow narrows the stereo image on stems coming out. Unless I’m doing something wrong with the wiring. I think I’ll just use ITB and leave the summing out of it. Especially if i have a pair of Neve 542’s on the mix bus with silk engaged? … although I do like the sound of the Steel transformer on the shadow hills.
I am, altho' it has been a minute since I used it. If I was to guess , you run the mix into the 542s and it sounds wider than if you run it into the Equinox or with the Equinox too. The reason is most likely because the 542s are two mono units and even if you have a "matched pair" or consecutive numbers like I do, they are not the same. They are different enough to give a wider mix. Some people won't like this, some - like me - will instead think it's one of the cool things about using them on the 2bus. That's probably why. I don't have fresh enough memory to remember if it does narrow the image a bit (which could very well be possible)
@@mixbustv yea well if you wanna buy my shadow hills equinox with the psu (it’s heavy) and do another video to test a/b summing box vs ITB you’re more than welcome to! 😄 I’m in Australia though.
I have a challenge for you. Buy a RND 5057 Orbit Summing Mixer. Route your signals to it for the "summing" without engaging the silk. Listen and compare the in the box sum and that of the 5057. I would like to see that video.
And that will demonstrate what exactly? That it will sound different. Which anyone with a functioning brain cell understands without the need for tests. Digital summing is literally PERFECT. All you need is to go out with anything and it'll sound different. But if you want to waste your money I ain't stopping you, although you probably already spent it
@@mixbustv What you call different, I call better. You keep calling digital summing "perfect." Are you aware that the human ear prefers imperfections? Hence why you have a ton of outboard analog gear. Have you ever even listened to a summing box yourself? Doesn't matter anyways. If I listened to half the stuff I read/saw on the internet, I would still be using a Focusrite Scarlett interface and would have never upgraded to a UAD Apollo because believe me, some people swore that there would be no benefit but I digress.
For anyone reading, summary of the story is this: You see it and it intrigues you? Buy it. You don't like it? Send it back. Stop listening to highly opinionated nonsense.
I've got a couple of saturation options, including some light weight console channel emulations. It's all I currently need. Would I love to put a programable patch bay with some great gear to good use ? Of course. Flavour. Precision. The feel and feedback of touching well designed controls is great to have. But in my case it's not economical in the slightest. I have to make do with a few dozen Midi Fighter Twister knobs, some decent faders, a few touch screens and a whole stack of arcade-level buttons that all drive my processors in the box. I really like the feel of a good Neve 8128 channel fader, or the rough edges of an 1178 knob, but I'll make do with what I've got :) . It's fun to use and pays the bills.
If all you want is analog summing, DIYRE sells a kit for like $50 USD. 16x2 via D-Sub, and it's tiny. Sure, you can make a fancy summing mixer with transformers and such, but if you're just doing simple analog summing... it's fifty bucks of parts. Now, you could run those into some colorful preamps and have a killer summing box that does the "glue" thing that nice saturation does for a hell of a lot less. And in fact, I recommend it: small studios might not have the cash for a ton of outboard gear, but you've probably got outputs and two nice preamps.
@@risingphoenix1484 D-Sub and Neutrik connectors: it's gonna sound exactly like the SSL SiX. If all you want is clean analog summing, that's what clean analog summing is. If it sounds like shit, it's cause it sounded like shit coming in: it'll probably null. Dan Worral has some excellent videos on the topic if you want more detail. If you want colored analog summing, then there's a whole rabbit hole to go down, but transformer balanced preamps are a classic option for a reason.
Damn, I was literally about to make a video on this exact same topic saying almost the exact same things you are saying about summing mixers. Guess I don’t have to now thanks.
If your Mixes are bad a summing mixer wont fix it. Just a straight up Information for People that inform themselves on this topic. The tool that had the greatest impact on my Mixes was my first Analog Bus compressor. Actually hearable difference and improvement in stereo width and depth. Id start with that, just my 2 cents.
I've seen the video with Reaper's creator, pretty amazing to have him on the channel. As a picky programmer though I want to say that floating point operations are NOT perfect, are not the exact equal sign and some tiny imprecisions may occur. But I challenge anyone to tell me they hear a difference between the bit depth we are actually using (increased bit depth would mean smaller magnitude of imprecisions). I don't want to put a controversy on the video though as this is still spot on sound wise.
Love your channel! What's the difference between a mix bus and a master bus? What kinds of processing should happen at which stage of the production???
Mixbus is mixing, mastering is mastering. They are two different stages, usually done by two different engineer (or a very good one). If it's you doing everything, it doesn't matter what you do where, it''s still you, still your room, still your ears, still your skills
Summing boxes aren't needed, but they sound nice. Studio One has console shaper that does the effect of a summing mixer and sounds good to me. So, no one really needs to shell out the money for one because this can be done in the box for people who WANT the effect. I'm not about to argue if people should want the effect. They have their creative reasons for having this effect on their songs and that is down to personal taste. Whether the console shaper sounds "analog" enough to make some people happy is up for debate but there are delusional people out there with money to burn and think hardware is always superior to plugins and no one can convince them even in a blind test that their hardware is obsolete in today's world.
there was a cool video back then about recreating some of the benefits of summing mixers, with some processing like saturation and crosstalk... very interesting one, made me buy DrMs which is awesome, can be dangerous and easy to go overboard with but amazing when you get it right
Doesnt make sense if you dont have high quality converters and speskers + room treatment first. I Have a SSL Six as a Summing Mixer with an Focusrite Interface and a not perfect room and I dont find much of a difference - maybe its the summing, maybe it is the lack of room/speaker etc
@@Firetracks I love the NLS summer and the ssl 4000 channel strip from bx. I've yet to try slate for summing don't know why I didn't think of that thanks fam!
@@Firetracks Have you had any experience with analog summing mixers? If so, how do you think it compares to digital summing? I feel like I already know the answer just curious of your personal opinion lol
Oh you mean a $10,000 USD MIXER? Ja, let's assume if you spend that much on a piece of gear it will DO something lol I also didn't know Kanye was a mix engineer, oh wait, because he's not, nor is Travis. Is Mike, he's their testimonial and he mixes those artists.
@@mixbustv sorry I’m maybe just missing the point. When you are balancing your mix and using all your outboard are you monitoring all that back through pro tools? Then you have a 2 out directly to speakers? Did I just answer my own question?
@@peppercrybeatz Everything is still monitored through your DAW. What you hear is what you print. The signal goes out to the analog gear and is returned to the DAW. Don't over think it...
Except, that is only in your head. There is nothing besides saturation that happens in summing mixers, it can't really, if you logically think about it. Dan Worall did a video not too long ago about this (/watch?v=wVp4syrFkE0), in which he shows this, including with a null test. There is no analog (as in non-linear) sum, so it is basically just a gimmick, to appeal to a market of people that think anything analog is just better.
@@AlexLapugean I’ve been doing this a looooong time. I’ve done my own tests. When I have a big mix the summing definitely helps with elements sitting better. Is it day and night? No. That’s why a Null test is moot here. We’re talking micro changes. Is it worth it? For me it is. While I respect Dan’s scientific approach to audio I’m into making music and feeling something while doing it. I would never tell anyone they need a summing mixer. I now use an API console but that’s for tracking as well as mixing. Do I need it? No. Do I love it? Yes
@@RPMusicStudios I understand having something for workflow purposes. A console is of course not needed but I would understand liking to work on one, having all those faders and knobs right at hand. But a summing mixer doesn't do anything that a simple DAW controller cannot do from workflow point of view and from the sound point of view, sorry mate, but a null test is proof beyond certainty that the signals are IDENTICAL. Saying you can hear a difference is like those audiophile snobs saying that they can definitely hear the difference of a $1000 cable lifted 20cm off the ground ... Well, there is of course a difference with the summing mixer, but the difference is simply a saturation added to the signal. If you particularly like that saturation, that is absolutely fine, but it has nothing to do with the "analog summing", as in it being different in any way from a digital sum, so the point I am making is that it is probably not that difficult to find a color box that ads the same character, while being much more versatile.
@@AlexLapugean I just watched his video. I’ve never got my mixes to null like that so maybe I’d have to try it again but I don’t have a summing mixer anymore. Perhaps he’s right. Now mixing on a console with outboard gear is a different beast.
Agreed, this has always been a head scratcher for me. If people like the sound that's cool, not here to tell anyone what to do. But why do an entire mix then run blindly it through a box that changes crosstalk, transients, etc? Better to mix it correctly from the onset. The new features they're adding make them more interesting though.
Are all summing mixers equal though. Summing only a bit pointless. But some offer great coloration options (5059, TC fat B) for example. As well as useful routing options. Not must haves of course and I’m sure can be approximated itb. But I like having the flexibility. More for creative purposes really. Very handy for creating Alt. mixes or parallel buses if you have a ton of outboard. Mostly luxury toys for creativity though. If I was always on the clock I’d probably use them a lot less. Thankfully I’m not so don’t have to worry. Good to have options though. But yes agree the ‘hype’ was just that. They are not ‘silver bullets’.
Thank god you have put out this video today was gonna pull the trigger on a Neve 5059 summing mixer .......i do have a lot of outboard gear including the Neve Portico II MBP so i guess i'm all set .......thank you for saving me a lot of $$$ that i can put elsewhere 👍
I have a 5059 that feeds into a 5060. Depending on your workflow and the gear that you want to live on the mixer, it is very worth it and can make a huge difference.
@@joelhume1 You can just have a much cheaper controller for the DAW mixer, and you'll have the same workflow, even beter. Besides saturation, there is nothing added by the suming mixer, so if that is your aim, you're much better off just getting a color box, that is much more versatile and also cheaper.
@@joelhume1 since 5060 cost a small fortune, what makes it most worth it, do mixes fall into place, faster in nicer more classic sounding way? because of being able to push the mixbus bus transformer red fader ?
@@barneyrubble8255 Hi, the 5060 is expensive and not for everyone. I’ve made my living off of mixing for the last 18 years, so it’s a small price to pay for the functionality. It is literally the center piece of my studio. I use the monitor control and headphone amp which both sound great, but the main reason to use a summing mixer is to have a place where all my analog hardware can live without the need for a bunch of DAW hardware inserts. I use a 5059 in conjunction with the 5060 to cover all my needs. With all my gear living on the mixers, the sound running through is incredible before I turn a knob.
In my case the saturation experience was freaking awesome that I decided to leave it alone because it soften out the low end but the experience was sonically good for someone working on romantic and classic music but for hip hop or urban music I wouldn't recommend it
If you are summing in the box using your DAW you are limited to the algorithms of your DAW simple as that, you’ll always get a pro tools sound or logic or reaper or ableton it’s just 1s and 0s and proprietary algorithms
I didn’t say that (and ironically that would be the point of putting it through an analogue summing mix to give it a particular sound which the DAWs do not have). Every DAW works on 1s and 0s and have their own proprietor algorithms when it sums them, you’ll always be stuck to that. That algorithm will produce a summing mix with a particular mathematical equation which you can equate to a particular DAWs way of summing it or sound if you will which it cannot deviate from because of copyright issues and how it works. You can sum a 10 in multiple ways; 2 x 5, 1+9, ect, DAWs are stuck to a particular algorithmic way of summing those 1s and 0s. The other part of it is that during summing it is incredibly inaccurate because there is polyphony involved and multiple sounds which your DAW cannot differentiate between, just like a soup which has all the ingredients in it, it can’t tell the raw ingredients apart anymore and estimates a particular final mixed sound. It can’t accurate map those 1s and 0s to how a sound made up of multiple sounds accurately anymore
I didn’t say that (and ironically that would be the point of putting it through an analogue summing mix to give it a particular sound which the DAWs do not have). Every DAW works on 1s and 0s and have their own proprietor algorithms when it sums them, you’ll always be stuck to that. That algorithm will produce a summing mix with a particular mathematical equation which you can equate to a particular DAWs way of summing it or sound if you will which it cannot deviate from because of copyright issues and how it works. You can sum a 10 in multiple ways; 2 x 5, 1+9, ect, DAWs are stuck to a particular algorithmic way of summing those 1s and 0s. The other part of it is that during summing it is incredibly inaccurate because there is polyphony involved and multiple sounds which your DAW cannot differentiate between, just like a soup which has all the ingredients in it, it can’t tell the raw ingredients apart anymore and estimates a particular final mixed sound. It can’t accurate map those 1s and 0s to how a sound made up of multiple sounds accurately anymore
I'll have to look up that video of you talking to the guy from Reaper. Do you use Reaper much yourself? (I know you're usually in Pro Tools in your videos!)
The transformers (or tubes) part is true and I agree. But for digital summing versus analog summing you are wrong, digital summing is far behind analog summing, it doesn’t add the same separation and depth, and it’s normal when you understand that it’s just some binary calculations applying the same algorithm everywhere, while an analog summing has too much variations due to the analog circuit which adds some separation because of the non linearity. It’s strange that you use PA SSL channelstrip because they add variations in each channel with their TMT technology saying that this helps adding depth and separation, then you say that the real equipments doing the same thing but in real world are not worth it. To correct what you are saying, analog summing adds some separation and depth, and the transformers or tubes in them add coloration and analog mojo, and both help enhancing a mix by few percentages compared to a mix summed digitally, and yes it’s just some few percentage but it’s worth it, like every hardware in your setup, each of them is adding just few percentage, so why you accept this for a compressor or a saturation box and you think that analog summing is bullshit because it’s just some few percentages? And summing mixers are not too expensive nowadays and they have better features, which explains why more and more people are using them.
Confirm. There's nice video by Dan Warral about analog summing. Called summing shwuminng or something like that. And. After calibrating accurately all the channels of my neve summer box - I felt myself so stupid. And from that time - my analog summer is just dustbox.. need to sell it. If someone's gonna buy it 😂
I am a producer / mixing engineer that doesn't make living of music yet, but I want to step up my "game". Is it a good idea to go semi-hybrid - I plan to use plugins on individual tracks, then go outboard for the busses (drums/bass/gtrs/vox/FX) into analogue gear, sum it and use analogue eq+comp before getting back into digital? I use pretty decent RME converters. Thanks in advance and keep up doing great work 🤘
Skip the summing. Basically useless besides the saturation part. And if it is the saturation that you want, there are much better investments than summing mixers.
@@AdamZiokowski666 Nothing wrong with that, if you are refering to summing in the DAW, than getting the 2bus from the daw out to the DA converters and then trough the analog chain. I was refering to skipping the analog summing mixers, and just sum in the daw.
@@AdamZiokowski666 Not sure I follow... You need DA conversion to get from the box (DAW) to the analog gear. Regardless by what particular piece of gear that is done, you cannot get away from it. The idea is, that if you just have an analog masterin chain, you need a single converter for that, while for an analog summing mixer you would need as manny DA converters as there are mixer channels (even if that is internally done in the summing mixer, there are still that many converters inside). So that ywould be an aditional reason the just skip the analog summing, You would be much better off to have the best converter you can, rather then several mediocre ones.
You have the silk in the 542s and others tho, arguably all better options than the summing. Funny enough quite some live engineers use it to sum things for the live mixes. (Obviously big acts)
@@mixbustv I largely agree with that. It is like better handled by things like the 542s and other similar processors. However, if you already have a bunch of analog boxes you use on individual tracks/groups, and you want more, this is not a bad choice. I agree most people could probably find better value elsewhere, but I also do think there is a genuine market for these types of things too (ie - not just people who want to keep marketers employed). That’s interesting about live engineers. I never thought of that but that makes sense to me
Well, just make life easier, like instead of buying a V475 summing mixer, just get that Card and insert it into the stereo Mixbus, boom you have the sound. No hassle needed, no DA Converters either. Bob Katz was already clear on the snakeoil of summing mixers in his 'must read' book 'Mastering Audio - the Art and the Science' from 2002 !!! RUclips came in 2005....
If your not at Semi professional level, This channel is not for you.. However we want hear the difference in sound among Api vs Ssl vs Neve and other big hardware brand
Yea the idea that the adding together of the signals is somehow better out of the box than in is just super strange to me. I’m all for analog gear and color. I just feel there’s way better ways of getting that. Plus I’m not a fan of the routing limitations that come with summing mixers honestly.
🤓To make this shit simple, a coil (a transformer is two or more coils interacting with each other by a magnetic force field) cuts off high frequencies and capacitors cuts off low frequencies - this is the reason why you see capacitors and coils in speaker filters. This is extremely oversimplified, but otherwise it gets very complicated. Due to this phenomenon, you get something called impedance - a resistance that changes depending on the frequency. To get the maximum gain, and a minimum of frequency issues, the two interacting circuits shall have a matching impedance. This is also likely one of the reasons why David likes his analog equipment, because it is slightly unpredictable, especially when using transformers and tubes. We can for sure emulate everything in the digital world, but when you start to crank things then the analog world starts to commonly create interesting unpredictable results, and no programmer can add this in the digital world without risking it to sound like shit if not sitting and tweaking that code for months or years.
Can anyone here definitively answer whether the old Waves NLS system is actually modelling summing? I hear mixed things about this. is it even possible to emulate true summing in a DAW?
not sure why you focus on that plugin in particular, is okay but there's better but, NLS is channel and busses saturation, there's nothing more to it. It's okay but I would NEVER use it on every channel for sure. Console 1 by Softube on the other hand is the way to go, but there's much more to it than just saturation on single channels. No it's not possible to emulate analog summing just like there's no way to emulate analog 100% in general. But the question is why would you want to do it? Again, you will hear different voices but having even a few selected pieces of analog will probably do more to your mix than analog summing. Yet you can start here: ruclips.net/video/u7TcIVLJN3o/видео.html ruclips.net/video/zirnaBrAi90/видео.html
@@mixbustv thanks so much for the reply! I'll watch these. I don't particularly like the NLS, but it advertised itself as being analog summing but many people in forums have claimed it's just saturation which isn't the same. I'm not a purist. I just want to understand how to make stuff sound good.
@@YourFavouriteColor Well, in a sense it is true, it is analog summing, but not because it "emulates the non-linear summing", rather because also in analog summing, there is basically nothing else happening besides saturation. And it's not even a great plugin for that, the saturation is not versatile at all, the plugin is cluncky as hell, doesn't have oversampling. There are much better plugins that recreate the transformer sound, that have many more options and a much better quality.
@@YourFavouriteColor I really like True Iron by Kazrog and P42 Climax by Pulsar Modular for relativelly simple transformer emulations, perfect for adding on indivudual channels (but also on busses, sure), and Saturn 2 by FabFIlter for busses/mix bus, for when you need more versatility/multiband capabilities (although that needs a bit more tweaking to get it to sound really good, it's not meant to be an "add it and forget about it" plugin).
A lot of pessimists and brokies in this comment section. These aren’t even that expensive lol Of course you don’t NEED this, some get use out of it some don’t. Depends on the engineer.
Spot on as usual. I would add that crosstalk also comes into play when summing in analog which is something to be avoided (theoretically) as the signal of a channels affect the neighbors due to electromagnetic interference. Making it even less perfect as u mentioned but…more analog in a way? AFAIK there is no plugin which recreates that because should have to be inserted in all channels. Perhaps heat by protools takes that into account? Or oxide in luna? I believe that is something interesting to be explored.
@@mixbustv A while back I added crosstalk using Ampex plugin by uad to a song’s master and the “producer” liked the effect when applied. More 3D-ish if you allow me. It ended up with nearly 200k views on youtube which is a quite a lot for an independent hip hop band (even though that I presume that it was not the primary reason as to why that happened:). Keep up with the content, I learn a lot!
No, that's not the case here, The summing mixers are not just a saturation boxes. I use Cubase from SL3 and from then I was trying to get professional sound, but no, something was always missing. In 2022 I start to going to a music academy and found out many real pro secrets of the music production, so this year I purchase a voxbox, a Shelford channel a tubetech mec 1a , an RND master buss processor, an uad x16 , an x8p AND and orbit 5750. GUYS, GET IT N O W . Your problems will resolved just like that. Extremely stereo widening , no masking whatever nowhere, cleaner low end , no harsh high end, etc, basically you getting a Rupert Neve console. Everything just getting their position in the mix effortless. The Shelford channel is amazing also, we compared it with the 511 and , well we where laughing...
So let me get this right. You say "no" to what I'm saying - someone who btw runs about 20x the analog gear you listed and have 20 years of experience vs you starting school last year - that the summing boxes are not just saturation boxes - even tho you can literally OPEN THEM and see what's inside - and you solved all your sound issues buy buying ANYTHING BUT a summing box? Makes sense lol I'ma save this for a video now
Op amps.... Multiple stages of op amps, transformers.... Capacitors.... EQ's have a while circuit.... Compressors have a whole circuit.... Consoles are complex.... Very tiny amount of multi channel Crosstalk. (not stereo Crosstalk) perhaps some noise suppression circuitry. Very, very complex. If you want to go outboard on the mix bus get a really nice compressor.... or like one of those well-made pull tech clones, etc. A dummy analogue summing box with a couple transformers is a joke.
That says literally nothing. "All about sound and dynamics" Nice abstract phrase. What's the difference in having let's say 50+ channels of analog gear?
@@mixbustv yeah you are right. In Dutch we would say "beetje kort door de bocht". When I take my drum machine and use the separate 8 outs to a mixer, proces them with eq, comp, tape etc. and then record it into my workstation it sound, for me (so maybe not for others) better then when I would do the same process fully ITB. More dynamics, more humb, more smash or whatever term you call it.
👎👎This is not the correct way to use SUMMING. Comparing two stereo channels is minimal change, which is not how to get the full benefit of summing. (I had to do the thumbs down! lol )
@@mixbustv You are correct. I was watching a Mad Steex video on summing as well, and I added my comment on your channel. my apologies. Thank you for making awesome content.
![Lil Uzi Vert - We Good [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DrSfBULAsek/mqdefault.jpg)
When I got my summing mixer, Neve 5059, That immediately had a massive impact on the quality of my mixes. With silk engaged, I was able to get rid of 50% of the saturation plugins I was using on my mixes and was able to get more width and depth instantly. It is indispensable to me. I consider it the most important piece of gear in my studio.
Exactly, silk. The transformer inside. That's what you like. Exactly the same you find in all the other pieces in their line, in my tape 542's etc.. not about "summing"
@@mixbustv like with everything it depends on your goals. The 5059 is amazing for creating a hybrid workflow with all of the analog inserts on each channel, it's great for summing multiple mics as I record in, it sounds awesome to track and mix monitoring through it the entire time, it has two different mix busses for creative routing etc. its not just a silk box
The biggest change I noticed to improve the signal quality in the most pleasant way for the ear, more than any analog machine like a compressor or equalizer or saturator, was passing my stems through the crane song egret.
@@mixbustvonly cause it’s neve transformers. The added harmonics from their transformers saturates the signal and gives it character and presence. It’s all about adding added color and depth in stages in your mix same as how people stage compression.
I'm glad Access Analog now has one up, so we can all rent one remotely for cheap and be the judge of whether it's worth the price of admission.
I've been making music for 33 years. I finally switched to a 32 channel summing setup a few years ago and noticed an immediate difference in the sonic clarity and depth of my mixes. I did A/B comparisons with numerous digital sum mixes and found the analog sum mix versions to be superior on every one. The biggest difference I noticed was the clarity in the high end and how the hi-hats, shakers, and other high end sounds sounded much more alive and had their own space to live, whereas on the digital versions the high end sounds sounded flatter and pushed to the back. I'll never go back to digital summing and there are many top mix engineers that swear by analog summing as well. Some people can't hear or appreciate the difference. I can, and it sounds amazing! 🤷♂️
I want to believe that with your "some people can't hear the difference" you're no backhand referring to me lol because your golden ears and your years of experience shold tell you that someone who runs an excess of 50 channels of hand selected analog on a regular basis drags your 32channels of summing by the leash and let it sit on command. It should also tell you that for that "analog mojo that makes everything more alive and bla bla bla" a setup with a collection of the best gear in the world, tubes, xformers, and units that ACTUALLY do something other than a shade of color puts a summing mixer to absolute shame. But I know you're smarter than that and you wouldn't poke a bear.
@@mixbustv No offense intended, sir! You know as well as I do though that many people can't hear the subtle differences and nuances of quality sound, whether it be mics, preamps, AD/DA, etc. I think the real argument is whether or not the cost can be justified to get that extra bit of quality sound. For many people, especially those that are not pros, probably not. I'm glad I did it though and am very pleased with the results.
the biggest complaint about most summing mixers I have is, that there is no individual level control AFTER you hit stuff on your inserts. every level change is changing the level going into a specific piece of gear and that would drive me nuts.
there are a few with faders, but then why not use a console in the first place?
@@DSane206 a very good point you bring up, I've talked to some pros that have wondered whether that 6000 dollar Atomic Clock really made such a huge noticeable difference in their sound after all, or whether that money should've been invested somewhere else on something more noticeably effective.
This is, of course, a question that only certain people can really answer- as you've noticed.
Speaking of Hearing...
I'd also like to point out that there have been some folks, especially during Covid, who were able to successfully place their music in films, and win Grammy's in untreated rooms.
I have friends who are currently in school for Audio Engineering, and I showed them pictures of some of these rooms, and their big complaint was that neither of these rooms were even treated. They argued adamantly how the engineer or musician couldn't really hear what was being referenced.
I then told them these people were pros, who in these very rooms, made music that went into film and mastered a Grammy winning album.
The only thing I'd like to encourage you to do is to follow your instincts, always keep developing that ear, and realize that many people may say Some Thing... but that Some Thing may not actually be correct 100% of the time. Do what you feel is right DSane, trust your Instincts.
If u have the skil of chain plugins in mixing and mastering, u dont need it.😊
I trust my ears, And Analog summing is absolutely crucial for me.
1. The idea of summing box is not things you add into your mix as "soundgoodizer", but a tool that you used while mixing and mix into it so you'll get the analog headroom while you are working in the box. Think of it when a track that already hit the ceiling in your DAW converted out of DAW into the summing box, you still be able to push it or do stuff to it because the headroom in the analog is unlimited until the signal get distorted/broken whatever before they are all summed and converted back to digital to you DAW to a proper volume, sometimes you get even more headroom when they are summed together because of the soft clipping that happens along the way in the circuitry for certain summing box that have all that. You will be able to do it the console way where sometimes mixers like to get that "pushed" sound and push it for how the analog gear handle the transient and volume. Not saying you have to do that or you can't do that in digital with clipper etc, but some people already familiar with working like that, and summing box will give that option and experience. All of this happens without you even noticing it, because you are busy mixing, which making it more cool. Does it improve the sound ? sometimes if done correctly.
2. The most obvious one is natural summing like how it was done in the consoles day, audio signals that were converted to electrical voltage summed together. It's an alternative to DAW summing where it is as perfect as we know it. When electrical voltage interact into each other and summed, there are natural phenomenon that happens caused by a lot of factor, tolerance of the component, temperature around you etc which will give a different result. Whatever that is, how small it could be, it's there and the DAW summing doesn't have it and it all happens while you mixing without you ever noticing it too. The result by no means is good or better, it's just different. Some people like it that way, that sounds are better merged together naturally like how it is in the real world instead of perfect math of DAW summing. It's just preference.
3. Testing mix with and without analog summing is just... weird. You use the summing box while mixing for the whole experience, you make mixing decision along the way. You don't add analog summing after you done with mixing, that's just another weird way to use it. A lot of engineers agree that there's no definite way to test the analog summing box because you can't just do it. Comparing mixes that done through analog summing, when all the decision made through it then put it out of the chain and compare the mix without it and says it's more 3D whatever is just dumb IMO. You would've made a different decision mixing without it. duh
4. Do we all need analog summing ? NO. Will it improves the mix drastically ? NO. Will it improves the mix slightly ? NO. Will it improves the mix at all ? Fucking NO. The only one that can improve the mix is you the mixer! As for now summing box is just different workflow and maybe another cool stuff to have and play around to make our everyday work more fun and cool. Different workflow sometimes give different result that can be good or bad depends on the mixer himself. That's just it.
And also it allows you to avoid some second stage conversion if you work with hardware on the master and buses
Brilliant comment! Thanks for your knowledge.
I agree 100%. I consider a summing mixer an invaluable part of my workflow and sound.
and….that’s all folks 💪😅👍
truly properly stated ✅
If you want headroom just a clipper? 😂
Thanks so very much for pausing to answer this, David.
You (and your team) are and have continued to be an integral part of my learning process. I appreciate you, Alex, and Bella immensely.
Be well, Brother.
Thanks for that question! Great to hear David talk about it.
@@thegoodgeneral Thank you for your reply. Sometimes I begin to wonder if i'm losing my mind down all of the little rabbit-holes which audio leads me down... it's great to share this @MixbusTV community with people who are also excited and curious to learn from our generous (yet humble) proprietor of information, his team, and his guests. :-)
I bought a used Dangerous Music summer for $700. It’s great. Does a lot of stuff in a single box.
Analog summing is on another level of quality - it's expensive but totally worth it. No chances for reproducing this sound using any plugins. Each instrument have own 'track' in a mix... everything sound more natural...wider, deeper - more like during live performance - each instrument have own space and they are not interrupting eachother. SSL Sigma is best analog summing device in my opinion and worth every pence. After hearing what analog summing does it's really hard to go back ITB.
You're describing analog. Not analog summing. Summing is not an issue ITB. Have as many pieces of analog as a summing mixer has channels and you'll have a much superior system
Just received my second hand VintageMaster neumann 475 (24 ch), I just love the way it sounds….
One major point I feel you’re missing is headroom. My Neve 5057 clips in a very musical way when pushed past 0, similar to a console.
True, yet you can get the same with other units that offer more functions for the same price. I'm not bring down the unit, it's a great one.
@@mixbustv just curious which sort of units would you be referring to? because I was looking at the Fatso but I read somewhere on your videos that for electronic music the fatso might be too soft in terms of colouring/clipping
After watching Michael Brauer's masterclass on the Pure Mix platform, and the way his assistant has recreated the brauerizer template completely in the box (summing mixers included), now I'm totally convinced that you don't need any real analog process in the mix. Although it can be fun and creative, it's not a MUST anymore.
As you said, you're convinced so..
lol.... yeah ok.. when you use Plugin doctor and look at what these plugins are doing especially the emulations.... they don't match. but like you said "you're conviced" but the science says nope.
@@risingphoenix1484 I don't think is about matching analog gear scientifically accurate. That won't happen. It's more about getting close, or creating something different but with analog flavor. Developing a template with what you had experimented its crucial to save your time and have that analog workflow and vibe. Trying to match analog gear with their plugin version is nonsense.
@@aureliosilvaStop it... when UAD or any company sells an emulation like a tube-tech CL1B.....they sell the expectation and market that plugin is doing the same thing as the analog Hardware. You are completely moving the goal post and being completely disingenuous when you say "getting close or creating something different but with analog flavor". or " Trying to match analog gear with their plugin version is nonsense." They wouldn't be making any money if that is how it was marketed. Are there some good plugins yeah but what you're saying hear makes no sense because that is what people are paying for.
@@risingphoenix1484 You name it...marketing has always served that purpose and will never change. The only thing one can do is learn and form strong criteria in this regard so as not to continue falling into the trap. Good luck.
I truly love my Neve Orbit summing Mixer. I think its the saturation and color it brings to my mixes. But totally agree that digital summing is far more perfect! Too perfect for my own likings so i guess thats why i love Analog summing more in a musical way. Cheers
People love the sound of distortion, noise, and crosstalk. It makes the audio sound more natural because too perfect is unnatural. I'm sure the hardware sounds really nice but plugins recently have caught up. Not all but a few have.
@@vigilantestylez interesting point. In your opinion which plug-ins have caught up. Asking out of curiosity. Cheers
@@vigilantestylez Hi, yea plugins getting better and better but so far I haven’t found the same or better sounds as my Neve Orbit, but ofcourse its also about personal taste. Altho Air windows Console 8 lite is amazing! Cheers
@@owlmuso a lot of offerings from Slate Digital, Brainworx, Lindell Audio, and UAD. I've heard good things about Acustica and Softube as well.
@@owlmuso I have compared a 1073 hardware unit to the Lindell 80 series and it's a perfect match to my ears. Can't hear even a slight difference between the 2.
Going from just summing in the daw, to a dangerous music box, to now a ssl six mixer. I must say summing mixers are still better for me. Much more headroom and everything fits into place easier like glue 😎
And you’re right analog gear chains are a better option Vs summing mixer. I’m Lucky to have my heritage successor and wa273 in the chain 💯
I'm very curious: what headroom? Because unless you use tape your headroom on summing ain't gonna change
@@mixbustvhen goin out of your DA with 1 DA channel for each instrument of your track (which are summed after in the analog domain ) , you consequently have more headroom for every channel : indeed, you have way less instruments per DA channel
@@mixbustvthe headroom is going to get re converted into the daw so it will be limited. But if you run your busses into your summing mixer I’m sure the added 2db of headroom while Eqing helps catch certain things we might not normally catch. Idk I might be wrong
Hi, David and everybody! It feels like in such a question there are many details missed. What is the person plans to sum? If there are tracks running from a computer, let's say 96khz 24bit without any processing, so technically better to sum them in a computer. Because anyway they are converted already. If there are a lot of plugins on them, so even more technical sence to sum them ITB, because plugins work at 32 or 64 bit floating point, and the converter will reduce them to 24. So there will be less information to sum OTB. If you have a console, or run on those track an analog processing, there is a sence to sum them OTB. The analog processing could be much more detailed, then digital. It's like working on a much higher samplerate. So you want to keep it analog, when you sum them up. If after the summing you have an analog devices running - so there's even more sence to sum OTB - less conversion rounds. This is my opinion of course. Especially the comparison to "higher sample rate" is arguable - depends which device. But that what I saw on analog oscilloscope - there are much more details running, and more "resolution", when you apply analog processing.
Your plugins PROCESS at 32 or 64 or even higher, summing will have NO EFFECT, zero, nada on those (already happened) processes. None. I'd go thru the rest but it's been a long day.
@@mixbustv Yeah, long day is always a factor. Thanks for your answer ( - :. So! - Summing? Which summing do you mean? Digital? Right - won't. Analog - also won't. But your DA converter in case of analog summing definitely will. It will convert every single track from 64bit fp to 24 bit. Maybe only if you have converter that can playback at 32bit, then no. But if you loose info on every single track and not planning to do with those tracks in analog domain anything - just to sum - THEN it's probably worthless from a technical point of view (musically - who knows?) to sum them in Analog.
Love my Dangerous 2bus+ and I love the peeps at Dangerous that go out of their way to ensure you enjoy their products.... ;)
I love my 2BUS+ too but how does the team go out of their way? I have never been able to contact anyone of them. What HW unit do you use for the insert button if any at all?
@@riktascale4 The way I use it, 16 channels from the Appollo x16 into the 2bus then return into the Appollo (Cubase 12). As for support I had several back and forths with Mickey Cushing and he was beyond helpful.
@@Phat-Monkey Ok but on the 2BUS+ there is an insert button (green light.) I was asking if you run any hardware unit into the insert of the BUS+?
@@riktascale4 no mate...
You are totally right about the mathematical part of a summing network. But there are a the transformers, a proper amplifier, and again transformers. They add harmonics, a minuscule amount of compression and group delays. These are the good parts. Add some tiny fraction of noise and some crosstalk from the resistors in a real mixer and you have the bad parts. If you don’t believe in the good parts, don’t buy an ORAM mixer, because except for the transformers nowadays it’s exactly his selling point - not perfect but perfect for music.
Yeah 2k for a summing mixer is allot for me but I would go for something like a new mic or 500 series collection instead. Unless Im looking for something like that ssl fusion 😍. All sorts of gear is just so cool and have their purposes.
Hello, I'm using a Dangerous 2bus+. I connected everything as it should be from/to my Orion Studio (it's pretty much a common sense setup). However, for some reason, I keep getting feedback when I go Main Outs from the 2Bus+ into any inputs on my interface. I'm sure it's something simple being overlooked. Any idea on what it could be?
After i realise that saturation is the key ingredient of audio summing mixers is a thing of the past when there is a very cheap saturation hardware out there that just as good or even better than most big name summing mixers . The secret weapon is APHEX AURA EXCITER WITH BIG BOTTOM
😄 please don't go saying this out loud
Are you familiar with the Shadow Hills Equinox summing box? I find it somehow narrows the stereo image on stems coming out. Unless I’m doing something wrong with the wiring. I think I’ll just use ITB and leave the summing out of it. Especially if i have a pair of Neve 542’s on the mix bus with silk engaged? … although I do like the sound of the Steel transformer on the shadow hills.
I am, altho' it has been a minute since I used it. If I was to guess , you run the mix into the 542s and it sounds wider than if you run it into the Equinox or with the Equinox too. The reason is most likely because the 542s are two mono units and even if you have a "matched pair" or consecutive numbers like I do, they are not the same. They are different enough to give a wider mix. Some people won't like this, some - like me - will instead think it's one of the cool things about using them on the 2bus. That's probably why. I don't have fresh enough memory to remember if it does narrow the image a bit (which could very well be possible)
@@mixbustv yea well if you wanna buy my shadow hills equinox with the psu (it’s heavy) and do another video to test a/b summing box vs ITB you’re more than welcome to! 😄 I’m in Australia though.
I have a challenge for you. Buy a RND 5057 Orbit Summing Mixer. Route your signals to it for the "summing" without engaging the silk. Listen and compare the in the box sum and that of the 5057. I would like to see that video.
And that will demonstrate what exactly? That it will sound different. Which anyone with a functioning brain cell understands without the need for tests. Digital summing is literally PERFECT. All you need is to go out with anything and it'll sound different. But if you want to waste your money I ain't stopping you, although you probably already spent it
@@mixbustv What you call different, I call better. You keep calling digital summing "perfect." Are you aware that the human ear prefers imperfections? Hence why you have a ton of outboard analog gear. Have you ever even listened to a summing box yourself? Doesn't matter anyways. If I listened to half the stuff I read/saw on the internet, I would still be using a Focusrite Scarlett interface and would have never upgraded to a UAD Apollo because believe me, some people swore that there would be no benefit but I digress.
For anyone reading, summary of the story is this: You see it and it intrigues you? Buy it. You don't like it? Send it back. Stop listening to highly opinionated nonsense.
I've got a couple of saturation options, including some light weight console channel emulations. It's all I currently need. Would I love to put a programable patch bay with some great gear to good use ? Of course. Flavour. Precision. The feel and feedback of touching well designed controls is great to have. But in my case it's not economical in the slightest. I have to make do with a few dozen Midi Fighter Twister knobs, some decent faders, a few touch screens and a whole stack of arcade-level buttons that all drive my processors in the box. I really like the feel of a good Neve 8128 channel fader, or the rough edges of an 1178 knob, but I'll make do with what I've got :) . It's fun to use and pays the bills.
If all you want is analog summing, DIYRE sells a kit for like $50 USD. 16x2 via D-Sub, and it's tiny.
Sure, you can make a fancy summing mixer with transformers and such, but if you're just doing simple analog summing... it's fifty bucks of parts.
Now, you could run those into some colorful preamps and have a killer summing box that does the "glue" thing that nice saturation does for a hell of a lot less. And in fact, I recommend it: small studios might not have the cash for a ton of outboard gear, but you've probably got outputs and two nice preamps.
its going to sound like sh!t
@@risingphoenix1484 D-Sub and Neutrik connectors: it's gonna sound exactly like the SSL SiX. If all you want is clean analog summing, that's what clean analog summing is. If it sounds like shit, it's cause it sounded like shit coming in: it'll probably null.
Dan Worral has some excellent videos on the topic if you want more detail.
If you want colored analog summing, then there's a whole rabbit hole to go down, but transformer balanced preamps are a classic option for a reason.
Damn, I was literally about to make a video on this exact same topic saying almost the exact same things you are saying about summing mixers. Guess I don’t have to now thanks.
If your Mixes are bad a summing mixer wont fix it. Just a straight up Information for People that inform themselves on this topic. The tool that had the greatest impact on my Mixes was my first Analog Bus compressor. Actually hearable difference and improvement in stereo width and depth. Id start with that, just my 2 cents.
I've seen the video with Reaper's creator, pretty amazing to have him on the channel.
As a picky programmer though I want to say that floating point operations are NOT perfect, are not the exact equal sign and some tiny imprecisions may occur.
But I challenge anyone to tell me they hear a difference between the bit depth we are actually using (increased bit depth would mean smaller magnitude of imprecisions).
I don't want to put a controversy on the video though as this is still spot on sound wise.
Can I have a link please. I don't find it.
My DAW of choice.
Awesome video
Love your channel!
What's the difference between a mix bus and a master bus? What kinds of processing should happen at which stage of the production???
Mixbus is mixing, mastering is mastering. They are two different stages, usually done by two different engineer (or a very good one). If it's you doing everything, it doesn't matter what you do where, it''s still you, still your room, still your ears, still your skills
Summing boxes aren't needed, but they sound nice. Studio One has console shaper that does the effect of a summing mixer and sounds good to me. So, no one really needs to shell out the money for one because this can be done in the box for people who WANT the effect. I'm not about to argue if people should want the effect. They have their creative reasons for having this effect on their songs and that is down to personal taste. Whether the console shaper sounds "analog" enough to make some people happy is up for debate but there are delusional people out there with money to burn and think hardware is always superior to plugins and no one can convince them even in a blind test that their hardware is obsolete in today's world.
there was a cool video back then about recreating some of the benefits of summing mixers, with some processing like saturation and crosstalk...
very interesting one, made me buy DrMs which is awesome, can be dangerous and easy to go overboard with but amazing when you get it right
What is the unit below your stamchild? Did you already make a video about it?
ruclips.net/video/YcEK13mism8/видео.html
I bought the WA-MPX tube pre amp and it sounds amazing . Thanks for the recommendation
It's a great fun unit!
Doesnt make sense if you dont have high quality converters and speskers + room treatment first. I Have a SSL Six as a Summing Mixer with an Focusrite Interface and a not perfect room and I dont find much of a difference - maybe its the summing, maybe it is the lack of room/speaker etc
Your chain is only as strong as your weakest link
What plugins would you recommend for “digital summing”?
Slate stuff or any channel strip plugins in your arsenal that also have a buss setup. Waves has their NLS linear summer. Many different ways to do it.
@@Firetracks I love the NLS summer and the ssl 4000 channel strip from bx. I've yet to try slate for summing don't know why I didn't think of that thanks fam!
@@Firetracks Have you had any experience with analog summing mixers? If so, how do you think it compares to digital summing? I feel like I already know the answer just curious of your personal opinion lol
@@jeremiahmaryland Analog over digital for me.
@@jeremiahmaryland Yezirr, let me know your thoughts!
Phoenix Audio Nicerizer 16MKII for me is the best summing mixer on Market.
Mike dean, Travis scott, Kanye west all use Neve 5060
Oh you mean a $10,000 USD MIXER? Ja, let's assume if you spend that much on a piece of gear it will DO something lol
I also didn't know Kanye was a mix engineer, oh wait, because he's not, nor is Travis. Is Mike, he's their testimonial and he mixes those artists.
Totally agree.
so.. if you don't like summing mixers, but you have lots of analog gear.. how do you "sum" it all together? you must have some kind of console right?
No, you sum it in PT. Everything ends up in the 2bus eventually, that's also why I don't really need summing mixers, I have a lot of outboard gear.
What a stupid question i know david have quite a few ad/da converters and a patchbay
@@bighousemusic628 douche bag
@@mixbustv sorry I’m maybe just missing the point. When you are balancing your mix and using all your outboard are you monitoring all that back through pro tools? Then you have a 2 out directly to speakers? Did I just answer my own question?
@@peppercrybeatz Everything is still monitored through your DAW. What you hear is what you print. The signal goes out to the analog gear and is returned to the DAW. Don't over think it...
I love summing mixers. For me it’s not about just transformers. I find vocals sit better when using summing mixers.
Except, that is only in your head. There is nothing besides saturation that happens in summing mixers, it can't really, if you logically think about it. Dan Worall did a video not too long ago about this (/watch?v=wVp4syrFkE0), in which he shows this, including with a null test. There is no analog (as in non-linear) sum, so it is basically just a gimmick, to appeal to a market of people that think anything analog is just better.
@@AlexLapugean I’ve been doing this a looooong time. I’ve done my own tests. When I have a big mix the summing definitely helps with elements sitting better. Is it day and night? No. That’s why a Null test is moot here. We’re talking micro changes. Is it worth it? For me it is. While I respect Dan’s scientific approach to audio I’m into making music and feeling something while doing it. I would never tell anyone they need a summing mixer. I now use an API console but that’s for tracking as well as mixing. Do I need it? No. Do I love it? Yes
@@RPMusicStudios I understand having something for workflow purposes. A console is of course not needed but I would understand liking to work on one, having all those faders and knobs right at hand. But a summing mixer doesn't do anything that a simple DAW controller cannot do from workflow point of view and from the sound point of view, sorry mate, but a null test is proof beyond certainty that the signals are IDENTICAL. Saying you can hear a difference is like those audiophile snobs saying that they can definitely hear the difference of a $1000 cable lifted 20cm off the ground ... Well, there is of course a difference with the summing mixer, but the difference is simply a saturation added to the signal. If you particularly like that saturation, that is absolutely fine, but it has nothing to do with the "analog summing", as in it being different in any way from a digital sum, so the point I am making is that it is probably not that difficult to find a color box that ads the same character, while being much more versatile.
@@AlexLapugean I just watched his video. I’ve never got my mixes to null like that so maybe I’d have to try it again but I don’t have a summing mixer anymore. Perhaps he’s right. Now mixing on a console with outboard gear is a different beast.
@@RPMusicStudios I wouldn't bother to be honest. If you already have your console and are happy with it, just keep on doing what works best for you.
Agreed, this has always been a head scratcher for me. If people like the sound that's cool, not here to tell anyone what to do. But why do an entire mix then run blindly it through a box that changes crosstalk, transients, etc? Better to mix it correctly from the onset.
The new features they're adding make them more interesting though.
its just saturation like you said. Amazing how many "pros" dont understand what saturation is and what it does.
Are all summing mixers equal though. Summing only a bit pointless. But some offer great coloration options (5059, TC fat B) for example. As well as useful routing options. Not must haves of course and I’m sure can be approximated itb. But I like having the flexibility. More for creative purposes really. Very handy for creating Alt. mixes or parallel buses if you have a ton of outboard. Mostly luxury toys for creativity though. If I was always on the clock I’d probably use them a lot less. Thankfully I’m not so don’t have to worry. Good to have options though. But yes agree the ‘hype’ was just that. They are not ‘silver bullets’.
What are your thoughts on the Thermionic Culture summing mixers?
I've never tried any of those sorry I can't comment. I was never a big fan of their CV tho' or the compressor.
@@mixbustv Ok, thanks for the response.
Thank god you have put out this video today was gonna pull the trigger on a Neve 5059 summing mixer .......i do have a lot of outboard gear including the Neve Portico II MBP
so i guess i'm all set .......thank you for saving me a lot of $$$ that i can put elsewhere 👍
I have a 5059 that feeds into a 5060. Depending on your workflow and the gear that you want to live on the mixer, it is very worth it and can make a huge difference.
@@joelhume1 You can just have a much cheaper controller for the DAW mixer, and you'll have the same workflow, even beter. Besides saturation, there is nothing added by the suming mixer, so if that is your aim, you're much better off just getting a color box, that is much more versatile and also cheaper.
@@joelhume1 since 5060 cost a small fortune, what makes it most worth it, do mixes fall into place, faster in nicer more classic sounding way? because of being able to push the mixbus bus transformer red fader ?
@@barneyrubble8255 Hi, the 5060 is expensive and not for everyone. I’ve made my living off of mixing for the last 18 years, so it’s a small price to pay for the functionality. It is literally the center piece of my studio. I use the monitor control and headphone amp which both sound great, but the main reason to use a summing mixer is to have a place where all my analog hardware can live without the need for a bunch of DAW hardware inserts. I use a 5059 in conjunction with the 5060 to cover all my needs. With all my gear living on the mixers, the sound running through is incredible before I turn a knob.
In my case the saturation experience was freaking awesome that I decided to leave it alone because it soften out the low end but the experience was sonically good for someone working on romantic and classic music but for hip hop or urban music I wouldn't recommend it
I wouldn't recommend you going around not recommending that on hip hop or urban music lol it won't make you look good
Old School hip hop definitely needs saturation. It's part of the sound of the era.
I think a few acustica plugins can really nail the analogue sound.... especially the Gold Neve bus preamps
Anything like nebula preamp and consoles destroys most summing mixers
If you are summing in the box using your DAW you are limited to the algorithms of your DAW simple as that, you’ll always get a pro tools sound or logic or reaper or ableton it’s just 1s and 0s and proprietary algorithms
There's no such thing as "Pro Tools sound" or logic sound. DAWs do NOT have a sound. Period
I didn’t say that (and ironically that would be the point of putting it through an analogue summing mix to give it a particular sound which the DAWs do not have). Every DAW works on 1s and 0s and have their own proprietor algorithms when it sums them, you’ll always be stuck to that. That algorithm will produce a summing mix with a particular mathematical equation which you can equate to a particular DAWs way of summing it or sound if you will which it cannot deviate from because of copyright issues and how it works. You can sum a 10 in multiple ways; 2 x 5, 1+9, ect, DAWs are stuck to a particular algorithmic way of summing those 1s and 0s. The other part of it is that during summing it is incredibly inaccurate because there is polyphony involved and multiple sounds which your DAW cannot differentiate between, just like a soup which has all the ingredients in it, it can’t tell the raw ingredients apart anymore and estimates a particular final mixed sound. It can’t accurate map those 1s and 0s to how a sound made up of multiple sounds accurately anymore
I didn’t say that (and ironically that would be the point of putting it through an analogue summing mix to give it a particular sound which the DAWs do not have). Every DAW works on 1s and 0s and have their own proprietor algorithms when it sums them, you’ll always be stuck to that. That algorithm will produce a summing mix with a particular mathematical equation which you can equate to a particular DAWs way of summing it or sound if you will which it cannot deviate from because of copyright issues and how it works. You can sum a 10 in multiple ways; 2 x 5, 1+9, ect, DAWs are stuck to a particular algorithmic way of summing those 1s and 0s. The other part of it is that during summing it is incredibly inaccurate because there is polyphony involved and multiple sounds which your DAW cannot differentiate between, just like a soup which has all the ingredients in it, it can’t tell the raw ingredients apart anymore and estimates a particular final mixed sound. It can’t accurate map those 1s and 0s to how a sound made up of multiple sounds accurately anymore
Yes it is 📀
I'll have to look up that video of you talking to the guy from Reaper. Do you use Reaper much yourself? (I know you're usually in Pro Tools in your videos!)
I don't, I'm a PT only user
ruclips.net/video/OU3uv0xvz8M/видео.html
Can you do a QNA on compressor input volume I can't find any information online
The transformers (or tubes) part is true and I agree. But for digital summing versus analog summing you are wrong, digital summing is far behind analog summing, it doesn’t add the same separation and depth, and it’s normal when you understand that it’s just some binary calculations applying the same algorithm everywhere, while an analog summing has too much variations due to the analog circuit which adds some separation because of the non linearity.
It’s strange that you use PA SSL channelstrip because they add variations in each channel with their TMT technology saying that this helps adding depth and separation, then you say that the real equipments doing the same thing but in real world are not worth it.
To correct what you are saying, analog summing adds some separation and depth, and the transformers or tubes in them add coloration and analog mojo, and both help enhancing a mix by few percentages compared to a mix summed digitally, and yes it’s just some few percentage but it’s worth it, like every hardware in your setup, each of them is adding just few percentage, so why you accept this for a compressor or a saturation box and you think that analog summing is bullshit because it’s just some few percentages?
And summing mixers are not too expensive nowadays and they have better features, which explains why more and more people are using them.
Confirm. There's nice video by Dan Warral about analog summing. Called summing shwuminng or something like that.
And. After calibrating accurately all the channels of my neve summer box - I felt myself so stupid. And from that time - my analog summer is just dustbox.. need to sell it. If someone's gonna buy it 😂
so true...
I am a producer / mixing engineer that doesn't make living of music yet, but I want to step up my "game". Is it a good idea to go semi-hybrid - I plan to use plugins on individual tracks, then go outboard for the busses (drums/bass/gtrs/vox/FX) into analogue gear, sum it and use analogue eq+comp before getting back into digital?
I use pretty decent RME converters.
Thanks in advance and keep up doing great work 🤘
Skip the summing. Basically useless besides the saturation part. And if it is the saturation that you want, there are much better investments than summing mixers.
@@AlexLapugean I want to sum busses before using analogue 2bus eq/comp. What's wrong with that?
@@AdamZiokowski666 Nothing wrong with that, if you are refering to summing in the DAW, than getting the 2bus from the daw out to the DA converters and then trough the analog chain. I was refering to skipping the analog summing mixers, and just sum in the daw.
@@AlexLapugean why should I add ad/da convertion instead of RND silk or Dangerous Audio X-former?
@@AdamZiokowski666 Not sure I follow... You need DA conversion to get from the box (DAW) to the analog gear. Regardless by what particular piece of gear that is done, you cannot get away from it. The idea is, that if you just have an analog masterin chain, you need a single converter for that, while for an analog summing mixer you would need as manny DA converters as there are mixer channels (even if that is internally done in the summing mixer, there are still that many converters inside). So that ywould be an aditional reason the just skip the analog summing, You would be much better off to have the best converter you can, rather then several mediocre ones.
Analog summing, in and of itself, isn’t worth it. But what some of those boxes do, ie - RND’s silk feature, could absolutely be worth it
You have the silk in the 542s and others tho, arguably all better options than the summing. Funny enough quite some live engineers use it to sum things for the live mixes. (Obviously big acts)
@@mixbustv
I largely agree with that. It is like better handled by things like the 542s and other similar processors. However, if you already have a bunch of analog boxes you use on individual tracks/groups, and you want more, this is not a bad choice. I agree most people could probably find better value elsewhere, but I also do think there is a genuine market for these types of things too (ie - not just people who want to keep marketers employed).
That’s interesting about live engineers. I never thought of that but that makes sense to me
Well, just make life easier, like instead of buying a V475 summing mixer, just get that Card and insert it into the stereo Mixbus, boom you have the sound. No hassle needed, no DA Converters either. Bob Katz was already clear on the snakeoil of summing mixers in his 'must read' book 'Mastering Audio - the Art and the Science' from 2002 !!! RUclips came in 2005....
If your not at Semi professional level, This channel is not for you.. However we want hear the difference in sound among Api vs Ssl vs Neve and other big hardware brand
Yea the idea that the adding together of the signals is somehow better out of the box than in is just super strange to me. I’m all for analog gear and color. I just feel there’s way better ways of getting that. Plus I’m not a fan of the routing limitations that come with summing mixers honestly.
🤓To make this shit simple, a coil (a transformer is two or more coils interacting with each other by a magnetic force field) cuts off high frequencies and capacitors cuts off low frequencies - this is the reason why you see capacitors and coils in speaker filters. This is extremely oversimplified, but otherwise it gets very complicated. Due to this phenomenon, you get something called impedance - a resistance that changes depending on the frequency. To get the maximum gain, and a minimum of frequency issues, the two interacting circuits shall have a matching impedance. This is also likely one of the reasons why David likes his analog equipment, because it is slightly unpredictable, especially when using transformers and tubes. We can for sure emulate everything in the digital world, but when you start to crank things then the analog world starts to commonly create interesting unpredictable results, and no programmer can add this in the digital world without risking it to sound like shit if not sitting and tweaking that code for months or years.
Can anyone here definitively answer whether the old Waves NLS system is actually modelling summing? I hear mixed things about this. is it even possible to emulate true summing in a DAW?
not sure why you focus on that plugin in particular, is okay but there's better but, NLS is channel and busses saturation, there's nothing more to it. It's okay but I would NEVER use it on every channel for sure. Console 1 by Softube on the other hand is the way to go, but there's much more to it than just saturation on single channels. No it's not possible to emulate analog summing just like there's no way to emulate analog 100% in general. But the question is why would you want to do it? Again, you will hear different voices but having even a few selected pieces of analog will probably do more to your mix than analog summing. Yet you can start here:
ruclips.net/video/u7TcIVLJN3o/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/zirnaBrAi90/видео.html
@@mixbustv thanks so much for the reply! I'll watch these. I don't particularly like the NLS, but it advertised itself as being analog summing but many people in forums have claimed it's just saturation which isn't the same. I'm not a purist. I just want to understand how to make stuff sound good.
@@YourFavouriteColor Well, in a sense it is true, it is analog summing, but not because it "emulates the non-linear summing", rather because also in analog summing, there is basically nothing else happening besides saturation. And it's not even a great plugin for that, the saturation is not versatile at all, the plugin is cluncky as hell, doesn't have oversampling. There are much better plugins that recreate the transformer sound, that have many more options and a much better quality.
@@AlexLapugean any recommendations?
@@YourFavouriteColor I really like True Iron by Kazrog and P42 Climax by Pulsar Modular for relativelly simple transformer emulations, perfect for adding on indivudual channels (but also on busses, sure), and Saturn 2 by FabFIlter for busses/mix bus, for when you need more versatility/multiband capabilities (although that needs a bit more tweaking to get it to sound really good, it's not meant to be an "add it and forget about it" plugin).
A lot of pessimists and brokies in this comment section. These aren’t even that expensive lol Of course you don’t NEED this, some get use out of it some don’t. Depends on the engineer.
Infamous means famous for being Bad, as in "a date which will live in infamy" (Pearl Harbor attack).
Yes I'm aware. The video was controversial because many people like summing
Spot on as usual. I would add that crosstalk also comes into play when summing in analog which is something to be avoided (theoretically) as the signal of a channels affect the neighbors due to electromagnetic interference. Making it even less perfect as u mentioned but…more analog in a way? AFAIK there is no plugin which recreates that because should have to be inserted in all channels. Perhaps heat by protools takes that into account? Or oxide in luna? I believe that is something interesting to be explored.
no there are a few plugins emulating crosstalk but it's usually groups or 2bus plugins
@@mixbustv A while back I added crosstalk using Ampex plugin by uad to a song’s master and the “producer” liked the effect when applied. More 3D-ish if you allow me. It ended up with nearly 200k views on youtube which is a quite a lot for an independent hip hop band (even though that I presume that it was not the primary reason as to why that happened:). Keep up with the content, I learn a lot!
Harrison Mixbus ?
Dan Worralls video on this is fabulous
🙂👍
There is more chance that you will have more crosstalk when using analog summing.
No, that's not the case here, The summing mixers are not just a saturation boxes.
I use Cubase from SL3 and from then I was trying to get professional sound, but no, something was always missing.
In 2022 I start to going to a music academy and found out many real pro secrets of the music production, so this year I purchase a voxbox, a Shelford channel a tubetech mec 1a , an RND master buss processor, an uad x16 , an x8p AND and orbit 5750. GUYS, GET IT
N O W .
Your problems will resolved just like that. Extremely stereo widening , no masking whatever nowhere, cleaner low end , no harsh high end, etc, basically you getting a Rupert Neve console. Everything just getting their position in the mix effortless. The Shelford channel is amazing also, we compared it with the 511 and , well we where laughing...
So let me get this right. You say "no" to what I'm saying - someone who btw runs about 20x the analog gear you listed and have 20 years of experience vs you starting school last year - that the summing boxes are not just saturation boxes - even tho you can literally OPEN THEM and see what's inside - and you solved all your sound issues buy buying ANYTHING BUT a summing box? Makes sense lol I'ma save this for a video now
Op amps.... Multiple stages of op amps, transformers.... Capacitors.... EQ's have a while circuit.... Compressors have a whole circuit.... Consoles are complex.... Very tiny amount of multi channel Crosstalk. (not stereo Crosstalk) perhaps some noise suppression circuitry. Very, very complex.
If you want to go outboard on the mix bus get a really nice compressor.... or like one of those well-made pull tech clones, etc. A dummy analogue summing box with a couple transformers is a joke.
An analog mixing board and /or summing mixer is all about the sound and dynamics.
That says literally nothing. "All about sound and dynamics" Nice abstract phrase. What's the difference in having let's say 50+ channels of analog gear?
@@mixbustv yeah you are right. In Dutch we would say "beetje kort door de bocht". When I take my drum machine and use the separate 8 outs to a mixer, proces them with eq, comp, tape etc. and then record it into my workstation it sound, for me (so maybe not for others) better then when I would do the same process fully ITB. More dynamics, more humb, more smash or whatever term you call it.
Cap 🧢
No, it isn't.
Never was
Why does mike dean swear by his neve
summing mixer 😂
@@coldfacejaywhat does Mike dean know? He only mixes the biggest hits...we should trust YT comments, they got the real sauce.
There are a bunch of talented individuals who all have different techniques. There are big engineers who are hybrid and some completely itb.
It most definitely is a great tool I wouldn’t sleep. Most engineers use them
Nope...analog summing boxes are not worth it ...please donate your Portico II to my address please lol
Not worth the money they asking. Looking at you Neve👀
👎👎This is not the correct way to use SUMMING. Comparing two stereo channels is minimal change, which is not how to get the full benefit of summing. (I had to do the thumbs down! lol )
Your comment doesn't make any sense, jsyk
@@mixbustv You are correct. I was watching a Mad Steex video on summing as well, and I added my comment on your channel. my apologies. Thank you for making awesome content.
I take it back. Mad Steex did it the right way.