Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Recording Gear and Equipment [BG]' started by diverse379, Feb 7, 2019.
Well, regardless of what I may or may not think about Firewire, it's a legacy standard that's being phased out. So unless you're heavily vested in hardware with Firewire interfaces, now is probably a good time to start migrating to either Thunderbolt or the the newer USB standards,
If you're interested you can read the whole sad history of the Firewire standard here.
Interestingly enough, the main thing that got me interested in Mixbus was the fact they had versions running natively on Windows, MacOS, and Linux. Such is the advantage of basing your product on well-supported Open Source software that is under very active development. That was something that was important to me (being an IT guy for a living) since it essentially makes Mixbus obsolescence proof as far as platform is concerned. And the license you purchase can be used on any of the three platforms.
But beyond that, once I started using it I began to appreciate the sound quality and the workflow. It's based on Harrision's hardware consoles and it feels very similar in use to using an actual console. I don't know if that makes it "better" so to speak. But I'm from the analog era and I have some experience using things like a Neve console so it feels like home to me. Someone who came up in the PC/digital recording era might be more comfortable with some of the newer interfaces and products that pack other functionalities like loop creation etc. under the hood. Mixbus is pretty flexible. But it has a pretty aggressive recording console paradigm it does't stray too far from. So if you approach recording more from a traditional "recording a live performance" perspective (like George Martin) rather than the newer solo loop and sample framework (like Moby or Björk) then Mixbus should feel very comfortable.
I guess you could say I like Mixbus half because it sounds great, and half because I'm too lazy to learn a totally different approach to recording. I don't record professionally so I don't need to keep up with the times. YMMV.
Pretty much all of the above over the years. Plus I sometimes close mike the strings on the fretless if I'm not using a cab at the same time. Just depends on the sound I'm after.
However, it has always gone to one tape track. I have yet to do much DAW recording. With low track count (up to 8) I have to make a decision and record what I want at the time.
1. Bass - 1960 Ampeg B15 - Electrovoice RE20 - Focusrite ISA One - AD converter
2. Bass - Retrospect Juice box - AD converter.
3. Bass - Focusrite ISA One DI - AD converter.
I have 3 requirements for recording bass.
1) tube preamp
2) absolutely no noise
3) simple pc interface
My long time setup was the post pre DI out from a Mesa Boogie M2000 tube amp into an E-mu 1212m pc sound card. I record at 24 bit 48khz. The Mesa amp has a built in compressor and I usually apply a small amount of limiting while recording and maybe a bit of tone shaping with the onboard EQ.
Recently I got myself an A-designs REDDI and use that instead of the amp. The unit is a tube pre that was designed to sound as much as possible like a vintage Ampeg B-15. At $775, it isn't cheap, but it sounds absolutely amazing all by itself.
I've occasionally used a Tech21 SansAmp BDDI with marginally acceptable results, but it sounds a bit harsh to my ears. I suppose it really is more suited for live use.
Ive used digital pedals before but have always been disappointed with the amount of noise they produce.
From the last recording session with my band. Forgive the cheesy "Paint" diagram but it effectively conveys the idea..
This is exactly how I do it as well.
I run a direct out from my Mesa D800 into my Focusrite Scarlett 18i8 interface, which I'm using with Logic Pro. Clean signal in, add effects later.
That’s because it’s the right way.
@2saddleslab Very cool song. Well done all around!
I try to get two channels. One goes through my line out, and the other is a miced cab. Engineer can blend to taste.
There's always discussion with the engineer about what he/she needs from my line out.
Bass-> HPF (MicroThumpinator) -> Transformer Out of Ampeg PF20T -> Focusrite 6i6 -> Reaper
Bass->HPF->Focusrite 6i6->Reaper and apply Amplitube Amp Sims in DAW
*noodles for a few minutes * ooh better grab my pen and notepad! This could be something eventually thought I posted this yesterday but I'm just being a smart allec. Still, this is how I record stuff so I don't forget it atm
Thank you, sir! Very much appreciated.
These days just a DI to an audio interface and run an amp/cab sim.
We certainly all have our applications and needs.
I personally want full control once the signal has gone to tape/digital, and for me it's usually the most transparent dry signal as possible before going to digital. I use just a SPL Channel One -> UA Apollo Duo(or MOTU Ultralite Mk.III) -> MOTU DP9
If there are problematic frequency issues with the dry signal, then I can dial things in, but already having great bass tones without assistance means I almost never need to. And for that matter I'm not trying to get my ultimate *punchy/fat* bass mixed tone before going into digital (my studio certainly isn't a live stage), I just want the ultimate dry, workable signal that can be manipulated in digital space that leaves no regrets due to what I may have already done to the signal... Pre/cab sims seem to make so much more sense when a full mix/arrangement can define the context for my bass timbre's needs.
I've depended on a single preamp/compressor for nearly 20 years now for all my mic/line needs, and although I'd likely have done better with other units for certain applications, the Channel One us so easy to use and is excellent for dry bass tones that may or may not need just a little compression and/or EQ assistance.
I’ve never used one
But I like the fact that you have used it for so many years
You know exactly how to get your tone
Bass > Ampeg scr-di > Tascam 388
Direct from pedalboard into my Scarlett Focusrite then DAW.