difference between analog mixing and digital mixing

[cvsound]

I have tried to mix the same project (a live orchestra recording
recorded with 2 Neumann KM130s' and 1 KM83), both with the Samplitude
V6.0 in the computer, and also brought the whole project to analog
using a good Mytek DAC then mixed through a Millennia Mixing Suite.
The analog mix sounded more dimensional, and the mics sounded fuller.
Can someone explain the reason. Thanks.

Eric

[George Gleason]

cvsound wrote:
> I have tried to mix the same project (a live orchestra recording
> recorded with 2 Neumann KM130s' and 1 KM83), both with the Samplitude
> V6.0 in the computer, and also brought the whole project to analog
> using a good Mytek DAC then mixed through a Millennia Mixing Suite.
> The analog mix sounded more dimensional, and the mics sounded fuller.
> Can someone explain the reason. Thanks.
>
> Eric

The analogue is less accurate making small errors on your part less obvious
it also adds more distortion(distortion being a abberation of the base
signal, for good or bad)
george

[George Gleason]

cvsound wrote:
> I have tried to mix the same project (a live orchestra recording
> recorded with 2 Neumann KM130s' and 1 KM83), both with the Samplitude
> V6.0 in the computer, and also brought the whole project to analog
> using a good Mytek DAC then mixed through a Millennia Mixing Suite.
> The analog mix sounded more dimensional, and the mics sounded fuller.
> Can someone explain the reason. Thanks.
>
> Eric

The analogue is less accurate making small errors on your part less obvious
it also adds more distortion(distortion being a abberation of the base
signal, for good or bad)
george

[Arny Krueger]

"cvsound" > wrote in message
om

> I have tried to mix the same project (a live orchestra recording
> recorded with 2 Neumann KM130s' and 1 KM83), both with the Samplitude
> V6.0 in the computer, and also brought the whole project to analog
> using a good Mytek DAC then mixed through a Millennia Mixing Suite.
> The analog mix sounded more dimensional, and the mics sounded fuller.
> Can someone explain the reason. Thanks.

Sure, anybody who thinks that they are going to make the same identical mix
on two different mixers at two different times, or even the same mixer at
two different times, really needs to step back and think at their work.
Mixing just isn't that precise.

If you need to understand this better, just play a pure sine wave through
your mixer, and try to set a fader to - infinity and then *the same* level
twice in a row by ear, without peeking. Measure the actual level you set
each time. Your two levels will probably be 0.5 dB or more apart. That's
more than enough to unintentionally create differences in soundstaging.

[Arny Krueger]

"cvsound" > wrote in message
om

> I have tried to mix the same project (a live orchestra recording
> recorded with 2 Neumann KM130s' and 1 KM83), both with the Samplitude
> V6.0 in the computer, and also brought the whole project to analog
> using a good Mytek DAC then mixed through a Millennia Mixing Suite.
> The analog mix sounded more dimensional, and the mics sounded fuller.
> Can someone explain the reason. Thanks.

Sure, anybody who thinks that they are going to make the same identical mix
on two different mixers at two different times, or even the same mixer at
two different times, really needs to step back and think at their work.
Mixing just isn't that precise.

If you need to understand this better, just play a pure sine wave through
your mixer, and try to set a fader to - infinity and then *the same* level
twice in a row by ear, without peeking. Measure the actual level you set
each time. Your two levels will probably be 0.5 dB or more apart. That's
more than enough to unintentionally create differences in soundstaging.

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> I have tried to mix the same project (a live orchestra recording
> recorded with 2 Neumann KM130s' and 1 KM83)

With two mics, what's to mix? Or do you mean "master"?

> with the Samplitude
> V6.0 in the computer, and also brought the whole project to analog
> using a good Mytek DAC then mixed through a Millennia Mixing Suite.
> The analog mix sounded more dimensional, and the mics sounded fuller.

Did you send the computer mix out a digital output and through the
same D/A converter so your monitoring was comparable? Or if you burned
a CD from the computer mix, did you listen to the CD through that same
D/A converter? How about word length? Did that change? If so, when and
where?

There are all sorts of "issues that shouldn't be" when mixing in a
computer. Same with mixing on an analog console. They're just
different, that's all.

I suspect that the greatest difference is where and with what the D/A
conversion was done, or how you got from your mix to what you were
listening to.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> I have tried to mix the same project (a live orchestra recording
> recorded with 2 Neumann KM130s' and 1 KM83)

With two mics, what's to mix? Or do you mean "master"?

> with the Samplitude
> V6.0 in the computer, and also brought the whole project to analog
> using a good Mytek DAC then mixed through a Millennia Mixing Suite.
> The analog mix sounded more dimensional, and the mics sounded fuller.

Did you send the computer mix out a digital output and through the
same D/A converter so your monitoring was comparable? Or if you burned
a CD from the computer mix, did you listen to the CD through that same
D/A converter? How about word length? Did that change? If so, when and
where?

There are all sorts of "issues that shouldn't be" when mixing in a
computer. Same with mixing on an analog console. They're just
different, that's all.

I suspect that the greatest difference is where and with what the D/A
conversion was done, or how you got from your mix to what you were
listening to.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[[email protected]]

On 19 Nov 2004 07:16:34 -0800, (cvsound)
wrote:

>I have tried to mix the same project (a live orchestra recording
>recorded with 2 Neumann KM130s' and 1 KM83), both with the Samplitude
>V6.0 in the computer, and also brought the whole project to analog
>using a good Mytek DAC then mixed through a Millennia Mixing Suite.
>The analog mix sounded more dimensional, and the mics sounded fuller.
>Can someone explain the reason. Thanks.
>
>Eric

Digital misses out high frequencies often, I think.

[[email protected]]

On 19 Nov 2004 07:16:34 -0800, (cvsound)
wrote:

>I have tried to mix the same project (a live orchestra recording
>recorded with 2 Neumann KM130s' and 1 KM83), both with the Samplitude
>V6.0 in the computer, and also brought the whole project to analog
>using a good Mytek DAC then mixed through a Millennia Mixing Suite.
>The analog mix sounded more dimensional, and the mics sounded fuller.
>Can someone explain the reason. Thanks.
>
>Eric

Digital misses out high frequencies often, I think.

[Blind Joni]

>>Can someone explain the reason. Thanks.
>>
>>Eric
>
>Digital misses out high frequencies often, I think.

More likely harmonics and such added by the analog circuitry...it started out
in the DAW.




John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

[Blind Joni]

>>Can someone explain the reason. Thanks.
>>
>>Eric
>
>Digital misses out high frequencies often, I think.

More likely harmonics and such added by the analog circuitry...it started out
in the DAW.




John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

[Mike Rivers]

In article <1100984837.RXhnieXqdVniScgOqNtyEw@teranews> writes:

> Digital misses out high frequencies often, I think.

Do you have a good reason to think that? Perhaps you're using too low
a sample rate? Tried 44.1 kHz yet?



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article <1100984837.RXhnieXqdVniScgOqNtyEw@teranews> writes:

> Digital misses out high frequencies often, I think.

Do you have a good reason to think that? Perhaps you're using too low
a sample rate? Tried 44.1 kHz yet?



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Logan Shaw]

wrote:
> Digital misses out high frequencies often, I think.

Depends on what you mean by "high".

- Logan

[Logan Shaw]

wrote:
> Digital misses out high frequencies often, I think.

Depends on what you mean by "high".

- Logan