[Frank Stearns]

(Scott Dorsey) writes:

Mike Rivers wrote:
On 12/24/2012 9:20 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

It's not the processing that is phenomenally crude, it's the user interface.

The processing might be great, but I want faders that I can ride and I
want one control per function.

Typically, an EQ plug-in looks like the real thing. You see
one knob or switch per function, but you have only one
control, and that's the mouse that you have to move to each
knob before you can adjust what that knob adjusts.

Right, it's not the plug-ins I am complaining about, it's the mixing process.
The plug-ins might be fine, but if I am using a mixer I already have with
outboard stuff I already have, why should I bother?


I've told my story before, but after 35+ years behind large format consoles,
switching to an ITB rig was awful. But I had to, because of the market
realities in this locale.

Took me a little over a year of constant complaining to come around, and I refused
to even start with it unless I had a 37" 1920x1080 LCD monitor with two similar
resolution 22" wing monitors. (Fortunately, I was able to hit the market just right
to build on the cheap a higher powered box that could support that plus the ITB
processing required.)

Sure, I too would like a knob for every function (and there is no way in hell I'd
ever consider mixing live sound on a "paged" or "moused" interface). But there are
some real advantages in the small footprint, gear cost, and maintenance. Day-to-day
good things can happen, such as complete and immediate mix recall being first and
foremost, followed by a delightful precision that is exactly repeatable at each
playback.

Part of the learning curve is dealing with the distractions and psychological
"clutter" of the computer environment -- which is in part, as someone observed, the
huge number of choices leading to all sorts of artificial and perpetual decision
angst that really shouldn't be necessary.

(You get around that by taking a day or longer break before you get too deep into
those mental "loops". You use the perfect recall to come back later -- days, weeks
-- when you are fresh. That's the single thing I love the most about digital mix.)

IMO, much of running things ITB has to do with how we adjust our "human information"
processors, and how we set the work flow to take maximum advantage of the good
portions of what the environment offers.

Another part is getting a minimally-usable working environment from day one, such as
plenty of display real-estate.

Having said all that, I think us old folks actually have it easier, once we overcome
our misgivings, because many of us started out on four or eight tracks, in *very
expensive* environments (studio and musician costs). We learned straight-away how to
be efficient and not navel-gaze.

Contrast this to someone who always had 128 tracks, a garage studio with an entry
cost of 1/100 of what it was 30 years ago, and you can see where many of the
workflow problems arise. Those old "primitive" settings were perfect training
grounds; if I were king I'd make the kids live in one of those environments for a
while to really grasp how to keep things flowing before they moved over to
digital.

When we learn how to recast that ability to be efficient and make decisions on top
of a new tool set, it's the best of both worlds, at least it has been for me.

I was dragged kicking and sceaming into that new world. But now that I'm
there, I can't imagine going back.

YMMV, of course. Do what makes you happy and keeps the clients happy, but also
realize that sometimes a little irritation can pay dividends later.

Frank
Mobile Audio
--