PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

I've been a closet fan of the Harrison mixbus series and have been a user up to Mixbus 3. Basically, the idea is to take Ardour and supercharge the mixer so that each channel's eq and comp uses some sort of emulation of the Harrison console's eq and comp. They've come out with a 32c and so I paid $99 and got it.

First, to explain Mixbus a bit. Apart from the custom eq and comp per channel, you get 4 bus channels and a master channel that come with a tape saturator by default. I don't now exactly what tap reel they're modeling, but anyway, it does the usual distort a bit if it's too loud deal. The sound coming out of it sounds natural and generally produces acceptable results. Notice that tape sat is only on bus and master.

With 32C, which is positioned as their "advanced" line, you get 12 bus channels in all, so you can create more complex bus groupings and also are able to take advantage of the tape sat on each of the bus channels. The tape sat is not the coolest I've heard. It's quite nuanced, so you while you can pick up some distortion when it's driven strong, generally it's not much of an "in yo face" effect. Anyway, with 32C update, you get more bus channesl, and then a new EQ model per channel based on the 32c console.

The 32C console EQ modeling as far as I can hear is an improvement over whatever the EQ model Harrison used for Mixbus 3. It's more intuitively controllable, and also has a stronger audible effect. But in reality, can I achieve the same effect with a different EQ? With careful listening, probably. But in general, I do like the 32C eq's characteristic. It's generally good a producing well defined low end for those kicks, and can get bass lines to contribute to the harmony without mucking the low end, and maintaining good body. Not that no other EQ can achieve this. I think I can dial any EQ to do this, but it's just more intuitive with the 32C EQ.

So basically, with the whole Mixbus thing, you get tape sat and channel EQ and comp. 32C gives you a variation on the EQ, and more bus channels so you can use more tape sat. It's not a package you'd want to do tracking in. It's purely good for mixing stems. (since it's based on Ardour..) But generally, I feel like Mixbus or 32C is built by people who know mixing very well, and the product really works WITH you as you're making mixing decisions. I like the results coming out of it with me simply mixing "along" how the mixer responds. Sort of pushes you to make good decisions. It's definitely not the end all, but it's fun to mix on a desk built by people who understand mixing. That's a rare find. The tape sat won't make or break the deal, its impact on the sound is much too nuanced. Actually, coming to think about it, the mixer layout (which is great) is actually very similar to the STM1632 mixer, or whatever it's called.

So the portaudio vs. Scope issue has been solved by the ASIO/Directsound on Windows? How much of a CPU hit is there when "every resistor, capacitor, and transistor was modeled" with "DSP". (Sounds like a good candidate for a Scope device, or do we already have one, oh yeah, whatever it's called ...?).

@ Ronnie, I think you'll find Ken isnt running mixbus on Scope, so no bearing on that issue. If not for that, i would have given mixbus a full tilt. As it is, the Reason SSL is by far the best mixer I've ever used, virtual or real.

How's the Reason SSL on CPU?

Never really measured it. All I know is that I can run 80 track mixes, (with several submixes) @96Khz & 2ms XITE-1D latency. With loads of Rack Extensions, devices, samplers and all SSL track compressors turned on.

Whilst recording a vocal track - if I have a compressor and EQ active on the recording channel whilst recording then the recording is a bit behind time, so I generally bypass those now during recording. That's the only performance issue I have.

In general in http://www.reasontalk.com/ forum you read reports about individual Rack Extensions and their latency and taxing CPU, but not much discussion about the CPU usage of the SSL desk in itself.

Theres a free Reason 9 demo if you want try it out : https://www.propellerheads.se/reason/tryreason or check out the youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0brsU8sFyyQ

Theres no artificial limit placed on the number of channels, buses and FX you can add dynamically - only what your system can handle.

wow, I didn't realize SSL emu was built INTO Reason. Pretty drastic move, but I've always thought mixers in DAW packages needed more character. Maybe not necessarily "modeled" after existing ones, but characteristics and operational "feel" that's been consciously designed.

I like the authentic look of both mixbus and Reason SSL, but on large mixes the slimmer strips on the SSL reduces horizontal scrolling. Mixbus I would happily use on projects that fit one screen - eg 24 tracks with 4 submix busses.

I love the layout of both Harrison and the Reason SSL. The Portaudio issue with Harrison is a show-stopper for me with Scope. I use Sonar so Reason is not on the $ list. Perhaps if they were VSTs that would be great. Even better, for all you SDK folks out there, a Scope Plug would be awesome. I would be willing to pay for that as I do 99% of my mixing and mastering in Scope.

The thing about the Reason SSL is that it's workflow is totally dynamic. That is, you drag a new Rack Extension or other instrument into the rack it automatically creates a sequencer track and a mixer track for it.

That could be problematic regarding dynamic DSP allocation on Scope.

I don’t think Mixbus is especially better than any other good DAW mixing console out there today. I recognize that its layout it is more suitable for large projects and medium size studios, but not better sounding or more capable-suitable at the end of the day for the one-man-band musician. I think its benefits are visual clarity, consistency all over the place, and a transparent commercial sound that bothers no one. With so many bus groupings at your disposal, you can work comfortably separating every group of instruments and add FX in very specific ways, certainly cool. Anyway, I find it a bit cold for me if I were to use only Mixbus for a final mix. I think it is a good tool for final mixes, but if you should work elsewhere your tracks first, unless you yourself are the recording engineer and not the musician.

To be totally honest, I believe Mixbus has been made for formal trained engineers, not people like me , that is to say, musicians that “dare” to get into the mixing world because they love it, but don’t have a clue about “scholastic maters” in terms of mixing! So, even if I contradict the formal orthodox school of mixing, I would say that Mixbus is not the best way for a “musician” to feel comfortable at mixing. I tried it for a while but did not like it. I don’t either like the fact that in all channels EQs are exactly the same. I think it is better to have different options for different needs. Yes, I know most real analogue consoles have exactly that! There is a goal for consistency, and as I have said, this is great to achieve reliability, but it is at the same time like eating every day the same thing... I don’t feel any more in that spot. I think “mixing tradition” itself have been modified as a paradigm for people like me, so even if I wanted to reach a while ago the “pro realm” so to say, I today prefer no official or traditional ways for tailoring sounds, making music and working in final mixes. I kind of like the crazy possibilities of mixing free from the norms of the analogue world, into the digital world.

I personally like Studio One 3 suggested mixing workflow by Presonus. Now that I am working with it I can tell you it is very convenient, intelligent and extremely fast! I see Mixbus as a Truck, very good for heavy work, yes, but versus a Ferrari, which would be Studio One, if you need to travel by yourself! Track folders are very smart in SO3, organization is fast and detailed, mixing is made easy, you don’t forget or lose momentum when doing something complex you are feeling “as a musician”. Every DAW should have this feature! You can also switch instantly between stereo/mono buss to check compatibility in an instant. There is a feature that allows you to move very accurately any fader because you can expand the length of the fader, this makes very smooth movements. I don’t know of any other DAW, for the moment, so smooth in fader movements. It also has drag-and-drop inserts and sends, no need to be rooting anything, it’s done “NOW”, o love it! No need to create channels, rutting busses, etc. Of course, you can precondition the way the software is going to act, and this is amazing. For me “fast” equals “creativity”. When you have too many stops in between inspiration, inspiration goes away and Cupido greets you from far away… You can do parallel compression, split the EQ used on a channel, it’s crazy. I could not have imagined a DAW could go that far and be that perfect. Cubase 5.1, the DAW I used for many, many years, is obsolete compared to Studio One 3.

kensuguro,
fwiw, robin gareus works on ardour (mostly the video part iiuc), but he's also releasing his own plugin series ánd works fulltime for Harrison for about a year now. His plugins are at https://github.com/x42 maybe there's some hints there on the mixing strips fx.
Grtz from a happy Ardour user