Anyone using a separate DAW for mixing only?

[Peter Roos]

I am beginning to think about having a separate DAW for mixing. I don't like to have my mixer setup and all the plugin settings in the same project as the Midi tracks. I prefer to have a separate mixer setup, that is more related to the templates for my GigaStudio PC's than to a particular music project. In hardware terms: I'd prefer to have a fixed, optimized mixer for my "orchestra".

So I am thinking about "scoring" with my current DAW PC (still running Logic 5.5) and to add a separate DAW to be used as a mixer only (SX3), using MADI to receive all the outputs from my current and future sample PC's.

I wonder if anyone else is using this approach? I believe that professional composers (e.g. at MV) often use ProTools for mixing, separately from their sequencing DAW.

Curious about your comments!

Cheers,

[Angelo Clematide]

That's the way i do it! Ditto composing with Logic 5.5 on one DAW.
All together three DAW, the third one for film works.

.

[thomas wolter]

hi peter.

best experiences here with logic 7 on a mac as the composing DAW, all signals goes via RME MADI card to "the best audio workstation + mixer" i know:

Soundscape 32, expanded with a mixpander 9 DSP card, a second mixpander is used for the I-BOX MADI TA (64 madi channels, 24 TDIF, 24 Analog) breakout box.

three extension PC´s connected via TDIF to this i box Vienna instruments and
Gigastudio3 machines ...

i love that soundscape stuff, very stable, no latency (DSP based!), best hardware solutions you can get for money ...

have a lokk at www.sydec.be ...

best regards

thomas

[mathis]

@thomas wolter said:

, no latency (DSP based!),

Sorry to be anal, but every DSP has latency. Big problem with ProTools actually (for me, I hate it anyway... [8o|] ) Soundscape might be smarter than Protools but there is simply no zero latency in the digital domain.

Fo what it's worth, I love my Samplitude as the Mixing DAW.

[Peter Roos]

Hey Mathis,

For mixing, would you recommend me using Samplitude instead of SX3 (which I have)?

I really love the idea of having a separate, virtual mixer (which ProTools also is of course).

Thanks for the thumbs up in my other topic [;)]

[Dietz]

Modern DAWs like SX/Nuendo are very smart when it comes to latency compensation.

But this is also the biggest problem for a setup like Peter Roos is suggesting: Due to the fact that SX knows nothing about the audio generated with Logic, it can't take care for any latencies arising due to routing and the use of plugins. This is true as long as the audio is fed into SX on behalf of "ordinary" real-time streams, no matter if they are analogue or digital.

The only cure - other than compensating _manually_ for any processing delay (shiver!) - is to export audiofiles from Logic to SX and start mixing from there.

[Peter Roos]

Hi Dietz,

No, I will not send any audio from Logic, just receiving it in the 2nd mixer DAW. So I don't expect problems in this area.

The first DAW will just do Midi and control my Giga PC's, whose output will go to the second DAW.

[mathis]

The thing is that if you use the Computer DAW as a live-mixer and you use plug-ins, every plug-in will introduce a different amount of latency individually for every channel. So that might fuck up your timing and/or phase correlations between tracks. You can manually compensate, as Dietz doesn't recommend. Waves had compensation plug-ins, just to add the right amount of delay for the other channel(s!).
Integrated Audio DAWs do this compensation automatically with offsetting tracks.

@Another User said:

For mixing, would you recommend me using Samplitude instead of SX3 (which I have)?

I can't praise Samplitude enough, but honestly I have to say I have no experience with Cubase later than Cubase VST (which I still use for Midi).

Ever thought of a *real* mixer? That sounds actually more appropriate to your setup.

[thomas wolter]

mathis

(Sorry to be anal, but every DSP has latency. Big problem with ProTools ...)

(Ever thought of a *real* mixer? That sounds actually more appropriate to your setup)

that´s what i do with soundscape for many years, really no noticable latency on NATIVE plugs. (different thing on VST´s !!!)

Ever thought of a *real* mixer? That sounds actually more appropriate to your setup.

---

Quick facts…

Mixpander

* 1 x Mixpander/9 (or Mixpander/5) card with 64 channel Expansion Bus port for connection to the iBox*
* Nine (Mixpander/9) or five (Mixpander/5) super fast Motorola DSPs working in parallel power the 128-channel real-time mixer and zero-latency DSP plug-ins
* VST/VSTi plug-in support
* WDM/Multimedia/ASIO/GSIF drivers and Soundscape Mixer application


iBox 64-MADI-T professional audio interface

* 56 or 64 MADI digital inputs and outputs at up to 48kHz, 28 or 32 MADI digital inputs and outputs at up to 96kHz
* 24 TDIF digital inputs and outputs at up to 48kHz, 12 or 24 TDIF digital inputs and outputs at up to 96kHz
* 64 channel Expansion Bus port
* Word/SuperClock input and output
* Stereo headphone output
* Connects to Mixpander via Expansion Bus port


* The Mixpander/9 and Mixpander/5 can provide 64 external inputs and 64 external outputs via their Expansion Bus port. The actual number of external inputs and outputs for a given Mixpander Bundle is determined by the model of iBox that is connected to the Mixpander.

[mathis]

Also a "real" mixer has latency, as soon as it is digital. I believe you that the Soundscape DSPs are superfast, but there is no zero-latency.

[Dietz]

The small latency we experience in every modern digital system is negligible as long as we don't have to deal with tracks "real" recordings, which can contain some bleed from other signals. In this case, even 1 sample latency between two tracks can make all the difference in the world, due to hard phasing artefacts.

When we talk about mixing tracks derived form our Library, there will be no remnants as one would encounter from a multi-mic'd recording from a stage. Several samples delay, or even one or two milliseconds can be tolerable, as the "micro-groove" of a full-blown orchestra is not as sensible as as a kicking R'n'B-beat, for example.

[mathis]

As I said:

@mathis said:

Sorry to be anal, ...

[Dietz]

Yes, I know. Actually I was trying to support your point of view, while pointing out the merits of _virtual_ orchestration at the same time [H]