Query failed: connection to localhost:9312 failed (errno=111, msg=Connection refused).
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Which desk is it?
It is unlikely that you get a sonic improvement from a most consoles so think carefully before embarking on this.
There is a reason why almost everyone I know, including some grammy award winning mixers, are mixing either entirely in the box, or at most using hardware as insert effects.
I wouldn't consider going back to using a console unless it was a high end Neve, API or SSL.
Even then the sonic benefit is not massive.
Pro Tools HDX has a 64 bit floating point mixer with many thousands of dB of dynamic range.
That is... more than enough.
A console can be a workflow improvement under certain circumstances.
One way to do it is to use a console for tracking only, and mix in the box, perhaps using a bit of quality outboard.
That is how a number of people who still use a console are working, because fast (instantaneous) recall is just too important these days.
'So when I'm done recording. Do I repatch the outputs of the interface back to the inputs of the console or can I just patch these permanently to the line level Jacks at the input stage?'
So... it depends.
If you are using a large inline console then you can just use the small fader inputs for the tape (or DAW) returns and flip the faders so that the DAW returns go to the big fader.
If you aren't using an inline console then yes, you are probably going to have to repatch.
I wouldn't bother- the last 5 years of me owning a large format console I used it primarily as a place to put my mouse and keyboard when mixing.
I loved tracking through it of course.
I'd instead invest in better monitoring or better microphones/outboard, perhaps a mix bus processor that doesn't exist in plugin form. Or acoustic treatment.
Studio: https://www.voltperoctave.com
Music: https://www.euclideancircuits.com
Me: https://www.jamesrichmond.com
Auto-Bounce by Tom Salta
Dreamhost Web Hosting
Would look cool though in my music room.
And you can pick up lower end consoles (Allen and Heath) for peanuts these days.
The 32 channel Soundcraft Spirit I had in my project studio has direct outs and tape returns, along with mic and line inputs. So everything was permanently patched and it was just a case of selecting inputs.
I only had 16 outs from 2 X 8 channel Protools Mix + interfaces so mixed in stems when out of the box but generally mixed in the box
For the professional studio I built we had a Tascam DM4800 with 32 in / out and I built a patch bay ( to the left of the desk) that could send any of the 48 inputs form the live room to any of the 32 inputs of the desk. So the performers plugged into the nearest socket where they stood and the 48 inputs were spread all round the room meaning mic cables could be short.
Same with headphone returns
I would agree with @octatonic ... as cool as it sounds there's little value in using most old analog desks for mixing. They are filled with cheap op amps, have a fair bit of noise and a lot of cross talk. It's a nice thing to do once on a while to understand how records were mixed before automation but for fidelity mixing in the DAW and tracking with a few well chosen mic pre's is better.
I don’t think the minuscule sonic benefits (disregarding how you actually interact with the physical controls and how that can influence mix decisions due to the speed of workflow) are worth the hassle of recall and waiting for mixes to print etc.
Just recalling the console would take nearly 30 mins or so if not longer. I could boot the computer, open the session make tweaks and resend the new version to the client in that time ITB.
People pore over this stuff in far more detail than is required.