avatar

paulyd

Gold Finger

Posts: 298 Member Since: 28/01/2011

Lead

Mar 2 16 4:26 AM

Tags : :

I have been eyeballing the Mackie Control Universal Pro and figure it would be relatively easy to integrate with Logic Pro X. However, if one really takes to these things and starts adding the Mackie extender units, the cost quickly adds up. At that point, digital mixers start looking attractive. I'm using RedNet and some of the new digital mixers integrate with the Dante networking protocol. Some of the mixers also integreate with cue mixing systems. The dream, to me, when recording, would be to use the analog outboard of my choice, A/D with RedNet, set Logic to its Low Latency Mode, then route the audio via Dante to a digital mixer with built-in DSP for cue mixes. However, the mixer would have to have very low latency for recording and then act as an intuituve control surface when mixing. I suppose if it had nice DSP effects, that would be a bonus when mixing. The digital mixer intergrated via Dante might be a complex setup, but worthwhile after the intial setup and a level of comfort were established. Anyone here have experience with this stuff? I would appreciate your thoughts and experience with this. I have been a keyboard-and-mouse engineer since moving away from low-end analog mixers. 
Quote    Reply   
avatar

jimlongo

Gold Finger

Posts: 595 Member Since:28/01/2011

#1 [url]

Mar 2 16 11:45 PM

All I ever wanted was an interface that replaced the mouse and keyboard (which aren't ergonomic controllers for software mixing), and supplied something more traditional.

For me, the Command8 was a fantastic tool. Granted the fader quality wasn't the greatest, but I liked the size, you could put it just off to the side, and you had a few faders, some knobs, and the ability to quickly flip the controller so it controls any parameter of any plugin. Very easy to work with, and the cost was right.

That's been replaced at Avid by the Artist Mix series which is much better build quality, with many more features, and the price has started to creep up, but still what I would want.

Either way, keeping your audio separate from the controller seems like a way to go to me. The other consideration I think is to keep all the mix information in one place, in your logic or protools session.  With a digital mixer you now could have automation in your session and separate automation in the mixer, it just starts to become too fragmented (you have a daw session and a mixer document to backup).  With a controller you keep everything (audio and automation) in your single session. 

Last Edited By: jimlongo Mar 5 16 3:22 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

paulyd

Gold Finger

Posts: 298 Member Since:28/01/2011

#2 [url]

Mar 7 16 2:20 AM

jimlongo wrote:

 The other consideration I think is to keep all the mix information in one place, in your logic or protools session.  With a digital mixer you now could have automation in your session and separate automation in the mixer, it just starts to become too fragmented (you have a daw session and a mixer document to backup).  With a controller you keep everything (audio and automation) in your single session. 

That is an excellent point. I wouldn't want mixes to become dependent on a specific piece of hardware. There is enough complexity with DAW's as it is. That is certainly why control surfaces still hold their appeal, especially the Mackie/Logic combo. It's a combo that has been around for a long time. It would be very easy to setup and I'm sure it wouldn't take long to get the hang of it and integrate it into the workflow. 

Quote    Reply   
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help