Mixing w/ Analog Summing Question

[Kerouac]

Alright, so a friend of mine is planning on mixing his album and then he will send it out for mastering. He is renting some gear from a local rental place (DA, Summing Mixer, Buss Compressor) and wants to set it up like this:

 

His tracks > Apogee DA > Neve Summing Mixer w/ Buss Compressor on Drums for "glue" > Apogee Duet > Logic for a single stereo track, monitored through a Benchmark DA.

 

Now, I told him that I thought the Buss Compressor wasn't a necessity but he says he wants to do it and it's his coin, so go nuts, man. But he wants to record it at 24/96khz on the Duet and into Logic, while the source materials were originally recorded at 16/44.1 and occasionally 24/48. He says that mastering engineers will want int in 96 and since he's running it through an analog stage he wants to recapture that "analog sex." I maintain that if he didn't record his sources in such a way to take advantage of the higher sample rate, it really won't have any positive effect and will end up being dithered down later.

 

What do you all think? I suppose we can also record it both ways and then see if there is a discernible difference between the takes.

[WRGKMC]

Tell him to read a book. Better yet, record some pink noise in the same sequence as suggested then put it in a static frequency analizer and over lay the two signals at the two different rates as a visual sample. Some people cant believe the truth unless they can see it, and even then they still think they can hear something that doesnt exist.

 

In any case its your call. Just be sure he realizes you cant synthasize frequencies that no longer exist so your butts covered.

[veracohr]

Unless the analog gear is adding noise way up high, which ideally it shouldn't, there's no reason. The source won't have anything up there.

[Kerouac]

It's gratifying to know that even though I could barely pass my classes in college and high school I can learn things that really matter.

 

Thanks guys.

[chris carter]

Your friend is right... and also wrong.

 

Buss compressor: why not? The only reason not to use it would be if he just doesn't have the talent. Buss compressors in the hands of the inexperienced are horrible (just like EQs in the same hands, or reverb in the same hands, etc.). But in the hands of the experienced they are great. Not sure what the problem is here.

 

Mastering engineers wanting 96kHz: That's news to me and I've made a LOT of records (some of which have done rather well). They aren't going to really care if it's 96 or 88.1 or 48 or 44.1; they can work at any of those sample rates (plus a few others) without flinching.

 

Tracks at 16 bits, mixdown at 24bit: He's correct. He will have a much improved s/n ratio and will be able to hit the converters softer and closer to where they are more linear if he mixes down to 24bits. Definitely a good move there.

 

Tracks at 44.1 or 48, mixdown at 96kHz: He's correct. If he's mixing through analog and then hitting an A/D he will get a slightly better sound quality at 96kHz. This is because the LPF on the filter will be a much shallower slope than at 44.1 or 48kHz and thus introduce less audible artifacts. That said, the difference in quality will be "subtle" at best. That said, since it's on another computer (or so it seems) and thus not locked to the playback DAW, and it's only one stereo track so computer power isn't a concern, then why the heck not???

[Phil O'Keefe]

Since he's going through an analog mixing chain, there is potentially an increase in quality on the stereo mixes if he records them at a higher sample rate, although no mastering engineer I've ever known has ever given me grief over my delivery of a 24/44.1kHz mix. The question I'd have for the ME would be regarding their method of sample rate conversion (SRC). Sometimes the benefits of the higher sample rate are lost due to the SRC process, although having the higher sample rate mixes may be nice for the future in case we ever do go to higher resolution consumer playback systems (not likely any time soon IMHO).

 

I would DEFINITELY encourage him to record the mixes at 24 bit, even though some of the original source multitrack files were done at 16 bit.

 

The mastering engineer can take care of the SRC and the dithering.

[Phil O'Keefe]

Oh, I forgot about the compression.

 

If he's using it as a bus compressor for the drums / drums and bass, that's one thing. I use inline and bus compression on my mixes all the time, and I definitely consider it a standard mix tool. However, if he's talking about using it as a main stereo bus compressor - IOW, strapping it across the stereo outputs of the summing mixer prior to the two track recorder's A/D, my advice would be to proceed with caution. A little bit is one thing, or a lot in order to simulate what it may sound like post-mastering compression, but the temptation for some people is to slam it and leave it.... and that kind of ties the mastering engineer's hands. IMO, it's better to leave them with something to work with in terms of dynamics than it is to try to do that part of their job for them.

[fch1987]

Familiar with the period