Academy Dashboard Forum Production Mixing Analog Summing Reply To: Analog Summing

#8404
Steve A
Participant

    That 'tilt' EQ is mostly the 'thickness' setting on Slate's Revival plugin, I should have just used the regular EQ, as Revivals setting is quite broad, picking up too much of the bass.
    Yes, the highs around 8k were boosted because using an analyzer on your mix next to mine in PT, that frequency definitely was lacking, so I just matched it. That's why I said I find it hard to believe they leave settings flat on the EQ in their chain, matter of fact, I'd be willing to bet they don't...
    So was it close enough? ..or would you spend the $180 on a 10 song LP? Just wondering..

    Also, I've been thinking on what Warren said about all of this, and it makes sense to a degree. Yes, you wouldn't have a consistent sound using a summing box, but I don't think it would be that far out of whack. I think your analog summed mix speaks to that.
    *However* Don't get me wrong, I'm in total agreement with Warren's main point, that the front end gear is going to make the biggest difference in getting killer fat tracks to your DAW.

    Wanna read something completely different about all this though?
    I was doing a search about how automation would effect a summing box and came upon this thread in another forum..
    I have never heard about doing what they are talking about...talk about eye-opening!
    Check this out, and read posts 3, 8, and 11 in particular, I'm going to try this, and see if what they claim is true.
    Here's the thread: http://recording.org/threads/itb-vs-passive-summing-otb.57805/