![]() Hi All! So yes it does, but it only does this with Version 4. After some trial and error I found the functions I wanted/needed to have mapped Check out the parameters list by clicking here. On the official website forum someone created a list of the parameters, but again that list seemed to be a little off from my experience, but others have said it does work, so who knows what causes my experience to be a little different. Then comes the other filter, then comes other EQs and stuff. Then 6 Refers to a specific function, in my case it refers to I believe low or high pass filter. And I never changed the standard chain that automatically loads with EQ on top fyi. On the official Harrison forums people been saying that 2 should be a 1, but for all my trying doesn't work - it works with 2. Then the 2 refers to the second plugin in the chain. Then S1 means First Channel Selected (in case you'd have selected more channels). So to explain in short Channel 1, is midi channel. wondering how much power your computer has? thanksĭoes your mapping follow your channel or bus selection?Hi All! So yes it does, but it only does this with Version 4. Overall, I'm using it as a finishing tool, not as the main workhorse. I know this is an older post, but wanted to give an update on my experience with Cubase and Mixbus 32C. The EQ knobs are pretty small and it's challenging with a trackball to dial in values.Ħ) I couldn't get it to see my Artist Mix controller, big disappointment for roughing in fader values. And changes that need to be made for volume will mean that I have to make the change in Cubase, export the group stems and replace the group in question.a pain for sure, BUT with the time I saved today AND the enjoyment of mixing in-the-box again, a additional step I'm willing to make.Ĥ) I'm still trying to make sense of the clip messages per channel strip, to monitor & maintain proper gain-staging through to the end.ĥ) I wish the EQ / comp had the ability to dbl-click and manually input a value. It just sounded together in the right way.ġ) I used a couple UAD and Slate plugs on my master.Ģ) 3rd-party plugin GUIs got a bit sluggish when the DSP started running up, but I stopped using the visual aspect of the plugin and used the click-wheel of my trackball for minute changes, and adjusted till it sounded right.ģ) All automation was done in Cubase before exporting group stems. I exported my group stems from Cubase and imported those into MB32 and finished off my mix, and that's a resounding YES! It was the missing element to my mixes, that last 10% that was eluding me on this project. ![]() Mixbus 32 for me is still a DAW in progress, which has come a LONG way since I started using it, but still not enough to replace Cubase.at least not yet. Today, a few years after that ordeal and as a heavy Cubase user, I decided to try a different workflow. I tried using it with Soundflower / Jack to use as a software summing solution, but it took a lot to make that work, and at the time, other plugins weren't easily integrated. I was an early user of Mixbus, perhaps much earlier than it was useful for me. I am wondering if their is much difference in sound between these 2 DAw's? If so what difference, and how much? How do you describe the sound difference?Īny difference if you use the Saturation tape in Mixbus or the UAD Studer or Oxide plug in?ĭo you find the work flow much better with one over the other?Īlso why use the Pilot feature and 2 DAW's open, why not just do everything in Mixbus 32CI know this is an older post, but wanted to give an update on my experience with Cubase and Mixbus 32C. Now it looks as though I will have to purchase it. The difference., Could simply be put like, its like mixing down on a different desk, one that adds a bit more magic perhaps, everything sits in a different way in the mix, like its one sound (Glue), whereas Mixbus I might describe as focused, I can hear all the instruments and vocals there and all blending together quite nicely, Maybe the 32c emulator creates a bit closer to the quality of mixing with actual voltage under the faders. Ive been asking myself the same thing, So I got given a trial version (thankyou!), and did a remix on it on a track I'm really gelling with at the moment, Ive gotten to know all the phrases and nuances like the back of my eyelids. Does it have more of an analog sound compared to Cubase and if so is it because of the tape emulation being added?Yes!, something like that, its hard to find words for it, Ive been using mixbus for some years now and Harrisons great service has provided me with any updates, so Ive gotten to know it pretty well, an how to get great sounds out of it, awesome! ![]() You mentioned the mixes sound nice and there is some glue to the sound. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |