Which Summing Mixer...If Any??

[paulsmusic]

I have recently started using an SSL Nucleus control surface, and have been considering buying an SSL Sigma, which integrates with the Nucleus. I wondered what the advantages of summing into the Sigma might be, compared to other summing mixers? From what I understand, the Nucleus can automate analogue level changes within the Sigma. But how would that differ from automating levels in my DAW, going into a fixed channel level, such as the Neve Orbit?

Also, any thoughts on your favourite summing mixers, and whether they are worth spending money on? I've been looking at the Sigma, Neve 5059, Neve Orbit, and Dangerous Music 2 Bus+.

Thanks!

[Hugh Robjohns]

From what I understand, the Nucleus can automate analogue level changes within the Sigma. But how would that differ from automating levels in my DAW, going into a fixed channel level, such as the Neve Orbit?

If you automate within the DAW the level coming through the converters will be varying and some people get funny about 'using less bits' with quieter signals. If you automate the Sigma, the MDACs are controlling the analogue signal level, in a similar way to VCAs or faders, so you can optimise the converter levels. Personally, I doubt you'd hear any difference but it's analogue, so it must be better...

Also, any thoughts on your favourite summing mixers, and whether they are worth spending money on?

Personally, I'd go for a passive summer, like the Rolls Folcrum -- or even make your own. There's a colossal signal loss through a passive mixer (typically 30-40dB) so you'll need to pass the stereo output through a pair of mic preamps to make the gain back up -- but that way you can choose the kind of preamp you want to give the kind of sound character you want (clean, fat, vintage or whatever...).

[CS70]

Also, any thoughts on your favourite summing mixers, and whether they are worth spending money on? I've been looking at the Sigma, Neve 5059, Neve Orbit, and Dangerous Music 2 Bus+.

Thanks!

Worth spending money on, not sure about any I happen to use a D-Box (first version) as monitor controller, which has a summing function. Someday I'll buy a D-sub and hook it up to the converter to see if it makes a big difference, but right now I feel my time is better spent getting that guitar riff just right..

[paulsmusic]

Personally, I'd go for a passive summer, like the Rolls Folcrum -- or even make your own. There's a colossal signal loss through a passive mixer (typically 30-40dB) so you'll need to pass the stereo output through a pair of mic preamps to make the gain back up -- but that way you can choose the kind of preamp you want to give the kind of sound character you want (clean, fat, vintage or whatever...).

I like the idea of using the Rolls Folcrum...I have a UAD based set-up, so could get some different flavours with the Unison Preamps...also I could sum the mix through the mic preamps on the SSL Nucleus...

As a PC user I haven't yet been able to try out the Neve summing that is available for LUNA, but this could also be an option if/when UAD update LUNA for PC.

[paulsmusic]

right now I feel my time is better spent getting that guitar riff just right..

I know what you mean!

[MrWolf94]

Also, any thoughts on your favourite summing mixers, and whether they are worth spending money on? I've been looking at the Sigma, Neve 5059, Neve Orbit, and Dangerous Music 2 Bus+.

Thanks!

Worth spending money on, not sure about any I happen to use a D-Box (first version) as monitor controller, which has a summing function. Someday I'll buy a D-sub and hook it up to the converter to see if it makes a big difference, but right now I feel my time is better spent getting that guitar riff just right..

I run a D'Box+ which is even tougher than regular D-Box, because I use a Red8Pre, basically so I can have 5 D-Subs. On new D-Box+ you have to have a spare Line-Out DB-25 to Summing Input D-25 of the D-Box+ summing mixer/monitor. I know I have 5 analog Outputs on plus, but I always thought original D-Box had more analog I/O, but then again never used one so am ignorant. I have a dedicated Mic Input D-Sub connector on my interface, which means if I use 8 channels of the mic pre's that you cannot bypass preamps on, it still leaves me with 32 channels of I/O minus one the for having to Sum In with DB-25 to DB-25 for DBox+, but I can use Line-Level to bypass Pres on rest of I/O and am able to have enough hardware routing for D'Box+ (or could just switch to Source if I just want to monitor, and use a solid DAC without wasting a D-Sub with 8 summing channels and also have two analog outputs available).

Again most people probably don't use heavy I/O Interfaces like 5 DB-25 connections on rear, but I think it's a great way to get Hardware Inserts if not using heavy amount of outboard gear. Once it becomes to much though I've already decided on a Flock Audio Patch, because I refuse to keep adding patch cables and patching. I feel this should've evolved to a Flock analog style with digital interfacing long ago. Going just straight DB-25 to DB-25. I hope this becomes a new hybrid patching trend in future!

[resistorman]

I think Hugh's DIY suggestion is the way to go if you want to try out analog summing.

I like passive passive mixers, one is in my system now. Every time I tried to add a sub-mixer for my modular rig to my main system, I would fight with noise and ground loops. Out of curiosity, I bought a cheap, simple passive mixer and it worked very well to submix my rig to my main mixer. So I built a 10 channel (5 stereo) passive mixer with good parts... it's very clean and quiet (of course) with the added benefit of knocking the level down from Eurorack to line level-ish voltages. This is a very specific use case, though.

I believe summing mixers for the most part are in the same category as the magic cabling you can buy for exorbitant prices. If you spend a lot on equipment, you damn well will convince yourself you hear a difference.

[paulsmusic]

As an update since my original post, I bought a used Neve 8816 on Ebay, and am very happy with the results

[Matt Houghton]

I hope this becomes a new hybrid patching trend in future!

If you've made your purchase, I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

But if not, then keep your eyes peeled for our review of the CB Electronics XPatch-32, which will appear in SOS August 2021.

There's also another one by Anatal Audio that I've only recently learned of. That might also be worth looking into...

[paulsmusic]

Thanks Matt. I’ve already bought the Neve 8816, but will look forward to reading the SOS review in August

[MrWolf94]

I hope this becomes a new hybrid patching trend in future!

If you've made your purchase, I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

But if not, then keep your eyes peeled for our review of the CB Electronics XPatch-32, which will appear in SOS August 2021.

There's also another one by Anatal Audio that I've only recently learned of. That might also be worth looking into...

Well obviously have the D-Box+ and Source like I mentioned. I have the means to just use a Dante matrix, but they really don't tailor to the small-mid studio setup. You can find all the info you want on building an ecosystem for superbowl though lol. Still at a crossroads of just hard patching from Red 8Pre, or trying to find a Digital/Analog Patchbay, because I'm done with freakin' TT and patch cables. I feel like it's so archaic, messy, and unnecessary when their running Dante based ecosystems in schools now. I'm like so I can bluetooth monitor 5 different connections on my D-Box+ from my iphone, but Patching other than like CB Electronics, Bittree (Which is just a Dante Patchbay, yay lol), and Flock Audio haven't found a better way to patch over many DECADES? Frustrating. I thought Pro Audio was for "streamlining" workflow, not remaining "stagnant" and looking like a telephone operator on "Mad Men" lol

[Hugh Robjohns]

I have several different electronic matrix systems here. A Z-sys aes3 router, Crookwood analogue and digital routers, and an SSL x-patch analogue router... and they are all useful and effective.

But I can still patch or change simple patches much quicker on the physical patch bay like a telephone operator!

Sometimes simple proven technology is still the best option.

[MrWolf94]

I have several different electronic matrix systems here. A Z-sys aes3 router, Crookwood analogue and digital routers, and an SSL x-patch analogue router... and they are all useful and effective.

But I can still patch or change simple patches much quicker on the physical patch bay like a telephone operator!

Sometimes simple proven technology is still the best option.

Would you use a still use a basic analogue patch and dozens of cables over a “hybrid” analogue/digital UI like a Flock Audio type Patchbay, that you can still use for 48v? If given the choice and the price was not a factor?
I mean yea we can also still record/mix/master on a Gramophone to a Berliner Flat-Disc also, but there’s a reason we don’t anymore. Better streamlined technology.
Obviously, you can use your analog patch fine, but the whole argument is you still still have to patch initially, and route what you want when you want through cables you have to buy. I just feel a one and done patch would produce better workflow, but it all is dependent on size of studio/project ones in plus equipment needed to patch. I know Abbey Road wont be using Flock Audio anytime soon, I get it, but nothing wrong with seeing what could be improved on.
I think people default to standard patching because there really aren’t any large-scale alternatives outside of AoIP which is just as esoteric in a way.