Converter for PC?

Discuss the hardware/software tools and techniques involved in capturing sound, in the studio or on location.
Post Reply

Converter for PC?

Post by ShaneAnthony »

I recently purchased a used Yamaha PM-2000 32 channel analog console to use with Pro Tools, in place of my MIDAS M32 Live digital console.

Can anyone recommend what would be the best converter/interface for me to use with my Windows PC?

I want to be able to record at-least 20 tracks simultaneously into Pro Tools, and mix down 32 on my Yamaha console, analog summing a master back into ProTools.

I need to be able to monitor the input through PT while recording, without noticeable latency.

I was looking at the Ferrofish A32 Pro. Any thoughts on that?

Thanks, Shane
ShaneAnthony
New here
Posts: 6 Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2022 10:37 pm

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by The Elf »

The Ferrofish A32 , in all its guises, is a lovely piece of gear. I have a pair of them hooked up to an RME MADIFace XT. I get 64 line ins and outs, all with gain controls.

The mixer will give you mic pre's, but... do you really want to throw all of this back out into a mixer? Your choice, of course...
User avatar
The Elf
Forum Aficionado
Posts: 20474 Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 12:00 am Location: Sheffield, UK
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by Zukan »

Elf's suggestion is foolproof but if you want to go down the budget route think pre strips and ADAT.
User avatar
Zukan
Moderator
Posts: 9952 Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2003 12:00 am
'Shaka. When the walls fell. Zukan...with his arms wide.'

Samplecraze
1-2-1 Tuition

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by James Perrett »

Zukan wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:12 pm Elf's suggestion is foolproof but if you want to go down the budget route think pre strips and ADAT.

Yes, if you are happy with standard sample rates you could go for a Digiface USB with your choice of convertors but if you want to work at 96kHz then MADI or Dante starts to look more attractive.
User avatar
James Perrett
Moderator
Posts: 14940 Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:00 am Location: The wilds of Hampshire
JRP Music - Audio Mastering and Restoration. JRP Music Facebook Page

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by ShaneAnthony »

James Perrett wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:16 pm Yes, if you are happy with standard sample rates you could go for a Digiface USB with your choice of convertors but if you want to work at 96kHz then MADI or Dante starts to look more attractive.

Thanks for the replies! I have also been looking at the Lynx Aurora (n), but they offer 3 connectivity options.

I want high quality, and also to be set for the future, for upgrading, or anything else down the road. I'd like the converter to be something I don't worry about for a long time in my studio.

I also want to run each recorded track out to my outboard gear (Pultec EQs, Tube Compressors, Bricasti M7 reverb, etc...) and then back into Pro Tools, then send everything back out to analog sum through my Yamaha PM-2000 and my stereo Zener Limiter, then print the master back into PT. So with going in and out a couple times, I want the best conversion quality, so I'm not degrading sound each time.

I also want to input monitor through Pro Tools while recording. I know the Lynx is more expensive, but that's why I was wondering if the the new Lynx Aurora (n) would be better for me.

Regarding connectivity, I'm not sure which way would be best to go.

My PC has USB 3.0, and 3.1, but no Thunderbolt. I could get a Thunderbolt card for it, and get the Lynx Aurora w/Thunderbolt 3.

Or, if I bought the Lynx Aurora Dante version, could I connect it by plugging straight into one of my ethernet inputs on my PC?

I'm not sure how MADI works.

Lynx also offers an HDX version with Digilink, but I'm not sure how that connects to my PC either.

What would be best?
ShaneAnthony
New here
Posts: 6 Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2022 10:37 pm

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by jaminem »

Hi there as you've probably already guessed asking which is 'best' is probably not as simple as you thought.
In reality most modern converters will do a decent job and you are unlikely to find that at the sort of budget you are considering (Lynx Aurora's are expensive things) they cause you any noticeable problems.

To that end I never define 'best' as being just related to sound quality - in my world there are other important things that go towards making a product the best:

- Reliability
- Ease of use
- Expansion options
- Future support

These are all just as important as sound quality IMHO.
So some things to consider.
The converters on the Lynx i'm sure are fabulous, I heard the previous version and they were amazing so I have no doubt the later version will not disappoint, for me though the thing thats critical is the connection to the host PC, and the protocol used to do it. Yes there is a Thunderbolt connectivity option for the Aurora, but I would be wary of this. PC's and thunderbolt can still be a fairly flaky thing - its still not just a case of adding a thunderbolt card to your PC and off you go. Its better than it was for sure but its not a given, dependant on the age/type of your current device

This also means you would be at the mercy of Lynx's drivers. I would want to satisfy myself that these drivers worked well, were updated regularly in response to Microsoft's constant OS meddling, and have a decent projected lifespan.

If not I'd be looking at other options of a way to connect the Lynx to the Host PC - for me unless you are 100% wedded to PT at which point HDX (which I admit to knowing nothing about) seems sensible, the 2 options you have here are Dante and MADI.

Now, I have never used Dante, but If I was starting from scratch like you appear to be, I would 100% be looking at how to make that work - and if whatever I chose supported AVB, even better. IMHO network based audio is the future, its infinitely scalable, massively flexible and best of all, uses very cheap cabling which is proven in multiple applications.

Personally I went the MADI route, Dante was still a bit new and pricey for me (you say you don't know what this is - its a digital audio connection protocol much like ADAT in that its based on optical technology but it carries up to 64 channels of audio, and as long as you have the appropriate devices at each end of the chain it just works) Like Elf I have a Ferrofish A32 but mine is connected to an RME Fireface UFX+

The sound quality of both RME and Ferrofish is perfectly sufficient and is never an issue for me, despite using lots of outboard gear so lots of conversion, but more importantly the RME drivers are rock solid, frequently updated and RME have an amazing track record of legacy product support - this is my 3rd RME product yet they still support the 1st one I ever purchased

To summarise, choose whatever converter you wish, make sure it has Dante/AVB/MADI capability but build it around an RME core.
jaminem
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1472 Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:00 am

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by ShaneAnthony »

jaminem wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 10:08 am Hi there as you've probably already guessed asking which is 'best' is probably not as simple as you thought.
In reality most modern converters will do a decent job and you are unlikely to find that at the sort of budget you are considering (Lynx Aurora's are expensive things) they cause you any noticeable problems.

To that end I never define 'best' as being just related to sound quality - in my world there are other important things that go towards making a product the best:

- Reliability
- Ease of use
- Expansion options
- Future support

These are all just as important as sound quality IMHO.
So some things to consider.
The converters on the Lynx i'm sure are fabulous, I heard the previous version and they were amazing so I have no doubt the later version will not disappoint, for me though the thing thats critical is the connection to the host PC, and the protocol used to do it. Yes there is a Thunderbolt connectivity option for the Aurora, but I would be wary of this. PC's and thunderbolt can still be a fairly flaky thing - its still not just a case of adding a thunderbolt card to your PC and off you go. Its better than it was for sure but its not a given, dependant on the age/type of your current device

This also means you would be at the mercy of Lynx's drivers. I would want to satisfy myself that these drivers worked well, were updated regularly in response to Microsoft's constant OS meddling, and have a decent projected lifespan.

If not I'd be looking at other options of a way to connect the Lynx to the Host PC - for me unless you are 100% wedded to PT at which point HDX (which I admit to knowing nothing about) seems sensible, the 2 options you have here are Dante and MADI.

Now, I have never used Dante, but If I was starting from scratch like you appear to be, I would 100% be looking at how to make that work - and if whatever I chose supported AVB, even better. IMHO network based audio is the future, its infinitely scalable, massively flexible and best of all, uses very cheap cabling which is proven in multiple applications.

Personally I went the MADI route, Dante was still a bit new and pricey for me (you say you don't know what this is - its a digital audio connection protocol much like ADAT in that its based on optical technology but it carries up to 64 channels of audio, and as long as you have the appropriate devices at each end of the chain it just works) Like Elf I have a Ferrofish A32 but mine is connected to an RME Fireface UFX+

The sound quality of both RME and Ferrofish is perfectly sufficient and is never an issue for me, despite using lots of outboard gear so lots of conversion, but more importantly the RME drivers are rock solid, frequently updated and RME have an amazing track record of legacy product support - this is my 3rd RME product yet they still support the 1st one I ever purchased

To summarise, choose whatever converter you wish, make sure it has Dante/AVB/MADI capability but build it around an RME core.

Thanks for the reply.

I'm not starting from scratch, just making another transition in the studio journey. I've been doing this for 30 years, and love making music for the Lord. I'm a pastor, and a worshiper. I started out as a kid recording from one cassette tape to another to be able to do 2 tracks! Then I bought a 4 track cassette recorder when those were out, and it was unbelievable. From there I eventually transitioned to a Mackie board with a Tascam 8 track digital recorder and I was in heaven. Then a ProFire Lightbridge with Steinberg Cubase/Nuendo. Lately I've been using a Midas M32 Live digital board, and at this point, I'm married to Pro Tools. I'm excited to use my new Yamaha PM-2000 with a high quality converter. We feature a lot of guitars in our music, need the ability to record a full band at one time, and I love the vintage gooey 70's/80's warm sound.

One of the advantages of the Lynx Aurora (n) is it has exchangeable modules in the back, so if I need Dante in the future, or something else, I can switch out the Thunderbolt module for a different connection. That seems pretty future proof.

Also, I've read that Lynx support is superb. Everyone who has the original Aurora only has good things to say about it, and everyone who has the new (n) say they'll never use anything else. The sonics are supposed to be amazing. I have a question into Lynx to see what they recommend for my situation regarding connectivity.
ShaneAnthony
New here
Posts: 6 Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2022 10:37 pm

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by ShaneAnthony »

I ended up purchasing a Thunderbolt card for my motherboard, and bought the Lynx Aurora (n) 32 channel TB3, which will arrive by the end of this week. I pick up my Yamaha PM-2000 console out of state next week.

I had contacted Lynx directly about the different connectivity options on their new (n) converter, and they were great in answering all my questions. I thought this info might help someone else. Here is my communication with them. You can see my questions, and then the responses below:

Question #1.
Do you sell the 32 channel with USB?

No, the channel maximum for USB is 16 channels. On Windows you can only use one AuroraUSB at a time

Question #2.
Is there less latency with Thunderbolt over USB? I use Input Monitoring in Pro Tools, so latency matters a lot to me.

Thunderbolt is MUCH faster than USB. It is generally considered the best choice for software input monitoring. TB starts at <1ms, USB closer to 6ms

Question #3.
Should I buy a Thunderbolt card for my PC and get the Aurora (n) 32 channel TB3 version?

That would be great, but this is only an option if your motherboard is already thunderbolt ready. There is not a universal PCIe > Thunderbolt card, since thunderbolt is actually more bandwidth than PCIe.

Question #4.
I've never used Dante before, and don't know anything about it. If I bought the Dante version, would it simply connect via one of the Ethernet ports on the back of my PC?

Dante is similar in latency to USB. Not particularly fast. It does get close to thunderbolt speeds with a Dante accelerator card, like the ones sold by Focusrite, SSL and Yamaha. That will get you under 2ms of latency. With the Dante Virtual soundcard, you would still be start at @ 6ms.

Question #5.
Should I buy the HDX version along with a Lynx LT-HD2 card? Keep in mind, I only have Pro Tools Studio

That would also be a low latency option, but I believe you would need to upgrade to ProTools Ultimate for that to work.

Of the four options, and considering latency is important to you, I would suggest the thunderbolt option or HDX option as your best performers.
ShaneAnthony
New here
Posts: 6 Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2022 10:37 pm

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by Eddy Deegan »

Thanks for the update ShaneAnthony!

I've slightly edited your post above to make the distinction between questions and answers clearer, and also to remove the name of the Lynx support staff member who signed off at the end.
User avatar
Eddy Deegan
Moderator
Posts: 9250 Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 12:00 am Location: Brighton & Hove, UK
Some of my works | The SOS Forum Album projects  

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by ShaneAnthony »

Eddy Deegan wrote: Thu Jul 07, 2022 12:42 am Thanks for the update ShaneAnthony!

I've slightly edited your post above to make the distinction between questions and answers clearer, and also to remove the name of the Lynx support staff member who signed off at the end.

Thank you!
ShaneAnthony
New here
Posts: 6 Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2022 10:37 pm

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by The Elf »

I use Input Monitoring in Pro Tools...

I'd urge a re-think on this. Monitoring through your DAW is adding latency from square one. That's why I use RME, and that's why I'm devoted to TotalMix.
User avatar
The Elf
Forum Aficionado
Posts: 20474 Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 12:00 am Location: Sheffield, UK
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by resistorman »

The Elf wrote: Thu Jul 07, 2022 10:17 am
I use Input Monitoring in Pro Tools...

I'd urge a re-think on this. Monitoring through your DAW is adding latency from square one. That's why I use RME, and that's why I'm devoted to TotalMix.

^^
Yes
User avatar
resistorman
Frequent Poster
Posts: 2778 Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2015 12:00 am Location: Asheville NC
"The Best" piece of gear is subjective.

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by ShaneAnthony »

The Elf wrote: Thu Jul 07, 2022 10:17 am
I use Input Monitoring in Pro Tools...

I'd urge a re-think on this. Monitoring through your DAW is adding latency from square one. That's why I use RME, and that's why I'm devoted to TotalMix.

Thanks for the input. I have already purchased a Lynx Aurora n TB3 because I found a really great deal on one. However, for the future, I'll keep what you guys are saying in mind.

With the Thunderbolt version I bought, the latency is under 1ms, so I'm not sure it's anything to even be concerned about either way.

I have a question though...

In Pro Tools, with input monitoring, I can be monitoring the input, and the moment I turn off input monitoring, I can be hearing what I recorded, that easy. Or l could even use the auto-input record feature, where the monitoring happens while recording, and automatically plays back out the same fader when not recording, without having to change a thing.

With the RME TotalMix, using it in conjuction with Pro Tools Studio, wouldn't I have to go back and forth between the two softwares, adding one more step to the process?
ShaneAnthony
New here
Posts: 6 Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2022 10:37 pm

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by Aled Hughes »

ShaneAnthony wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 11:57 pm I had contacted Lynx directly...

You can see my questions, and then the responses below:

Question #2.
Is there less latency with Thunderbolt over USB? I use Input Monitoring in Pro Tools, so latency matters a lot to me.

Thunderbolt is MUCH faster than USB. It is generally considered the best choice for software input monitoring. TB starts at <1ms, USB closer to 6ms

This is interesting. I'm pretty sure RME claim the opposite, saying that Thunderbolt offers no benefit unless the channel count is extremely high (I run an RME MADIFace Pro which handles 136 channels at low latencies with no problem)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSIf4QGYs-c
Aled Hughes
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1894 Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:00 am Location: Pwllheli, Cymru

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by The Elf »

ShaneAnthony wrote: Thu Jul 07, 2022 8:18 pm In Pro Tools, with input monitoring, I can be monitoring the input, and the moment I turn off input monitoring, I can be hearing what I recorded, that easy

I don't have to turn *anything* on or off: I record, then play back immediately - nothing to do and no clicks. TotalMix is always taking care of the monitoring behind the scenes.

Sounds like you're using some form of what I know as 'Direct Monitoring'. I tried it, ditched it and never went back. I'm not using Pro Tools, though.

If you have something that works for you, that's fine. A couple of clicks shouldn't slow you down too much.
User avatar
The Elf
Forum Aficionado
Posts: 20474 Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 12:00 am Location: Sheffield, UK
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by Luke W »

Aled Hughes wrote: Thu Jul 07, 2022 8:55 pm
ShaneAnthony wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 11:57 pm Question #2.
Is there less latency with Thunderbolt over USB? I use Input Monitoring in Pro Tools, so latency matters a lot to me.

Thunderbolt is MUCH faster than USB. It is generally considered the best choice for software input monitoring. TB starts at <1ms, USB closer to 6ms

This is interesting. I'm pretty sure RME claim the opposite, saying that Thunderbolt offers no benefit unless the channel count is extremely high (I run an RME MADIFace Pro which handles 136 channels at low latencies with no problem)

It sounds like it has a lot to do with controller chips and drivers rather than the protocol itself. I'm looking at a new machine and interface in the near future so have been doing some digging, and happened to read about this exact issue last night.

The "Latency & The UFX+" box at the bottom of this article gives an explanation:
https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/rm ... e-ufx-plus
User avatar
Luke W
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1612 Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:00 am Location: Northamptonshire, UK

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by MaestroMikeT »

Aled Hughes wrote:
ShaneAnthony wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 11:57 pm I had contacted Lynx directly...

You can see my questions, and then the responses below:

Question #2.
Is there less latency with Thunderbolt over USB? I use Input Monitoring in Pro Tools, so latency matters a lot to me.

Thunderbolt is MUCH faster than USB. It is generally considered the best choice for software input monitoring. TB starts at <1ms, USB closer to 6ms

This is interesting. I'm pretty sure RME claim the opposite, saying that Thunderbolt offers no benefit unless the channel count is extremely high (I run an RME MADIFace Pro which handles 136 channels at low latencies with no problem)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSIf4QGYs-c

We must not forget that it is not only about the protocol but also about the internal architecture of the system. For example, I still run an ancient PCI interface, Delta 1010, at 64 buffer, and never ever felt the need to use any intermediate mix - I’ve always monitored directly through DAW. In a secondary portable system I have a much newer USB interface, and I can’t get down to at least 1,5 X the latency on the PCI interface. So the PCI bus is much more “direct” - that’s a word to describe something I can’t really pinpoint - than USB bus. I believe USB interfacing became so ubiquitous because of its enormous convenience, portability, etc.
So maybe Thunderbolt achieves lower latencies not only because of protocol but also on the architecture side of things, but I digress and someone more knowledgeable will undoubtedly step in.

Enviado do meu iPhone usando o Tapatalk
MaestroMikeT
Poster
Posts: 63 Joined: Thu May 07, 2020 3:24 pm

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by Aled Hughes »

The Elf wrote: Thu Jul 07, 2022 9:12 pm
ShaneAnthony wrote: Thu Jul 07, 2022 8:18 pm In Pro Tools, with input monitoring, I can be monitoring the input, and the moment I turn off input monitoring, I can be hearing what I recorded, that easy

I don't have to turn *anything* on or off: I record, then play back immediately - nothing to do and no clicks. TotalMix is always taking care of the monitoring behind the scenes.

Sounds like you're using some form of what I know as 'Direct Monitoring'. I tried it, ditched it and never went back. I'm not using Pro Tools, though.

If you have something that works for you, that's fine. A couple of clicks shouldn't slow you down too much.

IIRC you're using Cubase right? Which can control TotalMix directly via ASIO Direct Monitoring (so when you're monitoring a channel through Cubase, it's actually switching the TotalMix channels on and off). Not all DAWs can do this.

I'm interested in how you're doing it - say you're recording a live performance, are you monitoring the channels through Cubase, or live via TotalMix? The latter would require you to switch from TM to Cubase on playback, unless you're using ASIO Direct Monitoring?

Personally, I use TotalMix to take care of any headphone mixes, but monitor my own feed via Reaper's input monitoring. If I'm also playing I monitor my own instrument via TotalMix to avoid any latency. But it does require quite a bit of Window switching (in the studio i have an iPad running TotalMix Remote, so all my TotalMixing happens on that so the main PC is always showing Reaper.)
Aled Hughes
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1894 Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:00 am Location: Pwllheli, Cymru

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by The Elf »

You're massively over-complicating it. I just monitor through TotalMix - no need for Cubase to do anything! I don't do *anything* to switch monitoring on/off - it's just always monitoring. I never even need to look at TotalMix.

I don't use Direct Monitoring. I know Cubase can do it, but it involves switching monitoring on/off, which is a needless extra step.
User avatar
The Elf
Forum Aficionado
Posts: 20474 Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 12:00 am Location: Sheffield, UK
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by Aled Hughes »

The Elf wrote: Fri Jul 08, 2022 4:31 pm You're massively over-complicating it. I just monitor through TotalMix - no need for Cubase to do anything! I don't do *anything* to switch monitoring on/off - it's just always monitoring. I never even need to look at TotalMix.

I don't use Direct Monitoring. I know Cubase can do it, but it involves switching monitoring on/off, which is a needless extra step.

Ah I see, so you're always hearing the live inputs into your system? How do you adjust the monitoring balance between inputs for yourself? Or do you just leave them at unity and listen to that? Do you switch to TotalMix to mute any unused mics during overdubs etc or is everything open all the time?

I don't think I'm needlessly over-complicating it though - it works for me. I like being able to adjust the balances in the DAW while recording so there's a half decent mix straight on playback when the band comes back in - same goes for a reverb send etc.

It also gives me some peace of mind that I'm listening to what's actually being recorded and that the DAW isn't buggering the recording up without me hearing it, although that's probably juts me being over-cautious as it's never been an issue!
Aled Hughes
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1894 Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:00 am Location: Pwllheli, Cymru

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by The Elf »

Aled Hughes wrote: Fri Jul 08, 2022 5:55 pmAh I see, so you're always hearing the live inputs into your system? How do you adjust the monitoring balance between inputs for yourself? Or do you just leave them at unity and listen to that?

That's about it! I have my input gains set at a sensible level for each instrument and that's how it stays.

But this is on home turf.

When I'm working with bands I set each of them up a mix and that's pretty much how it remains - I will make the odd change as required, but it's rare. I give each player his own signal to balance on their own mixer, so 'more/less me' is out of my hands.

I'm certainly not dipping in and out of TotalMix all the time.
User avatar
The Elf
Forum Aficionado
Posts: 20474 Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 12:00 am Location: Sheffield, UK
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by Aled Hughes »

The Elf wrote: Fri Jul 08, 2022 6:09 pm
Aled Hughes wrote: Fri Jul 08, 2022 5:55 pmAh I see, so you're always hearing the live inputs into your system? How do you adjust the monitoring balance between inputs for yourself? Or do you just leave them at unity and listen to that?

That's about it! I have my input gains set at a sensible level for each instrument and that's how it stays.

But this is on home turf.

When I'm working with bands I set each of them up a mix and that's pretty much how it remains - I will make the odd change as required, but it's rare. I give each player his own signal to balance on their own mixer, so 'more/less me' is out of my hands.

I'm certainly not dipping in and out of TotalMix all the time.

Thanks. I might give it a go then. I’m always changing my mind about how best to monitor my inputs, and it’s always good to hear how others are doing it.

I take it that for overdubs, you’re sending the artist a stereo playback mix from Cubase via TM?
Aled Hughes
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1894 Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:00 am Location: Pwllheli, Cymru

Re: Converter for PC?

Post by The Elf »

Aled Hughes wrote: Fri Jul 08, 2022 7:30 pmI take it that for overdubs, you’re sending the artist a stereo playback mix from Cubase via TM?

Yes.

While we're tracking I don't worry much about the mix I'm getting from Cubase; I'll throw the faders around as the musicians need. There's time for me to get picky about the mix when tracking is done.

It's a rare occasion when two musicians tracking together want vastly different mixes from Cubase, but I always have that option with Cubase's Cue mix facility.
User avatar
The Elf
Forum Aficionado
Posts: 20474 Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 12:00 am Location: Sheffield, UK
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.
Post Reply