Hi,
I was just wondering how Final Mix (+other mackie pluggins) compares to something like T-Racks? I didn't actual expect to get these with the downloadable version but was happy when I noticed them there. I'd just like to know how they stack up to other offerings on the market from those of you who have compared these.
thanks
steve
FinalMix compared to?
-
- KVRist
- 233 posts since 10 Aug, 2004
-
- KVRAF
- 6740 posts since 25 Mar, 2002 from sheffield, england
Final Mix is an extremely powerful and flexible tool, which has a bit of a learning curve if you want to get best possible results.. I've never used T-Racks, but I get the impression from the screenshots that its a bit more 'dumbed down'.
I think your basic premise is wrong though: I don't believe there is any 'mastering' plug that will suit every mix.. you need to judge each mix on its merits, and do what is needed to make it fit.
Whenever I have needed a multiband compressor or good EQ I have managed to get results from the Mackie plugs, so I don't feel any need to buy mastering plugs at the moment. (Except possibly Ozone, and I only want that for the dither algo!)
I think your basic premise is wrong though: I don't believe there is any 'mastering' plug that will suit every mix.. you need to judge each mix on its merits, and do what is needed to make it fit.
Whenever I have needed a multiband compressor or good EQ I have managed to get results from the Mackie plugs, so I don't feel any need to buy mastering plugs at the moment. (Except possibly Ozone, and I only want that for the dither algo!)-
- KVRAF
- 2565 posts since 30 Mar, 2004 from Phoenix AZ USA
TRacks is a completely different animal.
Final Mix is a clean transparent plug.
TRacks is anything but.
It colors your music with this fat, warm, slightly distorted, overdriven tube like sound.
It is wonderful on some material like acoustic jazz for example.
On the other hand if you have an electronica track with very smooth synth pads you probably would be better with a transparent plug like FinalMix or Ozone.
Final Mix is a clean transparent plug.
TRacks is anything but.
It colors your music with this fat, warm, slightly distorted, overdriven tube like sound.
It is wonderful on some material like acoustic jazz for example.
On the other hand if you have an electronica track with very smooth synth pads you probably would be better with a transparent plug like FinalMix or Ozone.
-
- KVRist
- 145 posts since 3 Jun, 2005 from Ontario California
I have the T-Racks analog mastering plugins and they are very good. I agree, if you use the T-Racks presets they can definately be anything but transparent however the parimeters that can be tweak'd are many. You can fine tune everything and get a very transparent mix ( if thats what you're looking for ). I must confess I haven't had too much "hands on" with Final mix.
Chance Pataki
The Musicians Workshop
musicians.workshop@gte.net
http://www.the-musicians-workshop.com
The Musicians Workshop
musicians.workshop@gte.net
http://www.the-musicians-workshop.com
-
- KVRAF
- 6740 posts since 25 Mar, 2002 from sheffield, england
AFAIK T-Racks comprises EQ, full-band compression, limiting & soft clipping, that correct?
Final Mix offers EQ, multiband compression, more EQ & soft clipping.. there is a bit of overlap, but the two aren't really that comparable IMO.
Final Mix offers EQ, multiband compression, more EQ & soft clipping.. there is a bit of overlap, but the two aren't really that comparable IMO.
-
- KVRist
- 145 posts since 3 Jun, 2005 from Ontario California
The analog modeled mastering plugins has a very good EQ section, multiband compression, hard and soft knee limiting & clipping. There is another T-Racks plug in called T-Racks 24. That is a limited version. That must be the one that you are refering to.
Chance Pataki
The Musicians Workshop
musicians.workshop@gte.net
http://www.the-musicians-workshop.com
The Musicians Workshop
musicians.workshop@gte.net
http://www.the-musicians-workshop.com
-
- KVRist
- 333 posts since 25 May, 2004
I wouldn't call Final Mix transparent either, it's also on the warm side. Very musical, though. If you're into transparency, go with the Ozone.AndrewSimon wrote:TRacks is a completely different animal.
Final Mix is a clean transparent plug.
TRacks is anything but.
It colors your music with this fat, warm, slightly distorted, overdriven tube like sound.
It is wonderful on some material like acoustic jazz for example.
On the other hand if you have an electronica track with very smooth synth pads you probably would be better with a transparent plug like FinalMix or Ozone.
-
- KVRAF
- 6740 posts since 25 Mar, 2002 from sheffield, england
I just checked their site: its a multi-band limiter, not compressor..
Anyway, I still say they are fundamentally different: FM's dynamics section is far more flexible and powerful than T-Racks (eg: Final Mix gives you the option to expand the bass dynamics instead of compress them.. T-Racks doesn't)
..but it lacks "tube modelling", whatever that means.
Anyway, I still say they are fundamentally different: FM's dynamics section is far more flexible and powerful than T-Racks (eg: Final Mix gives you the option to expand the bass dynamics instead of compress them.. T-Racks doesn't)
..but it lacks "tube modelling", whatever that means.
-
- KVRAF
- 1820 posts since 28 Mar, 2005
i have t-racks, final mix, and waves C4/L2 and well... all of the waves bundles and a few of the free things out there.
they're all different animals. they're all useful. between t-racks and final mix, i'd choose t-racks. final mix does nothing more or better than t-racks, other than having a "slightly" more flexible eq. period. it just has a different look. personally, i like t-racks way better than final mix.
with t-racks you can achieve a loud mix by using the soft clipping feature along side the multiband limiter. personally, for a quick fix on some fast mixes i like to use the "clipper" portion of t-racks with the "no overs" setting. it's been a godsend for many a mix at my desk. so has final mix though...
with final mix, you can see the input signal, get that nice and hot without any overage and then move on over to the output signal to get a pretty hot mix. but you know... hot mixes are not always called for. i really like to aim for a level around -1db to -4db.
you don't really want to be able o "hear" any of the stuff that is applied with these prgrams anyway do you? if so, you really should consider going back in and fixing your audio per channel.
i recommend using a nice eq, and a nice compressor/expander/limiter (as needed) on each channel that requires it. this way you will be able to beat offensive channels into submission whenever the need arises.
i rely more heavily on eq, compression and limiting than on anything else in my arsenal. then the other stuff is icing on the cake. i like a light less sweet icing. barely noticeable.
get your compression right on each channel (not overdoing it) and possibly a limiter on some channels, and you'll come out ahead at mixdown. your overall volume levels will practically set themselves at that point. this is the value f a really great compressr limiter. and coupled with a great eq, your job will practically mix its self.
there are tons of great books and papers out there on the subject, but none will do as much for you as open minded experimentation. as far as t-racks vs. finalmix, well, that's all dependent upn what yo're going to be running through it. that's where the experimentation comes into play for you. you can answer most of your own audio comparison questions with a little a/b testing. that's the only way you're really ging to get a definitive answer.
they're all different animals. they're all useful. between t-racks and final mix, i'd choose t-racks. final mix does nothing more or better than t-racks, other than having a "slightly" more flexible eq. period. it just has a different look. personally, i like t-racks way better than final mix.
with t-racks you can achieve a loud mix by using the soft clipping feature along side the multiband limiter. personally, for a quick fix on some fast mixes i like to use the "clipper" portion of t-racks with the "no overs" setting. it's been a godsend for many a mix at my desk. so has final mix though...
with final mix, you can see the input signal, get that nice and hot without any overage and then move on over to the output signal to get a pretty hot mix. but you know... hot mixes are not always called for. i really like to aim for a level around -1db to -4db.
you don't really want to be able o "hear" any of the stuff that is applied with these prgrams anyway do you? if so, you really should consider going back in and fixing your audio per channel.
i recommend using a nice eq, and a nice compressor/expander/limiter (as needed) on each channel that requires it. this way you will be able to beat offensive channels into submission whenever the need arises.
i rely more heavily on eq, compression and limiting than on anything else in my arsenal. then the other stuff is icing on the cake. i like a light less sweet icing. barely noticeable.
get your compression right on each channel (not overdoing it) and possibly a limiter on some channels, and you'll come out ahead at mixdown. your overall volume levels will practically set themselves at that point. this is the value f a really great compressr limiter. and coupled with a great eq, your job will practically mix its self.
there are tons of great books and papers out there on the subject, but none will do as much for you as open minded experimentation. as far as t-racks vs. finalmix, well, that's all dependent upn what yo're going to be running through it. that's where the experimentation comes into play for you. you can answer most of your own audio comparison questions with a little a/b testing. that's the only way you're really ging to get a definitive answer.
-
- KVRAF
- 6740 posts since 25 Mar, 2002 from sheffield, england
erm.. typing "period" at the end of a sentence does not stop it being utter bollocks.lharless wrote: final mix does nothing more or better than t-racks, other than having a "slightly" more flexible eq. period.
Final Mix has one of the most flexible and powerful cross-overs I've ever used, feeding 3 of the most flexible and powerful compressor / expanders I've ever used..
.. T-Racks apparently provides all this flexibility with about 4 knobs per band (none of which are labelled "ratio")
Only a preset-whore could make a statement like that..
-
- KVRian
- 1283 posts since 10 Oct, 2002 from Barcelona
It has a really nice interface... maybe tomorrow we'll talk about it's sound.
-
- KVRist
- 145 posts since 3 Jun, 2005 from Ontario California
I usually use the T-Racks plugs with Peak-4. Peak is a 2 track stereo host. I usually use the pro's for mastering because they are completely disconnected from the project, master unbiaslly, they have the ears, equipment, and experience. When a client's budgit does not allow for it, then I will fly it into Peak.
Chance Pataki
The Musicians Workshop
musicians.workshop@gte.net
http://www.the-musicians-workshop.com
The Musicians Workshop
musicians.workshop@gte.net
http://www.the-musicians-workshop.com
-
- KVRAF
- 7045 posts since 28 Apr, 2004 from france
Does anybody makes real professional mastering using only Acumalabs tracktion FInalMix ?
I think it is a great terransparent leveller, but i don't know if anybody woudl suggest it better tnah Waves plugins or Izotope Ozone, or.. ?
Is finalMix a professional tool, is it enough to use only that, or is it aimed at maximising mixdowns while bouncing traks ?
I think it is a great terransparent leveller, but i don't know if anybody woudl suggest it better tnah Waves plugins or Izotope Ozone, or.. ?
Is finalMix a professional tool, is it enough to use only that, or is it aimed at maximising mixdowns while bouncing traks ?
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
FinalMix was being marketed as a $300+ mixing and mastering solution before Acuma Labs was folded into Mackie Plug-ins and packaged as part of Tracktion, if that helps.
The Acuma Labs people (or at least, the one I've talked to) are serious about what they do and didn't just whip together a set of plug-ins to add to a feature list for selling T2, that's for sure.
There are people who think Waves are overrated pieces of crap (I'm not one of them-- not having used it, I have no opinion whatsoever) so it really IS all about personal preference. Lee doesn't prefer FinalMix, but I love it. I also have little basis for comparison. Its inclusion saves me from having to 'sweat it' about searching for something else. I may not be aware of every option, but at least I'm pleased with this one and don't have to look further.
I'm only too aware that I'm a hobbyist, not a maker of "final CD-press-quality" tracks. That doesn't mean that I don't strive for them to be the best possible tracks that they can be with available tools, it just means that I know I'm still learning and I have no need to spend another several hundred dollars on "mastering" bundles for me to learn and produce good results. Indeed, I was doing well enough even before FinalMix.
Or, put another way:
If you have the ears and the expertise to know the difference, you will be able to understand FinalMix's controls and abilities very quickly. And then, you should be able to say with confidence, "It's not suiting my vision of a mastering solution" without needing someone else to tell you that solution X or Y are better. Otherwise, if you're not tweaking the plug-in to your mix and using its functions to produce whatever results you want to produce, you're probably making judgements based on presets. I can say that I don't like ANY of the FinalMix presets because a preset can't really do much for your individual (like a fingerprint!) mix. I'm still glad they included presets so that I can fart around and find a jumping-off point, OR if I'm just sketching an idea out, I can throw on a preset when I send a mock-up to someone... but in general, presets in something like this cannot and will never reveal the depth of the software.
Greg
The Acuma Labs people (or at least, the one I've talked to) are serious about what they do and didn't just whip together a set of plug-ins to add to a feature list for selling T2, that's for sure.
There are people who think Waves are overrated pieces of crap (I'm not one of them-- not having used it, I have no opinion whatsoever) so it really IS all about personal preference. Lee doesn't prefer FinalMix, but I love it. I also have little basis for comparison. Its inclusion saves me from having to 'sweat it' about searching for something else. I may not be aware of every option, but at least I'm pleased with this one and don't have to look further.
I'm only too aware that I'm a hobbyist, not a maker of "final CD-press-quality" tracks. That doesn't mean that I don't strive for them to be the best possible tracks that they can be with available tools, it just means that I know I'm still learning and I have no need to spend another several hundred dollars on "mastering" bundles for me to learn and produce good results. Indeed, I was doing well enough even before FinalMix.
Or, put another way:
If you have the ears and the expertise to know the difference, you will be able to understand FinalMix's controls and abilities very quickly. And then, you should be able to say with confidence, "It's not suiting my vision of a mastering solution" without needing someone else to tell you that solution X or Y are better. Otherwise, if you're not tweaking the plug-in to your mix and using its functions to produce whatever results you want to produce, you're probably making judgements based on presets. I can say that I don't like ANY of the FinalMix presets because a preset can't really do much for your individual (like a fingerprint!) mix. I'm still glad they included presets so that I can fart around and find a jumping-off point, OR if I'm just sketching an idea out, I can throw on a preset when I send a mock-up to someone... but in general, presets in something like this cannot and will never reveal the depth of the software.
Greg
