Ok, mixbus sounds amazing.
Anyone tried presonus ctc console shaper and can compare please? Thanks
presonus ctc-1 vs harrison mixbus
-
- KVRist
- 30 posts since 27 Jul, 2015
-
- KVRian
- 888 posts since 31 May, 2008 from Australia
My preference is using the ctc-1, I own Mixbus 3 and 4, Mixbus does sound good, but so does Studio One 3 with the console shaper via mix engine fx used properly. I happen to like the sound I can get with Studio One better, plus you have the 3 different consoles to choose from and all the variations there in. While Mixbus also sounds good, it also comes with all it's deficiencies and issues, vst/vsti support, midi, stability, performance etc etc when compared to other DAW's. Mixbus to me is just not an environment I like to spend time in, it can be quite flaky, don't particularity like the GUI, and to me it looks like something out of last century, it's just not easy on the eyes, I have tried hard to like it, but I just can't, and since S13's Mix Engine Fx's and the Console Shappers come on the scene it's a moot point for me as I prefer the sound I can get from S13, not to mention superior workflow, and just straight out better usability all round.
Say 'NO' to Clap
-
- KVRist
- 149 posts since 14 Oct, 2015
I disagree. I have tried the console shaper it is good but not as good as Mixbus IMHO. In Mixbus obviously I'm talking about 32c but it applies for the baby mixbus also. I don't even try to make a mix sound great. It will just sound great the moment I start doing basic mix techniques which is EQ = test. The EQ is by far the sweetest EQ that I have ever heard. You can push it 16 dB still sound sweet.
About workflow, It is the easiest I feel more easy in Mixbus when I mix than Studio one. When I mix I don't think about one channel I think about the relation ship between several channel at a time. And in mixbus I can see them always including the signal flow. Lets say I have stereo track which I want to compress the right channel only, I can compress or EQ that channel and in addition I still can see the signal flow on the console. Studio one is a fantastic writing tool hands down. But when its come to mixing I have no hesitation to pick Mixbus.
I use Mixbus for mixing not for MIDI arrangement. For that We have plenty of choices specialized on that. But for mixing I won't even sit for argument. Mixbus speaks by itself.
I'm on mac all of my AU works as expected. I wasn't suppose to post since Mixbus 4 is not released officially until tomorrow but I just can't stand when people even complain about the looks. Mixbus looks will put every single DAW out there to the trash. Plus you can customize the look. What else do you need. Keep in mind the screenshot is taken from TV.
picture hostingcertificity.com
About workflow, It is the easiest I feel more easy in Mixbus when I mix than Studio one. When I mix I don't think about one channel I think about the relation ship between several channel at a time. And in mixbus I can see them always including the signal flow. Lets say I have stereo track which I want to compress the right channel only, I can compress or EQ that channel and in addition I still can see the signal flow on the console. Studio one is a fantastic writing tool hands down. But when its come to mixing I have no hesitation to pick Mixbus.
I use Mixbus for mixing not for MIDI arrangement. For that We have plenty of choices specialized on that. But for mixing I won't even sit for argument. Mixbus speaks by itself.
I'm on mac all of my AU works as expected. I wasn't suppose to post since Mixbus 4 is not released officially until tomorrow but I just can't stand when people even complain about the looks. Mixbus looks will put every single DAW out there to the trash. Plus you can customize the look. What else do you need. Keep in mind the screenshot is taken from TV.
picture hostingcertificity.com-
do_androids_dream do_androids_dream https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=164034 - KVRAF
- 2908 posts since 26 Oct, 2007 from Kent, UK
I don't think you can compare the two - HMB isn't a console emulation - it just has the workflow of a console with added saturation on the busses and master buss. Not a console emu per se.yonhorizon wrote:Ok, mixbus sounds amazing.
Anyone tried presonus ctc console shaper and can compare please? Thanks
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 30 posts since 27 Jul, 2015
I didnt hear ctc-1 , but mixbus sounds incredible.
Yes its maybe possible to achieve this with saturation plugins and that, but MB just sounds great like that.
But it is looks archaic and the workflow is also sluggish.
(too bad they didnt do the implementation with reaper instead ardour)
So was hoping to hear that ctc-1 can do something similar sonically.
Thanks for the replies!
Yes its maybe possible to achieve this with saturation plugins and that, but MB just sounds great like that.
But it is looks archaic and the workflow is also sluggish.
(too bad they didnt do the implementation with reaper instead ardour)
So was hoping to hear that ctc-1 can do something similar sonically.
Thanks for the replies!
-
- KVRist
- 149 posts since 14 Oct, 2015
So you don't like console look? It is time saving even when its come to mixing.yonhorizon wrote:I didnt hear ctc-1 , but mixbus sounds incredible.
Yes its maybe possible to achieve this with saturation plugins and that, but MB just sounds great like that.
But it is looks archaic and the workflow is also sluggish.
(too bad they didnt do the implementation with reaper instead ardour)
So was hoping to hear that ctc-1 can do something similar sonically.
Thanks for the replies!
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 30 posts since 27 Jul, 2015
I like the console look and workflow. I dont like ardour look and things in the ardour workflow..
-
- KVRist
- 38 posts since 24 Jan, 2011
Once you are used to the Mixbus Worflow everything else feels clunky, And soundwise Mixbus 32 C sounds efforthlessly amazing. In Mixbus I am finished with the mix where in other DAWs I'am still adding plugins