what program do you use to mix a song?

[Hypertone]

What program do you use to mix a song? I currently only use Live 4 for production, but I want to start mixing my songs and need an program with a nice mixer, where I can see all levels and can quickly adjust plugins and easy make aux busses.
What do you use?

Why can't you do this in Live?

Agreed.

[braj]

I can see someone having an issue with Live that you can't see both the Arrange and Session views at the same time (and thus can't see both the mixer and linear arrangment at once). But as for Live's mixer not being adequate by itself, I don't think that is very valid. It may not be 3-D but you definitely can see all the levels, adjust plug-ins (especially handy if using Live's native plugs) and aux bussing is a breeze. And setting up and editing control surfaces is incredibly easy. I own Logic Express and I love it's mixer, but Live is definitely a more immediate experience IMO and I definitely feel I'm more in control of the session in Live.

[Hypertone]

IMO Live's mixer rocks. I wouldn't want to use any other. It's very easy to work quickly, route inputs/outputs in seconds, drag and drop fx, full automation of everything, record a softsynth to audio while you play it. It even has a crossfader.

[xander]

Geez -- everyone has so many amazing tools and choices

I have FLS and Audition, but the mixer alone in FLS is excellent. Audition is simply incredible (IMHO).

[Hink]

Geez -- everyone has so many amazing tools and choices

I have FLS and Audition, but the mixer alone in FLS is excellent. Audition is simply incredible (IMHO).

I saw your name as the last responder and knew what you would say ...I second it....

[headquest]

Really I think Live 5 is an EXCELLENT program, and that it excells as a composing and a live (no kidding ) performance tool. However i would say that for mixing i would pick ANY of the above mentioned (definetely Samplitude, Sonar, PT and maybe even logic or SX3) in NO time as I think they lend themselves much better to mixing than Live does.

How / in what way?

What I do is use logic for production and the "draft" mixing so I can burn copies and have a listen to how my track is coming along, and then when it's time to make the final two-track for CD i export every single track in 24bit waves and do the mixdown in samplitude (eagerly waiting for Mactels so i can buy one and use the logic 7 export all tracks feature). That gives me MANY benefits in the mixing stage. That said I justify the cost of buying a separate package ( actually I use samp at a mates will buy it when they work on the things i said ) and the trouble of having to individually export each track - even in a host with no offline bouncing (Logic PC 5.5.1) while you may not. All depends on how you work.

Using Logic and then exporting each seperate track to Samplitude for mixing... sounds like quite a process! Obviously you must feel there are real benefits to doing this, but you don't explain what they are... could you do that, because it would be interesting to know?

Regarding the other four that I mentioned I have personally used, I prefer ABleton Live for mixing to any of them for the following reasons:

Cubase: Routing is over complex; the effects are substandard
Audition: lacks level meters on a track-by-track basis; limited bussing; no real-time effects on Master channel
Reason: Need to use more than one mixer if you exceed 14 tracks
Tracktion: Larger projects require too much scrolling up/down; Can't adjust the level of "frozen" tracks; volum/pan filter and level meters get squished when you add effects to a track, and can become unmanageable.

Let me clarify though that I don't DISLIKE mixing in any of the above. I simply prefer Live... because:

* Simple but powerful routing
* As many busses as you want, and send knobs appear/disappear as required rather than hogging screen estate
* Drag and drop any effects as inserts, sends, or onto the master track
* Ableton audio effects are outstanding
* Horizontal scaling of mixer strips makes it easy to customise how many tracks are visible depending on the project
* Crossfading within a mix can be very creative and is made easy
* Visually combining the volume slider with the level meter is an inspired SOFTWARE solution rather than a pointless hardware emulation. In a software setting, its easy to use and saves screen space.

Regarding that last point, I can see that Smaplitde's mixer LOOKS stunning, and for anyone who is trained in mixing in a hardware environment I can imagine that Samplitude would be a strong choice

[headquest]

And the number 1 reason I use Sonar is ease of use and total control.

Heck to get to the mixing console on Sonar 4 takes just 1 click of the mouse, from there everything is all striped on each track for easy viewing, Vsts effects aux s/r and total control from the mixing console over automation, all visible on the mixing console all functions a mouse click away, whats so hard about that?

I know from reviews and comments many make here that Sonar's mixing is popular and powerful, though I again don't quite see what it offers that (for example) Live doesn't .

Just as you ran the Live demo and didn't get it, I ran the Sonar one... and didn;t get it . I guess that the best comparisson would be made by somebody who DID get both programs

Stuff I didn't really get in Sonar -
* Routing
* the EQ - seems to have a different number of bands on the mixer than those it has when you open it up properly Deeply bizaare - how on earth are you supposed to get around that
* Lots of wasted screen space on the console in my opinion

Each to their own of course.... and there is certainly plenty to get excited about in Sonar

Other products that work well with Sonar4 are XT , Project 5 "Dimension is a killer synth btw", Reasons 3 and Fruity Loops all can be Rewired into Sonar

They can all be rewired into any Rewire host, inclyuding Ableton Live. In fact many Sonar users complain about the Rewire cpacity being limited in Sonar - I have seen better rewire implementation requested a few times.

and with all the problems I see ppl having with one host after the next, Ive rarely seen problems with Sonar not that I havent crashed it cause I have but I blame that on me overloading it sometimes

It crashes when you overload it - do you mean too many tracks? I've seen just as many people report problems with Cakewalk as anything else

I have had Live since version 2. In the last 2 and a half years it has only ever crashed one single time... which was in fact an early beta 5 version I was testing, and the problem was resolved prior to the commercial product going out . Live's rock-solid stability is one of the many reasons so many musicians trust it on stage over alternative software.

[headquest]

I can see someone having an issue with Live that you can't see both the Arrange and Session views at the same time (and thus can't see both the mixer and linear arrangment at once).

Firstly, you CAN see/use the mixer in Arrange view. It is just presented differently. The level meters, volume/pan/send amounts/routing/effects properties/mute/solo/record arm/etc are ALL there though in the Arrange view, too.

In any case, your general point is true of almost all programs.

The original software that tried to integrate the mixing paradigm fully into its arrangement view was Sonic Foundry's Acid. Since then, Tracktion and P5 have both copied Acid's approach to mixing, putting everything on display at once.

To my thinking, all three of those programs have a very cluttered interface as a result of this approach, and I find that offputting, personally. P5v2 is undoubtedly the best of those three, though, and the device chain presentation on the left side of the screen is excellent.

[braj]

I can see someone having an issue with Live that you can't see both the Arrange and Session views at the same time (and thus can't see both the mixer and linear arrangment at once).

Firstly, you CAN see/use the mixer in Arrange view. It is just presented differently. The level meters, volume/pan/send amounts/routing/effects properties/mute/solo/record arm/etc are ALL there though in the Arrange view, too.

In any case, your general point is true of almost all programs.

Most other DAWs allow you to have multiple windows open, so you can (in Logic for example) have a mixer windowbelow the arrange window. I don't think I'd like to see Live get multi-window support though. What I'd love to see in Live would be support for showing the arrange view on one monitor and the session view on another.

Anyway, I totally prefer Live despite this, I was just playing the devil's advocate to try and understand how someone could find Live limiting.

Another one I guess would be you don't know what plugs and inserts are associated with a track until you click on it (unlike Logic or Tracktion where you can see all the related plugs and inserts). But again this isn't a big deal to me since I just label the track appropriately. Again, just trying to be fair. The ability to try new ideas quickly from Session view while mixing without altering your arrangement in any permanent way definitely makes up for this IMO.

[headquest]

Most other DAWs allow you to have multiple windows open, so you can (in Logic for example) have a mixer windowbelow the arrange window. I don't think I'd like to see Live get multi-window support though. What I'd love to see in Live would be support for showing the arrange view on one monitor and the session view on another.

Definitely . I think that's pretty much guaranteed for Live 6 now, because so many folks have asked for it.

Anyway, I totally prefer Live despite this, I was just playing the devil's advocate to try and understand how someone could find Live limiting.

[roderick]

There are some things that I'm impressed with live for but going from cubase to it there are quite a number of issues that make me feel like I'm missing a limb in it.

Personally I believe Live is extremely wasteful of cpu compared to cubase.

[xander]

Geez -- everyone has so many amazing tools and choices

I have FLS and Audition, but the mixer alone in FLS is excellent. Audition is simply incredible (IMHO).

I saw your name as the last responder and knew what you would say ...I second it....

Indeed mate!

I've entertained fantasies that, had Imageline bought Cool Edit and somehow worked it's audio engine into FLS, the product would have been unbeatable IMHO. Even so, I'm pretty happy as it is.

[BONES]

eagerly waiting for Mactels so i can buy one and use the logic 7 export all tracks feature

Really? That's been in ORION since about v2. For all the points wazun mentioned in the original post, ORION Platinum seems to be the perfect choice as it works in exactly the way he described and offers incredible quality and efficiency.

[Muff Wiggler]

p.s. - to get on topic for a change, i use Cubase SX3 for everything except converting a wav to mp3 - i use dbPowerAmp for that

[Tronam]

Live is a great music writing tool with VSTi's and sample manipulation, but its MIDI and outboard gear support is still extremely primitive compared with the likes of Logic or Cubase. Many people (including myself) still use a lot of external hardware in both composition and mixdown, but if you do absolutely everything "in the box", then there's no reason why Live couldn't fulfill your mixing/"mastering" needs, especially if you are already very familiar and comfortable with its workflow and layout. Use what feels "right" and it will be.

-Tronam