DP Monitor comment

[podlegoop]

I'm running DP 5 with a MOTU2408mkIII interface. I have a question about DP's monitoring. Okay, if I set up a session and use the "Monitor thru effects" in the monitor setup window, I can use the auxes to create monitor mixes, but I have latency issues, of course. Now if I us the "direct hardware playthru" instead, I can monitor the the main mix (fader levels) with out latency because it's esentially comtroling cuemix and now I have a stereo mix without latency for monitoring without having to actually open cue mix. Now if I want to send some "more me mixes" or a second cue mix all together, I have to open cuemix to do this. What I would like to do is in my control room, have my mix and again use the aux sends for controling monitor mix levels. My real question here is why, since MOTU makes DP and thier own hardware, can't they figure out a way to implement using the aux sends in DP to control monitor mixes while in direct hardware playthru? The aux sends will only send playback of tracks to the other outs, which is also a must for monitoring, but it just doesn't make sense. My main mix can monitor the inputs and listen back to tracks at the same time, why can't the auxes have the same functionality. I know pro tools does this and altough I don't care for pro tools, this lack of functionality is making me want to switch.

[Mr_Clifford]

I know pro tools does this and altough I don't care for pro tools, this lack of functionality is making me want to switch.

Well Pro Tools HD/TDM does, but not LE, in case you thought you could solve your problems by going and getting a Digi003 or M-Box. In LE in low latency monitoring mode you can only get the low latency on the Main Analog Out 1-2, and you can't really use any bussing. It really is only useful for bedroom warriors who want to do some DI guitar overdubs.

[podlegoop]

I know only TDM systems do that. I'm very familiar with pro tools. I just don't like it. I know that it's really intended just for simple over dubs, but this program should be able to do this. I wouldnt be saying this if the hardware and software were made by different companies. Seriously, if they can make the faders in DP control the cuemix levels remotely for one mix, why not more. I can achieve these results I'm looking to get by using a combination of aux track levels for playback and cue mix for monitoring, but that is abusurdly annoying to have to switch back and forth between the two windows. Not only that, but then I don't have control support for the monitor mix levels.

[podlegoop]

I meant to say I don't have control of monitor mix levels on my control surface.

[mesaken]

I would love to see that feature implemented as well. Then while tracking in DP you could work on the mix and not affect the headphone sends and be in "no latency" mode.
Since I pulled my console and went to SPL Mixdreams, I have lost that
luxury. I can use outboard analog for tracking, but without a console and
without this feature in DP tracking isn't as friendly as it could be.

[Timeline]

Only Magic Dave knows where the bones are buried on Direct Monitoring in the main mixer and he's keepin vewy vewy quiet.

[podlegoop]

if this is possible and I'm just missing something, please someone speak up. I've contacted MOTU about this and all they have to say is, "that's what cuemix is for." I know that's what that program is for, but in modern studio these days doing everything "in the box", this console like fuctionality is of upmost importance. I think it's more important than mics, pre's and all that other nonesense. I'm not say that stuff doesn't matter at all, but it doesn't matter if your musicians aren't getting a good headphone mix. That destroys thier performance. And while I can get one without this feature, it takes over 3 times a long as it would if I had it. Toggling through two different mix windows is kind of stupid. Isn't that why they call it the mix window in the first place- so you can do all of your mixing there?

[James Steele]

I know pro tools does this and altough I don't care for pro tools, this lack of functionality is making me want to switch.

Well that's one possibility. You could sell your 2408MkIII core system for maybe $700 and then you'd only need about $7,300 more to get into a PT-HD system with an interface at street price.

[James Steele]

I meant to say I don't have control of monitor mix levels on my control surface.

The new CuxMix has support for Mackie control surfaces. If you launch CueMix there's a "Control Surfaces" item in the menu bar. If you choose "CueMix Control Surfaces > Enable..." you should a dialog to open a help file, unless a Mackie surface is set up. I'm not exactly how this works as I have an AlphaTrack and that's it.

[Shooshie]

if this is possible and I'm just missing something, please someone speak up. I've contacted MOTU about this and all they have to say is, "that's what cuemix is for." I know that's what that program is for, but in modern studio these days doing everything "in the box", this console like fuctionality is of upmost importance. I think it's more important than mics, pre's and all that other nonesense. I'm not say that stuff doesn't matter at all, but it doesn't matter if your musicians aren't getting a good headphone mix. That destroys thier performance. And while I can get one without this feature, it takes over 3 times a long as it would if I had it. Toggling through two different mix windows is kind of stupid. Isn't that why they call it the mix window in the first place- so you can do all of your mixing there?

Most headphone mixes do not resemble the actual musical mix. Most players need for their studio mix to be biased toward their own sound, which of course is not at all the way it will sound in the final mix. Even huge mixing boards have a separate mix area for the headphone mix. It's not a sophisticated mix; just enough of the main instruments so that they can hear what they're playing along with, plus a very nice and detailed (translate: loud) channel of their own sound. The musician wants to hear his nuances, so that he knows what he's laying down.

CueMix is that "separate mix area" just like in the big studios. It even has "Talk-Back" channels and buttons. I cannot imagine what's wrong with that setup. Nothing. It's ideal. Furthermore, it allows you a separate mix for each pair of channels. Thus, you can set it up for your guitarist, bassist, drummer, and depending on how many channels you have, many other players as well. It's really quite extraordinary. These mixes are all simultaneous! Once you've set them, each output pair will receive its own mix no matter what the other channels are getting.

My CueMix will sync with external control surfaces. I don't know which (don't use them, myself), but the setup and enabler is there.

This is a case of inexpensive ingenuity that trumps even the expensive board setups. What more do you want?

Shooshie

[James Steele]

One thing that may help is that if your connections are fairly consistent and you typically bring the same instruments in through the same channels, you can save CueMix setups and use them as starting points. I have a few that I use and I can recall them quickly and be pretty close.

I'm not trying to downplay your desire to have things the way you'd like them to be, but barring spending a lot more money for a PT system, until things change (if they do at all), there may be ways to improve the situation and make CueMix a bit less hassle.

[James Steele]

My CueMix will sync with external control surfaces. I don't know which (don't use them, myself), but the setup and enabler is there.

From what I gather any of the Mackie surfaces work. This may mean that the less expensive units that can do HUI emulation may work fine. Not sure. Someone with one of those Behringer units might be able to confirm this? If that's the case then those are cheap enough that you could buy one just for quick CueMix adjustments perhaps?

[bassie12]

Preface: I am not a MIDI guy. I stopped caring about it in 1988. My work as a recording engineer/ producer hs only been better for this decision. YMMV. Besides, I frequently work with MIDI geniuses who can sequence an orchestra to a spastic gnat's ass if necessary. I still like the sound of real strings, instruments and players MUCH better and am frequently blessed with the opportunity to record them.

For a long time, I was exclusively employed by a very nice record label that was a "DP only" house and also dedicated to a digital signal path. So like a good soldier, I was enthusiastic, nay, evangelistic about DP. And I was really good at it. Long before cuemix, I figured out that a console was the answer, and so a couple of Yamaha O2rs(LOONG time ago) it was. 96 channels of total recall, eq, comp, fx & outboard with DP 2.7(BLAZING!) as my recorder. With the advent of cuemix I hated the clumsiness of swithching apps & GUIs, so the next big studio upgrade was a DM2000, a pile of 192HDs and 2408mkIIIs, and lots of lovely outboard & plugs. In the past few years, family obligations (BIG ones) led to a need to leave my nice job with the nice record label and strike out yet again as a freelance engineer, my personal G5 dual 2.7 and 1296s (I like these better than 192HDs) in tow......

James, with all due respect, if working in a project/composer situation is where you're at, then "One thing that may help is that if your connections are fairly consistent and you typically bring the same instruments in through the same channels" works fine. In a session situation, with two to four sessions a day, different clients, different bands, styles, producers, schedules and budgets, you work on the fly. In the time it takes to sift through a pile of presets, I'm used to setting up my drum sounds, getting the bassist sorted, and finding out how many cabs the guitarist really needs. Every instrument/song/style demands a different approach. My favorite vocal mic/preamp chain depends on the singer, song key, weather, part of the room the singer is comfortable in..... Same goes for drums or any other instrument.

So what did I do? I sold my 1296s, G5, & 424 card, and bought a Pro Tools HD3 rig. Live cue mixes? No problem. Latency? NOT a problem. Explaining to clients why I'm not using PT? No longer a problem. The spinning ball of death & endless waiting for fades? Absolutely NOT a problem. My rig travels easily, so I am not bound to any facility. My clients are happy and I'm happier.

What do I miss about DP? I REALLY like the pitch fixing, so I keep it around on a MacBook Pro/Traveller setup, dump tracks as necessary, tune 'em up & back they go to PT. Though I must admit, the new AutoTune graphical mode is mighty spiffy. I do a load of consulting & keeping project studios that use DP running around here & am happy to do so. I'd rather these guys use DP than any of the LE or M-Box "solutions", as they don't hold a candle to a smoothly running DP rig. HD is a different story and in my experience worth every penny.

I still try to keep up on MOTU & check in here daily, but I'm probably a ProTools guy until someone comes up with a more elegant/practical solution. Strangely, the day Logic8 was introduced, my PT rig did not wither & die. For my (and my clients) needs, $700 versus $7500 (actually a LOT more if you do any orchestral recording) is not a viable argument nor is any specification explanation the begins with "It depends...."

Personally I would LOVE it if MOTU (I have a lot of years invested in DP) got it together adressed all this stuff and made ProTools obsolete. I'm always rooting for the underdog. Until that time I need to make a living & keep the unnecessary stress (read: tap dancing while waiting to see if the spinning pizza is a crash or just a brainstone being passed) on the down low.

Just my opinion, YMMV, and my flame suit is on. Have a great day

[Timeline]

Great post B-12.

I agree about the fast setups and wish MOTU would have come up with some PCI processing to rival PT on those points.

As far as I'm concerned DP will remain my favorite for lo pressure and home applications because they give us major bang for the buck, well... and I know it inside out.

But one thing for sure, I will ALWAYS want the internal mixer to have Direct monitor switching with low latency and until they offer tape style switching with this it will always be a second choice app as far as I'm concerned.

I bought PT LE years ago and due to the fact the disabled my IO card and orphaned me I decided never to go back. Maybe I need to give em another look. 10 grand US might work out fine for me.

Anyway, Aloha my friend.

[Klaus]

Most headphone mixes do not resemble the actual musical mix. Most players need for their studio mix to be biased toward their own sound, which of course is not at all the way it will sound in the final mix. Even huge mixing boards have a separate mix area for the headphone mix. It's not a sophisticated mix; just enough of the main instruments so that they can hear what they're playing along with, plus a very nice and detailed (translate: loud) channel of their own sound. The musician wants to hear his nuances, so that he knows what he's laying down.

CueMix is that "separate mix area" just like in the big studios. It even has "Talk-Back" channels and buttons. I cannot imagine what's wrong with that setup. Nothing. It's ideal. Furthermore, it allows you a separate mix for each pair of channels. Thus, you can set it up for your guitarist, bassist, drummer, and depending on how many channels you have, many other players as well. It's really quite extraordinary. These mixes are all simultaneous! Once you've set them, each output pair will receive its own mix no matter what the other channels are getting.

My CueMix will sync with external control surfaces. I don't know which (don't use them, myself), but the setup and enabler is there.

This is a case of inexpensive ingenuity that trumps even the expensive board setups. What more do you want?

Shooshie

Sorry to jump in...
Did MotU fix the 'not' working link button in the Cuemix Console
?
Try this :
Set up a 'Talk and a Listen' situation, check out if it works separately, then
engage the link button and realize *Talk and Listen don't work simultaneously*....although the buttons are 'both' highlighted...
I posted here, on motumacatYahoo, no solutions, not even confirmations,
if I remember right.
Again, did they really fix it ?

Take care

Klaus