On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 20:34:12 -0700 (PDT) Len Ovens <len@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Interesting. A lot of comments show that most people think this is a > straight up daw comparison. That is not true. It is mixbus vs. reaper > with plugins to achieve the same result. The reaper tracks may even > have analog stages in them as the studio does own some. The reaper > tracks were the original tracks and had the most time spent on them > (they were being paid for) but the MB stem mix was done only for > demonstration. If the MB mixes turn out better under those lines... > it says good things about MB. If the reaper plus plugins plus more > mixing time sounds better it says not so much. The mixes were pretty > close. Right. This has to be taken with a grain of salt. And there is no mention of which plugins were used. For instance, they might have chosen digital functional compressors but then they might also have used vintage emulations. Same with EQs. If they thrown in a bunch of Pulltec emulations, or SSL, then it becomes more a choice of which console to use, each with its own sonic flavours. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
