On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:17:16 -0400, Robert Edge wrote: >> The name 32C comes from the 32C hardware that it emulates. >> >> It emulates... because... it is software. Yes, this is about a >> softwar product. Mixbus 32C is a software product, based on >> Ardour. As the subject line states. Just making sure everyone is >> one the same page. >> >> > >Harrison has been mostly in the business of making digital consoles >for a couple decades now. > >The previous product with the Mixbus name used the EQ, dynamics, and >tape saturation algorithms from those consoles, thus literally >providing the same channel strip. Not an emulation, the same thing. >At least that is what Harrison claimed. > >So yes, the distinction matters. And this is the important point I try to point out. Assuming the software should be as good as a mixing console, it doesn't matter if it's as good as the tools provided by the analog or digital consoles. The difference is that the engineers and artists used a mixing console, not some software for a desktop PC, a sound card and a mouse. The mixing console has got inputs, faders and knobs. The differences of usable EQs are less important, for the sound, as well as for the work-flow. Regards, Ralf _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
