I agree about the Dr_Pepper/Mr_Pibb nature of the question. But, I was only referring to the number of times the audio crosses the A/D then D/A boundary. In my mind, the fewer the better. All the other issues, automation, etc., are less of a concern for me. Cheers.... On 30 May 2009 at 16:21, Ricus Vincente <wizardofgosz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 2009-05-30 at 13:14 -0700, Kevin Cosgrove wrote: > > This is one of those coke/pepsi hornets-nest questions. > > I guess it depends upon how much I like the automation in Ardour. > > Plus your question has two levels. The convenience of the automation > in the DAW, vs. the automation in the console, and the different > question of preferring the way mixing in the box sounds over mixing > through analog gear. > > There's no question in my mind that I always want my audio passing > through analog gear on the way out (I'm taking about good analog gear > here, not crap). > > Keeping the faders on my console at unity and making automation moves > with the DAW is something that is amenable to me. > > Best, > Rich... > > > > > I'm mostly interested in transport controls. A control surface with > > > faders would come in handy some times, but for mixing we have an actual > > > analog console (a cool vintage piece at that). > > > > Once you're in the digital domain, are you sure you'd want to go back > > to analog for the mixing? > > > > > > -- > > Kevin > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Linux-audio-user mailing list > > Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-audio-user mailing list > Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user -- Kevin _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
