Hey guys,

How are you?

Well, I currently use Studio One as my main DAW, but I'm thinking about giving Mixbus a shot for my mixing tasks.

So, does anyone here has figured out a nice workflow to make these two DAWs work well together?

I mean, sure, I could just export the stems from Studio One to Mixbus, but there might be a better workflow that I'm not aware of.

Here's a video where a guy uses Jack audio to route Protools into Mixbus. Would something along these lines work with S1 as well? I'm on Windows 8, by the way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJKSImri0vA

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,

Morgan.

 

I have both, but for me . . . I'm hopeful that the new features in Harrison MixBus are (or will eventually be) powerful and comprehensive enough to stand on its own. They've added MIDI and Jack is no longer required. I'm assuming v3 plays nicer with others, but maybe there will be no need for another DAW to track with.

 

This is one of the reason why is better to use monitors(if you can of course), specially at mastering process:

Ian Shepherd
https://youtu.be/6eDXQBPRhnE?t=11m18s

I will advice to anybody who is newbie and even professional to subscribe to his channel, to learn secrets about mastering process, also recording revolution is great.

 

Sorry, but I can't see how your reply relates to the OP.

I think you've replied to the wrong thread.

Anyway, for what it's worth, I do use Presonus Eris E8 monitors.

 

Oh my, wrong thread of course, thnx for noticing This one is right link

 

hey, RMorgan,

because it is the architecture of the jack connection kit that makes it possible to work the way the protools into mixbus and vice versa solution does, it quite certainly will also work with your choice of digital audio workstation program. *yes*

best to test the matter, then decide if the gain in sounding possibilities is worth the trouble to set it up. *yes*

all the best for all of us...

 

Hey man,

Well, in theory it should be fairly simple indeed...I practice, I can't even make Jack show up in S1's audio device manager...

I'll keep trying, though, and I'll make sure to detail the process here if I succeed.

 

hello, RMorgan,

the right thing to do (with the right attitude).

waiting for your success story, wishing you the best...

post scriptum, sorry, no studio one user here.
starting jack, then studio one, the program does not even recognise the new connection possibilities?
have you checked the jack site for compatibility issues?
have you searched the presonus forum for solutions?

 

Update:

I did manage to rout the signal from S1 to Mixbus using the same process described in the OP's video.

It turned out that JackRouter was not showing up in S1's device manager because you actually have to register its dll manually using windows's cmd. After doing that, it shows up just fine and you can select and configure it normally. Now, if you ask me, I have no idea why JackAudio comes with an installer package but you still have to register it manually...It just seems stupid; One would expect that all necessary processes would be executed during install, you know, like all other software out there.

Anyway, honestly, I don't think it's worth the hassle. I've been testing Mixbus V3 extensively these days and I don't think it sounds any better than any other DAW with some quality analogue emulating plugins configured correctly. It's native EQ, compressors and tape saturation algorithms sound really nice, but it's nothing really outstanding.

Mixbus V3 is still very buggy and crashing all the time. I'm sure the developers are working to solve that, though. Its developers seem to be very proactive.

I'll just give it some time, do a few more tests with different materials to see if my conclusion is definitive but, so far, I believe it will take a looooong time until Mibux can be considered as a full-featured DAW. It's nice, but it's not worth the worflow hassle.

 

hello, RMorgan,

feeling really glad you have succeeded with your system. *yes*

as for setting up the jack connection kit, am unable to recall if had to do the same.

mixbus, for me, from v1.0.1, was love at first audition, continues being so till today, thus am surely enormously biased. *yes*

for me, it does wonderful things with the audio inside it, can not really define what, how, though. *yes*

do not give upon it too early, keep trying, do some more mixing with it, try it just with stems you process inside it, compare these with your similar mix from the other program, test it within every possible stage of your work. *yes*

set up the same processing in both of your programs, till completed mix, then compare the results. *yes*

surely you will find out why the program is so loved, even praised, by loads of its users, it just might need some more time. *yes*

could also be that it simply will not be good enough for you, in that case just bin it for some while, then try it again later, perhaps within some other genre, if even then will not be sufficiently different, you can decide its fate. *yes*

wish you more success with it, plus the usual best of the best...

later edit, post scriptum, your later added two paragraphs show the right direction to take.

 

Thanks for the reply my friend,

So, since you're an experienced Mixbus user, do you mind if I ask where do you fit it in your workflow?

I mean, you probably use it just for mixing, right? Do you do a little pre-mixing (levels, automation, etc...) and processing (compress, eq, etc...) in your other DAW before exporting stems to Mixbus?

What is, in your opinion, the best workflow here?

Cheers,

Morgan.

 

hello, RMorgan,

will be back in couple of hours, the detailed answer also needs some time.

might also suggest to comb through their user forum, there are loads of much more experienced, even big name, users there, quite good way to spend your time during this interval.

till later...

later becomes now... *yes*

feels as the most important thing to mention, you do not need to consider the program as one full fledged workstation, providing you with the ultimate end to end solution, in order to work with it.

perhaps the second is that one is not required to have one or two or three workflows, rather just being in the flow during the working process (the dementedly stubborn experimenter in me simply does not allow any other way to do this).

the basic assumption, the experience too, is that mixbus does some kind of miracle with the audio it processes.
do not want to detail this, the tests, more than this here, if it becomes valid for you, you will use the program, if not, you will lump it.

on many occasions, one feels if the project in question will require some mixbussing or not.

on some cases, all the already edited, composited, cleaned up, pocketed, mix readied, etc. tracks are to be mixed, processed, solely, in mixbus.

there might be occasions when instead of doing the full mix in the program, the choice is just processing couple of tracks in it, then the resulting tracks, stems, are going back to the main program, using mixbus as one choice summing mixer.

if the project requires, mixbus is capable of functioning as your finest squashing chain, so the drum, the bass, tracks, overhead recordings, sometimes other stems too, are going into it, then out when ready, back to the main choice.

sometimes just the effect sends are to be processed in it, as these, after mixbussing them, feel as more dimensional, more open, more defined, more refined, more of everything positively expressable.

some pads, drones, keyboards, such stereo tracks, stereo stems, will gain some kind of unexplainable plus, similar to the effects, in the stereo imaging, thus worth the work.

there are times when just couple of lead instrument tracks are sent through its channels, driving them quite hot, then through the buss tape saturation, then through the master bus tape saturation (there is some difference between these two, at least in the earlier versions), then back to the main program, using these for, in, parallel processing.

many times, vocal tracks, human voice tracks, with partially inappropriate microphone choices, can be healed, just by importing, then exporting them, then with added processing, they can shine through, instead of drowning underneath every other element.

another thing, instead of using jack, the results are, sometimes, sounding better, sitting better in the salad, through the import, export, functions.

please, understand, these are not just my admittedly over biased ears, skewed perceptions, when time allows, clients choose them, blindly, over the originals.

there are no ready recipes, at least do not want, will not, prescibe them, not for you, nor for myself.

your ears, your time, are there, use them, when the muse sings, when you want to make something exceptional.

hope all this will become of some help, wish you all the best...

 

Thanks brother,

I've been playing with it today and I'm starting to notice the subtle but elegant sonic enhancements that it's capable of.

Like you said, it really does something to the stereo image of a mix, something that I was trying to do for a long time but didn't know how. This is the first thing I've noticed about it.

Another thing that it does really well is to help to gel vocals into a mix. Its compressors are actually top-notch and really simple to setup.

So, yeah, I think I'm starting to get it.

I believe the best workflow for me right now is to record, correct and automate things on Studio One and then export the stems to Mixbus for mixing. I don't think most people will be able to use it as a full-fledged DAW right now, but it works pretty well as a mixing console.

Cheers,

Morgan.

 

Hey Morgan! I'm right there with you buddy! I'm using Studio One as my main daw and I just got MB3. I have yet to do much with it and I will probably be importing stems from S1. My problem is stability with Mixbus. My computer is running Win7, used solely for audio, and has never seen the internet but I'm getting random crashes with only one or two tracks. I think I'm going to like it...hopefully when 3.1 is released. The funny thing is that Ardour for Windows runs fine and it's the same platform???

 

Hey brother,

Yep, it's crashing a lot here too, mostly when trying to start a new project from scratch within Mixbus.

Today, when I used it solely for mixing stems produced in S1, it didn't crash even once.

A lot of people are complaining about constant crashes in the official forum, so the word is that Harrison is already working on v3.1 to address a zillion bugs.

I really didn't like the fact that they did release a very buggy software, specially when there isn't any demo, but I'll forgive them if they manage to fix at least the instability issues in the next couple of months.

Anyway, what do you think about it so far? Did you manage to finish a mix in it? What's your verdict?

Cheers,

Morgan.

 

hello, RMorgan,

glad you gave it more time, with it more chances to shine.

once you really begin to experiment with it, the program will, subtly, find its own place in everything you do. *yes*

it just needs time, ears, effort, testing, comparing, plus the added patience right now, then there will be loads of flashes of insightful solutions, at the end of the present dark tunnel. *yes*

you can ask support for the older version, that one is loads more stable, also sound-wise is not really different. *yes*

participate on the user forum, the more reports go in about things, the more usable feedback they get, thus we all gain with the resolved issues. *yes*

wish you loads of success with your mixbussing, plus the usual best of the best, plus pray do include that v3.all.problems.sorted.stable.release...