Mixbus 32C Released

[Compyfox]

I think in this case it was meant sarcastic (gates to hell are open). In fact, what happened after that with the comments by one of the representatives (if not THE representative) turned into a clear sign of "stay the hell away from this host". At least for me.


But glad that I could brighten up your day.

[ObsoleteAcc99]

Actually it really worth it but you will never know without a demo anyways. They are not the same products by any means. Even though the developers and Harrison states they are. To me I don't know if is because of the new EQ or what, they totally don't sound same 32C is light years away gigantic and warm. But they both can deliver the job but 32C with less plugin than Mixbus. If your music doesn't need Mixbus 32C, It is not a must to have it. You can get the 79 version.

It's the same daw. I don't know where you come up with this stuff lol.

there are exactly 2 differences.

32c gets a thorough emulation of the harrison 32 console EQ , whereas cheaper mixbus gets a cut down "inspired by" version.

32c gets 12 buses with harrison saturation and pdc, and standard gets 8.

That's it.

What you are paying the $220 difference for is the EQ emulation, i.e harrison is basically saying here is a harrison 32 console in a DAW, and 4 extra busses.
To some, that EQ will of course be worth it. The UAD plugin used to cost more than that I think. I got it for $99 on sale, and it's a great EQ. I imagine the official harrison one will be similar.

[Studio Saturn]

Hi TheoM, Yes sure I also compared the UAD vs the Harrison 32c and they don't match frequency by frequency but by ear they are identical or you can make them sound identical. for example, On Harrison 32c the number which is written doesn't translate when you cut off HP filter or boost. you have to use your ears to decide every decision you make. My mac mini runs more instance than My UAD quad and it is a perfect deal for me. Plus, I was on trial version for UAD Harrison and I didn't bother to purchase it cause it is like having 2 Harrison 32c. So to answer your question they are not identical with UAD unless you want them to be and they can be.
Since you already satisfied with UAD now I won't even advice you to buy it. About difference between Mixbus and Mixbus 32c in theory they are more or less the same but my ears tells me different so I will stand by my words 32c sound warm and huge to me. I have never tried Mixbus ever since I got 32c. The best part is that it has made other summing engine redundant for me meaning like I don't need api vision from UAD SSL or Neve. Useless specially in 32c.

When I use api vision in Reaper or Studio one 3 it might bring a difference to my mix but in 32c it is useless. Man people have appreciated when Studio one 3 release this engine injection thing Summing FX thing and I tried it and I was the only person to point out the flow phase problem in gearslutz and criticise it while people appreciate it big time including protools expert. And Presonus released point update and admitted the phase problem. Sometimes people believe what they want to believe. It is not in my nature I don't give a damn. If Mixbus is bad, I will call it bad. Thanks to Harrison experience It has helped me to identify Studio one problem before the fix came out. And still the FX injection thing doesn't come close to Mixbus. What really sad is people don't even have Harrison Mixbus 32c but they talk bad about it before even see what it does.

How good it is, only the user knows and remain mystery until you become a user.

Mixbus was not useful for people who use mac since the plugin side-chain was not fully working up until the latest version. Now there is no holding back to anyone.

[ObsoleteAcc99]

you completely misunderstood my post and answered questions i didn't even ask, and tbh i find the post a bit strange.

But I am happy you are happy with the daw. Make great music!

[zoot_rollo]

i recently rediscovered Console Shaper in Studio One.

which led me to thinking about Mixbus - again.

i like the philosophy - and at first REbrush with CS, i like what i was getting - AND needing less sweetening.

i don't mind the $$$ cost of experimenting with Mixbus. what i DO care about is the TIME!

TheoM made some great points and i enjoyed reading them. now he's suspended.

curious - but none of my business.

i like Studio One and CS - may be a better "ground up" approach as opposed to NLS, VCC, Satson, etc...

so - 32C?

where is everyone on this?

thanks in advance.

[Compyfox]

i like Studio One and CS - may be a better "ground up" approach as opposed to NLS, VCC, Satson, etc...

so - 32C?

where is everyone on this?

I just invested a bit of time to take a closer look at "Console Shaper" in StudioOne. The big difference they do here compared to NLS, VCC, Satson, etc... is that the plugin communicates with the "mix engine" of the host (read: it taps "into it") and has more interaction with the channels. While the plugin versions (at insert 1 each) basically don't do any further channel interaction (bleed from other channels, crosstalk, "overdriven" channels messing with adjacent channels, etc). Unless we talk "stereo bus" plugins, which usually have the Crosstalk matrix (L bleeding into R, R bleeding into L) built in - sometimes stronger, sometimes less strong)

It's what (funny enough) SKnote tried in recent years with the Crosstalk and Bleed features, and what Slate originally had in pre-v1 of VCC as well (they removed it due to reasons unknown). Now Studio One offers this as additional "brain" module.

It's still a module that you have to load/activate. In theory, you can say that Mixbus is having having the same concept. Only that it doesn't - the channels in the Harrison Mixbus don't talk to each other. They're plugins in a specific fixed position, adding mojo or not (Cubase users might know this as the "Channel Strip" feature). So Presonus is somewhat the forerunner this time around.



So we're sadly talking Apples and Oranges here. Presonus tapping in it's own mix engine (see the official promo video at point 4:14min), while all other tools are pretty much "superimposed" on the mix engine.

See here:
https://youtu.be/qDNnft2TCwQ?t=4m14s

The difference is subtle however, since we don't have further channel interaction like "one too strong channel pushing adjacent ones" (SKNote's STRIPbus could do this once). So it doesn't matter if the plugin interacts at the core level, or on the next available layer but very first plugin in the chain. At least as of this moment (read: it's down to marketing once more).

Then again, if you want "full control" over noise/crosstalk, etc... there are tools on the market that offer you that other than "fixed crosstalk" and just a drive button. One tool that comes to mind, but is sadly discontinued at this point, is SleepyTimeDSP "Crosstalk 2".

However, what Presonus showed in their official presentation video, is something I'd consider "too much". Yes, it sounds impressive if a track is distorting and spitting at you. But in reality, not so great.




Long story short:
Presonus or Harrison? It's your choice. To me, this is not reinventing the wheel from either of these companies. It's still a superimposed module on a pure digital brain. And the difference (crosstalk especially) is very subtle and doesn't need a "communicate at core level" integration. It's a flaw that engineers tried to get rid of for decades (including bleeding and "channel ducking" on overdriven/broken adjacent channels) and that people want to have back now(!).

Don't let the marketing fool you. This is all I can say.

[zoot_rollo]

thanks for the thorough reply.

when i tried CS again yesterday, i tried a few of the presets.

the crosstalk was crazy (not good) - it was OK on just the drum bus. but above that, i would use VERY little if at all.

i will experiment with it tonight - add SKNote Strip3 on certain channels.

i initially liked the warm-up CS imparted.

yes, i CAN be a sucker for marketing - but it's worth a go since it comes with S1 anyway.

gonna hang back on MixBus.

i'm just doing a funk/fusion-bass/drum/guitar thing. no synths - low track count.
pretty simple.

thanks again.

[Robert Randolph]

Guys, there's now a mixbus demo!

http://harrisonconsoles.com/site/mixbus.html

[Russell Grand]

I love how this thread was full of people howling for a demo of Mixbus and then, as soon as someone comes in to share that a demo was released: crickets. For over a year. KVR slays me.

[fluffy_little_something]

Don't the Mixbus DAWs have a stereo width knob in the channel strips?

[telecharge]

With the demise of Sonar, I'm looking at Mixbus again....

How are Mixbus users liking v4? I have v3, so I'm trying to determine if I should upgrade.

[Robert Randolph]

With the demise of Sonar, I'm looking at Mixbus again....

How are Mixbus users liking v4? I have v3, so I'm trying to determine if I should upgrade.

I recently did a long review on Mixbus v4. http://admiralbumblebee.com/tags/#Mixbus

I think it's a pretty awesome product for a lot of folks.

[telecharge]

I recently did a long review on Mixbus v4. http://admiralbumblebee.com/tags/#Mixbus

Thanks, I'll check it out. Did you upgrade from v3? I read the press release for v4, but I'm not seeing enough there to warrant an upgrade.

[clintmartin]

I'm another Sonar Platinum user, and a Mixbus 4 fan. It's on sale for $29...you can't beat that. It's a fun DAW.

[Robert Randolph]

I recently did a long review on Mixbus v4. http://admiralbumblebee.com/tags/#Mixbus

Thanks, I'll check it out. Did you upgrade from v3? I read the press release for v4, but I'm not seeing enough there to warrant an upgrade.

At the current black friday price, I think there is plenty of reason to upgrade.