A question on Hybrid mixing and connectivity

Axe_meister

This is more of an intellectual exercise (although I have spotted a nice Allen and Heath console for peanuts)

Let's say I'm using a DAW as a glorified tape machine and I have a 16 in 16 out interface.

First I need to get my instruments into the DAW.
The mixing desk obviously has a bunch of XLR inputs.
Instruments will be a combination of those miked up (guitar, drums) and those that already have line outs (keyboard).
Let's say the desk has some really good microphone pre-amps.
Would I just have a bunch of XLR patch bays to which I connect the microphones directly that are then routed to the desk and then a bunch of DI's for direct signals (that convert to XLR)?
So for recording I set the channel strips to either Microphone or Line level.
Then use the direct outs on the desk to the inputs of the interface.
So when I'm done recording. Do I repatch the outputs of the interface back to the inputs of the console or can I just patch these permanently to the line level Jacks at the input stage?

So now for mixing. Say I want to bounce the tracks out of the DAW and back in again via the channel strips.
Direct outs are usually pre-EQ and any channel strips FXs (e.g. compression). So would I use the AUX outs and go back into Interface (requiring re-patching).
Then I want to do the final mix down, so back out of the interface through the mixer to a mix bus that goes back to the interface to the final stereo mix.

To me it looks like an awful lot of re-patching, unless you have an absolutely massive number of console channels and lots of ins and outs on the interface.

Or is there a simpler method? 

octatonic

Yes, hybrid mixing with a console sometimes requires a lot of patching.

Which desk is it?

It is unlikely that you get a sonic improvement from a most consoles so think carefully before embarking on this.
There is a reason why almost everyone I know, including some grammy award winning mixers, are mixing either entirely in the box, or at most using hardware as insert effects.

I wouldn't consider going back to using a console unless it was a high end Neve, API or SSL.
Even then the sonic benefit is not massive.
Pro Tools HDX has a 64 bit floating point mixer with many thousands of dB of dynamic range.
That is... more than enough.

A console can be a workflow improvement under certain circumstances.

One way to do it is to use a console for tracking only, and mix in the box, perhaps using a bit of quality outboard.
That is how a number of people who still use a console are working, because fast (instantaneous) recall is just too important these days.

'So when I'm done recording. Do I repatch the outputs of the interface back to the inputs of the console or can I just patch these permanently to the line level Jacks at the input stage?'

So... it depends.
If you are using a large inline console then you can just use the small fader inputs for the tape (or DAW) returns and flip the faders so that the DAW returns go to the big fader.

If you aren't using an inline console then yes, you are probably going to have to repatch.

I wouldn't bother- the last 5 years of me owning a large format console I used it primarily as a place to put my mouse and keyboard when mixing.
I loved tracking through it of course.

I'd instead invest in better monitoring or better microphones/outboard, perhaps a mix bus processor that doesn't exist in plugin form. Or acoustic treatment.

Axe_meister

Cheers for that, it was more of an intellectual exercise, have been watching for too many YouTube videos but they never tell you about the re-patching.
Would look cool though in my music room.
And you can pick up lower end consoles (Allen and Heath) for peanuts these days.

Danny1969

The 32 channel Soundcraft Spirit I had in my project studio has direct outs and tape returns, along with mic and line inputs. So everything was permanently patched and it was just a case of selecting inputs. 



I only had 16 outs from 2 X 8 channel Protools Mix + interfaces so mixed in stems when out of the box but generally mixed in the box

For the professional studio I built we had a Tascam DM4800 with 32 in / out and I built a patch bay ( to the left of the desk) that could send any of the 48 inputs form the live room to any of the 32 inputs of the desk. So the performers plugged into the nearest socket where they stood and the 48 inputs were spread all round the room meaning mic cables could be short. 
Same with headphone returns



I would agree with @octatonic ; ... as cool as it sounds there's little value in using most old analog desks for mixing. They are filled with cheap op amps, have a fair bit of noise and a lot of cross talk. It's a nice thing to do once on a while to understand how records were mixed before automation but for fidelity mixing in the DAW and tracking with a few well chosen mic pre's is better. 

Nerine

I think a lot of it comes down to justification and the reluctance of people to accept that actually a laptop can sound as good as £100,000’s worth of analogue hardware when it comes to mixing. Hence people will always hear “that analogue sound” when they have a vested or financial interest to do so. A lot of it is confirmation bias, gatekeeping and snake oil. 

I’ve mixed albums fully analogue on big SSL consoles, and completely ITB, and a hybrid of the two with summing mixers, outboard compressors etc. 

I don’t think the minuscule sonic benefits (disregarding how you actually interact with the physical controls and how that can influence mix decisions due to the speed of workflow) are worth the hassle of recall and waiting for mixes to print etc. 

Just recalling the console would take nearly 30 mins or so if not longer. I could boot the computer, open the session make tweaks and resend the new version to the client in that time ITB. 

I’m pretty much exclusively ITB nowadays. I did some shootouts of analogue compressors vs their plug-in equivalents, and I sold a load of my hardware. 

Also, not being funny, just slap some tape sim and/or saturation on your channels or busses and you’re gonna get most of the “vibe” anyway. 
People pore over this stuff in far more detail than is required. 

A mix is going to benefit more from better balance decisions than how much analogue “mojo” has been added. 

Stratavarious

You can get a big desk that has the interfaces built in these days for not too much money.

I use a Soundcraft MTK22.. each of its 22 channels will send/return to a DAW.  No extra patching to an interface needed.  

TBH, once you start editing. In DAW world and automation, the extra desk functions barely get used.. EQ, faders, etc.   It is largely redundant as studio tech. It is just an interface that is primarily used to capture a live band performance to individual tracks.