#Mixbus 32c eq vs. mixbus 4 software#

Now that I have the 32c-v6 from previous version v3, the next step is put Cubase&MixBus together. Hi Till, I confirm every word that you said, but for some work, example arrangement of soundtrack for video games or film, the editing in Cubase 10.5.x via VST Expression is to another world. If you spend as an Audio Engineer half of your life behind an analog console (in my case 3 DDA AMR24 desks) you will love Mixbus 32C. I can record vst instruments directly as a wave file. It most certainly would not take more than to publish their protocol paper, but seems they are not willing to do that ever.Quote:The On-Board Tools of Mixbus and optional Plug-Ins give me all I need. It is a shame to restrict such a fine piece of controller and virtually render it more or less useless for the future. The C24 is something like a Black Box without documentation. Sorry, but control surfaces are always a thing and there are even strange dialects to the existing widely used protocols that can be an obstacle. Sure - the C24 is another league, but blame it to avid that it is such a closed proprietary design and they seem not to be willing to publish the protocol ever. The perfect surface at the moment is the Behringer X-Touch, which is the most complete integrated control surface, including channel strip lcd and everything. Mixbus can use MIDI controller, OSC and Mackie protocols. Which is a shame, because it is an expensive and obviously nice controller. Seems like they want it to die in EOL instead of beeing opened to be of use with anything else. Avid never published anything about how it works.

#Mixbus 32c eq vs. mixbus 4 software#

Making it work with anything outside protools would take a guy willing to analyze the ethernet protocol (re-engineering) and translate it with a software to any of the standard control surface languages. It does speak non of the protocols other DAWs understand, not EuCon, not HUI, not MCU, not LC, not OSC, nothing. It is up to now incompatible to any other DAW. The C24 communicate via a highly proprietary ethernet protocol that never has been exposed of re-engineered. With ANYTHING other but Protools below 12. I can totally understand this would be a great thing with the C24 as a controller. And since the Mixbus community is widely a 'non-nonsense' type of guys i expect there will be a lot of useful stuff be shared in the form of scripts for everyday tasks.

According to Harrison, the scripting engine will have such powerful interface to Mixbus functionality that it would even be possibility to write your own MIDI processors, think of custom MiDI-plugin functionality. And i really need such functions like 'spread the different midi channels of track x into seperate tracks starting from Track y but leave out channels without content' or you can guess how interesting and effective individual export-scripts would be, if you need some custom works to be done to each exported track and many other useful possibilities. In Sonar there is such a scripting language, that is not documented anyhow, except with 'example scripts' and some old external webpage. This is one of the most useful things i oftenly miss in DAWs or it is there, but undocumented or handled like a 'legacy' thing nobody needs. I guess this makes wide parts of Mixbus automatable in a virtuelly near unlimited manner with a widely used standard scripting language that is quite versatile. They implemented a Lua-based scripting engine. The version 4 in march will have a new feature that i am really looking forward to. The idea of the character EQs seems very useful to me, quite an intelligent idea.Īnd a last one that might be important for editing tasks in Mixbus. Right now, i have the Essentials bundle (Verb and Echo), the Mastering EQ, the Spectral Compressor, the De-Esser, my next purchase will most probably be the character bundle. What i do in the meantime, is, that i purchased some of Harrisons own LV2 plugins, and up to now, i was not disappointed with any of them. I can say nothing about Waves, Slate and iLok based plugins. Some other VST2 64bit plugins, like Klanghelm stuff. I use AD2 and Jamstix for drum bus stuff, Mixbus sounds great for creating drum tracks. I did not check it, but i think VST3 is also not implemented right now, but don't nail me on this.įact is - i rarely use 3rd party plugins in the meantime. And the Sonar VST implementation is quite good.Īs for plugins - Harrison will not build a bitbridge, they only support 64bit plugins. In the meantime, i also have found a plugin, that made problems in Sonar, but works flawlessly in Mixbus. Often, because the plugins have a problem or don't work fully up the the interfaces specs. AFAIK Harrison does implement the interfaces to exact specification, so, it is possible that NOT all plugins load flawlessly.