![]() ![]() ![]() I like it, produced a couple of albums from scratch demos with 32c. I'm sure there are other differences, too, that aren't important to me but would probably be worth the different in cost and screen real estate for a real working DAW-user. The 32C has more buses and different algorithms in the equalizer section that make it sound more like a Harrison Series 32 EQ than a generic four-band semi-parametric general purpose EQ, neither of which appeals to me enough to upgrade from the $19 version to the $99 version. I don't have to "build" a channel before I can use it. To me, the advantage of MixBus is that everything that's on my console is there, right in front of me. And I believe that starting out as a console builder gave them look-and-feel experience to create a program that would be reasonably comfortable for one who mixes in the traditional way, and that's me.ΔΆ0 years ago, I'd say "I'd consider replacing my console with a computer if I had a monitor the size of my console." Now that a console the size of Keith's is affordable, I don't really have the interest any more, but I've looked into a multi-fader control surface and a large monitor and think that I could get comfortable with it if I wanted to. ![]() It started with Ardour as a base, and Harrison, who was an active supported of the Ardour project, gained a lot of experience in working with it as a component of their large frame consoles from a dozen or so years back. I don't like any one DAW program better than another because I don't use any of them enough to really learn what I could like or dislike, but about Harrison, mostly what I like is the company and how the program was developed and evolved. I've been keeping up with their basic MixBus, it's currently, and frequently on sale for $19. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |