You touched on a potential weak spot on the Bluebox right there. So far, Iāve found no way to rewind or fast forward in a track, nor does it do punch in - out or loop takes. The last, Iām okay with, but not being able to move back and forth is starting to get to me. Say you got something entering at around 3 minutes or so, and youāve tweaked the eq some and maybe touched the reverb a little. You have to listen through the whole thing now before you get there, to hear if youāve done a tweak you actually like.
Iām still thinking I just havenāt figured out how to rewind and f forward yet, or that itās coming at release or close to it. This is one of the things Iāll be asking 1010 as I wrap up my review, to see where theyāre at with that.
If this is intended primarily for live recording, I can see the reasoning behind it. But there are so many ways to use this in a small studio context, it would be daft to not give us an option to just scrub across the tape, kind of.
Compared to say the Heat or the SSL SiX, which both have lovely hints of subtle saturation when you push them to places where you maybe shouldnāt go, this oneās very harsh. It canāt be used for effect or flavour, at least I canāt
However, you can go slightly beyond the red without breaking the track, so it seems to be somewhat forgiving. In general, you can push the Bluebox pretty hard to make your mix loud and big. Headroom hasnāt been an issue so far.
So hereās another one made on the Bluebox. I pushed this one more, recorded straight from all the Blackbox three stereo outputs into the Bluebox and then did the entire mix in the Bluebox. Reverb, delay, eq, compression and obviously panning and gain, itās all Bluebox as is the actual recording itself.
Iāve done an SSL SiX version of this as well. I donāt think comparisons are relevant, since theyāre so different in terms of both sound and workflow, but all the same, thereās a clear difference between the results and not just because Iām not great at mixing and sound engineering.
I would love your comments on the above. I really got ear fatigue on this one and canāt tell if I got this right and if not, where it might have gone wrong. Some might be prescribed to my very basic mixing skills, some might be due to the character of the Bluebox, so Iād love to get feedback on this to better understand how I can work the Bluebox better. Iāll bring in a few here that I know usually offer solid feedback, so my apologies for dragging you into this @cold_fashioned@ddiamond84@captain8@GovernorSilver@lesstalkmoredisco@papertiger
Overall, I enjoy the tune. I used headphones, and it still seemed as though the kick & bass line were a little low in volume. That might be contributing to a little lack of cohesion, since the higher pitched elements are panned a decent amount. I donāt think the panning is too much, though - I like that aspect. Of course, Iām no pro, so take my comments with a grain of salt. I also just woke up. Iāll listen again a little later & with different headphones, just to check again.
So because of this I decided to be your laptop-speaker ears @circuitghost In all honesty I listen to music more often then not on my phone/laptop these days, especially bits from Instagram or Youtube. So itās good reference speakers for me;)
Nice tune, I like the sweet and uptempo combination. Nice and dreamy.
Soundwise, Iām really inexperienced in mixing myself still, so take my take as a laymanās take:
On my laptop speakers the kick and other lows were even more missing. I feel its mostly soft thud. Having a traditional mixer which you could overdrive a bit, the added grit/texture/mids from overdriving kick/bass might actually be a benefit, as opposed to the clean Bluebox.
The tune sounds very clean (neither positive or negative, just an observation)
I feel the highs are a bit too sharp for my ears (maybe especially the longer sustained high pad notes stuff, not the hats)
Thereās not loads of mids in the composition, correct? Maybe good for a next test.
Everything is crisp and clean, and it feels like thereās lots of room/space left. Maybe only the highs are a bit overcrowded in this mix? (Is that a think? Im semi-bluffing semi-going-by-guts)
I donāt have lots of knowledge on stereo matters, but indeed it feels like thereās some stuff happening there.
Maybe for experimentās sake some other time you could try one in mono, and fill the mids/lows a bit more crowded, see what happens.
With the sound being very cleanish, Iād be curious for a test that uses some outboard roughness (send-return via a Heat or other saturator/overdrive/other crunch?), see how it captures that.
Hmm, I felt this at times (a little) as well. I didnāt say anything because I generally think Iām just sensitive to higher tones. If anything, maybe the highs were sharper earlier and then mellowed (or my brain adjusted?).
I would also say that it seems clean and clear (not a bad thing). I actually would be curious to hear the SSL version, if only to hear what youāve been saying about the SiX all year long. Hehe.
Thanks, great feedback youāre right, the highs are a bit too sharp, and in a way, thatās a testament to the Bluebox. Source material is a bit too sharp and I couldnāt get around it without muddling other things up, so itās a bit of a compromise. Couldnāt be save because I never got the source quite right, which became obvious when I mixed this.
The drums are supposedly intended to be low, as is the bass, sort of subtle and in the background to be more part of the overall texture and not drive the piece more than anything else. I think that worked slightly better in the SSL version, though.
Overall, all of which youāre pointing out is really due to my lack of mixing skills rather than the Bluebox itself, except perhaps for the clean sound. Thereās no way getting around that, unless you actively work dirt and grit into the material through outboard sources or the material itself.
It looks like it indeed. But for a small (and relatively affordable?) box that does lots, itās not a bad thing that it also doesnāt beautifully color your sound right? Fact that you get so much and it sounds good and clean is quite exceptional already. Plus, most of my gear I like because it adds some character or roughness; for example why I moved from DT to Rytm (for my taste DT was very pristine, whilst Rytm has more to offer on the overdrive/roughing side). With the built in effects of OT and Rytm thereās already lots present to rough and dirty up my sound, so capturing that cleanly in the Bluebox would be fine.
I agree with what cold fashioned said above but I think not so much cohesion is good as it accentuates the simultaneous multiplicity of the sonic experience hahaā¦ good stuff, sounds like it would be good at half time and half again as wellā¦
Hey, yes, in fact the track on debate right now is made with those two only. I built the beats, loops and song in the Blackbox and used its multiple outs to record directly into the Bluebox. I turned off the Blackbox compressor, panned everything to the center in the BBox except for the drums and no reverb or delay, saving all that for the Bluebox, and only filter for character.
The two together is more or less a complete micro studio, as long as youāre comfortable staying within the sampling realm.
Thanks, yep, I actually made like a one minute version, thinking āThis is enough actually, where do I go from here?ā Notable without most of the drums, mainly the ambience and just subtle beats to drive the sense of velocity to some extent.
It tends to get that way. You got a complete something. It turns out all right. But then thereās a section thatās slightly better than the rest, and you realise thatās where your next song is, and this one maybe never sees the light of day.
But also, to just finish something, no matter if itās any good or not, is also a way to move forward.
Hearing the two versions for comparator purpose was really useful for me. For the record, I donāt think one sounds fundamentally better or worse - there are parts of the Bluebox mix that I prefer, and parts of the SSL mix I prefer. So, Iād put that down to workflow and mixing choice differences. My own mixes are barely passable so the Bluebox will definitely meet my needs. Regaridng the EQ and anything channel based (obviously send effects would be different) but are you able to āflattenā the channels so that when you copy each individual track off the SD card with eq applied?
Another interesting comparison would be if you took the Bluebox version and zeroād all the EQs and compression. Perhaps even taking the reverb etc off too. So you could compare a raw recording from the Bluebox with a processed recording from the Bluebox. Donāt feel obliged to do that, Iām just thinking out loud.
no, it doesnāt show up as a USB unit, so itās like the Deluge and the Tracker (I believe?) that way. Connect the card to your
In all honesty I listen to music more often then not on my phone/laptop these days, especially bits from Instagram or Youtube. So itās good reference speakers for me;)