On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 12:05 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote: > With unlimited tracks available, this makes sense > of course, though it encourages postponing everything to the > mixing stage. I'm not convinced that is always a good idea, > you can easily end up with 'too much to handle' there.
PS: I'm especially thinking about the band in the box approach, For synth plugins I mix already before recording and for sure, others who record a band could use EQs before the recording too. At what time you need the EQs doesn't matter, you need EQs for mixing music. Is there really the need to include EQs only when they are needed and to exclude them, when they aren't used? What exactly is the nuisance, if EQs are always included/available, even when they aren't needed? Horsepower of the computer? From cheap to expensive analog mixers, all provide EQs, you can't get rid of them, when you don't need them. There is no reason to get rid of them. Horsepower of a DAW computer vs searching for a good working EQ, learn that EQs usually are needed etc. ... to make EQs optional comes with more drawbacks than advantages. There's nothing wrong with learning by trail and error, but newbies don't become a chance to do this, when the mixer design isn't good, when even basic tools aren't defaults. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
