I bought Mixbus, coming from a background where I really had no idea about Ardour, and think it sounds great! I’m trying to spread the good word across all the forums I stop at.
I would really, really like to see Mixbus continue to grow, and see Harrison keep Mixbus alive along the development of Ardour. I realize that this depends on the commercial success. I have a few comments on what I’ve perceived so far, based on my own experience.
As an Ableton user, I was first exposed to Mixbus, and thus Ardour, through the Live Forum. There, I found the thread at gearslutz. Ultimately, I bought Mixbus based on: 1) the positive feedback on gearsultz; and 2) the introductory pricing. However, as a reflection on Harrison, I thought the thread was a mixed bag. In particular, I saw the same question being repeated and unanswered by Harrison representatives. These questions concerned how the Mixbus achieved its allege improved sound. While I was able to discern the reasons, it seemed that many could not, and that these took a disproportionally negative stance to what I otherwise saw as a great product.
My personal experience involved setting up Mixbus with Live, a process I am still refining. While I was able to initially figure out a work flow on my own, I easily saw how others could be extremely put off by the process. However, I must emphasize that Mixbus and Ardour have not crashed on me as of yet.
Thus, in my opinion, the two biggest obstacles I can see so far to Harrison and Ardours continued success with the Mixbus involves two issues: 1) a clear, streamlined explanation of why and how Mixbus sounds “better” than other DAWs; and 2) clear and concise explanations of the various ways to route audio and midi from one application into Mixbus.
To give an example in outline form:
-
Why Mixbus sounds better - Harrison’s Algorithms developed from 30 years of experience
A. At the summing level - what’s the difference between the way most DAW’s sum and Mixbus?
B. EQ’s - exactly what are they based on?
C. Compression/Limiting - same with EQ’s
D. the 4 Mixbusses - clearly explain their advantages and uses
-
Routing Audio - the Flexibility of JackOSX
A. Setting up jack - a simplified version of what is presented in the quickstart guide
B. Routing application outputs --> I’m still figuring this one out
C. using the Jack audio unit / vst plugin --> the method I currently use
-
Routing Midi
A. MTC sync
B. Midi Patchbay
All in 2 pages, tops. I had to search through forums to find out how to do everything needed to do, and I’m still in the process of figuring somethings out. But to attract new users the sound difference of Mixbus needs to be clearly spelled, imho, and the integration aspect needs to be presented in a way that makes people realize how powerful it really is. I’m excited now to be using Jack, and equally excited to have an app which can fully take advantage of it. But this aspect isn’t really being presented in the clearest way, in my opinion.
Like I mentioned regarding the gearslutz thread, there is so much noise that its hard to really hear what Ardour and Harrison are saying with this product. I will end with the caveat that what I am suggesting may not be needed by more season engineers and producers, as I am more of an artist. However, a lot of the negative and critical comments were being made by, it seemed to me, much more seasoned and veteran engineers.
In the end, a concise explanation highlighting the main factors contributing to the Mixbus sound and clear step by step instructions for integrating Mix Bus with the major DAWS may be able to get people to take that $80 plunge. If they’re like me and most of the other happy users, it will be well worth it!
Many thanks to all who worked on this great product.