All user reviews for the Harrison Audio Mixbus 2.0

Daw for Windows,Linux and Mac.
They use jack as audio engine which works perfectly on Windows.
The basic version with no plugins supports the following per track :
Input assign, direct output assign, Insert assign
( all these for both software and hardware), 3 band eq, 8 bus sends, pan, fader and more.
Everything will be explaind perfectly in the manual or will be explained in video tutorials.

Very easy to handle with excellent audio quality due "analog algorithms"


SUITABILITY/PERFORMANCE

This daw works perfectly with existing outboard equipment.
Daw to gear to daw latency is calculated ( measured) by the daw and automatically adjusted.

OVERALL OPINION

This is what i think the cheapest daw which preform the best with a big to the analog world.
For me, this will be the number one daw.
And if the people of Harisson Consoles keep up their efforts I will keep updating this program.

The installation is done it without problems?
No, everything is fine.

The general configuration is easy?
It is understandable, even though the process is not as simple as a Reaper or Live.

Have you experienced any incompatibilities?
None.

The manual is clear and sufficient?
It is in PDF I think, but the official video tutorials are valuable.

SUITABILITY/PERFORMANCE

What is the configuration of your computer?

I installed Mixbus on three machines. Three PCs with a dedicated audio (a cube under Windows7 64bit home, equipped with a quad core, a few gigs of ram, SSD and an RME HDSP RayDAT station connected to a Yamaha 02RV2 ADAT 4in / 4out or 32 channels in and 32 channels out), a powerful laptop (Windows7 64bit big i7 under two fast disks and lots of RAM, a ROG from Asus, with an M-Audio Fast Track Pro USB), a small Portable Linux Processor which is a very modest Pentium Dual Core (a Lenovo IdeaPad paid 600 euros there quite a few years).

In all cases there is no problem.

OVERALL OPINION

How long have you use it?
Past year.

Have you tried many other models before buying it?
Yes. And I always use Reaper upstream to phase composition, then I export my tracks separately and I work all in Mixbus to finalize the mix.

What thing do you like most and least?
I love the logic of Mixbus, console ergonomics and especially the grain it brings.
Because yes, Mixbus color the sound with a theoretically derived grain of the same DNA as the console of the brand. I have not the chance to have a big Harrison to mix my sound gadgets, but I've always liked the particular grain of brand products.

What I like least: for the moment there is no management of MIDI in Mixbus on Windows systems. They are working it seems. Mac users there is law, those Linux too. That's why I restarted an old laptop with Linux inside. Only complaint, grievance but weight. Otherwise Mixbus is perfect, ideal for mixing (it is aptly named).

Harrison drew on the core to produce Ardour Mixbus, which explains that Ardour sessions can be read by Mixbus. The program is reliable, efficient and has the foresight to reserve resources from the beginning of labor. It may be strange but setbacks are avoided.

Latency is not really the workhorse of Mixbus, in the sense that it is theoretically not use this software to play live virtual instruments or amp simulations. It's a big console + magneto with treatments of choice. Besides plugins offered by Harrison are excellent (I stopped the massacre at Universal Audio in a while, I can not compare) and they are often offered as a bundle at a knockdown price, as Mixbus.

When you have limited space and a big analog console does not fit into the room or in the budget, Mixbus is a compelling choice.

Yet tenor STAN Mixbus made its merry way. Compatible with Windows, Linux and Mac os X even PPC, it is universal and it is a rare quality.

As pointed out by Linn is a remarkable and has plugins high quality software. I find at least the level of the best and say the WAVES, often well above ...

You can enjoy discount and just follow the officielle.Tout page was said except that Mixbus is based on Jack, great system that allows you to route all in all.

Finally, the service is top class, the head Harrison answering your emails usually within one hour. I had lost my license for a plugin, Ben Loftis has sent me back in time by email last night Sunday ...

Harrison, the giant behind Mixbus:
http://harrisonconsoles.com/site/index.html

SUITABILITY/PERFORMANCE

2 MACS under Mavericks, no worries.
RME UCX

OVERALL OPINION

J "uses Ardour since its pre-release.
QP exceptional report. No worries dongle or another, a simple TXT file placed on its space, and the software is allowed ...

Duet with Logic Pro X at this time.

I eagerly waiting Mixbus 3 with MIDI and see if I can definitely do without Logic and other PT (which is likely ...)

I use it under GNU / Linux, especially with Ubuntu and Ubuntu Studio. However, I can confirm that it works very well on Windows and Mac. Making it the only recording and mix compatible with the three software systems. Harrison also created a small program that allows the need to convert sessions Pro-Tools, Logic and others for Mixbus, sold separately.

We download an installer that is doing all alone like a big one. You must first install jackd and put the license text file in his personal directory. And it's all good. The same goes for the three systems.

For GNU / Linux, the thing a bit unusual for people who are not familiar, this is Jack correctly configure and launch first: latency, sampling frequency, etc.. are set out in Mixbus. So be careful at this point depending on the project.

Also for Gnu / Linux, consider using a multimedia oriented like Ubuntu Studio or AV Linux distribution, or otherwise, performance level that will not top (Feel free to ask me questions about it).

SUITABILITY/PERFORMANCE

It is based on Ardour, 100% Open Source, but Mixbus replaces the mixer "classic" for a software on pc by emulator analog console. On the menu, 8 bus, compressor and EQ emulator tape drive, etc. .. on each slice. So, Mixbus is much more greedy qu'Ardour without adding additional effect: there is already a default processing.

Apart from that, with an AMD A6, it is happiness. I look forward to version 3 better exploit multicore. Note that GNU / Linux, it is best to avoid the Intel CPU and logical CPUs (examples: i5, i7), it loses in performance (hence the choice of AMD). Note that we had a need for stability at the beginning, because of the AMD driver. But it was resolved long ago. Please note: we can do sessions several days without rebooting anything.

Mixbus I run on different machines, including my old Thinkpad T61. The studio Azarecord, we use with RME card 24 i / o adat and pre-amps and converters, and if I also use firewire or usb travel cards. It is always a pleasure.

The biggest session we had was for a video, to mix 23 tracks, many effects and automation, etc.. it has not exceeded 50% of the CPU. Project officials were impressed that we have not a mac pro and pro-tools as everyone else, although it sounds great.

For our part, we thus find it with a relatively low acquisition cost compared to the performance that was.

I put 8 because I'm waiting for version 3 with management for Multi-Mix part.

OVERALL OPINION

I use it for a little over a year. Previously I was Ardour user, I still occasionally used for its light on some recordings. Then I opened the session in Mixbus to the mix.

The value for money is just huge: it was the sound of a Harrison console in the PC. Since we made the mix with Mixbus, many people who listen to our mixes and ask us what is the console overpriced we have in governance. We do not have console, for since Mixbus, we sold.

The nice thing is that the publisher is the same as a lot of software. However, the mix part works as a console. So, an engineer / sound technician can not lose, that's the same thing ready worklow in analog. We can even do without plugins in many cases on the edges. On the other hand, those who actually use their ears to his work immediately captivated by the sound.

So without hesitation, I would do this choice and I recommend it to all those who wish to work as analog, but digital.

use with a macbook pro early 2012 and a PC fixed, smooth installation on the two platforms.
manual very clear to those who read English. Unlimited bus with 8 tracks tape sat by default.

SUITABILITY/PERFORMANCE

So there should be differentiated two parts: the tracking and mix.
recently used for recording 16 simultaneous tracks, I met a lot of crashes, software unresponsive or unexpectedly left, fortunately he had to reopen well preserved all data. Sessions on heavy, I also had some concerns graohiques recorded tracks not displayed, forced to restart the app to refresh the display. also lack virtual tracks for alternate takes. My other worries tracks recorded on the mac version does not display their name in the edit view qd I pass on the PC version. In short a lot of small annoyances that waste time and do not allow intensive use for tracking. Good for routing by allowing against a lot of things and is simple to use.
mix in the situation is reversed no worries, the software responds well (in fact it uses all the resources it needs from the beginning of the session, as if using all the comp and eq, so that the cpu usage seems high at first, but increases only slightly thereafter), the issue is rather well done, the software leads to a gain staging which facilitates the consistent mix, eq and comp are well integrated and there fetches external plugs that for a particular color, like the old what, makes you go faster.
And thanks to the soft tape sat a sound to him, you like it or not ...

OVERALL OPINION

used since December, I did a lot of intensive testing in a real situation, and I do not regret the purchase ($ 49 is given) but for now I'll confine the mix and will use another soft for the recording, which is a shame it requires additional handling.
Hoping that no mas lot of trouble will be set in future versions, we should not forget that he is relatively young compared to other apps, and then it deserves a 10.

Installation on Mac too easy, slip the icon in the programs. It runs very well. I had some small problems early which are set to As. The customer service is excellent.

SUITABILITY/PERFORMANCE

I have a MacBook Pro 2.8GHz i7, 4GB of ram. It runs very well with. Except at the end when I met all the tracks of external plugins ... I reached the limit of my PC. I use KRK Ergo with, I ride always 32bit, 96kHz. This configuration is solid and stable. It sounds ...

OVERALL OPINION

I am a subscriber for about 4 months. I also Cubase, Live, Logic Pro, FL Studio, but I use that Mixbus now.

What I like the most:
- This is the console page
- Automation
- The workflow
- The summation
- The grain

What I like least:
- Compressors might sound a little better.
- The equalizer could have a little more parameter.
- The lack of scoring and the fact of registration noon. The customer service of Mixbus told me they were considering this.
- The graphical appearance, I think it is not very nice. It is a matter of taste of the shot. The new integrated plugins are not better

For unbeatable value. It really is excellent as software. I hope they continue development for many years.

Typical Installation
no inconsistency so far even if I start ardor of
pity that there is not a choice of language for the installer
the configue is both simple and very well thought

the first hours were laborious because everything is displayed in English but a faith based on all activated will translate immediately better

the manual will have to use the translator is common to all browsers

SUITABILITY/PERFORMANCE

Initial tests on a laptop just to mix so I'll see (or rather hear) what happens in the time to come on a pc fixed
queques crunches but probably due to the 250gb hd vista configue and 3gb ram
if the set is rather consistent

OVERALL OPINION

last night
I have an old Cubasis VST32 which hitherto has always given me satisfaction and I prefer to invest in that herd of virtual and at the time he was 50 € for argus in 2004 so I do not vai m ' complain

Mixbus but it is something different about it behaves like a true console access direct semi parametric eq on the console as English (I seck touting an old console and I must say that it is the same temperament )
access function plug is seen
the tape saturation directly integrated on all buses is a must in terms of cpu

simple and fairly intuitive, although in some very specialized function

working method is radically different but it is excellant magneto function without unnecessary
the sound that is out is pretty hefty

with experience? we'll see in time
one thing is sure is that we really just leave the sauce

I would bring some later modified, as

I use Linux, the installation is very simple. The configuration is just as easy if you know how to use the jack sound server. No inconsistency encountered, I use a 64 bit OS. The software is translated into french.
The manuals are in English but damn. I say, because there is the quickstart that explains the installation and key operations, and the instruction manual that comes much more into detail.

SUITABILITY/PERFORMANCE

Elitegroup motherboard GF8100VM-M3, AMD Phenom 9600 quad core, 4GB of RAM. Linux Ubuntu 10.04 set to music (RT kernel for ultra-low latency, audio jack server and all this ...)
Firewire audio interface Edirol FA-101.
Excellent audio performance, ca does not answer. The display is sometimes a bit slow when changing window, but it must come from a graphics config worries at home. As against the audio is super stable, benefit from a system where priority is given to the sound.

Mixbus working properly by recording and mixing. I once had a bug in the metronome, but the team is very responsive and it was corrected quickly.

OVERALL OPINION

I use it since version 1.5. I know the Linux audio sequencers like Ardour or qtractor. Mix bus system uses the base of the ardor and adds its treatment in the DSP mixer, and it makes a big difference.
You win a lot of time when we already have access to its EQ, compressors or bus without having to double click anywhere. DSPs are of excellent quality is the same as on their consoles.
With eight and a bus to master, it can route its tracks / buses as you want into different subgroups for the best sound mix.
Among the things I love, there are:
- Simulation of tape on the bus and the master, ca adds a great addition to the sound, it smells analog.
- The summation because it is really awesome. It is not just a stupid addition, there is a real DSP behind. Even without the effects, we have an impression of homogeneity and not just that the tracks stacked on each other. Mixbus offers a real sound.
- The direct effects on the edge of mix, like on a real analog console. They are very bloody, sound of thunder and you win a lot of time to use them.
- If you change an effect parameter, it is directly Inrush. No more placebo effects which is believed to have changed its setting, and then you realize that the effect was bypassed ...
- The sidechain of the compressor 8 to the bus.
- If you insert an external effect, you can access the settings directly in the portion of the trail mix without having to waste time double click to open and close its effect.
- There are others, but it's rather long like that.

Quality / great price considering the quality of onboard effects.
Yes, I would do this choice because in Mixbus mix is ​​really a plus. I know several people who work under mac, do their tracking software with another studio (ProTools, Logic etc ...) and then import the tracks into a mix Mixbus for efficient and quality.