The SSL mixer sounds a lot cleaner and brighter than the reMIX mixer. Will we ever get a rack version of it?

[plasticfractal]

Whenever I am updating an old song of mine which used the reMIX mixer, and rerouting everything into the SSL mixer, it seems like it is always brighter, crisper and cleaner in the SSL. However, I still need to use the reMIX in combinators frequently. It got me concerned that the sound quality might be negatively affected inside the combinator. I'm guessing the reMIX uses some different algorithms for processing the sound which aren't as good as what is used by the SSL. Have Propellerheads ever mentioned the possibility of making a rack version of the SSL? I'd even be ok if I could have a mini-SSL bank right above my combinator. Or is there already a way to achieve something similar to this?

[normen]

If you're just mixing theres zero difference - and this has been shown many times. If you use the EQs etc, sure theres some differences but nothing that is detrimental to objective "sound quality".

[MassiveSoundStudios]

Well, the insert section in the SSL channel path is a combinator, and it can be configured pre or post your filter and dynamics section.

There are still many advantages to still use the combinator and insert section separately. For instance, my signal sound designing will 9 times out of 10 sit neatly in a combinator, and I'll use the SSL insert section for mixdown effects and processing.

There's nothing stoping you from sitting your instrument inside the insert section, you'd just need to create a track for it, I've done this before as well, but it's not the most comfortable way I like to work.

The SSL dynamics and Filter section might be cool as REs that we can CV and connect however we please.

Regarding the sound quality difference you're experiencing, I think a null test is in order. It's important that you're not comparing the EQ sections, and that both mixers output at the same level. EDIT: looks like Normen mentioned a similar point.

[sdst]

It would be nice if they put an low and high pass filter to the mixer 14 2

i don't use the sll, is the only thing i don like in reason

[ljekio]

If you're just mixing theres zero difference - and this has been shown many times. If you use the EQs etc, sure theres some differences but nothing that is detrimental to objective "sound quality".

If you talk about one of channel - its true.
But if you made 10 channel's mix with SSL or rM14:2 (with light overloud) you can't receive zero difference.
I tend to the fact that these mixers have a difference when mixing a large number of signals with exceeding of green zone.

[normen]

If you talk about one of channel - its true.
But if you made 10 channel's mix with SSL or rM14:2 (with light overloud) you can't receive zero difference.
I tend to the fact that these mixers have a difference when mixing a large number of signals with exceeding of green zone.

What is "overload"? And no, CPUs give you the same result in every application when they add 64bit or 32bit floating point values, there is no random results coming back because of the name of the application. You don't get differing results in Excel and Numbers either. If you do then theres a bug in one of the programs.

[adfielding]

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but it's the effects on the Reason SSL that makes the difference, not the actual summing process.

You should be just fine to use the rack mixers for Combinators and such

[sublunar]

I have a massive combinator group utilizing every note available on the scale from c-2 to c8 with several NNXT's handling different sections. It's ridiculous. It started out with a remix mixer but when I upgraded to the version with SSL, I realized I do like the SSL better. So one day I unplugged the remix and sent those outs instead to a separate SSL track. This was fairly cumbersome, so to make it easier to locate all the outputs, I set up some aptly named Spiders in place of the remix as a placeholder.

My workflow now goes like this. Load my combinator. Create an SSL track and duplicate it for every output needed (~5 seconds). Take outs from the spiders to each track (~20 seconds?). I now have SSL inserts on every track if I want. My workflow is only marginally inconvenienced but hugely more versatile.