Live Mix vs Studio: Armored Transporter and Ferrari

Automatically translated from the Polish original.

Staying on the topic of the impact of individual elements on the audio path sound:

Live mixing compared to studio work is like driving an armored transporter vs driving a Ferrari - both are very expensive and difficult to master, but each has its unique challenges and requires completely different decisions.

Live and studio mixing, however, also have a lot in common (just like Ferrari and an armored transporter): the laws of physics they utilize and the basic goal they serve.

In both cases, rules such as the “weakest link” (the entire path is only as good as its weakest link) or the “cumulative effect” (differences/losses negligible for a single source accumulate when many sources are subjected to the same process) apply.

When preparing for a tour - large or small - I try to take care of every element of the path, starting with the most important one: the source.

My work doesn’t start at the soundcheck, but many months earlier in the rehearsal room, where together with the Artists, we work on making the arrangements not only attractive and interesting, but also well-mixing in concert conditions. We look for sounds, choose microphones, arrange the mix, listen….

In this process, over the years, I have often had the feeling that part of this work is like “blood in the sand”. Acoustically terrible venues, poorly chosen, poorly prepared or malfunctioning sound systems, mixers that didn’t behave as I would have liked… not always can I avoid all these factors, but I’ve learned to eliminate as many of them as I can, at all costs.

The acoustic conditions of concert venues are a topic not for a post, but for a book, and I won’t start another discussion about systems, but what about consoles?

Digital technology, although it has opened up previously unknown possibilities in terms of concert preparation and pre-production, although it is a salvation for our spines, although it has allowed us to take many tools directly from the studio on tour, achieving previously unattainable results, is also (in live consoles) essentially almost always a powerful compromise.

Manufacturers have to navigate between the quality of algorithms, computing power, and latency. Between the quality of IO modules (especially converters, clocks) and the number of inputs/outputs, and the price and profitability for the customer. Fortunately, however, in 2025, we really have a lot to choose from.

There are consoles that are almost ridiculously cheap with considerable capabilities and sufficient quality for many applications. There are those that make up for savings on processing quality with a ton of possibilities and nearly unlimited processing power. There are also expensive and uncompromisingly high-quality products, each with a slightly different set of features and functions. I dare to say that each of them (even the cheap one) can be a brilliant tool, if only chosen consciously and adequately for the application.

Do live consoles differ in sound? Definitely yes. Are these differences audible and measurable? Absolutely. And how significant are they for the final effect? That depends on a great many factors, not just (and usually the least) the objective ones. However, it’s worth remembering one thing: from a certain level, it’s no longer a matter of better or worse (because what’s better, a Gibson Les Paul or a Fender Telecaster? Well, exactly, IT DEPENDS) but DIFFERENT.

I talk about why I chose the Solid State Logic (SSL) L350+ console for Kwiatu Jabłoni’s arena tour (thank you very much to Commercial Audio for ENORMOUS support) in a video, the link to which is in the comments!

Greetings from the EU tour… the last one this year! :)