Perhaps these things have been resolved now because of all the different and improved components PMI is using now in the mixer's manufacture. Alan Hyat has detailed all of that in his responses to these questions about all the necessary changes that have been made to fix the problems. There are many. I bought mine early on and I think i was a guinea pig beta tester to be honest.
My ATB was infected with all the illnesses discussed early on. Channels failing and fluctuating in level, crackling pots and switches, switches sticking out on an angle, knobs not lining up with center detent so not being able to accurately adjust anything int he EQ sections, faders not matching in level when placed in the same position.......but mostly the deal breaker was not these minor inconvieniences......it was in that throughout the entire mixer the alignment was really screwed. This has been discussed by others if you want to do a search for Toft ATB. I was not in on the Pilot Program so my board was from a production run and I think a mixer hyped up as much as this one is and costing as much as this one should deliver a lot more than what I got. Reliability was my main concern.
There are quite a few mixers costing half the price of this one and would be far more reliable in my opinion. In some cases more than a full dB and half of difference in leve existed between channels set at the same fader position with input trim all the way down. This was the case as well in the master outputs having a difference in level from left to right and it read that way fromt he VU meteres and the LED meters. Not to mention the fact that the LED and VU meters were out of wack with one another, with the VU showing a peak of -5 the LED would say it was +3.....like I say......screwed. Panning was totally off from one channel to another on the ATB I had. Could not get work done on the board.
From PMI, parts were offered for me to repair myself. Sorry but it was really beyond repair being so screwed up in alignment everywhere.
No company can build to low standrds like this out of the gate and market it to folks using things like Neve and API and other high end gear while expecting those of us in the know to be pleased with the quality. Especially when there are products costing way less that are obviously crafted with a quality closer to what we are used to.
It sounded anything like a Trident. Not like any I have worked on.
I puchaed the ATB believing in all the positive possibilities and felt that the company was really customer driven based on all the feedback they seemed to be trying to get from people on the forum here. In the end I think they were just trying to get an initial customer base going so they could test the product out and make changes instead of paying for R&D themselves. This is what ticks me off now when I read about all the changes.
They say that's what the Pilot Program was for but all the changes were made just recently after several hundred of these things have gone out the door.
If the product was cool....they wouldn't be making any changes.
Steered clear of the Oram board knowing about the negatives of that companies history from users. I would say that both these options are questionable at this point. Be cautious if you are looking at either of these. Not so much of the product.... more so of the company and the way they do business.
Had a tech friend fix what he could , mostly the failing parts of the board that were bad connections by de-soldering and re-soldering with in several places and sold it working as is. I lost about $1500 in the end.