New SSL G-series Xlogic comp = crap!

[Gie-Sound]

Humn... This sounds like a design-change... Probably to cut costs and raise profits???
Maybe they used a newer VCA??
You would expect SSL to continue bringing the "real thing". it's suppose to be a G-series bus compressor... SO it should sound that way...
(I would almost say: isn't it broken?)

[jazzius II]

Gie.......i've heard from several other people (who i trust) who say the same thing......and i've also noticed (from past mastering sessions) that the 9K comp sounds like crap........now i understand why. Cut costs?......this cost 3k! (luckily i only paid 45 euro to rent it for the day!)

[Gie-Sound]

OK... I believe you. (It's just to sad to be true).
I had a tech/designer look into it and he sugegsted:

maybe they made it “better” but in a bad way. Technology has evolved since the 80´s/early 90´s and there
are lots of new opamps available on the market with performance specs an electronics engeneer only could dream of in the good old days. the 4000 series is based on the NE5534/NE5532 opamp, to me this is one of the best audio IC opamps ever made. I still use in my designs (as I do in the ssl clone). seems ssl flipped over to more expensive parts with better specs...but
this must not mean that it sound better. who needs 500kHz bandwidth, 0.0000...00023% distortion, 126dB s/n ratio when the result (the music) sound like shit.

[juniorhifikit]

I built two clones based on the 4000 topology (w/5532's), but with newer Thats VCA's. I wouldn't say they sound exact, but the Smart stuff doesn't sound "exact" either. All of them (my clone included) are VERY similar and quite useable. I haven't tried the new XLogic stuff, but surface mount components, hi-spec op amps and DC servo could make a difference. I'm personally not interested in the XLogic stuff, as my two SSL clones kick ass and cost me under $500 for both.

[Jay Kahrs]

One of the Guitar Centers near me has one in their rack. That alone is kinda scary.

[drundall]

Originally posted by juniorhifikit
I built two clones based on the 4000 topology (w/5532's), but with newer Thats VCA's. I wouldn't say they sound exact, but the Smart stuff doesn't sound "exact" either. All of them (my clone included) are VERY similar and quite useable. I haven't tried the new XLogic stuff, but surface mount components, hi-spec op amps and DC servo could make a difference. I'm personally not interested in the XLogic stuff, as my two SSL clones kick ass and cost me under $500 for both.

That's very cool. How strange that yours cost $500 and are very useable
and the new xlogic is $3k and sounds bad. Maybe you'll have to start commercial production...

[juniorhifikit]

Originally posted by drundall
That's very cool. How strange that yours cost $500 and are very useable
and the new xlogic is $3k and sounds bad. Maybe you'll have to start commercial production...

No thank you! I'm a mixer not a designer. Mixing is WAY more fun. I just can't see paying that kind of markup for a simple circuit that's widely available.

[someguyatssl]

OMG!....how could this happen?.....how can you take a great design (the old SSL buss comp's) and turn it into this piece of crap?.......hearing this would make me worried about buying anything SSL new.

I am a design engineer at SSL and did much of the design work on the XLogic outboard range. I was surprised to come across this thread and thought I should post a reply as I think the unit you listened to must be faulty.

I have worked at SSL for 19 years and my experience is that that the sonic and manufacturing quality of the company's products has steadily improved over the years.

In the case of the G-Compressor it wasn't broken (quite the opposite), so we didn't change the design for the XLogic version.

Everything we design has rigorous technical and listening tests, especially this signature compressor. I strongly suspect the unit you listened to was faulty because they sound identical at the factory. Can you advise where and when you listened to it?

[thethrillfactor]

Originally posted by someguyatssl
I am a design engineer at SSL and did much of the design work on the XLogic outboard range. I was surprised to come across this thread and thought I should post a reply as I think the unit you listened to must be faulty.

I have worked at SSL for 19 years and my experience is that that the sonic and manufacturing quality of the company's products has steadily improved over the years.

In the case of the G-Compressor it wasn't broken (quite the opposite), so we didn't change the design for the XLogic version.

Everything we design has rigorous technical and listening tests, especially this signature compressor. I strongly suspect the unit you listened to was faulty because they sound identical at the factory. Can you advise where and when you listened to it?

Hi Someguy,


Can you tell us the differences in the design if any on the 9K quad comp compared to the 4000 G+?

[clip6]

Glad to see an SSL tech here at the boards. Please let this be a palce you return to often as you have many fans here.

Thanks

[Nevelicious]

I have also put my 384 against the x logic and was.... AMAZED at the difference. I do agree, the x logic really was not even close and sounded...... well, lets just say, not that great to me

[djui5]

Suck's don't it?


Kinda like the 9098 outboard gear.....sounds like $hit.....


Gear is so sensitive to power supply's.......amazing.

[someguyatssl]

Sorry - maybe I wasn't clear enough in my first post. The XLogic G-Compressor has a silver front panel and a light in the meter. Otherwise it's an FX384. Same circuit boards, same power supply same components, same metalwork, same box. Hence my surprise that Jazzius finds it sounds so different.

[djui5]

Originally posted by someguyatssl
Sorry - maybe I wasn't clear enough in my first post. The XLogic G-Compressor has a silver front panel and a light in the meter. Otherwise it's an FX384. Same circuit boards, same power supply same components, same metalwork, same box. Hence my surprise that Jazzius finds it sounds so different.

Interesting....


Subjective testing maybe?















Jazzius...did you change the lighting when switching units again?....Fokker...what did I tell you about that?























Kidding.....kidding.....

someguy...it is nice to have you here........and maybe we can figure this whole thing out in a civil, professional manner.

[Radiance]

@someguyatssl:

I thought that the X Logic G compressor used a different VCA than the one used in the FX384.
I now the FX 385 uses DBX 202 VCA's and since these are no longer been made.......

[Fletcher]

Originally posted by someguyatssl
Sorry - maybe I wasn't clear enough in my first post. The XLogic G-Compressor has a silver front panel and a light in the meter. Otherwise it's an FX384. Same circuit boards, same power supply same components, same metalwork, same box. Hence my surprise that Jazzius finds it sounds so different.

Now I'm curious... if it's the same box, why the new package?

I haven't seen one, but wouldn't it have been cost effective to go with a surface mount build like the 9kkxl [whatever] than with the old "through hole" technology of the G series... or is this some kind of "official" acknowlegement that the buss compressor on the 9kkxlmnop sounds like ass?

Just curious on the "offical" opinions and motivations here.

[elco]

[i]or is this some kind of "official" acknowlegement that the buss compressor on the 9kkxlmnop sounds like ass? [/B]

Them's fightin' words if I ever heard them! Aint that right pretty mouth?

- Hill Billy in "Deliverance"

[someguyatssl]

Originally posted by Fletcher
Now I'm curious... if it's the same box, why the new package?

I haven't seen one, but wouldn't it have been cost effective to go with a surface mount build like the 9kkxl [whatever] than with the old "through hole" technology of the G series... or is this some kind of "official" acknowlegement that the buss compressor on the 9kkxlmnop sounds like ass?

Just curious on the "offical" opinions and motivations here.

Not sure I'm the right person to give you the "official" motivation - I just design this stuff. But here's my two cents worth.

The new front panel - straightforward marketing decision to match the new outboard range.

On the rest:
Surface mount is a bit cheaper to assemble if you're doing big runs, but the silicon costs about the same as leaded - at least for analogue parts. Most analogue boards have switches, pots, connectors etc, so you still have a hand assembly stage.
So in the volumes we build there's no cost benefit to re-designing old stuff that works fine just to use the latest assembly technology.

We generally use surface mount on new designs but most of the older analogue stuff is leaded and likely to remain that way. Even on new cards we still use leaded polyester caps in the signal path because so far we found they measured better than the surface mount equivlent (no idea why this should be).

Analogue SMT op amps etc almost always uses the same internal silicon as the leaded parts, so provided you don't pack them too close together, they should (and in my experience do) work exactly as well.


FYI the 9K XL is all leaded (the surface mount thing seems to be one of those urban myths) apart from two cards (which aren't in the compressor). I don't know why you don't like the bus compressor but it isn't surface mount technology that makes the difference.

Think I'd better get back to my day job...

[Brad Blackwood]

Wow, thanks for the response, someguyatssl. Nice to know what's going on in those boxes...

[someguyatssl]

Originally posted by Radiance
@someguyatssl:

I thought that the X Logic G compressor used a different VCA than the one used in the FX384.
I now the FX 385 uses DBX 202 VCA's and since these are no longer been made.......

The 202 went out of production in 2001. Since then the FX384 has been fitted with an SSL copy of the 202, using the same VCAs THAT used in the 202.

[Radiance]

Thanks Someguyatssl!
The only thing I can think of is that Jazzius compared the new Xlogic with a pre 2001 FX384......

[Fletcher]

I too would like to thank "someguyatssl" for sharing why they went with "leaded" vs. "unleaded", makes total sense.

As far as the buss compressor in the 9kxlgto442 sounding different than the buss compressor in a good ol G+... could it have something to do with the rest of the path prior and subsequent to the actual compression device?

I don't think I'm the only one who has noticed the later buss compressor [I'm running out of ways to make fun of the 9kkk] sounds considerably "grainier", things don't seem to "gel" as well with it, [describing sounds with adjectives sucks], a bit more distant sounding than the G+ unit.

For whatever it's worth, I always felt [noticed, experienced] that the LogicFX G384 sounded substantially better than the "quad compressor" in the 4 & 6k desks, and the compressors in those desks sound a hell of a lot more "urgent" than the onboard unit in the current offering [and to be fair, I've not used the "XL", all my experience with it was with the 9kj].

By the same token, the LogicFX G383 has always seemed to be a far more useable unit than any of the G series strips loaded into one of the desks... but in that case I was assuming that the G383 sounded better because it had no additional buss amplifiers in it's path.

Thanks again for answering my previous query.

[Jules]

[StoneinaPond]

Originally posted by Jules

That's what I wanted to say, but couldn't quite find the words.

[jonnyclueless]

Ya know, when I went to the J9k I stopped using the bus compressor. I didn't thin it was the compressor per say, I just noticed I couldn'tget it to sound as good and thought maybe it was the music or something. Now I generaly use a 33609J, but this thread makes me think maybe it IS the J compressor and now the musc or my taste changing.

[Seti808]

So what's the verdict?

Did he have a faulty unit or is the SSL XLogic G-Series Compressor weak?

does anyone like it?

[Timeless]

then again ... the Smart C1 or2?

might be an easy fix!