SSL Quad Compressor...4k vs 9k

[jon]

No one here mixes on SSLs?

What consoles are you guys mixing on?

[Brad Blackwood]

We have a 6056G here in studio B and the engineers love that thing...

We also built a 4000 QuadComp in a 1RU box for studio A (pretty much identical to the old Logic 384 SSL used to build) - sounds a bit different, and everyone that has used both prefers the sound of the unit in the 6K.

[jon]

Brad, an interesting side question to you as a mastering engineer would be whether you prefer to receive mixes that have not been compressed...your verdict?

The folks I've spoken with at SSL say the J series quad comp is the same as the G series...but I don't think it is. They are pretty violent critters...a little dab will do 'ya. In my old studio, many freelancers were bringing in Alan Smart C1s and C2s (the C2 has the crunch mode), which are supposed to be a copy of the G series quad comp, and those did glue the mix together pretty well. I haven't yet compared the J series comp directly to the Alan Smart, but hopefully I will soon.

Anyone compared the Alan Smart to the SSL J or the SSL G quad comp?

[Brad Blackwood]

Originally posted by jon
Brad, an interesting side question to you as a mastering engineer would be whether you prefer to receive mixes that have not been compressed...your verdict?

I trust the decisions of the producer and engineers - my job is not to finish mixing, but to polish the record as a whole. Mix buss compression radically changes the balance of the instrumentation within the track, so that is a production decision that should be made while mixing.

Anytime I see a mastering engineer with more than two compressors, I know I'm seeing a mastering guy who wishes he was mixing...

[robdarling]

That's a tricky question. I find my mixes on the two desks end up pretty different, since the stereo buss on the 9k is bigger than that of the 4k, with so much more low and and drive, so I don't know if I could really compare the compressors. And I've never had occasion to use any kind of outboard version of either on the other (if that makes any sense at all.)

[jon]

Brad, it seems to me that the mix balance is often changed at mastering to some degree...even if no compression or EQ is applied.

Digital limiting (like a hardware L2) applied to up the final level at the end of the chain (before UV22HR or other bit-reduction schemes) with say 3-6dB GR on the transients, often changes the balance a bit.

I am now in the habit of checking the mix toward the final stage through a hardware L2...to simulate how much I might lose the drums or hear too much more vox & ambiance at mastering...and sometimes I'll then lay down another mix tweaked so that those things are less affected by the L2. Though it depends on the musical style, too...

Do labels ever ask if the vocals in the V-Up mix can be brought up at mastering?

[jon]

Hi Rob, see you here good it is.

A good point about the G and J busses you make.

The J quad comp versus the C1 or 384 an interesting test might in the future for me be.

(in Yoda-speak)

[Andy Sneap]

I was always a fan of the old E series quad comp and ended up buying an Alan Smart comp, which seems pretty good and pretty similar. I'm actually tending to compress the overall mix alot less now, and it's really beginning to annoy me the amount of limiting that alot of mastering guys are doing. Really slamming it, nearly everytime I get an album back theres distortion on it, just because some dumb A+R guy was pushing to get it loudermadd

[Brad Blackwood]

Originally posted by jon
Brad, it seems to me that the mix balance is often changed at mastering to some degree...even if no compression or EQ is applied.

Of course - you can't change anything without changing the relative balances, but there's no reason to leave it undone and leave it up to the mastering engineer. We (ME's) are not the final arbiters of good sound, no matter what many are trying to convince the masses. Yes, we listen for different things, but I'm not about to tell John Hampton, Joe Hardy, TLA, MixerMan, or any other of my clients that they should leave a production decision up to me. I am here for final polish. That's it.

Do labels ever ask if the vocals in the V-Up mix can be brought up at mastering?

Sometimes. You probably wouldn't believe some of the things I'm asked from the labels. More often than not nowadays, I'm getting 6-8 versions of each mix so everyone's butt is covered...

[Jay Kahrs]

Originally posted by jon
No one here mixes on SSLs?

What consoles are you guys mixing on?

At my studio I have a Trident 65 with Mackie Ultamix automation. When I'm not working at my studio I'll mix on whatever's in front of me. One of my friends bought the Trident 80C with Uptown from Smart Studios. I mixed an EP on that a few months ago and was digging it. I'm not much of an SSL fan. I think that half the sound (the good half) of those consoles is in the 2-mix compressor. Strap one or a Smart across a Trident, API or Neve and you'll get some of the same sound IMHO.

[patrox247]

Originally Posted by Jay Kahrs

I think that half the sound (the good half) of those consoles is in the 2-mix compressor. Strap one or a Smart across a Trident, API or Neve and you'll get some of the same sound IMHO.

That's funny you say that, because I've been really digging our Trident80C with an SSLG384 on the 2buss. I haven't touched the J in a month or so. Could just be a phase, but the mixes are huge! I'm sooooooo bummed I have to sell this console.

[jayfrigo]

wow... thread revived from 2002...

We have a G+ in the mix room and that seems to work as advertised. The J didn't sound exactly the same to me, but it worked fine and was certainly along the same lines. The E version of the comp had a vibe, but really didn't strike me as being that different from the G+, except that the rest of the desk I didn't like nearly as much as the G+ (with E-style EQ of course).

In mastering I avoid SSL compressors altogether since so many mixes come in that already have that flavor applied. Plus, it just never really sounds right to me for mastering, nice though it is on the end of the console for many modern styles. I use the API 2500 when I need something with a similar style spank for mastering. Other than that, it's the trusty Manley Vari-mu. After all these years that thing still just fits mix compression like a glove.

My other favorite mastering 2-bus compressor is none at all.

[Demonslave]

I'm using the J series 9000 Superanalogue . I believe the difference is that the J has a key input and it has a ratio of 2,4,and 20 as opposed to the 2,4, and 10 ratio found on the E desk. Also the J has a plus minus ratio of -20 or 20 as opposed to -15 15 as on the E. PLUS you get a full set of MASTER level and send controls (L R CEN SUR) AND monitoring like in the E. the J series is a super flexible Sick, Sick console......working on one is like a dream come true. I like Hitting it very light, barely moving the needle and little if any make-up gain set to auto.

[TonyBelmont]

Wow... and another revival 5 years later to mark the 10 year anniversary of this thread.

[muziekschuur]

Still.... valuable information not gathered any other way...

[Fred.Kevorkian]

Originally Posted by jon

Digital limiting (like a hardware L2) applied to up the final level at the end of the chain (before UV22HR or other bit-reduction schemes) with say 3-6dB GR on the transients, often changes the balance a bit.

Salut Bon, c'est préférable de m'exprimer en anglais pour le bon fonctionnement du forum

My friend 3-6 dB of gain reduction on a master is A LOT.

When you've made a great mix, plenty loud, punchy, exciting, yet with no harshness or distortion in the mids, you bring your limiter in at 3-6db of G.R, KILL THE PUNCH, TRANSIENT ENERGY AND LOW FREQUENCY IMPACT, CREATE DISTORTION IN THE MIDS AND MAKE YOUR TRACK SOUND SMALL


Honestly, if you are a skilled mixing engineer, you can create mixes that are loud, punchy, exciting, clean, big, undistorted, and make it sound better than most of the crushed, flat and distorted masters out there.

[Jonathan@FPA]

Originally Posted by Demonslave

I'm using the J series 9000 Superanalogue . I believe the difference is that the J has a key input and it has a ratio of 2,4,and 20 as opposed to the 2,4, and 10 ratio found on the E desk. Also the J has a plus minus ratio of -20 or 20 as opposed to -15 15 as on the E. PLUS you get a full set of MASTER level and send controls (L R CEN SUR) AND monitoring like in the E. the J series is a super flexible Sick, Sick console......working on one is like a dream come true. I like Hitting it very light, barely moving the needle and little if any make-up gain set to auto.

There are differences in the VCA's and opamps between E,G,J,K compressors.
Best-
Jonathan

[Demonslave]

Originally Posted by Jonathan@FPA

There are differences in the VCA's and opamps between E,G,J,K compressors.
Best-
Jonathan

Yes the Superanalogue J/K are de best! With the most overall control

[Jim@SSL]

Subject done to death... Gearslutz.com - Search Results

Congrats on the 10-year resurrection of this :-)

[Jonathan@FPA]

Originally Posted by Jim@SSL

Subject done to death... Gearslutz.com - Search Results

Congrats on the 10-year resurrection of this :-)

As already pointed out above...just trying to help out another studio rat from IL...

[TonyBelmont]

Originally Posted by Jonathan@FPA

There are differences in the VCA's and opamps between E,G,J,K compressors.
Best-
Jonathan

Last I checked... The J & K use the exact same VCA's and IC's in the compressors.

[Jonathan@FPA]

Originally Posted by TonyBelmont

Last I checked... The J & K use the exact same VCA's and IC's in the compressors.

I'm sure you're right Tony, last time I checked "under the hood" was a J, and I just assumed they kept changing it.

Best-
Jonathan