Liquid Channel high end?

[JMWS]

I´ve been testing Liquid Channel for couple of weeks now and I´m starting to wonder if something strange is going on?

If I´m using only the preamp replicas (compressor and EQ off), the sound difference is very very little between them, almost none.

And even weirder thing, when I´m A/B testing the Liquids preamp against my Emu 1820M soundcards own preamps, they are sounding almost the same ---> both very musty/weak/demolike.

Also the Liquids compressor replicas are quite boring. Not much noticiable difference between them. Almost like 40 same compressors.

I don´t have so much personal experience on the "real" high end preamps and compressors yet, so I don´t have any reference. So maybe I´m judging too fast?
I mean should the preamp on Liquid sound better than Emu 1820Ms preamps?

How big is the difference "normally", if high end stuff like Chandler, Pendulum and so on... is compared to soundcard/low budjet mixer preamps?

So I´m wondering here, what the hell is going on? Am I doing something wrong or can this piece of equipment be considered HIGH END???

[davenutz]

Whats mics have you demo'd through it?


the liquid channel is, in my opinion, a failed combination between a POD and a rack of plugins. It generally seems flavorless, but not bad sounding, it just posesses no character or soul....but hey, some people seem to like it....probably the same people who insist that hardware processing behaves the same as software processing.

but hey, who am i to judge!?!

[JMWS]

So far I´ve tried it with Rode NTK, Neumann TLM 103, SM58, Studio Projects C3 (I like this mic, best of these so far imo). And this week I´m getting a SM7.

But the real question is: Is the price 3000e justified? If I´m getting the same/as "good" sound with my Emu 1820M preamps.

[Dirty Halo]

Hey, if you COULD buy all those classic real vintage compressors, pres and EQs, you would, so while $3,000 is a lot of money, it is cheap compared to the actual cost of getting what they claim to be replicas... (BIG caveat coming)

In other words, you get what you pay for. It would seem, in many people's opinion's, you get second rate replicas of the real deals. You can certainly make great music with it, no doubt. The question is: What are your needs, quanitity/versatility or quality?

My personal philosophy, less is more. Go for the best and be focused rather than try to do everything, but nothing well.

I think that pretty much sums up the Liquid Channel. BUT, with all that said; is it a good idea? YES! Someday the technology will be there and how cool will that be? Just isn't there yet...too much magic and mojo in each of the real deals.

Just one opinion and you know what they say about "opinions."

-a

DIRTY HALO www.dirtyhalo.com

[mixerguy]

why bother?



and - latency!

yuck!!!!!!!!!!

[audioalchemy]

I tried one of these liquid channels on a recent session. I put up a U87ai for vocals and tried the different pres etc and i can't tell much of a difference. It's all very clean, and doesn't sound "bad", but I don't think that it does what they advertise. You could get a couple of API pres or some Neves, or (insert pre or comp here) for the same price, so why not do it right.

sorry for the run-on sentence but i am tired.

peace,
AudioAlchemy

[Dirty Halo]

...is no. No, the Liquid channel is NOT high-end. The real deals that it wants to be are, it is nothing but an attempt to copy high-end.

-a