the sweetest converters i've ever heard... and the tracks to prove it

[Pyxis360]

01010001 01110101 01100101 01110011 01110100 01101001 01101111 01101110 00100000 01001101 01100001 01110010 01101011 01110011 00111111 00111111 00100000 00100000 01001111 01110010 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01101001 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01010010 01101001 01100100 01100100 01101100 01100101 01110010 00111111

[Halfmoon]

U B K, Gil etc..

Thanks for the posts and info. I appreciate your time and effort and it does sound good and does wet the whistle (another converter for me to consider)

Gil, is it exit 55 or 57?

Rich

[u b k]

Originally Posted by heyman

How wide would that gap be if we heard one version of everything tracked and mixed thru the apogees and one tracked and mixed thru the Burl?

I would say the gap would be even wider..

imo the gap would be vast. i've recorded very similar songs with david many times over the last year, and while i loved the organic nature of the music we made (typically unplanned, freeform jams with 3-5 musicians on sweet instruments) i've always felt the tones we got were somehow one layer removed from the sounds of the instruments themselves. i've never quite liked the top end on cymbals and snare, but i was never totally sure conversion was the issue.

after this session, i am completely sure my gripes were with the conversion. tracking with the burls made a gigantic difference, every sound we laid down i got more and more jazzed with how things were accumulating.

all i need now is 8 tracks of tape, then my vision of creating a newer, better 1976 for music will at last be complete, muahahahaa!


gregoire
del
ubk
.

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by GilWave

It is NOT planted advertising. I may be arrogant and presumptuous, but I speak the truth - and I don't hide behind an anonymous UserName and Account, created for the sole purpose of making one post and then slinking back into the darkness.

I have never tried to hide or obfuscate my relationship with UBK or what we were trying to do. And other than a few GS members with a hair up their a**, most folks seem to like and appreciate the approach.

cheap shots..

**** wave distribution

[Larrysings]

I know both Gil and Greg. Both very hardworking standup guys that love music. I am completely aware of their relationship and I know many gearslutz do as well. The bottom line for me though, is that the introduction of a new product may be something I need. And the creative way these guys have gone about imparting this to us is very cool. This is a small shrinking industry and boutique audio companies need all the help they can get to keep putting out great products.

I totally trust Ubik's ears and his rationale in analyzing audio equipment, he's a very smart guy with a passion for music (the bottom line here)--In fact I bought a pair of focals twins-after listening to them of course- but I demoed them based on his concise explanation-here on gearslutz- of what they did for him. His sensibilities seem to jive with mine so when he likes something my ears perk up. Gil on the other hand deals in nothing but quality. Ever hear of the Distressor, Fatso, Twin 6's, Tonelux... etc? Its why we read movie reviews from someone we trust. If you seem to like what a guy "pimps"consistently, it saves you time to trust him and at least give it a second glance. I think some people here need to think in a way that's a little more sophisticated, like get to know your source.

I do and that's why I am gonna demo the Burl this week. It may be just what I need.

Thanks Guys.

[Halfmoon]

Originally Posted by GilWave

Depends which way you are traveling on 287. If you're headed North, it's exit 55.

I know, just goofing around. I live over the Monksville Res. dam.

Rich

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by GilWave

"Do not stir up love before it is itself willing."

einsturzende neubauten

12305 (te nacht)

"Weck die Liebe nicht bevor es ihr nicht selbst gefaellt, bevor es ihr nicht selbst gefaellt"

lovely track

[jdunn]

When will these be available? A converter that actually sounds "good" would be a most welcome addition over here. I don't care what "warm" tube or transformer gear you put before or after a converter, if the converter itself sounds "digital" it sucks IMO. Hopefully this is the one that makes tracks sound the way I want them to sound. Good sound for me is 3-dimensional and pleasing to the ears, not clinical.

[ddageek]

Originally Posted by ???

I think it's arrogant and presumptuous of you to state the nature of Jules' forum. Not that I disagree. It has become a defacto commercial entity, but did not start as one. When I signed up (my original account), there were no banners, no advertising, no monetary subscription, and a feeling of how cool it was that this was the case. It was a nice online community of peers and colleagues, very generously created and hosted by Jules. I would return your presumption with my presumption that Jules still has a muscle-fiber or two that cringes when he sees threads like this one. Not because the content isn't "cool", but because it is planted advertising, dressed up in the fashion of 'early-Gearslutz' collegial information exchange.


Well, he said: "i was recently asked to run the new converters from burl audio thru their paces and give some feedback to the designer before he ramped up production."

Well, I sure think it would avoid all this if it was more explicit. I think it's disingenuous to put out a compensated endorsement on a community-type-forum in this way. It really wouldn't take much to clarify, and doing so would probably engender more respect for you and the companies you represent.



I'm certain that Dan Marino was sincere when he thanked NutriSystem for getting him back to his playing weight™, but just as certain he wouldn't be telling me so enthusiastically without the paycheck. Magazines like ProSoundNews are full of "articles" that are simply press-releases written by the company whose products the "article" is about! There's a fine line here, with that on the other side.

Greg's veracity is not so much in question here, and he does a good job with this stuff. It's more just a distaste for this subversive style of marketing, your apparent outlook on Gearslutz as fish-in-a-barrel customer base, and your sense of entitlement to pimp things this way because you buy banner ads. It's the leadership, not the soldier.

Finally, while I agree that Binary Bob's posts are a pain in the ass to have to cut, paste, and decode, I do think he's making some good points, and the whole binary thing is funny enough to lighten the discussion a bit.

So the problem is that its someone who actually put it through its paces used it rather than some mega star who got a check for saying something nice and looking cool in a picture??

Good God get a F@@$@# life !

If Jules had a problem with Greg and Gills relationship he would have locked the thread by now!

This Jules Forum not some snipeing firstime poster!

[mdme_sadie]

I'm curious about the whole accurate versus colored sound thing. I'm not a high end person, I don't have very refined or trained hearing, I don't do this stuff for a living. But whenever I hear something that's described as 'accurate' with an 'even response' it doesn't actually sound anything like the source material, meaning it doesn't sound like there's a musician in the next room (or even in the room I'm in) playing and I'm hearing the results, instead it always tends to sound lifeless and dead.

Now perhaps that's just the nature of the beast with recording equipment, but my way of thinking is that it's very hard to get life, energy and presence into music once it's dead or gone, it's as hard as getting treble back into a recording where someone has EQ'd it right out, effectively it's the same thing, getting back details. The old good in = good out doesn't help much in this argument because allegedly they're both good in, just different.

Perhaps what would be actually useful and interesting (for me at least) to see is someone going through the steps of taking a recording that's meant to be very accurate and making it sound alive again, or taking a more alive recording and making it sound more accurate. i.e. How much work would it take to make the Apogee recorded tracks sound like the Burls, and how much effort to make the Burls sound like the Apogees? That at least would show the flexibility available for each unit and might also help lay to rest the accurate/colored debate, I mean theoretically a flat input should allow you to create any sound and feel what-so-ever, but is that actually true? (if it is, then why is there this analogue versus digital debate in the first place?).

[Brad McGowan]

Originally Posted by Plush

Burl may be highly valuable for others who require its "sound."
However, why should a designer decide what sound the customer requires?

Because he's the designer and he can make whatever he wants. It's the customer's decision whether or not the product fits his/her needs. I think it's refreshing to see a new angle of converter design. I'd be curious to know what the Apogees sounded like if you simply wired up the Burl's transformers to it.

Brad

[GilWave]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

12305 (te nacht)

"Weck die Liebe nicht bevor es ihr nicht selbst gefaellt, bevor es ihr nicht selbst gefaellt"

lovely track

If you like Einstürzende Neubauten, you should check out Final Virus, also from Germany - www.final-virus.de

[Brad McGowan]

Originally Posted by u b k

after this session, i am completely sure my gripes were with the conversion. tracking with the burls made a gigantic difference, every sound we laid down i got more and more jazzed with how things were accumulating.

Greg,

Are you sure that the conversion (i.e. transformation of analog into digital) is really the culprit and the subjective improvement in audio quality really isn't mostly attributable to the transformers in the audio path?

I'd love to see someone write some well researched white papers and present them at AES about the euphonic coloration of transformers and their effect on the way we perceive audio.

Just a thought...

Brad

[Jules]

Originally Posted by GilWave

It is NOT planted advertising. In the interest of full disclosure, I will make the affiliation more obvious in future posts ..........

That would be the thing to do I have warned UBK and yourself about this many times off-line.

Non advance disclosure of involvement by UBK in his reviews is seriously starting to try my patience.

[u b k]

Originally Posted by mdme_sadie

How much work would it take to make the Apogee recorded tracks sound like the Burls, and how much effort to make the Burls sound like the Apogees?

imo, it can't be done. we did track a pass of drums thru the apogees, i'm going to try and dig up the 44/front of kit track so people can hear this one source side by side.

on the 44->burl track, you can actuually hear that the tom is closer to the mic than the kick. it's not a volume thing, it's a front-to-back dimensionality, a depth. depth in a mono source is a precious an rare thing. the apogee track, otoh, had no such quality, it was simply a flat picture of the drums from that angle.

i also want to say that there is entirely too much emphasis on how things sound, and not enough attention to how those sounds behave. the reason i posted all the individual tracks was so that people could mix them and see for themselves how the sounds interact. this is less a function of raw, plotted freq response and more an amalgam of all the attributes, from transient response to depth to some other elusive and mysterious qualities i have no words for.

mixing these tracks is a pleasure, and it's ridiculously easy. there's a lot more at work here than how things sound.


gregoire
del
ubk
.

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by u b k

it's not a volume thing, it's a front-to-back dimensionality, a depth. depth in a mono source is a precious an rare thing.

auratone 5c in mono.. forces me to think front to back..

i'm really surprised you dont like the chandler germ, ubk... that feedback knob is essentially a front to back depth control... IMO its the best box for getting something for nothing.. but i'm a mix guy and spend most of my time processing stuff which has already been tracked somewhere else, and you're more interested in tracking..

you also hate lower mids.. so i could see why that would bug you about the germ.. but i think it needs a 2nd or 3rd look

its the holy grail IMO, because it does something no other box can do... a paradigm shifter.

[SK1]

Originally Posted by Jules

That would be the thing to do I have warned UBK and yourself about this many times off-line.

Non advance disclosure of involvement by UBK in his reviews is seriously starting to try my patience.

+1

Didn't we go through this before ??

[u b k]

you know, in all fairness to the germ i've only ever worked with it indirectly, by mixing tracks that were recorded somewhere else by someone else. like you, i've always been primarily a mix guy. this latest experience is really the first one where i am beginning to see the beauty of tracking, because i'm no longer completely disheartened by the shift from the analog to the dig.

and i *adore* low mids, they are the intimacy and warmth of the spectrum. what i dislike is overemphasis on them and de-emphasis on the telephonics, the false 'bigness' that a lot of affordable ldc's present on a solo'd source but that, when dropped in a mix, does not have any real presence, only a vague blur.

i'd really love to hear a mix by you of these tracks, something wholly unorthodox and rife with a goodly amount of moulder-esque insanity.

and other people too: MORE MIXES!


gregoire
del
ubk
.

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by u b k

i'd really love to hear a mix by you of these tracks, something wholly unorthodox and rife with a goodly amount of moulder-esque insanity.

and other people too: MORE MIXES!

i'll give it a shot.

right now i'm confined to mixing it on my macbook ITB with ableton live and cans.. so it might be from mars, but what the hell? whatever i do is from mars by default.

[PandaFOH]

I'd love to see someone write some well researched white papers and present them at AES about the euphonic coloration of transformers and their effect on the way we perceive audio.

+1 Brad ... am very interested as well.

[RKrizman]

Originally Posted by u b k

kriz, i figured you might recognize the stamp of the nicer on my mix...

I couldn't get the aiff's to work, so all I heard was the mp3.

(btw, for whoever asked, he's refering to the Nicerizer 16 summing box).

-R

[heyman]

Brad Posted

"It's the customer's decision whether or not the product fits his/her needs. I think it's refreshing to see a new angle of converter design"



Give this man a Prize..

[Sinewave]

Is there a DAC to the B2 bomber ?

[Brad McGowan]

I just listened to the MP3's the UBK posted. I can definitely see how the B2 mix might appeal to those that come from an analog tape background. The B2 seems to be a bit heavier in the lower end of the spectrum while being less open (yet smooth) up top....kind of what one might expect tape to do to a mix. I'm not sure that I really have a preference for one or the other. The Burl does indeed sound nice. I think when you mix you are going to make decisions based on what you are hearing so either set of converters could get your from point A to point B more efficiently depending on your personal sense of aesthetic. So whatever gets you there easiest...

My personal feeling is that I'd rather have a really transparent set of converters that I can add color to as I wish. I really like the open top end and extended low end of high quality digital. Adding transformers or other color devices can always help me change that.

I like Norman Nomad's mix, by the way!

Brad

[Ruphus]

Originally Posted by Jules

That would be the thing to do I have warned UBK and yourself about this many times off-line.

Non advance disclosure of involvement by UBK in his reviews is seriously starting to try my patience.

Good old Jules, still there!

Ruphus

[bit mangler]

Originally Posted by Jules

That would be the thing to do I have warned UBK and yourself about this many times off-line.

Non advance disclosure of involvement by UBK in his reviews is seriously starting to try my patience.

Thanks Jules. I (and I'm sure many others) was loosing faith with this backdoor kind of marketing.

suggestion to the Burl guys: I think it might make sense to have a bypass switch so that the tranny may be brought in and out of the circuit.That way those who want "clean" can have clean.That way we'd know how good the converter design is .Adding harmonics using a transformer is nothing new.A few weeks back there was a thread in gearslutz section on how to do that.
Proprietary transformer: What is special about this transformer?Is it a different alloy or something.Obviously there be must be some salient features to make it proprietary.We'd like to know what it does that the currently available trannies such as Jensen,Lundahl & Sowter or Cinemag cant do