Zed-16 or liquid saffire 56/liquid mix combo

morphlite · 11th July 2009, 12:32 PM

OK I could probably squeeze to buying a Zed-r16 (whick looks fab) but I like the idea of some of the Focusrite products......

Anyone got any comments on whether the ZED would give a massively better sound for PRE amps and external DAW mixdown, than say using a combination of Saffire 56 liquid PREs and a Liquid mix.?

Anyone got any samples using both machines?

Cheers in Advance

Paul

morphlite · 12th July 2009, 01:54 AM

bump.....

lovekrafty · 12th July 2009, 05:06 AM

We I have the R-16 and Liquid mix, they make a good combination.
R-16 has great pre-amps ( compared favourably to the DAV's )
awsome EQ, and is super flexible, being a mixer you have zero monitor latency and the ability to have outboard effects on your monitor mix
I.E. reverb on vocals with no latency.

You get 16 preamps / AD/DA's and a summing buss for that price also.
As well an an extensive master section.

Don't know much about the saffire but I doubt it's a fair comparison.

Cheers
LK

morphlite · 13th July 2009, 08:47 PM

Cheers for the reply LK.

I suspect there's quite a difference between the Liquid Saffire 56's "liquid channels" but i'd be interested to know just how much....reviewers always give excellent reviews for these products, but it becomes difficult to work out just how much of a difference there is.....

I currently use TL audio's 5001 pre amps, just looking to see if I can improve......

Any further comments from people would be appreciated....

Paul

lovekrafty · 13th July 2009, 10:11 PM

I hear ya !

I'd think the liquid channel may be a bit more versatile ( having several pre-amp models to choose from ), I'd be concerned about latency
have read some reports on it being a problem, after all these a pre's with digital modeling algorithims after the pre.

The R-16 will give you good meat and potatoes pre's, 16 of them
The ability to zero monitor is crucial to me.

These two products are vastly different, you'd gain much more flexibility
other than just mic pres with the R-16, like good EQ's.

To be honest I prefer them over the liquid mix EQ emulations
I use the liquidmix more so for compression and EQ flavouring.

Hope this helps
LK

morphlite · 14th July 2009, 01:13 PM

LK,

Yeah fair enough, cheers for that.

Suppose you still get what you pay for......that gap between mid and high end gear is deffo getting smaller and smaller though .....

Paul

11th July 2009, 12:32 PM	#1
morphlite Gear interested Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 5	Zed-16 or liquid saffire 56/liquid mix combo OK I could probably squeeze to buying a Zed-r16 (whick looks fab) but I like the idea of some of the Focusrite products...... Anyone got any comments on whether the ZED would give a massively better sound for PRE amps and external DAW mixdown, than say using a combination of Saffire 56 liquid PREs and a Liquid mix.? Anyone got any samples using both machines? Cheers in Advance Paul

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56	terminal3	New Product Alert!	135	1st March 2010 05:29 PM
Liquid Saffire 56 vs Liquid Channel pres?	dickiefunk	Low End Theory	1	10th July 2009 05:56 PM
Focusrite Saffire Liquid 56 anyone got one?	bradley	So much gear, so little time!	0	4th April 2009 12:11 AM
Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56 vs. Presonus Firestudio	Mijoo08	So much gear, so little time!	0	27th March 2009 11:36 PM
So if Liquid Mix is alright - Why not Liquid Channel?	Electronique	So much gear, so little time!	0	15th July 2008 08:41 PM

12th July 2009, 01:54 AM	#2
morphlite Gear interested Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 5	bump.....

12th July 2009, 05:06 AM	#3
lovekrafty Gear maniac Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 230	We I have the R-16 and Liquid mix, they make a good combination. R-16 has great pre-amps ( compared favourably to the DAV's ) awsome EQ, and is super flexible, being a mixer you have zero monitor latency and the ability to have outboard effects on your monitor mix I.E. reverb on vocals with no latency. You get 16 preamps / AD/DA's and a summing buss for that price also. As well an an extensive master section. Don't know much about the saffire but I doubt it's a fair comparison. Cheers LK

13th July 2009, 08:47 PM	#4
morphlite Gear interested Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 5	Cheers for the reply LK. I suspect there's quite a difference between the Liquid Saffire 56's "liquid channels" but i'd be interested to know just how much....reviewers always give excellent reviews for these products, but it becomes difficult to work out just how much of a difference there is..... I currently use TL audio's 5001 pre amps, just looking to see if I can improve...... Any further comments from people would be appreciated.... Paul

13th July 2009, 10:11 PM	#5
lovekrafty Gear maniac Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 230	I hear ya ! I'd think the liquid channel may be a bit more versatile ( having several pre-amp models to choose from ), I'd be concerned about latency have read some reports on it being a problem, after all these a pre's with digital modeling algorithims after the pre. The R-16 will give you good meat and potatoes pre's, 16 of them The ability to zero monitor is crucial to me. These two products are vastly different, you'd gain much more flexibility other than just mic pres with the R-16, like good EQ's. To be honest I prefer them over the liquid mix EQ emulations I use the liquidmix more so for compression and EQ flavouring. Hope this helps LK

14th July 2009, 01:13 PM	#6
morphlite Gear interested Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 5	LK, Yeah fair enough, cheers for that. Suppose you still get what you pay for......that gap between mid and high end gear is deffo getting smaller and smaller though ..... Paul