The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Post-fader compression issues
Old 21st August 2005
  #31
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaman
.....or do I need that 8 channel NICERIZER........ .........****....ubik....let me know how it sounds on drums ?
so... nicerizer or mixdream with xformer in? anyone heard both?
Old 22nd August 2005
  #32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaman
I definetly feel what you want to say thrill.
Wouldn´t we summing box lurkers all love to own a nice SSL/Neve/API like you...
Shaman i was just thinking out loud.

Its just at first with the advent of the ADAT it brought the so called "studio" sound to the home.

Then with the acceptance of computers and DAW in the studio, it led to the advent of this as a norm for the home/project studio and thus killing the midsize studio and eventually the bigger studios.

Thus it led to the end of analog tape as a recording medium.

Lack of demand equals death.

With the introduction of the digital mixing console and its acceptance in the home/project studio it pretty much did in the console manufacturers because they could no longer charge what a mid line console would cost to stay in production.

Not to mention the support which is all crucial for a large purchase.

Thus the end of the analog console.

Lack of demand equals death.

Now after years of digital futility the cry is we want the analog sound back.

So thus the evolution of the analog summing boxes began.

And now after 2 years its still not enough.

No we want more.

So specialized companies build add ons for these summers.

They even build desks to house them so it looks like a console.

But it still not enough.

Now there is talk about small moving fader packages, aux units and the like.

But its still not enough.

The cry continues.

So now people are asking about old analog consoles and tape machines that we back in the day in our right minds would not let touch our audio.

What they are really saying is:

We want the analog sound with out having to pay the analog price.


Sorry guys the truth is you can't have one without the other.

The price in parts and manufacturing is one thing.

But the support needed for day in day out work is another.

This costs money.

SSL for the first time in their history created a mini K console and i still see people crying around here how its too much.

Its not realistic they say.

Not realistic for whom?

Maybe not realistic for your bottomn line, but for the person that has the work and can afford it it will pay for itself quickly.

If the work ain't there then treat it as a hobby.

You'll enjoy it better.

Stop worrying of what's not there and focus on what is.

And if the need is still there for more channels,auxes and the like, boook some time in a big studio with a big enough console and start supporting that hand that fed everybody from the beginning.

It will comeback to you.
Old 22nd August 2005
  #33
Gear Guru
 
u b k's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor
What they are really saying is:

We want the analog sound with out having to pay the analog price.


Sorry guys the truth is you can't have one without the other.

well, i don't know what others are really saying, but i am getting clear, thanks to you and this discussion, on what *i'm* saying: i want the harmonic tone of a vintage, well kept 80x8, the drum punch and sheen of an api, and the pre/eq of a trident a range.

that's one nicerizer and a 33609j, one 8200 and a 2500, 8 dakings. that's what, $20000? i can spread that cost out over time, building as i go, increasing functionality and tone with every step.

zero maintenance, zero footprint, and a sound that is not available in anything that doesn't cost 3 times as much and take up 10 times as much space.

modular/hybrid approach is not, imo, a clamoring to return to the glory days of the analog console. it is a new model that pulls only what is needed from those large, high maintenance beasts and puts the sound, if not the full functionality, within reach of those of us who are way beyond hobby but way shy of industry moguls.

all the discontent you speak of is pushing things in a direction that very much works for a large number of music lovers who are not, as in my case, particularly concerned about what happens to and within the "music industry". i have different interests, different priorities and agendas that that sector was never interested in addressing. now the tides are shifting, and my market is gaining voice and power.

i like it, and i'm excited by the possibilities.


gregoire
del ubik
Old 22nd August 2005
  #34
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
Now that I'm using a summing box for my digital mixes I find myself using outboard compressors and then going straight into the Nicerizer instead of back into PT. So the compressor is post fader, but even more importantly, post reverb send. I don't mind compressing after the fader, in fact in many ways it could make more sense, but I'm annoyed by the compressor slamming a sax track up and down, for instance, with the reverb levels staying the same. It seems to unglue the track from the mix. Is anyone else bothered by this? If so, any suggestions?

Thanks,
-R
Can´t you choose the same output on both the sax and the reverb return, and then compressing them both?
Old 22nd August 2005
  #35
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrik
Can´t you choose the same output on both the sax and the reverb return, and then compressing them both?
I'm sending other things to the same reverb.

-R
Old 22nd August 2005
  #36
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

[QUOTE=thethrillfactor
Now after years of digital futility the cry is we want the analog sound back.

[/QUOTE]

Digital futility? Perhaps that's just the way you feel. Personally, I love what the digital revolution has provided me with.

Analog sound? Well, just the best aspects. So far the Nicerizer with Protools automation is heaven. The post fader compressor problem has been solved.

I think ubik said it all best.

-R
Old 23rd August 2005
  #37
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
Digital futility?
That's the impression from a lot of the posts here on digital mixing.

Hence the birth of analog summing boxes.
Old 23rd August 2005
  #38
Quote:
Originally Posted by u b i k
modular/hybrid approach is not, imo, a clamoring to return to the glory days of the analog console. it is a new model that pulls only what is needed from those large, high maintenance beasts and puts the sound, if not the full functionality, within reach of those of us who are way beyond hobby but way shy of industry moguls.
How can this be fully functional if there is still no solid solution to post fader compression apart from having to reconvert the signal which in my opinion should be avoided till the end.


Quote:
Originally Posted by u b i k
all the discontent you speak of is pushing things in a direction that very much works for a large number of music lovers who are not, as in my case, particularly concerned about what happens to and within the "music industry". i have different interests, different priorities and agendas that that sector was never interested in addressing. now the tides are shifting, and my market is gaining voice and power.

i like it, and i'm excited by the possibilities.


gregoire
del ubik
This is the kinda thinking that i am speaking of.

According to your reponse you are not concerned what happens to the "industry".

Well the industry is just not made up of musicians,producers and artists.

Its an industry like any other.

That means their are people that who don't have glamorous jobs that make them up.

But who cares if they go out of business as long as i have my new mic pre.

Guess what?

"Your market" as you call it will eventually become the model that is almost dead right now.

Why?

Because as soon as you can't make a payment on some new gear you will start hiring your "project studio" out to outsiders to make extra money.

Than you will really see the landscape and see what a void "your markert" has created.
Old 24th August 2005
  #39
Gear Guru
 
u b k's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor
How can this be fully functional if there is still no solid solution to post fader compression apart from having to reconvert the signal which in my opinion should be avoided till the end.

i agree, and that's what i was trying to say but i see the language was ambiguous: i get the sound, even if i don't get all the functionality.

consoles are badass, you'll get no argument from me. there is no substitute for the ease and coherence of the workflow i experience when working on a nice desk. it just comes at a price, namely maintenance, cost, and footprint, that i don't care to pay. so i accept tradeoffs, and thankfully sound is no longer one of them.


Quote:

"Your market" as you call it will eventually become the model that is almost dead right now.

Why?

Because as soon as you can't make a payment on some new gear you will start hiring your "project studio" out to outsiders to make extra money.

my market, such as it is, is someone who produces his own art in his own space using money that i generate in other ways. i'm not a hired gun, although i do occasionally barter, trade, rent, or gift my talents purely as a matter of choice. i have to love the music.

i don't make payments on gear, i buy it cash and carry. if that turns out to have been an unwise financial choice, i'll sell it.

i believe this market, the completely non-commercial recording setup, is huge and growing daily. we scrimp, save, and splurge on maybe one piece of sweet kit every year or so. my perception is that many, maybe even the majority, of posters here are in this boat.

from a manufacturer's standpoint, and a retailer's, selling one box a year to 20,000 artists for personal use is a helluva good idea. i'm pretty sure my review of the nicerizer generated more sales of that nature for phoenix than they would have ever sold to studios that are somehow connected to or dependent upon the industry.

i have no larger point here, i suspect i'm rambling. i just know that i'm not afraid of the future, because things are evolving in a way that give me more and more control over my own artistic fate and personal process. i really do feel for guys like you who've poured your blood and time into the work, and are extremely gifted, and now the structure that has been (relatively) stable for so long is in a state of deep uncertainty and confusion. i do trust that people in your shoes are talented enough and smart enough to make it all work out in the end, and i believe deeply that this pie is big enough for the me's and the you's to get everything we desire.


gregoire
del ubik
Old 24th August 2005
  #40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaman
how do you guys deal with buss compression on summing boxes ?

Let´s say I stemmed out my drums to the first 8 channels of my Mixdream and want to send only the drums to my C-2...

how the ****....?


You use one summing device for the drums...output the stereo outs to the C2, then input to 2 channels of another summing device that has everything else on it.

Or you could make duplicate tracks in your DAW (i.e. 2 x snares, 2 x kicks, etc) output individual tracks to say, 6 channels, and use the other 2 channels for a 'multed'/stemmed submix of the drums into the C2.

There are so many possibilities, it's all about getting creative with it.
Old 24th August 2005
  #41
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanEldred
You use one summing device for the drums...output the stereo outs to the C2, then input to 2 channels of another summing device that has everything else on it.

Or you could make duplicate tracks in your DAW (i.e. 2 x snares, 2 x kicks, etc) output individual tracks to say, 6 channels, and use the other 2 channels for a 'multed'/stemmed submix of the drums into the C2.

There are so many possibilities, it's all about getting creative with it.
there's a much easier way: get an SSL K, send it through a Neve 88R and control everything with an Icon... you can always put a ping pong table in the CR to fill up the extra space! hehhehheh couldn't resist.
Old 24th August 2005
  #42
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanEldred
There are so many possibilities, it's all about getting creative with it.
Right on. I've got the Nicerizer in the patch bay, so anything goes. It can submix synths, then send them individually to a recorded track. I can submix my fx sends in the nicerizer, or submix them in another mixer and bring them into 2 channels. Drums need a kiss? patch them in. Need to process and sum each drum individually? no problem. Happy with mixing them ITB, fine, send them out 2 stereo sends and compress one but not the other, assign to Nicerizer. Prefer the cleanliness of ITB for some tracks, fine, don't send them out.

Forget magic bullets. Something like this is a tool that you can just rotate in according to what it can do for you in any given circumstance.

-R
Old 24th August 2005
  #43
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor
Or a mini console?

But then I'll need automation?

Oh wait it should be moving faders right?

But moving faders isn't enough i need total recall like a DAW?

But 2 auxes isn't enough i need at least 12 auxes?

And more inputs 16-24 isn't enough?

I need 48-96?

And Eq and dynamics on each channel?


And of course it should cost under $10K.





You guys kill me sometimes.

I'm gonna demo a basic Tonelux setup next week..
closest thing to being a portable console,but expandable to any size or configuration.
and the third party module thing is happening..
and yeah Thrill..everything above, except total recall..which takes me back to API land[W/Flying Faders] without the size and older module etc upkeep issues[those older 500 modules can be a royal pain to keep up]
Sonically?
We'll see.
the N-16 would make a good efx submixer in addition to.
Old 24th August 2005
  #44
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor
How can this be fully functional if there is still no solid solution to post fader compression apart from having to reconvert the signal which in my opinion should be avoided till the end.
You can go out and back through good converters with little if any perceivable loss. I've tested this and the process is extremely transparent, especially if everything eventually gets dumped into an analog summing box.

As far as my own question is concerned, as i've fooled around with it a bit more i've found some advantages to post fader compression. Especially with the sax, it's often the case that a high "long, lunar" note will trigger the most compression, leaving what would seem an inordinant amount of verb or delay, unattenuated, hanging there. However, when everything is balanced nicely this can be a great effect, with the more dramatic notes seeming to take on a greater amount of ambience. Not necessarily a good or bad thing--just a different set of "givens" to maximize.

OTOH, it's no big to just mult the sax track and send it back into the DAW as a control track for the compressor. When you work on an analog board you do stuff like this all the time.

-R
Old 24th August 2005
  #45
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
You can go out and back through good converters with little if any perceivable loss. I've tested this and the process is extremely transparent, especially if everything eventually gets dumped into an analog summing box.



-R
See i disagree with this.

The more conversions you do the more the sounds take on the sound of your converters.

This will force you at times to do more processing to get the converter sound off.

I hear it as the sound becoming more 2 dimensional and flat.

To me that is one of benefits of working on analog to begin with, to give digitally recorded sounds(namely drums,guitars and bass) size and character.
Old 24th August 2005
  #46
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
I'm gonna demo a basic Tonelux setup next week..
closest thing to being a portable console,but expandable to any size or configuration..

Nice. thumbsup


Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
and the third party module thing is happening..
and yeah Thrill..everything above, except total recall..which takes me back to API land[W/Flying Faders] without the size and older module etc mantianence issues[those older 500 modules can be a royal pain to keep up]
Sonically?
We'll see..
If you come from DAW land you will miss the total recall.

Its the main benefit of mixing in digital land.

Especially if you work with people that obsess over minutae.

You know the musicians that have a DAW at home and want to make changes every day hoping that it will make their productions great.



Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
the N-16 would make a good efx submixer in addition to.

Wow a $3500 efx submixer...how JJP of you.
Old 24th August 2005
  #47
Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanEldred
You use one summing device for the drums...output the stereo outs to the C2, then input to 2 channels of another summing device that has everything else on it..
Uh...this may not work as well as you would think.

The more summing devices you add, the more the specs change for these devices.

Remember the way the specs are kept so pristine is that the devices are designed to be simple.

To do one function and do it well.

They aren't designed as a mixer and all in one system.

This is one reason that all the summers have no panpots.

It changes the image and size tremendously.

To incorporate the really great panpots would double and sometimes triple the price.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanEldred

Or you could make duplicate tracks in your DAW (i.e. 2 x snares, 2 x kicks, etc) output individual tracks to say, 6 channels, and use the other 2 channels for a 'multed'/stemmed submix of the drums into the C2.

There are so many possibilities, it's all about getting creative with it.

Yeah but what if its an 8 channel summing unit?

Or what if you do any processing when its been converted to analog(which i believe everyone does)?

How do you get it to the C2 then?

The 6 channels have to be combined(grouped) and sent to the C2 somehow.

Also how would you balance the C2 against these tracks?

What if you add EQ to the C2 drums?

What you do to the change in levels then?
Old 24th August 2005
  #48
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Yeah but what if its an 8 channel summing unit?

Or what if you do any processing when its been converted to analog(which i believe everyone does)?

How do you get it to the C2 then?

The 6 channels have to be combined(grouped) and sent to the C2 somehow.

Also how would you balance the C2 against these tracks?

What if you add EQ to the C2 drums?

What you do to the change in levels then?
SOME-OF-A-BEETCH!
Old 24th August 2005
  #49
Quote:
Originally Posted by u b i k

my market, such as it is, is someone who produces his own art in his own space using money that i generate in other ways. i'm not a hired gun, although i do occasionally barter, trade, rent, or gift my talents purely as a matter of choice. i have to love the music.

i don't make payments on gear, i buy it cash and carry. if that turns out to have been an unwise financial choice, i'll sell it.

i believe this market, the completely non-commercial recording setup, is huge and growing daily. we scrimp, save, and splurge on maybe one piece of sweet kit every year or so. my perception is that many, maybe even the majority, of posters here are in this boat.

from a manufacturer's standpoint, and a retailer's, selling one box a year to 20,000 artists for personal use is a helluva good idea. i'm pretty sure my review of the nicerizer generated more sales of that nature for phoenix than they would have ever sold to studios that are somehow connected to or dependent upon the industry.

i have no larger point here, i suspect i'm rambling. i just know that i'm not afraid of the future, because things are evolving in a way that give me more and more control over my own artistic fate and personal process. i really do feel for guys like you who've poured your blood and time into the work, and are extremely gifted, and now the structure that has been (relatively) stable for so long is in a state of deep uncertainty and confusion. i do trust that people in your shoes are talented enough and smart enough to make it all work out in the end, and i believe deeply that this pie is big enough for the me's and the you's to get everything we desire.


gregoire
del ubik

Ubik no argument here because i agree this is the way it should be.

You buy you gear and use it creatively for your purposes.

You pay for your gear in cash and don't have to lease or destroy your credit.

Buy something as you need it.

And i think that is great. thumbsup

But you are the exception believe it or not.

Most people that i know here especially in this city we live in are not just doing this.

Because they realize they can't keep up with their gearlust decide to start renting out their home studios to try to pay for gear.

Charging ridiculous prices that are all too unrealistic and undercutting everyone in the process.

Its not everyone's desire to make their own music with their studios.

Their are still people believe it or not that want to run a studio as a business.

But its become almost impossible if you are in the middle.

Not a major soundmotel but a really nice guy with a really nice studio who likes recording and helping people produce a quality project that is affordable.

This guy has been pretty much squeezed out of the picture.

Which is altogether sad.

Because you need a balance in the studio business.

You speak about low budgets and the like but what if you decide to record a real 7 piece string section, or an acoustic piano,a mini gospel choir, or live drums for one of your productions but the budget doesn't allow for Avatar,Right Track,Sony and the like?

What will you do then?

Will you compromise and try to do it a home?

With the hopes that what ever hired mixer gun is brought in can salvage it?

Or do the best i can and in mastering maybe it can be fixed?

In the old days there were lots of good options that were both reasonable and still yielded excellent results.

Now its either the very top or the very bottomn of the studio world.
Old 24th August 2005
  #50
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Yeah but what if its an 8 channel summing unit?

Or what if you do any processing when its been converted to analog(which i believe everyone does)?

How do you get it to the C2 then?

The 6 channels have to be combined(grouped) and sent to the C2 somehow.

Also how would you balance the C2 against these tracks?

What if you add EQ to the C2 drums?

What you do to the change in levels then?

Almost forgot...

does anyone still add reverb to their drums?

How about a little PCM 70 tiled room or 224XL on the snare?

How can this be done after the processing while its hitting the summer?
Old 24th August 2005
  #51
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor
If you come from DAW land you will miss the total recall.

Its the main benefit of mixing in digital land.

Especially if you work with people that obsess over minutae.

You know the musicians that have a DAW at home and want to make changes every day hoping that it will make their productions great.

Wow a $3500 efx submixer...how JJP of you.
Good points.
I come from mixing API 3288 [flying faders land] and I'm not big on most plugs these days anyways.so total RC is a complete luxury anyways.most of the music i'm mixing is basic rock.
People that obsess over minutea.yeah..way of life, that pretty much describes my commercial sound design clients [who I generally mix all ITB for that very reason].FTP'ing changes every 30 minutes between LA,Chicago and NY is not uncommon.The reedits alone could kill you.

But I don't mind going back to this type of setup for music stuff, if it means getting the sonics.
The N-16 already resides here and it was the prototype[condsiderably less than 3500 btw]
This has been an interesting/frustrating year for mixing I tell you.
Old 24th August 2005
  #52
Lives for gear
 
paterno's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jules
SOME-OF-A-BEETCH!
Don't you mean SUM-OF-A-BEETCH...
Old 24th August 2005
  #53
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor
Uh...this may not work as well as you would think.

The more summing devices you add, the more the specs change for these devices.

Remember the way the specs are kept so pristine is that the devices are designed to be simple.

To do one function and do it well.

They aren't designed as a mixer and all in one system.

This is one reason that all the summers have no panpots.

It changes the image and size tremendously.

To incorporate the really great panpots would double and sometimes triple the price.
The Nicerizer 16 has panpots. BIG panpots. Big red ones.

It's a nice option, since you can either send out stereo stems, or if you have a lot of mono tracks just send them out individually.

-R
Old 24th August 2005
  #54
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
The Nicerizer 16 has panpots. BIG panpots. Big red ones.

It's a nice option, since you can either send out stereo stems, or if you have a lot of mono tracks just send them out individually.

-R

So did the Inward connections summer.

My point was compared to the D2B it never sounded as wide.

Of all the summers i've used the D2B while the most neutral to my ears has always been the widest sounding(this includes the Folcrom and the API system).

I haven't tried the Nicerizer so can comment on the quality of the panpots(namely the cross talk), but its hard to design a great panpot system on a console that doesn't compromise the overall image.

This is one reason why large consoles are expensive.
Old 24th August 2005
  #55
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor
So did the Inward connections summer.

My point was compared to the D2B it never sounded as wide.

Of all the summers i've used the D2B while the most neutral to my ears has always been the widest sounding(this includes the Folcrom and the API system).

I haven't tried the Nicerizer so can comment on the quality of the panpots(namely the cross talk), but its hard to design a great panpot system on a console that doesn't compromise the overall image.

This is one reason why large consoles are expensive.
Point well taken, however you might want to give the Nicerizer a listen before you pass judgement.

If the D2B sounds wider than the Folcrom it wouldn't be because of panpots would it?

-R
Old 24th August 2005
  #56
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor
Uh...this may not work as well as you would think.

The more summing devices you add, the more the specs change for these devices.

Remember the way the specs are kept so pristine is that the devices are designed to be simple.

To do one function and do it well.

They aren't designed as a mixer and all in one system.

This is one reason that all the summers have no panpots.

It changes the image and size tremendously.

To incorporate the really great panpots would double and sometimes triple the price.


I'm not sure why the specs would supposedly change so much, people do this with sidecars all the time...i.e. Neve sidecar into SSL, it's the same thing. The pan positions can be determined in the DAW, it doesn't have to have panpots. The secondary summing device receiving the submix should see the signal coming from the first mixer/summer and be setup to receive L/R.





Quote:
Yeah but what if its an 8 channel summing unit?

Or what if you do any processing when its been converted to analog(which i believe everyone does)?

How do you get it to the C2 then?

The 6 channels have to be combined(grouped) and sent to the C2 somehow.

Also how would you balance the C2 against these tracks?

What if you add EQ to the C2 drums?

What you do to the change in levels then?


Well, I believe most summers are 16 channel, and if it's an 8 channel, then you get another one. Personally, I think less than 16 channels for the whole idea (with mixes over maybe 20 tracks) need to be 16, or 24, or 32 channels minimum. I couldn't imagine summing a 32 or 46 track mix (and I'm sure 100 tracks in your case) down to 8 or even 16 sometimes. My little console is 28 channels and it's just about right for my purposes, I do a lot of rock bands. Like I said it's all in the mind of the user, if you just make blanket statements like 'nope, nope not gonna work because of specs [which isn't even an issue]' no one is going to make any progress. It doesn't have to be all ITB, or on a full console with faders, there is an in between point that can yield professional, excellent results IMO.
Old 24th August 2005
  #57
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
Point well taken, however you might want to give the Nicerizer a listen before you pass judgement.
I did say i haven't had a chance to check it out yet.

But don't worry i will.

I like the idea as a summer for softening over digitized effects and plugs and for over digitized acoustic drums.

If its as good as you guys say it is i can see myself sending 8 outs of Altiverb reverb through it.

I can interface it with my SSL.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman

If the D2B sounds wider than the Folcrom it wouldn't be because of panpots would it?

-R
Of course not.

This is a difference case.

But i mentioned it because the designers decided not include them for a reason.

I know when i asked Chris Muth he was very adamant against it.
Old 24th August 2005
  #58
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor
If its as good as you guys say it is i can see myself sending 8 outs of Altiverb reverb through it.

I can interface it with my SSL.

I dunno, if your SSL is your sonic paradigm and you like the "sound" (or lack thereof) of the D2B then the Nicerizer may well not be for you. For the record I'm not making an objective endorsement of the box, just pointing some ways that it is improving my own work and trying to come to grips with the new possibilities.

I'd be interested to see what you think of the thing.

-R
Old 24th August 2005
  #59
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
I dunno, if your SSL is your sonic paradigm and you like the "sound" (or lack thereof) of the D2B then the Nicerizer may well not be for you. For the record I'm not making an objective endorsement of the box, just pointing some ways that it is improving my own work and trying to come to grips with the new possibilities.

I'd be interested to see what you think of the thing.

-R

The SSL is a sound.

It has its own sonic character.

Mines is modified for the summing to be a little more open,neutral and euphonic.

Its also bigger sounding than most E's.

The stereo image doesn't collapse when you smack it.

I have Neve EQ's and compressors to run things through to give them tracks character as well.

Same as Urei,Manley,Summit and all the other stuff as well.

Character isn't an issue for me.

Its the lack there of that is a problem for a lot of the stuff i get to mix.

So if a box can give it to me quick and i can control it it will be worth it.

As for the Altiverb which i use on almost every mix now, i do feel it lacks a little size and weight.

If i can run a couple of channels through a box and give it a little size,girth and character it would be worth it.

Same goes for acoustic drum tracks.

After all the processing if i can send them off somewhere for some cohesion it would help.

Havin a mini Neve console in rack would be incredible, but i am also realistic.
Old 24th August 2005
  #60
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by paterno
Don't you mean SUM-OF-A-BEETCH...

OT,but
Hey John, the New Warlocks sounds cool..good job!
Mojo mag gave it ...4 stars!
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump