The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Sound differences btw. API 550a & 550b
Old 17th April 2007
  #31
Lives for gear
 
666666's Avatar
I prefer 550Bs, because quite simply, they have the most control. Now and then you'll need to really shape something, and a 550A or 560 just doesn't have the available frequencies / bands to get the job done. Sometimes they will, sometimes they will not. After all, these things are tools... you need the most capable tools you can get your hands on.

I personally look at classic "simple" eqs as mere "effects", not as "eqs"... like a 550A for instance, or even a 1073... I'd use one specifically as a character effect, but not for serious "equalizing". Just doesn't have the control.

When doing a mix, I make sure I have enough "fully capable" eqs with FULL control on hand for all main tracks (such as 550Bs or better)... so that I can truly equalize what needs to be equalized... and THEN I'll try to grab some extra "effect" eqs as well to add on as icing on the cake.

Sometimes I'll piggy-back eqs if needed... run something first through a GML parametric in order to precision shape it, and THEN run it through a Calrec PQ15S or something to add some vintage British flavor or whatever.

Point is, when stocking your studio, I would pesonally not recommend DEPENDING on "simple" effect eqs as MAIN eqs... because when you need equalization control, you need equalization control... period. Simple "character" eqs should be secondary on the list.

So... in sum... if you are dealing with say ten main tracks, pick up ten 550Bs so that you're covered. You'll then be properly outfitted and will have the tools you need to deal with whatever mix is thrown at you. Then, if you have any loot left over, maybe grab some 550As and 560s for flavor / icing.

Old 17th April 2007
  #32
can't resist to show off our "lunch" heh
one 550a is still missing due to service and recapping, but nevertheless it's a nice pic






ourselves dressed with acoustically optimized hi-end t-shirts by manley playing around with the APIs

stefano


and me, murat
Old 17th April 2007
  #33
Quote:
Originally Posted by 666666 View Post
I prefer 550Bs, because quite simply, they have the most control.
But don't sound as smooth as the 500's and 550a's.

If it were me i would choose sound over function but i am not big API EQ fan anyway.

I much prefer Neve EQ's.
Old 17th April 2007
  #34
Lives for gear
 

I have 4 550A's, and 2 550B's. The B's can be closely copied with higher end plugins like the Sony Oxford, but are still a little nicer than plugins, and more flexible than A's. The A's have a punchiness, and bite that is definitely better than any plugin for drums and electric guitars. I much prefer the 550A's.
Old 17th April 2007
  #35
Lives for gear
 
666666's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bforest4 View Post
The A's have a punchiness, and bite that is definitely better than any plugin for drums and electric guitars. I much prefer the 550A's.
I am just wondering how MUCH extra favorable color the A actually has over the B. I am not doubting that the A has a more desirable character, but... I tested an old A once against a B and there was a difference, but not enough of a difference to knock my socks off. It could have been the specific unit I had, haven't had a chance to hear any others.

I'd think that a Neve eq indeed has MORE obvious color than a 550A... different colors of course, but... if you are going to have a "color eq" on hand, especially one that costs a small fortune, I'd go Neve... then you really get your money's worth of color. But maybe I should get my hands on a nice new 550A in mint condition to check out before I go any further with this point.

What I do know is that often when mixing, I make good use of the 550B's good control and couldn't imagine being without all that control. Sure, if something is recorded really well, you shouldn't need to perform eq surgery on every track later, but sometimes you gotta mix things that were not recorded in an optimum manner and then eq control is your best friend. It's painful when you need the control and don't have it... been there.
Old 17th April 2007
  #36
Lives for gear
 

The A's have more mojo..try for yourself and I think you'll hear it pretty quickly..
Old 18th April 2007
  #37
Lives for gear
 
Marjan's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 666666
I personally look at classic "simple" eqs as mere "effects", not as "eqs"... like a 550A for instance, or even a 1073... I'd use one specifically as a character effect, but not for serious "equalizing". Just doesn't have the control.

When doing a mix, I make sure I have enough "fully capable" eqs with FULL control on hand for all main tracks (such as 550Bs or better)... so that I can truly equalize what needs to be equalized... and THEN I'll try to grab some extra "effect" eqs as well to add on as icing on the cake.

Point is, when stocking your studio, I would pesonally not recommend DEPENDING on "simple" effect eqs as MAIN eqs... because when you need equalization control, you need equalization control... period. Simple "character" eqs should be secondary on the list.
Me too.
Old 18th April 2007
  #38
Lives for gear
 
jdjustice's Avatar
GEAR PORN: Pictures of 550a and 550b Switches

from this thread:
Automated Processes Inc. 550A and 550B?
and this post specifically:
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/959631-post9.html

Old 17th May 2007
  #39
Lives for gear
 
666666's Avatar
Well, I just got a pair of new 550As... and did a quick comparison test to my 550Bs.

My initial review... indeed there is a difference between the As and the Bs.

In sum, the As are indeed "smoother" and "softer" than the Bs... very obvious, at least when cranked. The Bs are more accurate and clinical sounding, by comparison... but still sound excellent.

But here's the wild part... I have one pair of older 550Bs... these sound noticeably different than the newer 550Bs I have (but match each other perfectly). The older 550Bs are noticeably more aggressive, they compress and get crunchy when cranked, just like old Neves. The old 550Bs actually sound more impressive on certain things than the new 550As. Of course it all depends on the source and what sound you are looking for... in other words, YMMV.

My initial impression is that I might actually like the older and newer 550Bs slightly better than the new 550As for what I do. Again, the old 550Bs are aggressive and crunchy, the newer 550Bs are clean and dynamic... and the 550As are soft and smooth... compared to each other.

I could see the 550As being real nice on say vocals.. and the old 550Bs being really nice on distorted electric guitars (due to the crunch and compression), and the newer 550Bs being excellent on drums (being clean and dynamic).

Like with just about any high end gear, regarding the 550As and Bs, it's NOT like some are "better" than others... it's a question of what sound / character is best for which track. Claiming a 550A is "better" than a 550B is a totally BOGUS statement... from what I can hear so far, a 550A is an apple, and a new 550B is an orange (and an old 550B is a banana)... and they're all delicious. I do very much enjoy the dynamics and natural character of the newer 550Bs, even though I predict most people would gravitate toward the older 550Bs and 550As due to the vintage-style colors... bottom line, they're ALL good! thumbsup

I still feel the 550As are limited due to their limited frequency choices... even during my el-quicko A/B test just now, I was finding it so much easier to dial in the "right" frequencies on specific tracks using the 550Bs than with the 550As. With the 550As, I was wishing I had more choices... I was able to dial things in more precisely with the Bs. That's a serious consideration. Who knows, maybe I'll sell an A and keep all the Bs. For desert island use, hands down the Bs win.... so it's just a matter of can I afford to sacrifice a truly useful and more accurate eq for a more limited one, just for the vintage color... hmmmm... tough one.... guess I need another 500 series rack!

Part 2: Just did a second quick A/B test... literately.... new 550A verses new 550B... seems that part of the "smoothness" of the 550A comes from the fact that the signals passing through it seem to get compressed a bit. What gets "smoothed" out are the dynamics. The 550B, by comparison, has more punch and more bite, due to it's more accurate natural dynamics.

The 550A can take quick short staccato type notes (say bongos) and make the notes sound a bit thicker at the expense of some dynamics... with the 550B, the same notes remain more as original (not thicker) but yet jump out at you more due to the retained dynamics. Again, it's all good, just depends on what you're tryin' to do. On percussion I tend to favor lively dynamics and thus like the 550B better for this.

The "old" 550Bs... not sure why they sound the way they do... not sure if it's because of different transformers (did not open them up yet to look), or due to mere age maybe...? They compress like the 550A, but yet are crunchy and aggressive (in a good Neve-ish sorta way) where as the 550As are more mellow (sound almost like tube units).

I think "mellow" is a good adjective for the 550As... which is why I am questioning whether or not they are worth keeping for ME personally... because I don't really do mellow... but maybe they'd be cool on a synth module or something where you want to unsterilize a digital signal without adding any harshness... etc.

But, having said that, another word to describe the 550A would be "musical". Though I miss the dynamics and punch, there IS something very pleasing and simply musical about the 550A. It has a certain sweet soothing character, your ears just say, "ahhhh, that's nice". It's a very warm color.

I must admit, when I first heard Neve 1073 pre-amps for the first time, I was like, "wow, these ARE as "good" as everyone says!"... the hype was appropriate. With the 550A eqs... no doubt they are excellent and have a unique vintage color... and no doubt API has done an amazing job recreating them, etc... but, I don't know if I'd agree with the level of hype, especially when compared to the 550Bs. Meaning, on some other forums in the past, some people have argued to the death that 550As are "way better" than Bs, that the Bs stink by comparison, etc, etc, etc... simply hogwash!... I could see many people, like myself for instance, prefering the Bs over the As for many things.

Again, they're both different, and they're both good... apples and oranges. What flavor do you want today? For anyone filling a 500 series rack with eqs, I'd say be sure to get both 550As and 550Bs as well. If you can only have a few, I think the 550Bs would prove to be more versatile and useful overall... and still sound GREAT, unlike what some people might have you believe.
Old 17th May 2007
  #40
Gear Addict
 
aryschien's Avatar
 

I'd suggest that you try the Avedis e27 and compare it to the new API 550B. For me the new 550B really doesn't live up to the hype. At least not like my Avedis e27 or new API 560. Among the three, it's the easiest to make the sound ugly with the 550B. It's still a versitile eq, and very easy to recall, but I would surely leave it for the most trivial tracks in my mix.

By the way, I use the Avedis e27 on snares and 560 on kicks and bass.
Old 17th May 2007
  #41
Lives for gear
 
666666's Avatar
Ok, so it seems that the 560 is a very popular unit for kick, snare and bass (in general based on many different posts)...

So, on what tracks do the 550As shine the most? What are most people using 550As for these days? And the E27 too (other than snare)?

I can't seem to find a track that I am really loving the 550A on. Again, it's probably due to the style I deal with and the sound I am most often looking for. But, because the 550A has received so much favorable hype over the years, I'd like to know how exactly all you guys (and gals) are using these 550A units.

I can appreciate the smoothness of the 550As, they DO sound VERY nice, indeed! But, I think it's the reduction of dynamics that is making me not fall in love with it (and this may be the reason some people DO fall in love with it). I like lots of "kick" and "punch" on things.... the 550B retains the kick and punch. The 550As are seeming a tad too mellow for my tastes.

I am thinking that the 550A might be great on vocals where you almost always need some degree of dynamic control and some extra overall smoothness... I rarely record vocals, do mostly instrumental music.... maybe this is why I am not appreciating the 550A???

I am already thinking of the 550As as "compressors"... like next time I need to add a little compression on a track, I'll grab a 550A and crank some appropriate eq gain. Seriously, in that regard, they do compress wonderfully... zero artifacts (other than the inherent subtle distortion)... it's the most smooth and undetectible type of dynamic compression I've ever heard. Perhaps THIS is the main reason why people love the 550A so much.

I think I may need to compare these 550As to some other non-API eqs just to widen the baseline here. This has me wondering how the 550As would compare dynamically to various vintage british eqs (which also compress).
Old 17th May 2007
  #42
Moderator
 
TonyBelmont's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 666666 View Post
So, on what tracks do the 550As shine the most? What are most people using 550As for these days? And the E27 too (other than snare)?
I have the Avedis E27's over here, and use them on anything that needs EQ. They work great on vocals, bass, drums, etc

They also work great on the 2 buss and have some very unique frequencies - 20k, 24k, 28k on the top end, etc.

There is also a well known mastering engineer who is now using them over his ultra pricey mastering EQ's....
Old 17th May 2007
  #43
Gear Guru
 
lucey's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyBelmont View Post
I have the Avedis E27's over here, and use them on anything that needs EQ. They work great on vocals, bass, drums, etc

They also work great on the 2 buss and have some very unique frequencies - 20k, 24k, 28k on the top end, etc.

There is also a well known mastering engineer who is now using them over his ultra pricey mastering EQ's....
I used them for a time but the control was too limited for what I was after. Hopefully Avedis will get the mastering version together someday soon integrating his unique Q ideas.

They have a nice clarifying effect including a phat transformer bottom from an intentionally colorful Jensen IIRC.
Old 17th May 2007
  #44
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 666666 View Post
Well, I just got a pair of new 550As... and did a quick comparison test to my 550Bs.

My initial review... indeed there is a difference between the As and the Bs.

In sum, the As are indeed "smoother" and "softer" than the Bs... very obvious, at least when cranked. The Bs are more accurate and clinical sounding, by comparison... but still sound excellent.
Just as you heard a difference in the new 550B's vs the old 550B's, there might be that same difference between old and new 550A's. Don't know cause I haven't tried the new ones, but that might explain the difference in our opinions.

I still prefer the extra mojo, crunchiness, distortion, punchiness of my older 550A's and think my newer (12 years old) 550B's are nice, but sound clinical in comparison and can be more easily copied with plugins. If I need some surgical EQ, I will go to my Massive Passive or a Plugin, both have much more control than a 550B.

API's can be had for less than one third of a neve eq so I think they are an incredible bargain for vintage EQ's. I would love to have a neve but can't justify the price, I would rather have 4 API's, or 4 channels of Focusrite, or a Massive Passive, or a couple of chandlers, etc..
Old 17th May 2007
  #45
Moderator
 
TonyBelmont's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucey View Post
Hopefully Avedis will get the mastering version together someday soon integrating his unique Q ideas.

They have a nice clarifying effect including a phat transformer bottom from an intentionally colorful Jensen IIRC.
You mean like this:


This is a pseudo-mastering variation of the E27 with +/- 6 db of boost and cut.

Mounted in an R52 rack.... sorry for the grainy picture.
Old 18th May 2007
  #46
Gear Addict
 
aryschien's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 666666 View Post
What are most people using 550As for these days? And the E27 too (other than snare)?
I can use the e27 on almost everything, if I want that color.

Or when I want to boost the 28khz all the way and get the air back on some tracks without ruining the sound. It's amazing. Not too many eq on earth can do that.

It's also great on kick and bass. I use the 560 instead only because it's faster for me to get it "right". Can't explain why.

Great on vocals. It's fast enough so the vocal will still remain intact after EQed. If I want color I'd just use a coloring compressor afterwards. Of course, sometimes sending the vocal to the Germanium Tone Control EQ is a lot easier.

But, hey, if you don't dig it, there's nothing wrong not using it. Like some guru once said in the other forum, "I don't have all the brands you mentioned, but I do hell of a great job."
Old 18th May 2007
  #47
Lives for gear
 
666666's Avatar
Follow up... I just spent some more time with the 550As this morning in a slightly different situation, different material, different monitoring, etc. I have a greater appreciation for them now and do plan to keep both.

In my earlier posts, I was complaining about how the 550As seemed to take away dynamics, as if that was such a bad thing. Well, today, actually trying to fit things into a mix, I of course was readily able to see how useful / helpful the 550A's subtle compression actually IS. Stuff going through the 550A seemed to find its place in the mix easier... (which makes sense of course due to compression). But, again, the compression that takes place in the 550A is so smooth and undetectible... the signal does not sound like it's being compressed, yet it just sits in the mix "better" and is more clear. Pretty neat.

I then did a quick A/B test, the 550A against a vintage Calrec PQ-15S. Of course the characters as well as frequency choices of these two units are different, but I wanted to get a feel for the difference in dynamic treatment, amount of "crunch", etc.

The Carlec indeed sounded "dirtier", more "rock n roll", but yet the 550A still had enough "hair" (peach fuzz actually) to keep it from sounding wimpy. It was still "happenin". The Calrec also compressed, but in a different way than the 550A... it was like if the Calrec had a lower compression ratio, but with a little extra limiting on top. The 550A by comparison sounded like it had a higher ratio, fast release... you could hear more decay, but oh so smooth... which was real nice. In sum, both compressed dynamics to an extent, the Calrec being a bit more of a hairy brute, the 550A being more refined and subtle but still having rock n roll qualities.

This comparison reminds me a lot of when I had compared an API 3124+ pre to an AMS Neve 1073DPA pre... both had the "rock n roll", but the Neve was more "balls to the wall", the API was a little more polite but still smokin' and drinkin'.

API stuff indeed has a unique inherent sound that's quite nice and very rock n roll. I think often it's harder to initially perceive the API sound because it is not as obvious and blatent as the British sound... vintage Neve stuff is so over the top that it's hard NOT to perceive it. The API sound still does the job, but without waving its arms... and it still rocks. Vintage Neve is straight scotch, API is Southern Comfort.

I think this also may be why I was initially not blown away by the 550As. Due to the years of hype I have heard / read, I was expecting more of a Neve-level thrill, I was expecting to get the socks knocked up my a$$... but what I got instead was something equally as beautiful and useful, just a bit more subtle and refined... and I needed to spend a little more time to soak in the essense.

Another useful bit of info... I ran signal through both a 550A and 550B, switched inline, but with all eq knobs flat... zero cut or boost... the 550A STILL added its compression. So, point is, if you have a track that does NOT need any equalizing, but could use a little dynamic control and extra decay / thickness, just run it through a 550A keeping all eq gain knobs at 0. I can only imagine what a mix would sound like with every single track going through a 550A. The mix would automatically be so much closer to a final product before even touching any compressors.

I know this post is a bit contradicting to my earlier posts complaining about a loss of dynamics. These days, with so many productions being over compressed, I have found great beauty is playing back signals that are hugely dynamic and enjoying the depth and "realism". I was recently (and still am) on a GML kick, appreciating the preservation of dynamics going through this gear... this is why I was liking the 550B better than the 550A yesterday (doing an A/B alone and not in a mix).

HOWEVER, the reality is, in a thick rock mix with tons of tracks, some degree of compression is NECESSARY... and high quality dynamic control is important... and I can see how having some 550As in the tool box could only be a GOOD thing here. I look forward to using these on a final mix. It sure is fun using excellent gear!
Old 2nd January 2009
  #48
Gear Nut
 

I remember this thread and it made sense to me why that the 550A was more expensive than the 550B.

But now they are the same price! Does this means the 550B is now wired like the 550A? Or they just increased insanely the price? Or what?
Old 1st May 2011
  #49
Gear Maniac
 
wrekdahouse's Avatar
 

bumping this thread....
i am putting up an 1608 and still have some days to choose how it will be fitted...


i see most 1608 ship with 550a, fewer 550b
Old 1st May 2011
  #50
Lives for gear
 
666666's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrekdahouse View Post
bumping this thread....
i am putting up an 1608 and still have some days to choose how it will be fitted...
i see most 1608 ship with 550a, fewer 550b
There's a wealth of info about these modules on the forum, just read all the related threads.

In sum, if you want maximum control / versatility, get the 550Bs. This is what I would do, because to me there's nothing more frustrating than not being able to get to where you need to go when doing audio work. 550As by comparison have way less control, but they do have a bit more sonic coloration than the 550B units. Some people value this coloration and want as much as possible.

The 550As will round off transients, add a bit of "compression", makes things a bit warmer, sweeter, thicker, etc. But the question is, do you want this color on every track? It's all a matter of personal preference and personal goals.

Me, I have a rack full of a lot of Bs, these get patched in when I need to actually do some "adjusting".

I also have some As as well for when I want to add some of that extra coloration on a specific track etc.

But keep in mind, the 550Bs ARE colored too, despite what some may tell you. You will still get plenty of very nice, rich API color from the Bs. The As are just that much more extreme.... which, in my opinion, makes them really nice on the right source, but also makes them less versatile.

If you need to fit 16 modules... hmmm... I think I'd go with maybe ten 550Bs and six 550As... or twelve 550Bs and four 550As. That's what I would do anyway.

Best of luck.

(PS - oh yeah, if you want the "real deal" in terms of classic 550A sound / character, get a few Saul Walker version 550As! For a deeper explanation of this, search the threads.)

Old 1st May 2011
  #51
Gear Maniac
 
wrekdahouse's Avatar
 

thank you for the answer,
yes i read all the pertinent threads, including all your reviews, which i usually adhere, as i love 225L too,
but never tried the 550b.

btw i used to work daily with a 2488 for a lot of years, so i am very familiar with the classic api sound, and the original 550a,
thats why i am going for the new console...
i have some original 550a too, i think the saul walker editions should be somewere between the older and the newer 550a.

ive never tried the 560, i dont know if i should skip them for now...
wwhitman's opinions has some weight, but the "shaping" MO may be good, i may order one to try..

what i know is that the extra slots will have al least 6 527, or 2 525 and 4 527...
Old 12th May 2011
  #52
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 666666 View Post

In sum, if you want maximum control / versatility, get the 550Bs. This is what I would do, because to me there's nothing more frustrating than not being able to get to where you need to go when doing audio work. 550As by comparison have way less control, but they do have a bit more sonic coloration than the 550B units. Some people value this coloration and want as much as possible.

The 550As will round off transients, add a bit of "compression", makes things a bit warmer, sweeter, thicker, etc. But the question is, do you want this color on every track? It's all a matter of personal preference and personal goals.

But keep in mind, the 550Bs ARE colored too, despite what some may tell you. You will still get plenty of very nice, rich API color from the Bs. The As are just that much more extreme.... which, in my opinion, makes them really nice on the right source, but also makes them less versatile.

I have the SSL Classics Collection, which includes the 550a and 550b. If I were to make a choice, would it make sense to say that one could purchase a pair of 550As for all of the attributes ("warmer, sweeter, thicker") that its internal electronics offer -- which a plug-in cannot. And leverage the additional functionality of the 550b via the 550b plug-in?
Old 12th May 2011
  #53
Lives for gear
 
666666's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBizzle View Post
I have the SSL Classics Collection, which includes the 550a and 550b. If I were to make a choice, would it make sense to say that one could purchase a pair of 550As for all of the attributes ("warmer, sweeter, thicker") that its internal electronics offer -- which a plug-in cannot. And leverage the additional functionality of the 550b via the 550b plug-in?
I suppose that makes sense if budget is an issue.

A facility I work at has a Waves plug-in bundle with the 550A and 550B etc. I've compared my handwired 550As to the plug-in, there is surely a difference. The plug-in overall is quite good and very useful, it does have a bit of the original sonic flavor, but it's nowhere near as big and sweet as the hardware. The hardware is on a completely different level. It's one of those deals where you hear the plug-in initially and think, "ahh, this is ain't so bad", and then you patch in the hardware and instantly realize why the hardware is indeed so prized.

I have not yet heard a plug-in that was truly "as good" or on the same level sonically as the hardware. Though some plugs seem to do a VERY impressive job at emulating the classic sonic colors and behaviors, it's quite amazing to me that this sort of thing can be done with "ones and zeros" , but at the end of the day, you don't get something for nothing... never did and never will.

BUT... a mix of hardware and software can indeed be a good compromise if budget is an issue. In one facility I deal with this is what we do and works out pretty well. The trick of course is to apply good strategy in terms of what gets patched into what.
Old 12th May 2011
  #54
Gear Nut
 

Good points.

This thread is great. Loads of great ideas and opinions exchanged.. (especially from you -- thanks for sharing so much).

A little off topic and curious what you thought. Do you think we (people in the studio) sometimes get too caught up in the "this vs. that" thing? For example, my favorite band is Metallica and I love their first three albums.. Though they "sound" awful, I listen to those albums the most. Now, as a listener, would I like them anymore or less if they recorded through API gear or Neve gear or an SSL board? I don't know. I tend to think that I'd love those albums just as much regardless of the gear used.

Thoughts?
Old 12th May 2011
  #55
Lives for gear
 
666666's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBizzle View Post

Good points. This thread is great. Loads of great ideas and opinions exchanged.. especially from you -- thanks for sharing so much..
Thanks!

Quote:
... Do you think we (people in the studio) sometimes get too caught up in the "this vs. that" thing?...
Yes, we can.

Without typing 37 pages about this, I'll try to sum it up as...

The quality, sound, color and behavior of gear used by an engineer / producer IS important when trying to reach a specific, artistic goal and/or requirement. But, it's important to a degree.

Some spend way too much time worrying about gear, and if it's a hobby to do so, then fine (probably represents a lot of folks on this board), but it's probably not truly necessary. I'd say it's fine, unless the gear obsession actually gets in the way of making music. The music comes first.

Some spend way too little time considering gear, and this can potentially be a bad thing. I've heard great recorded performances / great productions that sounded just awful in terms of fidelity / overall sonic quality. In these cases it's obvious to my ear that the audio work itself was done pretty well but the gear sucked (or was poorly chosen for the circumstance). It's a real shame when that happens.

If you simply wish to make great recordings / productions and don't really care too much about the subtleties of different gear and the assorted sonic colors you can paint with... as well as extreme high fidelity, etc... then I'd say extreme gear obsession is unnecessary, you could probably just go out and get a stack of SSL modules or API modules and just get to work, period, done, without thinking any more about it.

As far as legendary, favorite recordings that do not sound good... the actual music and performance comes first and is always most important... but it does really suck when one of your favorite recordings sounds poor, doesn't it? So, as an engineer / producer, I'm sure you would not wish to add more of such productions into the world. I think it's a real shame when a truly outstanding musical work is tainted with poor audio quality.

I personally have great appreciation for great music, great performances and great audio, so I am committed / dedicated to always trying to yield the best audio possible on every level. In this quest, the gear DOES matter... but, again, to a degree.

And, I'll just add this before someone else does, the sound that's being made as well as the skills of the engineer / producer still do come before the gear... of course. It all matters.

Do you need to go out and buy some 550A modules right now in order to make a decent recording? No. Might having such modules on hand help you to reach more specific and lofty sonic goals? Likely, yes.

Very many pages of discussion could be written on this subject, I'd imagine such discussions already exist elsewhere on the forum.

Old 13th May 2011
  #56
Gear Nut
 

well said man.
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