The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Tonelux/Nicerizer test Dynamics Processors (HW)
Old 6th May 2006
  #31
Lives for gear
 
Ruphus's Avatar
 

Ditto here.
A, B, .... C.
The PT example seems to show one more time how just subtle sonic smudge can degrade to mediocre emotional sensation.

Ruphus
Old 6th May 2006
  #32
Lives for gear
 
Mind-Over-Midi's Avatar
 

Thanks RoundBadge for posting this little demo. I really hate going along with the crowd, but after listening to these examples I have to say A, B, C. A is wider and has more depth than B or C. I can hear more room ambience in the A example, the highs seem a little smoother, the bass a little more pronounced. A was just more pleasant.



Old 6th May 2006
  #33
Gear Addict
 
RhOdEz's Avatar
 

Allright just to differ - B , A , C here on some wharfedale small speakers here and phones .
B - guitars are sharper a bit and i like that - i'll guess it's Tonelux ?
A - bit darker tone maybe too much for this song ? Slower transients ? Nicerizer ?
C - yawn

will take it to studio and check there - thanx
Old 6th May 2006
  #34
Lives for gear
 
syra's Avatar
Yeah...C sucks...

A and B sound much better. I still prefer the darker/bassier tone of A.
Old 6th May 2006
  #35
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Ok I just listened on real speakers... not headphones....

the kick and snare are WAY better in A

and by far the worst in C

in B they are ok quite good.... but I prefer the snare in A the most.....

I hope A is the Phoenix..... but I wonder!

WHEN DO WE FIND OUT?

Old 6th May 2006
  #36
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

The next morning, sober, I'm liking A. Sounds like my Niicerizer. (And not so muddy when I point the little round Apple speaker toward me instead of burying it behind the printer.)

How do you figure $7,000? Nicer plus converters? Or are you talking about the difference between Nicer and Tonelux. Surely that is huge.

-R
Old 6th May 2006
  #37
Lives for gear
 
GYang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
The next morning, sober, I'm liking A. Sounds like my Niicerizer. (And not so muddy when I point the little round Apple speaker toward me instead of burying it behind the printer.)

How do you figure $7,000? Nicer plus converters? Or are you talking about the difference between Nicer and Tonelux. Surely that is huge.

-R
I recently tried Nicerizer 8 (as addition to Nicerizer 16), that really adds mojo to tracks and sum, but haven't try Tonelux.
What we miss now is Chandler MM vs Nicerizer16?
Old 6th May 2006
  #38
Gear Addict
 
Wiggum, Ralph's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GYang
I recently tried Nicerizer 8 (as addition to Nicerizer 16)...
GYang, I know the difference of layout between the 8 & 16, but is there any sonic benefit of summing 16 channels vs 8, atleast when comparing the two?
Old 6th May 2006
  #39
Lives for gear
 
Faderjockey's Avatar
 

Another voter for A
Old 6th May 2006
  #40
Lives for gear
 
GYang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggum, Ralph
GYang, I know the difference of layout between the 8 & 16, but is there any sonic benefit of summing 16 channels vs 8, atleast when comparing the two?
Actually I didn't attempt to do 8 vs. 16 ch summing comparison, I think 16 is more flexible and better. Actually I do around 20-24 ch summing (Mixdream and Nicerizer 16), plus Nicerizer 8 as line amp (adding more weight to some tracks) and Lexicon reverb sub-mix route.
Same 8 channels through Nicerizer 8 has slightly more analogue warmth than through Nicerizer 16 (probably due to transformers on all input channels on Nicerizer 8).
There is no way back after you heard fine tuned good analogue summing setup with nice processing. Now I can say - IT IS NIGHT AND DAY diffference between finished ITB vs OTB mix. Always, on every material.
Even slightest shadow of doubt disappeared, so now creative forces are focused to find out which combination yields the most.
Old 6th May 2006
  #41
Lives for gear
 
drmmrboy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
Andrew ,don't forget to check clip "C" as well {The PT ITB} for referencestike
Taking them to my room in a few hrs, but wanted to ask; is C the original mix? Did you get it together ITB, then run stems? I'm asking because no matter what we say here, your the man at the con. Your running through these boxes for their sonic niceities, and your going to have to adjust to your taste.

A few have said they miss the bass in "B". If you adjust the levels for B, is it suddenly beating out A? I would mix a few tunes through them, then see what I dis/liked about them. That's just me, and I'm sure you know what you need to do to make your decision.

I wish I had to make a decision like this one.
Insted, for lunch in Philly, I have to decide, "with, or without?" You Philly guys know what I mean, and I want "with!" thumbsup
Old 6th May 2006
  #42
Gear Addict
 
JohnRodd's Avatar
 

So... I just downloaded the three clips and compared.

I thought A sounded better, then B, and in third place...... C

This seems to be a trend!



Just for fun I had my wife (who does not have trained ears, and does nothing related to music or sound for a living) come to my studio and listen. I didn't tell her what the differences were, or why.....

She very quickly preferred A, with B as a close second, and C as a distant third.

I guess I married the right woman!

Old 6th May 2006
  #43
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by drmmrboy
A few have said they miss the bass in "B". If you adjust the levels for B, is it suddenly beating out A? I would mix a few tunes through them, then see what I dis/liked about them. That's just me, and I'm sure you know what you need to do to make your decision.
If I had more time with the TLX rig,I would most certainly mix into each rig compensating for each systems sonic differences to get the best end result
Yes of course, every piece of gear has it's own sweet spot..
youre gonna hit an SSL differently than say an 8068 Neve
same with comps .EQ's etc

But given my time constraints, it is interesting and helpful to hear what each setup does relative to each other on the same excact session stems..
the levels are the same from the PT mix to the 2 OTB stem versions
nothing was touched..I was very careful about that.

If i had my way[$$$] ,Like having a bunch of different pre's and Mic's ..
It'd be great to have 4 or five different flavors of high end console..
..that would be damn coolstike

If i could afford to keep both of these boxes ,I would..
..but one has to go..
.that's the 5 thousand dollar question innit??
Old 6th May 2006
  #44
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman

How do you figure $7,000? Nicer plus converters? Or are you talking about the difference between Nicer and Tonelux. Surely that is huge.

-R
To clarify ,The startup TLX system I'm looking at is in the 7 G's range vs. just PT,no mixer.
Because out of sheer frustration, I've condsidered bailing on the whole summing deal a couple of times.

The TLX stuff opens the possibilities as far a a real mixer solution for what I do..
hence the demo..
i'm at the point of justifying the investment into a new more expensive rig,,
Story of my life
Old 6th May 2006
  #45
Lives for gear
 
AdamJay's Avatar
 

i prefered mix A

so which is it?!?!
Old 6th May 2006
  #46
Lives for gear
 
robot gigante's Avatar
B and A were pretty close- I liked the low mids and bass of A and the upper mids and transients of B. I'm a low end freak so I would pick A.

C- not even close to the other two.
Old 6th May 2006
  #47
Lives for gear
 
midnightsun's Avatar
 

Wow

RoundBadge is commended for such a great job setting up a comparison for us all. I loaded the files into Logic and had a good time A/Bing. First of all I liked the "music" on all three examples-- good tracking & mixing. You communicated damn good sound in all three examples. Rest assured your success will not be made or broken by any of the three methods.

I expect that I/we could be tripped up by your reshuffling the deck a few times. I wouldn't want to embarrass myself.

The following are my bias for a strong Tonelux vote
1. Channel inserts, aux sends, and stereo bux inserts give one tremendous flexibility to strap in his favorite outboard toys.
2. Well thought out monitoring/cue possibilities
3. Stereo mix can be output to numerous recorders simultaneously
4. If you want the Tonelux EQ and Preamps you will need to put them into a V-rack anyway
5. As your system grows (this is a given with a GS) you won't end up with an ill-assortment or collection of pieces that sort of integrate.
6. As I work with my Tonelux, real time or in the moment, I like the sounds I get and that makes me happy and feel creative.
7. I personally feel that where I spend my nickle in this world is my only true "vote" for what is right. I sure as hell don't want to cast too many votes for major companies that demonstrate time and time again that they don't give a **** about individuals. Tonelux, Nicerizer, and other boutique companies will get my vote.

I am a scientist and can say that none of this is science but that doesn't negate the value of good comparisons, not to mention good music and mixing. As all of the variables are held as constant as possible and performance is evaluated--- that is similar to running the BMW, Mercedez, and Ford PowerStroke at 2800 RPM and then judging the winner based on performance. The road, the ride, the load, and the comfort all come into play. Life is too short.... I'd go with the one that brings you the greatest joy and better facilitates your creativity.
Old 7th May 2006
  #48
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Thanks for the kind words midnight..
I'll do a reveal when I get home later tonight
Babysitting my two wild nephews
Old 7th May 2006
  #49
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
Thanks for the kind words midnight..
I'll do a reveal when I get home later tonight
Babysitting my two wild nephews
Well please do because I really would like to know (I am going to pull the trigger on my own N16 this week I hope if my tax check comes back).

Oh and seeing as how I got here before you did post results I guess I should add my 2 cents......

I took all of these and put them in Samplitude (had to install Quicktime to get the files to import, maybe .WAV next time? heh). Anyway I closed my eyes and moved the tracks around until I was sure that I had no clue which was which, pretty blind test but not prefect.

I sound like I am joining in here but I gotta say, A, B then C a distant 3rd (in fairness not all that distant but you get the idea).

Nice track and mix by the way!

A and B are close enough in my book so the real question becomes can you afford the cash for the Tonelux or can you live with the limitations and the "closed" system of the N16? Really I think the A and B mixes were just splitting hairs here, both are strong and both would put a smile on my face.

Thanks for the test..... oh and when you do reveal let us know what you think of the three.
Old 7th May 2006
  #50
Gear Addict
 
MrChang's Avatar
 

The song's cool; the mix is good. Nice stuff.

B>A>C

If the choice is A or B, and you already own one of them, I'd just keep that one. I know, how unslutty.

B, which just strikes me a shade, just a shade, brighter than the other 2, has the most clarity and openness around each element in the mix. I like that. Especially the gtr, vox and snare. A is really close on providing that, but slightly darker sounding.

C's mix seems to close up when the vocals are active, which doesn't happen in the other 2.

For what it's worth...
Old 7th May 2006
  #51
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

I just played this for my 9 year old daughter. She immediately preferred C, said it had more bass and an extra guitar. There was no dissuading her.

-R
Old 7th May 2006
  #52
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
I just played this for my 9 year old daughter. She immediately preferred C, said it had more bass and an extra guitar. There was no dissuading her.

-R

heh heh heh
The new generation of listeners!
Old 7th May 2006
  #53
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrChang
The song's cool; the mix is good. Nice stuff.

B>A>C

..

Cool thanks..although the song is not remotetly mixed..
Your just hearing the raw basic tracks of a band I'm recording right now with the faders thrown up for rough monitor levels,The "mixing" part won't happen for a couple weeksstike
Although the vocals are keepers give or take a little comping[No Auto Tune!]and the default TL Space med verb for ambience to the vox stems.
Old 7th May 2006
  #54
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
heh heh heh
So I see you're home. Which is which then?

-R
Old 7th May 2006
  #55
Lives for gear
 
Mind-Over-Midi's Avatar
 

?????????????????????????????????


Old 7th May 2006
  #56
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
So I see you're home. Which is which then?

-R

Not home .but the kids are finally asleep!



Well,here ya' go gents...



Clip "A" - Tonelux
.........

Clip "B" - N-16
.........

Clip "C' - really is PT ITB
Old 7th May 2006
  #57
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
Not home .but the kids are finally asleep!



Well,here ya' go gents...



Clip "A" - Tonelux
.........

Clip "B" - N-16
.........

Clip "C' - really is PT ITB
that blows my mind. I could swear A was the Nicerizer. In the vast scheme of things maybe the box has more clarity and detail than I give it credit for.

What do you think of the Tonelux now?

-R

-R
Old 7th May 2006
  #58
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
[QUOTE=not_so_new]A and B are close enough in my book so the real question becomes can you afford the cash for the Tonelux or can you live with the limitations and the "closed" system of the N16? Really I think the A and B mixes were just splitting hairs here, both are strong and both would put a smile on my face.
QUOTE]


Well I'm digging A the most as well..
I could still easily work with the N-16's sonics..I think it's a great sounding box!
And believe me, I've tried a bunch in the past year~
The N-16 pretty much came out on top after trying the Chandler,API,Dangerous,Fulcrom earlier this year.

..I just hate the limitations of a summing only solution.
Completely inflexible.

What I really want is a small modular mixer with stellar sonics that I can take to other Daw based studios and work with confidence.

So far the The TLX stuff fits the bill.. .. really impressed me so far sonically and feature wise..
No one is doing the high end mixer thing quite this way.

Also FWITW,the TLX rig has quite a bit more gain on the outputs than the N-16.
The N-16 had to seriously push into the red to match the Tonelux' output..
[don't worry, the N-16 wasn't pushed into that for the stems]

Thanks for the participation guysthumbsup

later for nowthumbsup
Old 7th May 2006
  #59
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
Well,here ya' go gents...



Clip "A" - Tonelux
.........

Clip "B" - N-16
.........

Clip "C' - really is PT ITB
gulp... i was sure A was the nicerizer. oh ****e.
Old 7th May 2006
  #60
Lives for gear
 
GYang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge

I could still easily work with the N-16's sonics..I think it's a great sounding box!
And believe me, I've tried a bunch in the past year~
The N-16 pretty much came out on top after trying the Chandler,API,Dangerous,Fulcrom earlier this year.

..I just hate the limitations of a summing only solution.
Completely inflexible.

What I really want is a small modular mixer with stellar sonics that I can take to other Daw based studios and work with confidence.

So far the The TLX stuff fits the bill.. .. really impressed me so far sonically and feature wise..
No one is doing the high end mixer thing quite this way.
Really appreciate this test.
I dig Nicerizer indeed, but if levels were properly matched, Tonelux sum is couple of shadows better on this particular song at least and that's what high-end is all about.
I was about preparing grand audition of Chandler vs Nicerizer (in colour department, as in clean Mixdream keeps my favorite position).
Seems that you've tried Chandler vs Nicerizer, what was conclusion?
Also, do you have impression that due to summing via Tonelux extra weight in bottom end, as well as, space in mid and high-end appears in other materials that you've tried?

My preliminary conclusion:

7 k over PT definitely worth (sonics and added versatility)
4 k over N-16 needs more elaboration in terms of improved sonics
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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
jayjay / High end
11

Forum Jump
Forum Jump