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 7th May 2006
  #91
Hunter, check your PM's please.... thanks....
Old 7th May 2006
  #92
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by van Overhalen
Now that you all have your summing box you are already after the next/ better/different one.
Or you believe that you need FOUR different boxes to cover every possible need
Well I hope that at least great music will pour out of your studios...
Amen !

No worries..but some folks here do this stuff[record other peoples music] for a living and they are simply tools to make The production process slide a little easier,period

As we all know it's a game of inches,even centimeters!

Quote:
Originally Posted by van Overhalen
The summing won`t make or break the music.
It's the vibe of the music, the mood, the emotion.
Yep, Thats always a given for methumbsup


Quote:
Originally Posted by van Overhalen
INow I hope I am more of a musician than of a technician and for the musician these subtleties are nothing but a major waste of time.
We all gonna die sooner or later and I don't want
people standing at my grave reading:
Well, he never wrote a decent song but after 20 years of research he found the
best solution to summing that money can buy...
I mean how far do you guys wanna go ?

P.S.
I think I wrote this for me personally cause I feel that I waste a whole lot of time with equipment decisions, so please don't be angry...


Right on..

You and all those other musician guys go and write those great songs

..And I'll be the guy waiting at the studio ready and willing to make those great songs sound the best I can with the best possible tools at my disposal..
that's my job
Old 7th May 2006
  #93
Lives for gear
 
superburtm's Avatar
 

Hey RB thanks for the test I didn't even need to listen to know that the TLX was gonna be the bully in the schoolyard beating up on the little (PT) girls

[QUOTE=RoundBadge]No worries..but some folks here do this stuff[record other peoples music] for a living and they are simply tools to make The production process slide a little easier,period
Old 7th May 2006
  #94
Quote:
Originally Posted by krid
Yes if you add control room monitoring and others stuff the price will go up.

4600 $ is just for a straight 16x2 summing mixer : 2 TX-FX2+, 6 TX-FX2, Rack and PSU.

Well, that's a lot of money in comparison to the Nicerizer 16.
True... and as I said, I don't hear a $2000 difference if your Tonelux configuration is correct, $4000 if mine is.

Also to be honest the Tonelux mondules still kind of confuse me with their names. I assume that to do 16x2 summing I would need an SM2 and 8 MX2's but I think, based on your post above I am off base.

I really think the files posted here by Badge were as cool as they were because of the tranny at the end of the line (and I really really don't now how the modules are put together so I don't know if the MX2 or the TX2 have a tranny also?). If that is the case the you have to have the SM2 right?

I am just not sold on the idea of "bad math" and digital summing issues, I think the magic of summing solutions like the thread posted here all comes from the coloration of the analog equipment and the SM2 tranny seems like the key to this test on the Tonelux side.

Roundbadge exactly what was the configuration of the Tonelux you tried? Did I miss that in this thread?
Old 7th May 2006
  #95
Lives for gear
 
blaugruen7's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeloocproducer
Roundbadge... first off, thanks for posting these. I think someone else mentioned it, but would it be possible, while you still had the gear there, to simply run the PT mix through the TL and N16 without fully stemming them out? I think this would be a very valuable test as well.
i would like to hear this, too.
Old 7th May 2006
  #96
Lives for gear
 
heyman's Avatar
I am curious to see how the Tonelux stacks up against the likes of Geoff Tanner's Gtm-822 and I am sure that Rupert will be getting in on the action soon enough as well..

Roundbadge, after aes - maybe a stem'd version of your mix running thru the 822?

Thanks for taking the time out to a/b those boxes..!!
Old 7th May 2006
  #97
Gear Head
Mixdream

Roundbadge I was just curious if you had any experience with a MIXDREAM and if so your thoughts on it
Old 7th May 2006
  #98
Lives for gear
 

Here's my idea of hybrid.
Attached Thumbnails
Tonelux/Nicerizer test-p1030117.jpg  
Old 7th May 2006
  #99
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by not_so_new
I am just not sold on the idea of "bad math" and digital summing issues, I think the magic of summing solutions like the thread posted here all comes from the coloration of the analog equipment and the SM2 tranny seems like the key to this test on the Tonelux side.
yeah. the 'bad math' deal died (for me) awhile back, but i'm always looking for better sounds.

thanks for the test roundbadge. wow.
Old 8th May 2006
  #100
Here for the gear
 

Thanks for this test. Surprised how noticable the differences actually are. I would love it if someone did this exact clip for all 10 or so summing boxes out there now. The tonelux was the clear winner for me as well.
Old 8th May 2006
  #101
Gear Addict
 
krid's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by not_so_new
Also to be honest the Tonelux mondules still kind of confuse me with their names. I assume that to do 16x2 summing I would need an SM2 and 8 MX2's but I think, based on your post above I am off base.

I really think the files posted here by Badge were as cool as they were because of the tranny at the end of the line (and I really really don't now how the modules are put together so I don't know if the MX2 or the TX2 have a tranny also?). If that is the case the you have to have the SM2 right?
To do 16x2 summing you could use 6 TX-FX2 and 2 TX-FX2+ or 8 TX-FX2 and a SM2.
The first configuration would be cheaper but I guess that it wouldn't sound the same as the one with the SM2.

I am also wondering if Roundbadge used the SM2 for this test ?

The SM2
"The Summing inputs use the Tonelux DISCRETE op-amp for summing, then feeds the Tonelux DISCRETE output op-amp into a transformer for the summing (or ACA) outputs. The return from the ACA out comes back into a DISCRETE booster amp, the master fader and transformer for the final output stages. Both the ACA outputs and the BOOSTER outputs are transformer coupled."
Old 8th May 2006
  #102
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by krid
To do 16x2 summing you could use 6 TX-FX2 and 2 TX-FX2+ or 8 TX-FX2 and a SM2.
The first configuration would be cheaper but I guess that it wouldn't sound the same as the one with the SM2.

I am also wondering if Roundbadge used the SM2 for this test ?

The SM2
"The Summing inputs use the Tonelux DISCRETE op-amp for summing, then feeds the Tonelux DISCRETE output op-amp into a transformer for the summing (or ACA) outputs. The return from the ACA out comes back into a DISCRETE booster amp, the master fader and transformer for the final output stages. Both the ACA outputs and the BOOSTER outputs are transformer coupled."


The SM-2's second set of trannies are part of the stereo insert stage[returns] on the 2 buss
More weight to the sound?..I would think so
But really,thats Pauls call.
I haven't compared the 2 modules myself.
......
The rack here has 8 MX-2's summing into 2 FX-2+'s
and 2 mic pres and 2 eq's.
Paul custom rigged the front of the demo rack with balanced TT outs.

The rack i want will definitely have the SM2 for the master 2 buss.



I engaged all the lights for a "Vegas mode"
Attached Thumbnails
Tonelux/Nicerizer test-tlx-angle.jpg  
Old 8th May 2006
  #103
Lives for gear
 

Yo roundbadge, how are those EQ's? Also, does that mean your demo rig is only an 8X2? Thanks
Old 8th May 2006
  #104
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrogantbastard
Yo roundbadge, how are those EQ's? Also, does that mean your demo rig is only an 8X2? Thanks

Yes the Demo rig is 8X2.. the stems were only 8 channels on each unit.

The EQ's are great on everything..I want 10 of them .. NOW!
Paul got it right.

The Pre's ..I'll try on something tommorowthumbsup
Old 8th May 2006
  #105
Gear Addict
 
van Overhalen's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge

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
Reading this I start feeling sorry for all the guys who had to work all their lives with only ONE console including the guys on this forum who have bought a Daking board and now are stuck with it....
I think the absolute worst thing that could happen to a lot of people in this forum is to have unlimited access to all the gear in the world...
No excuses and nothing to dream about any more...
I guess George Martin shouldn't have done Sgt. Pepper on 4 Track.
He should have waited 10 years for 16 Track...
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
No worries..but some folks here do this stuff[record other peoples music] for a living and they are simply tools to make The production process slide a little easier,period
Now, this is a really heavy argument or no argument at all...
Others on this forum are doing this for a living as well and mix entirely ITB as you might already know...
What bothers me the most is that these statements always come across as a fact.
You absolutely NEED this and if you don't use it your work will be inferior...
If this is really only about "just gear" why does this all tend to come across like "the holy grail" ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
You and all those other musician guys go and write those great songs

..And I'll be the guy waiting at the studio ready and willing to make those great songs sound the best I can with the best possible tools at my disposal..
that's my job
That's just fine...
as long as the addiction of gear comparing and hair splitting doesn't
get in the way.

Now we all know and agree that there is some kind of addiction going on here ?
When you really mean that you want to use the best possible tools in any given situation, how do you want to achieve that ?

How many different pres do you own ?
10 ?
And how many mics ? 10 ?
So you'd have a 100 different combinations on every possible source, right ?
So do you make a hundred little test recordings and see what sounds best ?
No you don't !
And why not ?
And that's just the mics and the pres.
Don't you tell me the more and better tools you have at your disposal the easier your job gets.
You like your classic Led Zep records and you know pretty well that you already have a greater variety of gear than they had
but do you therefore enjoy your records better than theirs ?
I doubt that.

Ah, and by the way, I liked A best, too (NOT essential, though) and I still wanna hear the PT - Mix/no stems through the Nicerizer/Tonelux.

And AGAIN please don't take me too seriously, I am just playing a little devil‘s advocate here
Old 8th May 2006
  #106
Lives for gear
 
robmix's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by van Overhalen
Reading this I start feeling sorry for all the guys who had to work all their lives with only ONE console including the guys on this forum who have bought a Daking board and now are stuck with it....

Hey, I resemble that remark heh

But I'm not sure what in the hell you're talking about. Are you saying we shouldn't want better gear that makes life easier ?

As for Led Zep, they may not have had the variety of gear we have today, but I think it's safe to say that the gear they did use was all top notch.
Old 8th May 2006
  #107
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
I engaged all the lights for a "Vegas mode"
And how beautiful it looks too, I might add.

For me, the whole reason I starting looking into summers instead of mixers, was because I don't want to mix with something that can't be automated or recalled. Buying a standard Tonelux rig doesn't really resolve this issue, its just smaller and sounds great.

Personally, I would wait until the Daking EQs are available. Then I'd simply get 8 x Daking, 2 x MX2 line inputs for my N16 and either an FX2+ or an SM2 for summing the 8 eqs with the N16. Would this work? Or do I need an MX2/MP1 for every EQ module?
Old 8th May 2006
  #108
Gear Addict
 
van Overhalen's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robmix
Hey, I resemble that remark heh

But I'm not sure what in the hell you're talking about. Are you saying we shouldn't want better gear that makes life easier ?

As for Led Zep, they may not have had the variety of gear we have today, but I think it's safe to say that the gear they did use was all top notch.
Yeah it's poor you with the Daking, right ?

Well, I don't know, it's just that I feel that people get carried away with all that gear choices...
This argument about gear making live easier is always used by Computer manufacturers and we all know that there are at least two sides to this story...

Take William Wittman for instance.
He always says :

You don't NEED different pres for different sources, you need ONE good one.

He is a hell of an engineer/producer in my book but nobody wants to listen to someone with such an unpopular opinion.

He is definitely in the minority here.

In the end it is all about what you BELIEVE that YOU need to make a good record.
(Now what`s a good record anyway)
It's all about what makes YOU feel well and round and comfortable.
I just can't stand this:
If you wanna do a great record you definitely need a this and a that and if you don't use it your record will sound like crap.


So back to summing:
If you sum in PT you suck.period
Damn fool, you.
Nobody will ever buy your inferior product.
Or even worse:
The GS community will not respect you !!!

Bob Katz said that he can't tell wether a record was summed digital or analog UNLESS he could COMPARE it summed both ways.

Now that is a valid point.

Noone outside your studio will ever know how you did it.
So do as good as you can and be done with it.

Simply STOP comparing.
It's a disease

There is no such thing like "better" in art.
Is Api better than Neve
Beethoven better than Mozart
Your wife better than mine
James better than Bond
"Smoke on the water" better than "Candle in the wind"

It's really funny that a lot of people here seem to dig
the records they grew up with (60ies/70ies stuff)
and try to achieve the same quality with a totally different approach.
Many more different mics, pres, outboard, over doing this and over doing that
and then complaining about the sound of today's records.

I personally am really glad that they had limited gear choices when they did their Led Zep, Beatles and Hendrix and Motown stuff.
But yes , their gear was top notch.
Old 8th May 2006
  #109
Lives for gear
 
GYang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by van Overhalen
You don't NEED different pres for different sources, you need ONE good one.

Simply STOP comparing.
It's a disease
There is no such thing like "better" in art.
It's really funny that a lot of people here seem to dig
the records they grew up with (60ies/70ies stuff)
and try to achieve the same quality with a totally different approach.
Many more different mics, pres, outboard, over doing this and over doing that
and then complaining about the sound of today's records.

I personally am really glad that they had limited gear choices when they did their Led Zep, Beatles and Hendrix and Motown stuff.
But yes , their gear was top notch.
Your points are clear and mostly healthy.
But average gearslutz is out of balance , so therapy is this insane search of what could be better or nearer to 'perfection'.

After one night slept with idea that I could probably need what Tonelux offers (in terms of versatility) I came to (healthy) conclusion that I will stick with Nicerizer8+16+Mixdream setup that perfecty fits my working routine.
For me only valid argument could be better sonics of any other setup.
Search is long, but not endless, for me at least.
I couldn't justify purchase of AWS 900, as simply NO BETTER MIX resulted out of several projects I tried to do on it. Same as on any other console I tried. If it would be really better (sonically) and cost me 200 k+ I would pay it.
Same as analogue tape, I tried it didn't like it more than what I get out of carefully chosen digital setup and that's it.
So, I think that RB just found for himself what suits him better that before and of course spending is fully justified by that.
For some reason I am not convinced that Tonelux 8 ch sum will be apparently better than Nicerizer 8 (AGAIN, IF EVERYTHING ELSE IS SAME) and although I think that file 'A' sounds better that file 'B', but file 'B' has less bottom end than file 'C', I express hesitation to accept that everything was matched carefully.
In my at least 10 comparisons related only to drums set+bass guitar ITB vs Nicerizer, it absolutely never happened that ITB mix yields more weight or subjective perception on low frequencies. Mixdream was subjectively equal to ITB, although slightly rounder more pleasant.
roundbadge - sorry, I appreciate your efforts and really nice test, but it should be very rare occassion (one of million) when due to unexplainable reasons low frequencies has been diminished in Nicerizer's circuits.
Old 8th May 2006
  #110
Gear Addict
 
krid's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
The SM-2's second set of trannies are part of the stereo insert stage[returns] on the 2 buss
More weight to the sound?..I would think so
But really,thats Pauls call.
I haven't compared the 2 modules myself.
Perhaps Paul could explain us the sonic differences between the SM2 and FX2+?
Old 8th May 2006
  #111
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil
In what way is a summing mixer, or a modular concept mixer like the tonelux different from what you call "a real mixer"? In that pricerange? New?
IMHO they're all mixers. However, in the case of the summers and the tonelux or API offerings the focus is more on quality of sound than on an abundance in functionality.
Not that a good mixer couldn't offer both, but there are choices to be made. The size of the footprint is one in 2006. And these are not FOH consoles that have a lot but sound "good" at best. (I use one now, till the new mixer here is ready sooo... )
You are on to something, as far as the fashion thing is concerned, however I think fashion in this case follows form. Very crudely put the development IMO has come full circle. From the small 8-16 channel handbuilt mixers from the fifties to the summer studios now. I do agree SOME of the summers are a bit too expensive (eh sorry pimps heh) for what is offered. *And ppl. do tend to be blinded by those maroon knobs. ahem * However compared to big desk quality analogue offered now (API, ADT, Neve, SSL etc.), you're just buying a little part; only what you need. And high overhead cost for the manufacturer means higher purchase cost.
I just love mixing on a small, good sounding analogue console... eh summer
I agree with much of what youre saying.

Yup theyre all mixers, same as a bunch of resistors on the back of a patch bay. My point is not that these boxes are low quality or bad sounding and therefore a rip off. I dont think theyre a rip off at all, I know what this stuff costs to make. Im sure Tonelux makes great sounding gear.

What Im questioning is the logic of spending an amount of money that could easily buy a great sounding console with mic pres, eq, aux sends, 100mm faders etc on every channel and a proper master section with heaps of routing options, on a box or "system" with far less features and far less channels when youre actually trying to make it do the same job.

The job being, to mix your recordings in a flattering way that makes you and your clients happy.

Its been my experience (and this has been reinforced by the samples you posted) that simply 'summing' a few channels out of a computer with an analog mixer doesnt help the sound much at all. A little, yes, but so much less than when you mix mostly or entirely analog on a good console with good eq, that it seems crazy to spend that kind of money on the former.

My console cost me roughly what, say, a Nicerizer costs new (about US$3k..is that right?). By the time Im finished restoring it and doing the mods I want to do It will be about double that. By that time Ill have 24ch of mic pres somewhere between Neve and API and 24ch of 4 band inductive eq like a 1081 but smoother. When I mix on it it makes a REAL difference to the sound. Im talking like a fundamental step up compared to mixing ITB. You all know the kind of difference I mean.

I just dont believe mixing just some of the tracks analog, with a couple of good eqs, and all the DAW faders still active makes the same kind of difference. By all means convince me otherwise, but so far Ive not found this to be the case.

You cant tell me that of the samples posted, A was a fundamental step up in quality...
It was a little better but is it worth the $7k (was that what the system cost?)

M
Old 8th May 2006
  #112
Gear Addict
 
van Overhalen's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GYang
Your points are clear and mostly healthy.
But average gearslutz is out of balance , so therapy is this insane search of what could be better or nearer to 'perfection'.
Well, thank you very much!
After Robmix sayin' that he had no idea what the hell I was talking about you just made my day !
Quote:
Originally Posted by GYang
Search is long, but not endless, for me at least.
I think that this is it:
Are you able to draw a line at some point or will it go on forever and ever...
Being a slave to gear manufacturers and their ever new (or old) and even BETTER gear heh
Old 8th May 2006
  #113
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
Tonelux featureless?
Do your homework buddy

No resale?
I haven't seen one Tonelux product for resale yet, so ??





Yamaha?!!? you mean for the "simply because of the number of channels and amount of electronics you go through" ....youre either kidding or trolling my thread right?
whatever... thats pretty entertianing nonetheless!heh

MCI?
I know someone who has one sitting in the studio with more mantainence issues than you have posts, and when its working,it sounds just OK to me
Big pass on that one

Amek?
9098?..sure go for it,knock yourself out.. if you have the room..I sure don't



That's ok..your entitled to your own opinion..
You're in the minority here ..but thats ok too.
you go get your mixing groove on a "Real console"... an old MCI ..
have fun with that..Cool old mixers for some things.....
Me?given the choice between an old API/Neve or MCI..,thanks but no thanks..i'll pass on the latter..I've been there ,done that

PS: these files don't contain "Mixes",just some very basic raw track stems for evaluation.nothing more




So surely don't waste your money and be sure to go get yourself that beautiful Yamaha mixer and show us those "Good sounds" buddy
Go ahead,knock me out with those mixes..
Well, you have a fair point. When I said featureless and no resale, I was refering more to the other 'summing mixers' that are just that. And Im not attacking the sound or build quality of your Tonelux gear.

But you posted some sound files that were meant to show how much better a mix sounds when summed analog, in particular through the tonelux system. It made a small difference but to my ears (and a few others perhaps) not $7/10/15k worth. What did it cost again?

If you were hoping for everyone to be shocked at how much difference the analog summing boxes made and to praise your decision to buy one, you probably shouldnt have posted the files. If you wanted to hear people's opinions on the topic the files you posted and maybe even (god forbid) take on some different ideas, then good on ya!

At the moment Im confused about you motives...

As for your incredulity at my suggestions for some other good sounding and cheap (because theyre undervalued) consoles, you sound like you pay more attention to brand names than whats actually inside gear and what it sounds like.
If you knew anything about whats inside a Yamaha PM2000 (for instance) youd wonder, like I do, why theyre so god damn cheap. If it had the word Neve on it, theyd be rare as hen's teeth and youd be saving up to afford one. I wont bother going into the tech stuff, so you can believe me or not.

As for the others, theyre different flavours of good for not much money and it depends what floats your boat. But I bet I (or you) could do a better sounding mix on any of them than you could on small and limited modular mixer, even if its componants sound great.

Quote:
..I've been there ,done that
I think youve hit the nail on the head there. The grass is always greener, and always more expensive.


M
Old 8th May 2006
  #114
Lives for gear
 
heyman's Avatar
The funny thing here is that if Roundbadge played track "c" to all of us with no other tracks to compare it to, what would we be saying? I know I would still say nice job..

I think you get track "c" to the point of the others, it would just take more time and "tricks" ... ie .. eq, effects..

So, I feel that both points are valid..

Roundbadge isnt saying what is better.. We are saying what is better.

Another good point is the Flexibility and ability to grow with the tonelux. Computers, get outdated.. How much will it cost the Daw guy to upgrade his converters, switch to PCI express, upgrade his CPU, plugins etc ?

If you are happy in the box, stay in the box.. If you have the money to spend, then spend it and it will pay itself back in the future.
Old 8th May 2006
  #115
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by heyman
The funny thing here is that if Roundbadge played track "c" to all of us with no other tracks to compare it to, what would we be saying? I know I would still say nice job..

I think you get track "c" to the point of the others, it would just take more time and "tricks" ... ie .. eq, effects....... (snip).....
If I heard "c" (the ITB mix) I'd say the snare sounded flat, papery and lifeless.... the width of the mix was narrow, and overall..... it sounded like a demo.

A or B sound more like a record to me.

I also question the notion of , as you said: "...I think you get track "c" to the point of the others, it would just take more time and "tricks" ... ie .. eq, effects......."

I question this.

flat is flat.



Old 8th May 2006
  #116
Lives for gear
 
heyman's Avatar
"I also question the notion of , as you said: "...I think you get track "c" to the point of the others, it would just take more time and "tricks" ... ie .. eq, effects......."

I question this.

flat is flat. "


This is true, but there are ways to trick the ears.. Some guys can do it better than others.

The tonelux stuff is like a straight shot from point "a" to"b" ... time saving - feels right no fussing..

I am also wondering what other benfits it would have running all the individual tracks thru the tonelux during tracking and then mixing as well. You would probibly see an even bigger diffrence in sound quality..!!
Old 8th May 2006
  #117
Lives for gear
 
dave-G's Avatar
Cool song, RB -- who/what is that? In this clip, it kinda sounds a little vintage X-ish

Hearing the different flavors between the Tonelux and the Phoenix is interesting.. However... It sounds to me like the levels of elements in the mix were not 100% matched when it came to the ITB version. The obvious examples of that are the center-panned elements (vocal, kick, snare), which seem a good bit quieter in the ITB mix ...

This makes sense, because when mixing on an actual console with panpots, or in this case, in PT, there's pan-law involved and something panned to the center will be compensated -2.5dB down from where it would be if it were on a direct output feeding the Phoenix and Tonelux units.

I won't get into the fact that it should be -3dB, as that's another nit for another thread. heh

-dave
Old 8th May 2006
  #118
Dave G-

Are you suggesting that the mid signal should be up .5 Db on the ITB for this to be a fair test? I'm not really hearing that...
Old 8th May 2006
  #119
Lives for gear
 

Roundbadge,

Please let me know how those preamp sound, especially on drums. Thanks.
Old 8th May 2006
  #120
Lives for gear
 
Mind-Over-Midi's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vudoo
Roundbadge,

Please let me know how those preamp sound, especially on drums. Thanks.

Ditto.



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