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 9th May 2006
  #151
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11413
I didnt hear enough of a difference between A/B to spend the extra coin... and with that source material I dont think you can tell a whole lot... I'm not crazy about either mix in general at all.

FWIW,They aren't remotely mixes..simply faders up on some dry basic tracks stemmed to 8 channels of a session I'm working on this week,with the exception of a little TL verb on the vox stem.
I had a demo rack here for 2 days.. This is only for a quick comparison ..nothing more nothing less ..
and the PT bounce was an afterthought.

if some people got something out of it ,Great!
If not..Oh wellheh
Old 9th May 2006
  #152
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
FWIW,They aren't remotely mixes..simply faders up on some dry basic tracks stemmed to 8 channels of a session I'm working on this week,with the exception of a little TL verb on the vox stem.
I had a demo rack here for 2 days.. This is only for a quick comparison ..nothing more nothing less ..
and the PT bounce was an afterthought.

if some people got something out of it ,Great!
If not..Oh wellheh

I got lots out of it

You rock

keep it up!

best

Old 9th May 2006
  #153
Lives for gear
 
pigpen's Avatar
 

Yea Hunter man...thanks...I dig that you are digging it. Not to mention that one of the ideas behind the summing is to have the ability to do at least 16 making even a bigger diff....I will let you know how the Shadow Hills Deluxe Summing Mixer weighs in versus the various attempts with a Dangerous 2 Bus....if it ever gets here!

Thanks for the post
Old 9th May 2006
  #154
Rep
Lives for gear
 
Rep's Avatar
C was cleaner and had More defined base,
the Weird phase made the other sound wider, c could be made to be like that
A/B was missing a Hole in the center if the Soundstage...
Same as on UBIKs Sum tests , when I first started noticing this,
.... just as Lucey said .... Transients are gone.

Dang it ... I really wanted to like it...
I guess it is time for me to go all in the Box, sell all the summing stuff,
this just keeps coming up.
...and I keep seeing that there is No difference other then Phase and distortion ,
that we deem "better"...
Old 9th May 2006
  #155
I think once the word is out as to which is which, the comparison is kind of over.
Old 9th May 2006
  #156
Lives for gear
 
TheSweetener's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
There is something weird about the panning, however. In my studio I switch between PT and Nicerizer all the time, and although I hear a difference it's nothing like the drastic difference in these mixes. I just don't think the PT mix is panned as wide, or else there's some weird phase thing happening, particularly on the Tonelux, that is throwing the image wider. What are the D/A's here?

-R
Exactly!

I can't believe the wideness of the two analog mixes have only to do with the summing. There must be a difference in panning. I've heard and done some comparison tests and NEVER experienced a difference as HUGE as in this test.

Of course I hear the ifferences in tone and loudness, but as RKrizman said you should really recheck the panning issue!

Thanks for test though!thumbsup
Old 9th May 2006
  #157
Gear Addict
 
van Overhalen's Avatar
 

Hey Roundbage,

you're great.

Thanks for your kind words and great reaction!
Old 9th May 2006
  #158
Gear Addict
 
van Overhalen's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doug_hti
Michael,

I don't know why I'm biting onto this, but....It seems you are missing the point to some extent.

I don't think anyone (I'm almostly 100% sure Roundbadge) is saying they "NEED" product A or product B or the combination.

It's a matter of choosing equipment that provides the best "value" for the given jobs that need to be done trying to achieve the highest quality possible.

Value in this instance carries a lot more categories than sound choices or sound quality. Value encompasses at least:
-sound quality
-sound tone
-flexibility and patching
-interface
-workflow
-cost
-size
-weight
-heat
-maintenance
-portability
-expansion
-support

There are a lot of people that have been "making records" for a long long time and are finding that it's next to impossible to be able to work in a $2k+(USD) a day room everyday with great maitenance, assistants, and a wonderful LF automated console. The average budgets just don't support it any more, even major label budgets. I know a handful of mix engineers that I've watched go through that transition (and continue to do so) of only working in big rooms (for their entire career) and move to a itb setup in their own project studio....believing they can pull off the same results... It's not easy, their results are NOT the same.

So finding a valid solution to deal with this issue is very real. For the people that have the mentality and the skill and are pleased with to work "in the box", great for them, it's a lot less painful. I believe there are some programmer/remixer/editor types that can really do a lot of damage working almost strictly itb.

For me (leaving the otb or itb solutions/problems/summing aside) it's really more about thinking and feeling a thought and immediately putting a hand there to turn a knob...reacting to a feeling. I know for a fact I eq and compress differently when I use a real compressor/eq verses tweaking plugs, even if the eq/comp is way behind me or to the side. I LOOK at meters and settings WAY too much setting plugins. It's also much more difficult to try things. Maybe an Icon is helping that problem (i'm sure it is).

And I'm really tired of people saying something "sounds fine". Is there some magic threshold of saying something "sounds fine" and the search for taking something to the next level diminished? I hear people say it "sounds fine" giving me the feeling that there is absolutely no need to try and make it better. Most of the professional people that I work with on a regular basis that get into the "sounding fine" statements typically means that they have retained as much of the budget and time for their mortgage payment and vacations as possible. Their talent keeps them busy, but their mediocre investment keeps them from the top top tier and they wonder why they haven't gotten the "big" break.

It's not a matter of "fooling"anyone because they won't know the difference. Most people aren't making these choices to tell their clients. Most clients could care less about how it was done, they just "want it done"
Fair enough !

I think me posting here was not about Roundbage or anyone specific but just
a reaction to the feel of this place in general.

See, there are all these comments about:

(in a dark god like voice):

"THIS IS THE HI END" and

"I DO THIS FOR A LIVING"

I got the impression that there are two types of really pro engineers around here.

I will name Bob Olhsson and William Wittman who are very easy and laid back.
They use hi end equipment and do their hi end jobs, you know who they are and what they've done and every now and then they pour words of wisdom or a little advice over the crowd and it is like:

Ah, that's the way they do it !

On the other hand is the - what I would call it - "rich kids " - fraction
and they always go:

I have a this and a that and I still need a this and a that and I' ll use my $4500
compressor mostly for triangle and fart-stuff.

I guess I just got a little bit tired about that and I apologise for trolling Roundbage's thread !

AND as I will always point out:

I LOVE great gear, I am absolutely in the same boat, I just want to keep it healthy and in good balance.

I WANT TONELUX !!!heh
Old 9th May 2006
  #159
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSweetener
Exactly!

I can't believe the wideness of the two analog mixes have only to do with the summing. There must be a difference in panning. I've heard and done some comparison tests and NEVER experienced a difference as HUGE as in this test.

Of course I hear the ifferences in tone and loudness, but as RKrizman said you should really recheck the panning issue!

Thanks for test though!thumbsup

Yeah.. the PT mix was kinda an afterthought at 2 in the morning..

I'll definitely recheck it tommorow when I have time
Old 9th May 2006
  #160
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by van Overhalen
Hey Roundbage,

you're great.

Thanks for your kind words and great reaction!

Thanks for the healthy debate
Old 9th May 2006
  #161
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by u b i k
i reckon they're cheap because the pre's are mediocre, the eq's are inflexible and edgy, they're not terribly reliable, and the whole kaboodle is noisy to a fault.

fwiw, i mix on an old sound workshop 1280b, so i'm no stranger to funky old gear that can be had on the cheap. but the sound workshop sounds like a big desk loaded with iron, and easily holds its own with a nicerizer and a studer half track. i've yet to meet a yamaha or amek that i can say the same of. they're great, they're analog, they're leagues better than a straight daw, but they're not blissful.

where to draw the line on the investment/return graph is an intensely personal choice. if $10k seems absurd to you to get the kinds of sonics at stake then so be it, but there are precious few paths to that last 5% and the road is not paved with the consoles you've mentioned --- well, except for some mci's, the maintenance of which i wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.

rigs like the tonelux yield a tone and a functionality that, once upon a time, used to cost in excess of $100,000 to get, and were in the hands of an elite few. so what you see as excess, i see as progress. god knows, in this age with the dominance of the PT/digital paradigm, audio needs all the help it can get.


gregoire
del ubik

Either youre talking about a different console, or the one you used is in a poor state of repair. Or maybe you and I just have a very different idea of what 'good' is.

The mic pre is a transformer + discrete opamp (990 pinout) type, similar to API, Tonelux, QuadEight, John Hardy etc. To me it sounds smooth but still pretty tight in the low end. Certainly NOT noisey, in fact theyre the second quietest pres I own.

The eq as standard is half great and half rather average. The high and low shelves sound great to me, very gentle and smooth. The mids are way too narrow but weve modded mine (replacing the gyrators with inductors) and changed the standard freqs to more useful ones. Actually as standard the eq topology is similar to the Tonelux eq, using IC gyrators (they look like OPA2604s perhaps?). The results are an eq quite close to a 1081 but I think a little smoother and with fewer freqs.

Thats great you have a Sound Workshop console, Ive not ever seen one or seen a circuit so I dont know what theyre like but Ill take your word that theyre nice.

I agree with you about the choice of where to draw the line with cost/performance. $10000 (or $100000 or whatever) for a console isnt rediculous at all to me, I know what this stuff costs to make. But $10000 for an 8 or 16ch mixer with a couple of eqs and a few other modules just to let you have analog summing, which (based on these examples) kinda sorta improves the sound, a bit, depending on how the pan law on PT was set (which we dont know)...?

I dont understand it. If it floats your boat then I dont have any illusions Ill convince you otherwise via the inter-not. But I can give my opinion, which is precisely what these forums are for.


BTW Id love to show you what the PM2k sounds like, but Im not quite sure how do to it in a meaningful way.


M
Old 9th May 2006
  #162
Big thumbsup for the test. The number of views this thread has had already speaks for itself.

I haven't had the chance to monitor on a decent set up yet, so the jury still out here. I could hear more bass, but I don't know if that makes it better.

Paul, any idea when the Dakings will be available? And would I need an MX2 for each EQ module to be able to sum them with an SM2 or FX2+, or could the EQs feed directly to the summing buss?
Old 9th May 2006
  #163
Lives for gear
 
heyman's Avatar
Jeez... lets take this for what it was worth.. The vast majority picked the tonelux.
Roundbadge went in, took the time out and gave us a snippet of what is possible - as these were stems. How about Tracking and mixing thru these things?

This is a great time --- where companies are starting to step up and meet the demands of audio guys that want a world class sound and dont want to shell out 50- 100,000 dollars for a console. I love the concept of buy what you need now and then add on later.. how many times has someone gone out and bought something only to turn around and sell it a year later because they outgrew it or
it was hard to work with?

"Daws" are great and have their place.. Just like tape. One cannot replace the other. They are all tools of the trade. This is Gear "Slutz" !!

Give me the best tools for the job, expensive/cheap, I dont care.. !!

Thanks again for listening..
Old 9th May 2006
  #164
RoundBadge, a question please; given that the Tonelux and Nicerizer have a definitive (flattering) tone, are you comfortable with mixing everything through one of these? How about using it for submixes, for instance like guitar and drums only and then route straight ITB stems parallel in the master unit?

(I don't know if this is possible, don't know enough of the Tonelux IMO it could open up different possibillities, especially with the flexible concept.) I have a simular idea, to use coloured bussing and mastering stages, with cleaner foldbacks on the master , now I'm figuring out a routing setup myself, it has to be perfect, so therefore the question.

Moogus, how about posting a ITB and PM2k sample? heh (if that is not too OT!!)

Last edited by Reptil; 9th May 2006 at 07:20 PM..
Old 9th May 2006
  #165
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToneLux
I think once the word is out as to which is which, the comparison is kind of over.
Why is that? They weren't level matched or pan-matched so it never was strictly speaking a valid blind comparison. Even knowing which is which you can listen, hear what you like, express an opinion. (My 9 year old daughter knew C had more bass, and it certainly didn't matter if she knew it was Pro Tools or not.)

I personally found the Tonelux rack interesting enough to ask Gil if I can borrow that rack, which is really about all you can ask for from something like this. Doesn't matter that I knew which was which when I formed that opinion.

So can I check it out a few days or not?

-R
Old 9th May 2006
  #166
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
Why is that? They weren't level matched or pan-matched so it never was strictly speaking a valid blind comparison. Even knowing which is which you can listen, hear what you like, express an opinion. (My 9 year old daughter knew C had more bass, and it certainly didn't matter if she knew it was Pro Tools or not.)

I personally found the Tonelux rack interesting enough to ask Gil if I can borrow that rack, which is really about all you can ask for from something like this. Doesn't matter that I knew which was which when I formed that opinion.

So can I check it out a few days or not?

-R
Hey Rick ,the rack is at Vintage King / LA..
let me know if you need contact info
Old 9th May 2006
  #167
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil
RoundBadge, a question please; given that the Tonelux and Nicerizer have a definitive (flattering) tone, are you comfortable with mixing everything through one of these? How about using it for submixes, for instance like guitar and drums only and then route straight ITB stems parallel in the master unit?
I'm not exactly sure what you're saying, but I think that's what I do. I have my converter outputs patched into the N-16, and then return it's stereo output into Protools, where I further process it and then bounce to disc. On every track, with a single clik, I have the option of send that track to one of the N-16 inputs or keep it within PT and internally buss it to the final mix. So yes, perhaps just drums and power chords to the N-16 and piano and rhythm guitar stays in the box. Or everything to the N-16. Or whatever. It's a very flexible way to work.

Often I'll use the N-16 as the receiver/mixer for any track that I send out for analog processing. The other tracks may or may not go there. Sometimes the clarity is preferable to the vibe in terms of what's required in the final mix. Just liking picking different preamps or mics.

In my studio the real mixing console is Pro Tools iself, controlled by a C24. I simply outsource a certain amount of the summing to the N-16, as needed.

-R
Old 9th May 2006
  #168
yes, that is what I mean.
I'm struggeling a bit with creating a routing and a workflow to make the whole process a bit more faster, but still keep tonal options open.
A coloured summer IMO is ideal for a submix. Both examples A and B sound like they should, on this song for instance. So nothing wrong with the subjective tone there. (and of course the mix) Keeps the audio path nice and short too, compared to a big loaded desk for this purpose.

But then the summing ITB (Logic) is missing some magic, so in that aspect I'd go for a transparent analogue mastering section where all the coloured/clean stems come together. and then back ITB and burn to disk. So I need two stages of summing. Or a desk with different coloured busses and a transparent clean master section?? Or just be content with ITB as a master and one submix option. Maybe I'm nitpicking here.

sorry for rambling, just thinking aloud, the idea of flexible (where to put in the chain) summing busses is just very appealing.

Last edited by Reptil; 9th May 2006 at 09:02 PM..
Old 9th May 2006
  #169
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil
RoundBadge, a question please; given that the Tonelux and Nicerizer have a definitive (flattering) tone, are you comfortable with mixing everything through one of these? How about using it for submixes, for instance like guitar and drums only and then route straight ITB stems parallel in the master unit?

(I don't know if this is possible, don't know enough of the Tonelux IMO it could open up different possibillities, especially with the flexible concept.) I have a simular idea, to use coloured bussing and mastering stages, with cleaner foldbacks on the master , now I'm figuring out a routing setup myself, it has to be perfect, so therefore the question.

Moogus, how about posting a ITB and PM2k sample? heh (if that is not too OT!!)
In one word ..Yes...
I'd be fine mixing on just one or the other for everything..nooo prob.
I don't know what style music you're up to ,but they both will work for my needs and then some..
The Tonelux option is great for my needs not only because I feel Paul really knows what he's doing ,but also for the fact that it's completely modular with so many expansion options:Pre's,EQ's,Comps,Automation,metering,console frames,third party involvement,etc..
These types of possibilities excite me.. ..
At this point,nobody else is doing it quite this way.
Did i also mention that the stuff is built as well as any high end stuff I've encountered,the switches feel and look great. the v-rack chassis is about the thickest guage steel I've seen on any audio gear[Like Geoff Tanners stuff,he doesn't skimp on the metalwork either.]
..seriously built to last..
It may seem trivial to some,but these details make a huge difference,especially for location recording/travelling..which I do quite a bit of.
The pictures don't really translate..the stuff is rock f*cking solid!
Old 9th May 2006
  #170
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil
Moogus, how about posting a ITB and PM2k sample? heh (if that is not too OT!!)
Yeah,bust em' out baby! heh

Last edited by RoundBadge; 9th May 2006 at 08:51 PM..
Old 9th May 2006
  #171
thumbsup
Flexible is a must for me, tonal as well as patch/configuaration options. Not just when buying but also as a system. A modular setup therefore is indeed exiting. Because I work on a number of different styles from clean jazz, to heavy processed stuff. To be honest, I'm still in the process of finding my "signature" tone, but I'm getting there rapidly.

I found a simular concept in old german broadcast units of the "Danner" type. modular for a completely different reason. ("hot" replacement, during broadcast) The tonal qualities of these units, generally speaking is, if I can judge from my limited experience, very different from american systems, like the tonelux (or the nicerizer for that matter). Guts vs. clean and detailed. I don't think a ballsy system only fits "rock" styles. FWIW

Nice. I'd love to hear one in the flesh.
Old 9th May 2006
  #172
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil
I'm still in the process of finding my "signature" tone, but I'm getting there rapidly.
I hear ya..
But your signature style really comes from how YOU implement the tools at hand in a given situation..
i know guys who can record/mix pretty much anywhere[within reason] and it still sounds like thier workthumbsup
Old 9th May 2006
  #173
Lives for gear
 
superburtm's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge
I hear ya..

i know guys who can record/mix pretty much anywhere[within reason] and it still sounds like thier workthumbsup

That's what's all about..skillZ
Old 9th May 2006
  #174
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by superburtm
That's what's all about..skillZ
Yeah but are you taking the picture with an old 110 or crappy polaroid camera, or with a pro 35 mm Nikon or Canon, with a good prime lens on it?

Old 9th May 2006
  #175
yes very very true. Skills. with capital S.

I'm moving up from funky old live mixers and project studio stuff (and some great synths) to a setup with slightly more headroom, clarity, balls etc.
So allowing the luxury to pick one or two cherries out of the gear basket. heh
expanding the limits within I work. making my life easier, when going for that elusive sound. learning some skills by practice and learning.
Your samples sparked my interest: The concept of "just do something nice with it", in this thread is meaningful to me. i could imagine a killer funk bassline through the tonelux. that is why I chose music. (or music chose me) It is not sterile, but a language of emotion, and to get that across. If ppl. are not able to imagine the tones posted, on their own productions, but want to rely on strict conventions, that is their thing, not mine. Maybe I'll keep spending the rest of my life looking for "that" sound. It does not matter. I'd rather do it with a few nice machines. It's the smile during the journey, right?

sorry for rambling (again)

Last edited by Reptil; 9th May 2006 at 10:32 PM..
Old 10th May 2006
  #176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixerguy
Yeah but are you taking the picture with an old 110 or crappy polaroid camera, or with a pro 35 mm Nikon or Canon, with a good prime lens on it?

Depends. If success is determined solely by its approximation to the real thing, then maybe you have a point. But if there is something else, something much more subjective and elusive, then it doesn't matter what kind of camera you use so long as you capture it.
Old 10th May 2006
  #177
Lives for gear
 
superburtm's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mixerguy
Yeah but are you taking the picture with an old 110 or crappy polaroid camera, or with a pro 35 mm Nikon or Canon, with a good prime lens on it?


does it matter if you don't know what to do with it?
Old 10th May 2006
  #178
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by superburtm
does it matter if you don't know what to do with it?
In one way..... a bad camera will limit how technically 'good' the end result can look.... not in an artistic way, but resolution, etc

Old 10th May 2006
  #179
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil
yes very very true. Skills. with capital S.

I'm moving up from funky old live mixers and project studio stuff (and some great synths) to a setup with slightly more headroom, clarity, balls etc.
So allowing the luxury to pick one or two cherries out of the gear basket. heh
expanding the limits within I work. making my life easier, when going for that elusive sound. learning some skills by practice and learning.
Your samples sparked my interest: The concept of "just do something nice with it", in this thread is meaningful to me. i could imagine a killer funk bassline through the tonelux. that is why I chose music. (or music chose me) It is not sterile, but a language of emotion, and to get that across. If ppl. are not able to imagine the tones posted, on their own productions, but want to rely on strict conventions, that is their thing, not mine. Maybe I'll keep spending the rest of my life looking for "that" sound. It does not matter. I'd rather do it with a few nice machines. It's the smile during the journey, right?

sorry for rambling (again)

I understand..

..You sound like the type of guy who might eventually benefit from an analog tape machineheh
Old 10th May 2006
  #180
Gear Head
Thanks for doing this Roundbadge. I got a lot out of it.
Mark Miller
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