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
Nicerizer/Tonelux/ITB level-matched comp Studio Monitors
Old 9th June 2006
  #121
Gear Maniac
 
Anonymatt's Avatar
 

You won't believe this. In my earlier post (last night), I mentioned dreams.

This morning I woke up fresh from a dream about this thread. RKrizman (you're in my dreams, sorry buddy) posted the answer key--and they were all the same file with different names. He was just trying to get a rise out of us.

You wouldn't do that, would you?
Old 9th June 2006
  #122
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymatt
they were all the same file with different names. He was just trying to get a rise out of us.

You wouldn't do that, would you?
No. But somebody should.

I'll post the results later today.

-R
Old 9th June 2006
  #123
Lives for gear
 
GYang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
No. But somebody should.

-R
Due to inconsistency of results.heh
Some are 100% opposite.

More comparisons are necessary, we had one kindly offered by RoundBadge that showed apparent difference, but I think that something was wrong with levels .
Here we have small difference, that is much lower than that I actually hear when compare ITB vs OTB mixes (it could be subjective due to fact that I don't do careful level matching, just try to get maximum out of both mixes and than in 99% of cases OTB wins, although in 30-50% ITB is almost as good as OTB and only due to preferable analogue processing I still keep summing OTB).
Old 9th June 2006
  #124
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GYang
Due to inconsistency of results.heh
Some are 100% opposite.

More comparisons are necessary, we had one kindly offered by RoundBadge that showed apparent difference, but I think that something was wrong with levels .
Here we have small difference, that is much lower than that I actually hear when compare ITB vs OTB mixes (it could be subjective due to fact that I don't do careful level matching, just try to get maximum out of both mixes and than in 99% of cases OTB wins, although in 30-50% ITB is almost as good as OTB and only due to preferable analogue processing I still keep summing OTB).
The differences are more apparent when you're actually working with the stuff, when you actually have a vested interest in the minutae that you are focusing on and which matters at the time.

-R
Old 9th June 2006
  #125
Gear Addict
 
krid's Avatar
 

So in the end which one did you prefer : Tonelux, Nicerizer, ITB ?
Old 9th June 2006
  #126
Lives for gear
 
abit's Avatar
 

What would be also interesting I think,
if we can compare the same material 100% ITB mixed,
where soft EQ, compression, FX were used.
And than mix OTB.. with summing devise and outboard toyz.
Old 9th June 2006
  #127
Lives for gear
 
GYang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by abit
What would be also interesting I think,
if we can compare the same material 100% ITB mixed,
where soft EQ, compression, FX were used.
And than mix OTB.. with summing devise and outboard toyz.
That's a whole different subject.
I can easily agree that clean OTB summers in many cases sound pretty similar to ITB summing engine and when all is carefully matched we have even difficulties to differentiate ITB from Tonelux or Nicerizer.
But from 100% down to earth daily practice, when you add some 10-15 top quality outboards and their processing is summed in analogue (assuming that you know well what you are doing), in vast majority of mixes result OTB will sound nicer/better/more pleasant to any human with more-less healthy hearing.
Old 9th June 2006
  #128
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GYang
But from 100% down to earth daily practice, when you add some 10-15 top quality outboards and their processing is summed in analogue (assuming that you know well what you are doing), in vast majority of mixes result OTB will sound nicer/better/more pleasant to any human with more-less healthy hearing.
I'm not so sure they need to be summed in analog. You can also bring each device back into its own input on the DAW and sum in software. My guess is that the difference between those tracks would be the same as in this test we're considering now.

-R
Old 9th June 2006
  #129
Lives for gear
 
abit's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
You can also bring each device back into its own input on the DAW and sum in software
-R
That's cool.
That might be test #3(or 103), I guess.
heh
And it's about - what the best way to mix OTB.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GYang
But from 100% down to earth daily practice
Right.
Thanx to Krizman we have a very valuable and interesting test.
But guyz, to send signal through summing ONLY is not the reason we loading dough in summing and outboard. Hello..#$%[email protected]?
Old 9th June 2006
  #130
Lives for gear
 
abit's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
can also bring each device back into its own input on the DAW and sum in software.-R
Actually it is a very, very interesting test.
I was thinking about this too.
In this case we don't need summing box. Sorry.
But plug everything to AD/DA.
Means we need to have right quantity! of convertors.
But I don't know what would be more logical investment in the end.
And if let say I need to use compression and EQ on my stem at the same time,
I'll go:
DA out
C in
C out
EQ in
EQ out
back to AD in

+ nice pre of your choice out of Main.
+2/3/4 pairs ad/da for FX.

This would be great test to have...


It would be my pleasure to do this,
but unfortunately I'm still cabless at the moment.
Old 9th June 2006
  #131
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Looks like anyone who is going to post has done so, so here are the answers.
Don't scroll down if you still want to play.









scroll








scroll






CHICKEN WINGS
A=Nicerizer, B=Tonelux, C=ITB

BLUES
A=ITB, B=Nicerizer, C=Tonelux

-R
Old 9th June 2006
  #132
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
I'm not so sure they need to be summed in analog. You can also bring each device back into its own input on the DAW and sum in software. My guess is that the difference between those tracks would be the same as in this test we're considering now.

-R
i agree. have digi 192s for inserts and one DA16X which i go to a summer with. if i want to avoid the ADA conversion i go with the summer. when submixing (i.e. drums), outboard goes on inserts. an analog console would be nice for automating outbard efx returns, but as of now all automation takes place ITB for me. no complaints.

the better the converters, imho the easier to get the desired results when inserting outboard. DAW + outboard is working for me. still like the idea of a nice analog console though...
Old 9th June 2006
  #133
Lives for gear
 
GYang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
You can also bring each device back into its own input on the DAW and sum in software. My guess is that the difference between those tracks would be the same as in this test we're considering now.

-R
I think that what we have are many subtle differences here and there, but all together it improves the end result significantly, if kept in analogue.
First of all, although I'm pretty anti-tape guy, in my case more and more mixes are going to be printed on tape and given to mastering engineer who will do his job in analogue and than make highest quality conversion to digital master. Reducing number of conversions to just ADC-DAC-ADC (instead of two more) is already step toward better sound.
Second, after going through analogue processing typical signal gets new, more complex nuances (among other also harmonics, artifacts, distortions, phase shifts etc.) that are even more difficult to be converted from analogue to digital and all that small changes again multiplies in digital summing (I can't explain it scientifically, but when carefully listened, some dimensionality is lost).
Third, IMO pan control on analogue mixers does same job somehow differently than in digital and help me to easier place the particular track on sound stage. That's one nice point in analogue summing and few boxes have this feature (here Tonelux scores highly).
Many factors should be taken into account, as converters, cabling (quality and length), good power supply when one wants to reach stellar results with analogue processing+summing.
In this respect OTB requires a lot more than ITB.
I can't imagine anybody in sane mind to mix and process OTB (time, space, costs, limited automation and recall etc.), if it would not bring clear sonical benefits without shadow of doubt.
Old 9th June 2006
  #134
Lives for gear
 
jchadstopherhuez's Avatar
 

well...

the tracks all sound good to me...just different.

i have tried most of the summing boxes..

i personally had the best results with the folcrum (i liked having the ability to switch my makeup preamp and change the overall buss sound) and the nicerizer 16

i bought the nicerizer 16...it works for me...and makes a huge difference to me over itb stuff.

i had an ssl 4056 for several years, i also had a trident 80...and a neotek, and a mackie..and a...

i made good records on all of them..
Old 9th June 2006
  #135
Lives for gear
 
abit's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
CHICKEN WINGS
A=Nicerizer, B=Tonelux, C=ITB
BLUES
A=ITB, B=Nicerizer, C=Tonelux
-R
Wow I nailed that chicken for 100%(!).
Where is my prize?!


But lost in the blues test.. somehow.
Means fresh ears and 1st impression is allway a truth.
Old 9th June 2006
  #136
Lives for gear
 
GYang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
CHICKEN WINGS
A=Nicerizer, B=Tonelux, C=ITB

BLUES
A=ITB, B=Nicerizer, C=Tonelux

-R
Abit was really pretty close.
Both songs ITB = 3rd.

After seeing results, seems that most listeners incl. me couldn't find where differences really lied.

RKrizman
What is your order of preference?
Old 9th June 2006
  #137
Lives for gear
 
GYang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by abit
But lost in the blues test.. somehow.
Means fresh ears and 1st impression is allway a truth.
You have best overall result I think.

Frankly speaking on Chicken I was more-less confident in choice, on blues it was mere guessing, difference there was minimal and not obvious better or not.
Old 9th June 2006
  #138
Lives for gear
 
abit's Avatar
 

I just went buy emotional impact I think.
ITB digits always giving me some feel of tension.
Where is N16 in the 1st place and TL after that sound more analogish and pleasant.
Thanx again to RKrizman for his time.


PS
In a long run all 3 didn't have drastic difference coz no outboard used,
and U're right -with outboard and a box it has to make much more difference vs pure ITB.
Old 9th June 2006
  #139
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
CHICKEN WINGS
A=Nicerizer, B=Tonelux, C=ITB

BLUES
A=ITB, B=Nicerizer, C=Tonelux

-R
Well I did not get a chance to check out Chicken Wings but as it seemed that the majority of the folks feel the difference was REALLY small, in my quick addition of the vote tally the Tonelux seemed to be the winner there.

For me B was my favorite with the Blues tune but they were all great sounding. As I said before, nice mixes, great tunes. Thanks for the work Rick, very cool.
Old 9th June 2006
  #140
Gear Addict
 
bit mangler's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by abit
Wow I nailed that chiken for 100%(!).
Where is my prize?!


But lost in the blues test.. somehow.
Means fresh ears and 1st impression is allway a truth.
Abit,

Congratulations..your prize in in the mail

Did you know how a Tonelux and Nicer sounded before the test..have you used them before?
Old 9th June 2006
  #141
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GYang
RKrizman
What is your order of preference?
I'd prefer to never hear any of them again!

On the "Blues" piece I liked how the trumpet sounded better through the Tonelux, rounder and further back. But the mix was really pretty murky on all of them--no magic bullet for sure.

Chicken Wings, I liked them all. I liked the Tonelux low end, a little rounder and tighter IMO, but on another day I might prefer the slightly different (broader?) shade from the Nicerizer, or the cold objectivity of ITB. Or maybe not hear or notice a difference at all.

I'm way too subjective on this to give any meaningful answer. Like I said before, it's really more about what overall methodology gets you there most easily. Each technology will suggest a methodology.

-R
Old 9th June 2006
  #142
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman
I'd prefer to never hear any of them again!

On the "Blues" piece I liked how the trumpet sounded better through the Tonelux, rounder and further back. But the mix was really pretty murky on all of them--no magic bullet for sure.

Chicken Wings, I liked them all. I liked the Tonelux low end, a little rounder and tighter IMO, but on another day I might prefer the slightly different (broader?) shade from the Nicerizer, or the cold objectivity of ITB. Or maybe not hear or notice a difference at all.

I'm way too subjective on this to give any meaningful answer. Like I said before, it's really more about what overall methodology gets you there most easily. Each technology will suggest a methodology.

-R
I guess that would be the question..... which worked best for your way of working? That will not apply to anyone else but it would be interesting to hear how you felt about working on each.
Old 9th June 2006
  #143
Lives for gear
 
abit's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bit mangler
Abit,

Congratulations..your prize in in the mail

Did you know how a Tonelux and Nicer sounded before the test..have you used them before?
Never heard TL and I was listening UBIK test on N16.
But never in real life any of them.
I did tested 8816 personally.

PS
What prize?!
I don't see anything from Paypal today.
heh
Old 9th June 2006
  #144
Gear Addict
 
bit mangler's Avatar
 

RKrizman,

Thanks for doing this for all of us.I really enjoyed this thread.IMO these tests were very scientific and reduced a lot of variables because of

1.matched levels
2.correct gainstaging

man,you have a lot of knowledge and experience.BTW did you play the B-3s.If yes I wanted to send you a PM(regd one of my personal projects)

thanks
Old 9th June 2006
  #145
Gear Addict
 
bit mangler's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by abit
Never heard TL and I was listening UBIK test on N16.
But never in real life any of them.
heh
Then how did you guess Tonelux without having heard it.

Prize withdrawn from mail
Old 9th June 2006
  #146
Gear Nut
 

At least I was consistent. I caught the ITB mixes on both, and was consistent from song to song, but I guessed the Tonelux clips were the Nicerizer and vice versa. Still each had a detectable signature. I'm surprised I thought the Tonelux was "soft".

Also interesting is that my preference depended on the song. For both I prefered the Nicerizer, but for Chicken Wings, the ITB was my second choice, despite thinking it sounded ITB.
Old 9th June 2006
  #147
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by not_so_new
I guess that would be the question..... which worked best for your way of working? That will not apply to anyone else but it would be interesting to hear how you felt about working on each.

On the Blues piece I already had an ITB mix but I tried to improve it after patching into the Tonelux. To no avail. I ended up getting a little too subjective trying it all these different ways and after I'd done all the level matched bounces I realized that I wasn't that happy with the mix. So I remixed it, trying to adjust the bass and clear it up, but lost something in the process. We've all been there, right? It was the "sacrificial song". What I posted was the first pass, very similar to my original ITB mix.

On Chicken Wings I learned my lesson. I took an ITB mix I had already done and was quite happy with and stemmed it out to the boxes. End of story. Of course, it was recorded bettter, and the playing was locked right in.

In the tiime I had left with the Tonelux I tried to do a mix from scratch of Chicken Wings, sending things out mono into the Tonelux and panning there, adding outboard, using the 2 eqs that came with it. My mix totally sucked. I was burned on the whole thing, first of all. Secondly, I realized what a huge undertaking it is to make that commitment to OTB analog processing. You really have to work just as hard to line up all the atoms again in the new chain. You have to commit yourself to the process and learn it. But I think there are sounds you can get that are hard to find in ITB.

I'm off to China for a week now and may not be checking in. Thanks to all for the discussion and positive vibe. Carry on.

-R
Old 9th June 2006
  #148
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bit mangler
RBTW did you play the B-3s.If yes I wanted to send you a PM(regd one of my personal projects)

thanks
Yes, it's a real B, recorded here at my place . On Chicken Wings it was a conventional setup with 2 x 184's on the top and a U47fet on bottom. The Blues piece, it was recorded with a Royer fig 8. The mic was place midway a foot or so in front of the Leslie, oddly enough with the polar pattern pointing straight up and down (don't ask).

-R
Old 10th June 2006
  #149
Lives for gear
 
Cojo's Avatar
 

I just have to say...

Wow, I didn't expect this results!

/Cojo
Old 10th June 2006
  #150
Lives for gear
 
abit's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bit mangler
Then how did you guess Tonelux without having heard it.
Prize withdrawn from mail
I don't know if it's right, but I was sort of tuned in 3 different things.
The logic was like,
we know Paul, and we know he came from API,
and also we know culture of API sound.
So I thought TLux suppose to be brighter than NS16, but at least more round and less irritating(to me) vs deadly cold ITB.
And NS16 is a fat goose, excuse my definitions.
Also I usually feel almost physical pain when something sounds bad
witch make my life measurable more often then I would like to.

Have to say another thank U to RKrizman not only for this cool test,
but for a very decent piece of music in this test.
So it was fun and a pleasure at the same time,
and not torture witch quite often the case.

BTW, can U belive it, I got a grand(!)from PayPal and I think it came from Phoenix Audio.
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
Farshad / So much gear, so little time
10
jayjay / High end
11
RoundBadge / High end
329

Forum Jump
Forum Jump