good 80's/90's analog consoles/mixers.

Kurkkumopo said:
If you would compare a semi pro gear like ghost, tascam msr24 and some semipro hardware stuff versus UAD plugins made of high end hardware would the semi-pro stuff sound more fatter and roll the highs off better than the UAD tape and outboard plugins?
Click to expand...

I don't know
Not owning or having used any of that gear, my answer would be pure speculation
 
RFR said:
I don't know
Not owning or having used any of that gear, my answer would be pure speculation
Click to expand...

I see, well, i think it will sound better with the plugins as they're modeled from the best out of the best equipment out there after all.

God, this thread will never die. :-D
 
Sorry man, but I am going to quote this "sound more fatter and roll the highs off better than the UAD tape and outboard plugins"?

That is an odd semantics question that would be based on someone Else's opinion. Even if they in fact even had a meaningful opinion based upon use (regardless of personal stature and experience), that would still be basically worthless info as it would completely depend on the material the particular software was used on.

That being said, we do learn from those that have more experience than us. But just because one producer endorses or uses a product, does not make it the best thing.

Any high level producer (unless paid to endorse a particular product), will say that you use the right tool for the job. That can be a SM57. Maybe not. Could be a vintage Neve preamp, could be a crappy Fender amp. Could be CLA new release of mixing tools software. Who knows.

It isn't about the high end of gear so much as it is the understanding of what gear gives the sound you are looking for.

Bottom line is the quality of what is recorded. Fuck that up and nothing else matters. Well, unless you have the software to fix it. I'll leave it at that. :)
 
In the case of the MSR-24, it is a last-generation deck competing with digital systems. The aim was to try and get it to reproduce audio accurately, not to colour the sound. It's a nice machine for tracking to, but it's unlikely to make the recordings sound fatter because that's the opposite of what it was trying to do.
 
jimmys69 said:
Sorry man, but I am going to quote this "sound more fatter and roll the highs off better than the UAD tape and outboard plugins"?

That is an odd semantics question that would be based on someone Else's opinion. Even if they in fact even had a meaningful opinion based upon use (regardless of personal stature and experience), that would still be basically worthless info as it would completely depend on the material the particular software was used on.

That being said, we do learn from those that have more experience than us. But just because one producer endorses or uses a product, does not make it the best thing.

Any high level producer (unless paid to endorse a particular product), will say that you use the right tool for the job. That can be a SM57. Maybe not. Could be a vintage Neve preamp, could be a crappy Fender amp. Could be CLA new release of mixing tools software. Who knows.

It isn't about the high end of gear so much as it is the understanding of what gear gives the sound you are looking for.

Bottom line is the quality of what is recorded. Fuck that up and nothing else matters. Well, unless you have the software to fix it. I'll leave it at that. :)
Click to expand...

You're right, it was kinda clunky question, but just speculating as usual. :D The right gear for a certain kind of music is also important, i remember that i was actually about to get an engl amp and thank god i did not, that thing is more suitable for death and black metal i think. Same thing with effects and synths too. I think i should atleast get those from that era like the spx90 and the dx7 that EFR recommended few times.

And yes if you don't know how to record properly then you're in trouble. That's one of the reason that i rather record in my own house so i have as much time as possible to nail the sound as well as i can.

Just leave the door open too, windows can be closed tho.
 
jpmorris said:
In the case of the MSR-24, it is a last-generation deck competing with digital systems. The aim was to try and get it to reproduce audio accurately, not to colour the sound. It's a nice machine for tracking to, but it's unlikely to make the recordings sound fatter because that's the opposite of what it was trying to do.
Click to expand...

I see, then it would be more clever to compare the older machines to the plugins like i already did and couldn't tell difference.
 
Yeah that's the thing...the focus toward the end of the analog tape era as far as machine and electronics design was "transparency"...input=output...no color or character added. It doesn't mean those machines sound bad...they sound great in my opinion, and depending on how you set the machine up and what tape you use you will incite various degrees of tape saturation...but the "mojo" machines are (I'm generalizing here) the transformer coupled wide-format machines like a 1" 8-track or 2" 16-track Ampex for instance. Some facets of the industry shunned such machines because of their propensity to color the sound. Since the advent of the digital age, with its innate transparency, we've seen the resurgence of interest in those things that do color the sound in a particular way because "transparent" can be had for a song (pun intended) with the affordability and availability of digital hardware and software. This is not to say you can't get some color on an MSR24, but since you would likely want to/need to utilize the dbx noise reduction, you would need to be conservative with your levels. If I had an MSR24 or MSR16, and I wanted more color out of it, I'd set it up at 250nWb/m but using a +3 tape if I could find it (Scotch 206, Quantegy 406). That way I could record at levels that wouldn't freak out the dbx processing, but the +3 tape, with its lower maximum operating level, would be more likely to saturate at those nominal input levels.
 
Msr16 running 406 here (And some old Scotch). Saturates nicely.
With 456 formulation it's a bit cleaner.
 
MIGHT COST a few bucks more than you're willing to spend , but the Neotek tabletop is a true inline analog console that has 16 channels in/out that in my opinion sound better than an ssl costing many thousands dollars more. check them out ,might be able to find a used one for less money but always keep in mind about your maintenance upkeep for analog compared to digital
 
sparky123 said:
MIGHT COST a few bucks more than you're willing to spend , but the Neotek tabletop is a true inline analog console that has 16 channels in/out that in my opinion sound better than an ssl costing many thousands dollars more. check them out ,might be able to find a used one for less money but always keep in mind about your maintenance upkeep for analog compared to digital
Click to expand...

Hi,

Looks pretty solid and i thank you for your suggestion but i decided to already go the ITB path in the end. :D
 
If you by any means have the space available to ignore the "not too wide and heavy" thing DDA desks is a steal.
For between 400 and 1000 pounds you can get a fully pro desk that sounds like a record, is reliable, easy to repair and fully modular.
I love our early 90's DDA Q more than any other equipment I'm using on a regular level. Lots of routing options, great sound, great EQ, more than decent preamps. But weighs around 70 kilo.
But will be worth it, I promise.

The same can be said about some of the bigger Soundcraft from the 80's and early 90's but never worked on one myself, only heard them in action live or on records.
 
Farview said:
That vixen album has electronic drums. They used an old D-Drum module, like a lot of the stuff that had this sound.

As someone who has done both analog and digital production since the 80's, the difference in sound between now and then is the production style, not the equipment.

In the 80's, especially the hair metal Era, the vocals weren't mixed way up front compared to how things are mixed now. The rhythm guitars weren't always doubled, especially in a band with only one guitarist. The guitars had a nasaly midrange sound, and the bass was brighter and didn't have a ton of sub low end.

Some of these production decisions were the style of the times, some were to accommodate the limitations of tape and vinyl.

But you do have to consider that the recording budgets were huge at that time. In that Era, the slick sounding stuff was probably mixed on an ssl, a console that could cost into the millions. None of the budget mixers you are looking at can come anywhere close to that sound.
Two inch tape at 30ips is much different sounding than smaller formats.
The stuff was recorded with the best mics, through the best preamps (neve, apiece, etc...) by people who trained in the studio system, in rooms specifically designed for recording.

Low to mid level gear in a spare room isn't going to get the same effect. And speaking of effects, you will need a ton of outboard effects. You will need a physical compressor for each channel you want to compress, and a reverb/multi-effects unit for each effect that you need to have concurrently.

Meanwhile, since you are starting out, you could get an interface, a few mics and some plugins and learn how to capture sounds, before you decide that analog is the way to go. No matter what, the mics will still be useful when you go analog, the interface will still be useful for mixing down to the computer, and burning cds, and the experience will translate.
Click to expand...

Sorry to necro this thread back to the book of the living, but you mentioned the D-drum module here, which clavia ddrum module exactly vixen used on that album? I might have to get one for myself too.
 
Kurkkumopo said:
Sorry to necro this thread back to the book of the living, but you mentioned the D-drum module here, which clavia ddrum module exactly vixen used on that album? I might have to get one for myself too.
Click to expand...

Ummm, whichever one was out in 1987. If I remember correctly, The sound library just grew as time went on. The old sounds were on the newer ones, at least from the mid 90's, since that is the last time I had my hands on one....

You could always just sample the beginning of Edge of a Broken Heart, it's nothing but kick iirc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top