TC Electronic Finalizer Express VS ART Pro VLA 2

M

mnawara

New member
Hi.. i am new to mastering and i want to get a hardware gear to help me master my projects in logic pro x because using plugins is not something i find handy.

i am thinking between a used TC Electronic Finalizer Express or a new ART Pro VLA 2..

any suggestions? and why

Thanks
 
They are two completely different things. A VLA might be OK forsome smoothing compression, but there is no way it will do any real limiting without it pumping terribly. I have one of those and I love it for bass, vocals, acoustic guitar, etc... but I would never in a million years use it as my only mastering compressor.

The finalizer is actually a mastering tool. I had the original finalizer back in the 90's. It works fine, but multiband compressors and limiters are also a little unnecessary most of the time. Especially when you can't actually adjust the parameters, like on the express version you are talking about.

Here is a list of proper mastering outboard gear MASSIVE Mastering - GEAR LIST

Really, for the $1000 you are going to spend on the finalizer, you could do so much better with plugin limiters, compressors and EQ's. With that budget, you could get a few different flavors of each, so you had some choices, depending on the material you were mastering.
 
thanks farview.. but i dont plan to get a new one.. a used finalizer could be around $500 and i really feel more comfortable dealing with hardware over plugins.. but i will have another look on what i can buy in plugins with this budget before i make up my final decision
 
I have a TC finaliser and they work fine....you can pick up the 24 bit version new for £415 from Andertons in the UK , i'm with you on hardware -go with what you're comfortable with.
 
The thing about the express version is you don't have control of all the parameters. You will have less control than you would with EQ, buss compressor and mastering limiter plugins. You also won't have to deal with clocking issues, assuming you don't want to send the signal out and back through the converters on your interface.

I really do understand the appeal of hardware, but buying a half-assed version of an outdated piece of mastering hardware might not be the answer.

There are plenty of FREE plugin limiters that will do a better job than a multiband comp/limiter. With plugins, if you need more bands of EQ, you just insert another instance of the same plugin and set it accordingly. To do that with hardware, you would have to buy another finalizer and hook it into the chain.

The finalizer is fine for what it is. But the express is pretty limited and both versions are very '1998 project studio master', if you know what I mean.

For a couple hundred bucks you can get emulations of hardware that mastering engineers actually use. Stuff that the hardware versions would cost you tens of thousands of dollars to buy... Or you could spend more to buy something with real buttons, but is just as digital as the plugin.
 
It depends how good a job you've done at the point it comes to mastering...also what your view is on pc based recording-i don't use it. I also wouldn't knock equipment based on its technological age.... for example SM 57's have been around for a long time, and there still a very worthy option for recording guitar......actually the examples are multiple. I guess we all have different views - also have a tc helicon harmoniser, now that imho is pretty useless but for me the express works.
 
The OP is already using Logic Pro X. Vintage analog equipment, like mics, mixers, etc... makes sense. Vintage digital equipment makes less sense, especially when going back to stuff designed in the 80's and 90's. Add to that the pointlessness of multi-band compressors and limiters, which are generally not used by mastering engineers (unless trying to fix a problem) AND the lack of parameter control of the express, it just seems like painting yourself into a corner and/or using the wrong tool for the job.

Like I said, I had a finalizer before I went computer based, back in the 90's. It was fine for the time, but it was also of the time. I generally set it for 1.12/1 with fast attack and release and the threshold turned way down, then bounced it off the limiters a bit. It ended up with a sound that was popular at the time, but isn't current any longer. It isn't classic or cutting edge sound-wise, it's in that middle zone where it's just outdated.
 
you operate in a totally different musical world , i would advocate the use of 2" tape over any digital recorder for a great recording! However, i think your point re the use limiters etc kinda of agrees with mine i.e. it depends how good your recording is at mastering stage.
However 'popular at the time' ignores how fractured music is these days -and what genre you operate in -are you familar with 'Shindig' magazine? Its a very very diverse music world out there.
 
I do understand that. But just like the way the use of certain keyboards will date the sound, mastering techniques will do the same to a certain point. Using the techniques of the 60's, 70's, and even 80's has a 'classic' sound to it. The 90's and 00's aren't far enough in the past to be 'classic' sounds yet. I'm sure it will happen in another 10 years or so, but not yet
Hell, it's only very recently that you could use a DX7 on a recording without people assuming it was recorded in 1984, or you found your grampa's keyboard and were having a laugh.
 
I appreciate the points your making farview and i appreciate having a sensible discussion with you, whether we've helped mnawara with his original post though i'm not so sure! I think we may have to agree to disagree over the express but i have found it helpful and with some merit.
 
If you are satisfied with what it does and what you get out of it, that's all that matters.

I just can't recommend a multiband unit to someone as their first purchase of mastering gear. I figure, if you are going to take on a job, look at how successful professionals do it and get as close as you can to those techniques.
 
both of u guys have helped me a lot.. i am an amateur music producer that takes this as a serious hobby, but since i am relatively new to mastering, i have chosen my post production tool (the finalizer) to be as simple as possible even if i have less control in parameters and more presets.. my hardware chain setup (in a week will be) as follows:
ART Voice Channel (Channel Strip)- Behringer FX2000 (Effects Processor)- Motu 828 MK3 (Audio Interface)- TC Electronic Finalizer Express.
Mics: AKG Precision 220 Condenser Mic, Shure SM57 Dynamic Mic and Sennheiser 835 Dynamic Mic. Midi Controllers: Arturia SparkLE, Nektar Panorama P4. Keyboards: Korg PA500, Yamaha Clavinova CVP 96. in addition to some acoustic instruments like guitars and oud..And finally a pair of ADAM A5X speaker monitors. i use logic pro x
 
@Farview well i havent yet received the effects processor. so so far i record dry and then apply effects later.. i think i need the effects processor mainly for either rehearsing or to use with the guitars. what do u think?
 
Recording dry is usually the best course of action. If you get the effect, or the amount of effect, wrong during tracking, you have to perform the part again. It is almost impossible to determine the right amount of an effect to use before you have all the parts laid down and you are mixing. When tracking with effects, it's very easy to wind up with a big soupy mess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top