LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteAs wild as I am (and I AM) about the UAD collection, I still haven't found a substitute for outboard gear.
Not that you can't do fine work "in the box," but there's just something missing...
Except for the Pultec plug - That things.
Outboard EQ more functional than UAD/Waves?? Hey guys narrowing down the list here trying to decide if I should get 2 Pres or 1 Pre with EQ. I have UAD Studio Pak and Waves Ren. I've never messed with outboard EQ much, just record flat into the DAW (Nuendo 2). I was wondering if the eq section of a Vintech X73i would yield results that can't be achieved with my sofware. For example, when I put a 57 on a snare it never sounds like a great snare, only after I blend in the bottom snare mic (phase reversed) and the room mics does it sound decent. If I had a nice outboard EQ would this help me to get a better snare sound than my softwares EQ? ( I usually put a 1176 ln and waves 4 band on the snare) Thanks so much....
As wild as I am (and I AM) about the UAD collection, I still haven't found a substitute for outboard gear.
Not that you can't do fine work "in the box," but there's just something missing...
Except for the Pultec plug - That thing
John Scrip MASSIVE Mastering Chicago
The Vintech is real good stuff and I would expect it to outperform anything in software when it comes to quality of tone.
- AudioGaff -
RO Pro Audio Moderator
ANALOG RULES! 8-)
It is always the same until someone changes it
So I take it that "pro" recordists rely on outboard eq's to dial in that sweet tone before hitting the recording medium. Is this typicly true for most tracks or just specific tracks like snare or kick? Can anyone post a snippet of a soloed snare track, just a few hits? I get ok sounds with rooms/overheads/bottom snare mixed in the but the soloed 57 thru a Neve 3405--1176LN--Waves 4 band always sounds unatural to me. I'm wondering how much the Vintech pre/eq will help the tone. Also, I just stumbled across the API 3124 4 channels of API for $2500. That sounds pretty sweet.....
A pro will do what ever it takes to get it as right as is humanly possible. Eq-ing up front is a bold move and forces you to choose and commit to your decision. I tend to not be so bold and wait until I am building my mix a lot of the time. I also do a lot of turd polishing of other people's stuff so I am forced to use eq at mixdown because it was badly tracked/recorded with or without eq.
The API 3124 is a great sounding unit. Can't go wrong there.
Hey thanks AudioGaff. I've got around $3k to spend and trying to get the most bang for buck that I can. That's a lot of $$ for me to spend and I'm losing my head trying to figure out the best way to spend it. Mic pres, pre/eq's, ribbon mics....ahhhh...so many things to check out and so little money. Perhaps I should do a poll...hmmmm thanks again.
J-3 Check out the 550 Eq by API...
Keeper mics and pres first, great monitors second, top notch conversion third. Expensive outboard eq after.Originally Posted by J-3
That makes sense about the "order" in which to upgrade in. I definitly heard a big improvement in my recordings when I swapped the 4050 and NT2 for the TLM 103. I could hear (though not as pronounced) an improvement with the Neve 3405 over the Allen and Heath. I'm Shure the GR MP 2NV will be way better than the 3405. I'm just running Delta 1010's now but in the future I'm shure i'll look into replacing those as well. Perhaps instead of a out board eq I can spend $150 and upgrade the eq's in the UAD-1 I belive they have the Cambridge eq. Anyone used this plug? Thanks J
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks