I own two as well as the focusrite ISA 428. I did have the Liquid channel but that went back. The Pure paths are fantastic. The preamps are fantastic. The EQ is excellant and the compressor is quite decent. A great channel strip period!
Blenn wrote: I own two as well as the focusrite ISA 428. I did have the Liquid channel but that went back. The Pure paths are fantastic. The preamps are fantastic. The EQ is excellant and the compressor is quite decent. A great channel strip period!
It's not that I didn't like the liquid it's just a bit gimmicky. The preamp is an excellant preamp but the emulations dont seem - well I dont know how to say - rounded. The compressors I found excellant but I have most of those with the UAD-1 cards. The ISA 428 gave better results for me so I got that instead.
I think in another 18mths or so the technology behind the liquid will be sounding better - -I am just not quite convinced yet. They're all too subtle for me hear any significant difference and again not full enough sounding.
Blenn wrote: It's not that I didn't like the liquid it's just a bit gimmicky. The preamp is an excellant preamp but the emulations dont seem - well I dont know how to say - rounded. The compressors I found excellant but I have most of those with the UAD-1 cards. The ISA 428 gave better results for me so I got that instead.
I think in another 18mths or so the technology behind the liquid will be sounding better - -I am just not quite convinced yet. They're all too subtle for me hear any significant difference and again not full enough sounding.
Paul
The whole concept of preamp modeling seems a little strange...the whole point of high end pre's is that there is no other way to get the sound...now if the LIquid was like a $500 entry home unit...that would be different.
I would have to agree with that - except that the units own propriety preamp is probably worth £750 UK alone coupled wiht a decent AD up 192 and some great compressor emulations makes it almost worth the asking price. But it still, for me , falls short of what it's point is.
Comments
Search the archives, it has been discussed. I own a pair mostly
Search the archives, it has been discussed. I own a pair mostly just for the eq. which is great.
:?
:?
I own two as well as the focusrite ISA 428. I did have the Liqui
I own two as well as the focusrite ISA 428. I did have the Liquid channel but that went back. The Pure paths are fantastic. The preamps are fantastic. The EQ is excellant and the compressor is quite decent. A great channel strip period!
Paul
Blenn wrote: I own two as well as the focusrite ISA 428. I did h
What didn't you like about the Liquid Channel?
It's not that I didn't like the liquid it's just a bit gimmicky.
It's not that I didn't like the liquid it's just a bit gimmicky. The preamp is an excellant preamp but the emulations dont seem - well I dont know how to say - rounded. The compressors I found excellant but I have most of those with the UAD-1 cards. The ISA 428 gave better results for me so I got that instead.
I think in another 18mths or so the technology behind the liquid will be sounding better - -I am just not quite convinced yet. They're all too subtle for me hear any significant difference and again not full enough sounding.
Paul
Blenn wrote: It's not that I didn't like the liquid it's just a
The whole concept of preamp modeling seems a little strange...the whole point of high end pre's is that there is no other way to get the sound...now if the LIquid was like a $500 entry home unit...that would be different.
I would have to agree with that - except that the units own prop
I would have to agree with that - except that the units own propriety preamp is probably worth £750 UK alone coupled wiht a decent AD up 192 and some great compressor emulations makes it almost worth the asking price. But it still, for me , falls short of what it's point is.
Paul