No, I said that song sounds glassy and asked you why?

I'm out on this thread. You've been a good sport.

Regards

So you don't have an example
Of non zzzz music?... anything would be fine.
I can find all kinds of stuff that sounds better than mine recorded by the masters. If its better converters vs mics.pres and technique I'm curious to listen. Just would like an example that definitively shows this is better than that because of converters before I'd buy better converters vs mics pres etc...

Something helpful that just came to mind, then maybe others will continue where I left off. I'm way over cooked on this one.

I first became aware of the importance of converters and the interface when I noticed start points didn't line up during a test of recording 8 tracks at a time on a FF800. Maybe you want to try this at home. Arm 8 tracks, run a HH through it an see if all 8 tracks keep in phase for a minute with each other. I'm pretty certain they didn't and Im pretty certain the ability to punch in was shotty too.
Now, maybe it was my FF800's ( however I had 2 brand new ones at the time) and maybe it was the computer and FW card ( however I am using a custom built i7 and Texas Instr FW.
I noticed inconsistent peaks not lining up and realized this would never work in the hybrid set-up I was starting to build.

When I switched them for a few ADI-8 QS and AES PCIe 32 interface, the issues I was experiencing all went away and so did the glassier sound. I noticed a big improvement in sound and the way it tracked. The imaging was wider and the over all sound was silkier, tight bottom end and definitely had less glassy sound. The biggest improvement was in the sweeter upper mids even at 44.1.24.
When I compared the ADI-8 QS' to Prism Orpheus, they were comparable. When I compared the QS' the the Lavry Blacks, it was also close enough. When I compared them to Orion32 /10M combo via USB, the ADI-8 QS still sounded better and I debated selling the Orion. I posted this here a some members agreed. (yes, we've been here before ;) )
When I switched to MADI, ahhhhh - the Orion sounded great without the 10M and performed hands down, the best of all systems to date. The sound is pretty close to the others; close enough. So, maybe the question really is, the converters are okay but the clock isn't on those and on many other systems. And why we get an accumulative thing happening as track count increases.

A Prism Atlas just arrived today! I'm unboxing it as we speak and expecting it to be pretty sweet too. Its my new capture ADDA and mobile combo.

I'm curious to hear if anyone tries this with their converters, what they see and hear?

That's cool I'll try that and see. So your contention is that the converter clock etc. Can be out of sink with itself. Interesting. I've never tried that. If that is the case that would be a problem.. good benchmark test. I like it.

Here is a Prism Orpheus 44.1/24 and I do not hear zzz in this at all.

[MEDIA=soundcloud]audiokid/playhouse-choir-trk-6
[[url=http://[/URL]="https://soundcloud…"]View: https://soundcloud…]="https://soundcloud…"]View: https://soundcloud…]

Nice example.
Sounds good..

Chris Perra, post: 417176, member: 48232 wrote: The swirly cymbal soundd is due to mic placement.

Also some sound sound more swirly than others. Converting to mp3s causes odd things as well. A blanket statement that my converters are the culprit is not looking at all the factors.

You said that Libre has the issue as well it was 1 mic 1 take. With a room effect added. Pretty hard to put that out of phase.

View: http://youtu.be/hZk…

These cymbals sound decent. Same converters .. you'll also notice that some cymbals sound more swirly Than others

Better converters help For sure...but that to me should be the last piece in the chain you should worry about.

so you don't have anything record previously to share with the absence of zzzz?

Thanks, is this you?

Who me? The drummer in the video? Yes that's me.

very impressive. Very well done and very natural. Excellent playing indeed and I like the sound of your room which I noticed from 17:30 on. Are you really using a FF800 and you play this well and have a room like that? Shame lol!

Now, its always impossible (at least for me) to hear for myself and to trust any comparison unless I loop two 1 bar ABABABAB"" together seamlessly one mono or stereo lane with matched volumes and have it repeat for at least 20 bars. You must be able to hear the next converter without a click in the loop. I had 10 of these examples and recently erased them to free up more space on SC. They are the best way to hear fro youself. I never trust AB that are on separate tracks or that are on separate files.

You could do a null test but this all becomes really noticeable during mixing. That is if you can hear it.
I can't help but to encourage you step up your conversion and interface. I'm certain you will thank me until the end of time. But, try the example on the 8 channel, I'm curious to learn what you find. Also, try and do a few overdubs. Try to trip the clock up through normal ways we create in the studio.

Not to be rude, but, you are also a drummer and there has never been one drummer I know that didn't have hearing loss, so, I'm just say. If I had to stand in front of a crash my whole career, I know I would not be sitting in this chair talking to you about sound quality.

I know I am lacking high end so I get my kids to check above 16k for me.
Damn, I really have to stop for now,
Its been a pleasure.

cheers!

I'm using beringer Ada 8000 into a rme digiface
Or digiset. . It's the one with no inputs but light pipe. .

I have some hearing loss i wear earplugs
I have tinnitus though. .I can still hear good from bad though. ..

Are you using the mic pre's too?

I started to wear plugs at 20, very handy for a drummer that does studio work. Specially when you have a session next day of a show :)
I can still hear up to 16-17khz after 30yrs of drum playing !! :)

The ADA is a pretty basic preamp set. Good player, good mics, good room can get you a long way !
Do you have a lot of post processing ?

For those really wanting to dig into the depth of clocks, this may be one of the best reads on the web for this.
http://recording.org/index.php?threads/what-is-clock-jitter.45012/

The swirly sound is not only mic placement, its the sound of transient smear and (once again) accumulative aliasing distortion building up.
Skins are about the most forgiving on their own. I mean, I we used 8bit samples for years. Its the sound of the 80's techno. Anything above 10k however is tin through that.
The pre's in that ADA are nothing short of horrendous but you've done an amazing job capturing your kit without revealing the shifting. I'm quite amazed it sounds this good on the single tracks. I would have expected complete crud. I would however, go bonkers trying to mix anything musical because you can clearly hear the transients swirling all over the place.

Upgrading to anything mid level would be a huge improvement for you.
Kudo's on your video and abilities.

I have high end custom mic pres. I have the gain on all the Ada turned right down. .

It's the dumbest thing ever I know but it sounds good.

there's a bit of compression and eq on each channel and a uad plate emt 140 on snare and toms a bit.

My room is in fact completely dead.. it's a uad ocean way room plug in only on the room mics that give it the vibe.

On my Process page of the custom drum tracks site there's a video showing the Room mic thing. Gear page has the gear I used.

http://www.customdrumtracks.ca

I'm in Vancouver right now will be back home next week. I'll try your test.

Thinking about it I'm wondering about a few things.. If I took 1 hihat mic and sent it to 8 tracks of my Daw. Would that be an indication of jitter or bad conversion?. As it's only 1 input being spread into 8 ports of the Daw. As opposed to 8 separate mic inputs each having it's own pathway. If there was an issue using only 1 input timing wise because it's only using one source wouldn't that be more a Daw or hardware issue?..

I have a Mic splitter I think I'll try a hihat mic into both ada's so I'm tracking into 2 Adas at the same time and see if there's an issue..

Upgrading my converters would make things sound a bit better I think but the cost of 24 ins and outs would be very expensive..

Your description of how you would want to test stuff of one right after the other in a perfect controlled situation is an example of how close things are..
To me to justify the expense I'd need to be able to hear the difference easily. I can instantly hear the differences with Rooms, speakers, mics, high end pre's and instruments.
Not so much with converters.

Chris Perra, post: 417233, member: 48232 wrote: I'm in Vancouver right now will be back home next week. I'll try your test.

Thinking about it I'm wondering about a few things.. If I took 1 hihat mic and sent it to 8 tracks of my Daw. Would that be an indication of jitter or bad conversion?. .

Maybe,
There is no doubt your conversion is on the bottom of the scale but, would it make a difference if you upgraded, and would you hear it, maybe not. I'm not sure if what I discovered would repeat for you. But, its an interesting test never the less.

Your drums sound okay on their own. Your drums in the busier music don't as much. But as you say, you intended to add the swirly effect and if you are happy, keep being happy!!!!!! . You seem to have the best out of what you have, pretty impressive for Behringer! Thanks for sharing the tip on gain staging. Its been confirmed many times here that lower levels produce better results with prosumer products! Kudo's.

Lets us know how the test goes?

The earlier stuff I've recorded is a mess.. This is a better example of where I'm at drum/mix wise.. Little bit of phasing going on mostly due to bus compression..

http://customdrumtracks.ca/custom-drum-tracks-demo-reel/

These examples show dry, mixed and mastered stages,.. As more plug ins etc get added things get more phasey..
http://customdrumtracks.ca/audiovideo-examples/

I'll post the results on Mediafire in waves. . when I do it.

Bus compression should never create phase like this unless something is really whacked. Goofy vocal riders and look aheads might do that but they are more gooey. I use bus compression all the time and its never degraded the transients to a point they start swirling like this.
Your converters are lying to you and you are blaming or putting your attention to area's that are distractions. Its why quality actually helps us learn correctly, better pin point problem solving. You think its the compression, I say its a combination of bad clock and inconsistent voltage swinging your waves all over the place. Its accumulative.
If it is however, your compressor , throw that one in the dump.

I don't believe that converters are any less important than any other part of a DAW rig. As with anything, your chain is only as strong as your weakest link.

Speaking in terms of standalone audio I/O Preamps (I'm not referring to consoles here) I will say that I suspect that when upgrading to a nice preamp / audio I/O, that you are also very likely upgrading the converters as well, whether you're aware of it or not.

If you pay $200 for a mic pre /I-O, then both the pre amps and the converters are going to be of a grade that is relative to the price.

However, if you are upgrading to a pro model - of which there are many as we know - then the pre amp section is probably not the only part that is better - the converters will also be improved.

In my own experience, most pre amps in the $400 - $600 range are all going to be pretty much the same, by and large - there may be different bells and whistles to each, but sonically, they will all be very similar.

Now... I'm not saying that there aren't some models in the $400-$600 price range that don't sound decent - to the contrary, for the money, some may even sound great.

I recently worked with a client who had a Focusrite 18i20, and for the $500 or so that he spent for it, I was very impressed. If I was limited to $500 to spend on a pre/audio I/O, I'd be seriously looking at that Focusrite model...but, while it sounded very nice, it did not sound as good to me as an RME, Apogee or other $1000-and up models that I've worked with in the past.

(By the way, all of the above is based on the premise that all the mics used through these various models are pro caliber - Neumanns, AKG, Royers, etc.)

Based on my own personal experience in using many different models, in order to really hear "that" pro caliber sound, one has to spend quite a bit more money than $500 to hear a dramatically better difference, and it's more than likely that when spending $1000 and up, you'll be getting a higher quality conversion stage as well as a better preamp section.

IMHO of course. ;)

I can't remember who said to me on this website : 'Cheap loves cheap!'
If you rig an all consumer gear studio, it'll sound good but you may work hard to arrive there... (harder EQ and processing)
If you introduce 1 pro gear like a new mic, either you'll think pro doesn't make any difference or you'll accept the fact that this new pro signal doesn't get on the recording by other gear's fault.

Once I bought my first pro preamp, I rediscovered many mics I had put to the side before. When I bought the AD96 converter and 4-710 (on which I used the 4 line to converter inputs, I needed to revisit the mic locker again.. LOL..

Chris Perra, post: 417232, member: 48232 wrote: I have high end custom mic pres.

I'm really appreciating your sincerity. What are you considering high end custom pre's?

so, working backwards thru a signal chain would you say starting with high quality converters would be smart because an expensive (custom?) mic & pre are never going to reach their potential without pristine converters.
same way a nice mic wont achieve its full potential until you have thermionic love happening.

they are all important, just like the mess coming out the other end: speakers->room->ears but do you suppose any one is more important than the other?
mic->pre->converter

Its all relevant. If you only have a few bucks and are in this for more fun, mic and pre and some cheapo AD is good enough.

If you are wanting to learn the detail of your work, then it only makes scene that you clearly can't make solid decisions on a pre amp when the converters are smearing and colouring up your entire track. To what degree this happens? Its accumulative and subjective to the transients.
Listen to the difference between all these examples. The simple tracks sound less irritating, once the cymbals and a fuller mix is in the game, brutal.

A cheap dynamic mic sounds very different through a cheap chain compared through my m-2b/LA2A/1176/Prism . As pcrecord just said, he is revisiting mic(s) that he thought sounded a lot different before. So true. Welcome to the world of mass misinformation.

Its all relevant. Converters are one of those things that we don't hear the difference because we can't if they aren't up to par in a system.

The sound of these last examples are the classic sound of what I don't want to ever hear. Do your cymbals sound like that? Swirly? If they do, then you have problems. Is it the mic placement, pre amps or converters?

There have been discussion on how important the PSU is in the converter box. Even though I use the Orion32, which is a one rack unit, the ADI-8 QS' sounded better. More smooth. Why is that? Why is it that Prism only has 8 channel converters costing thousands more apposed to the new 1 U rack 32 costing thousands less? Whats up with that? Who is zooming who? You'd think Lavry, Prism, RME would be doing this too! I suppose they will but they will be compromising somewhere.
Aurora 16's are so hot, they won't last a decade. How could they. So, Maybe they all start out close and after a few months converters start degrading or become inconsistent between each lane.. I wonder how a 5 year old Aurora 16 sounds compared to a new one?

I just received the Atlas and it retails for $7000. Its only 8 channels and its a double space.

I don't know. Just saying....

Do cheaper converters have voltage issues that effect the channels? don't know what it is that adds to the expense or why they build them like this, but I do here the sweetness between them all and like how all my channels sound year after year. They should last for years and sound sweet and clean.

I guess it also comes down to whether your are making music for people that have good consumer speakers/headphones in the hundreds to lo 1000's range. Or, making music to appeal to
HiFi buffs that can't sleep at night because of bad converters haha..

Better converters are better yes.. But for me I'd need to spend 28 grand to replace my converters to get that prism sound.. For the cost vs value in the real world as far normal people actually noticing, Mics and pre's are going to be a more noticeable difference.

It's also important to note that the oh mic placement I have has a super wide stereo field.
I'll do a test X/Y and see if I get the phasing that you hear.

The nature of drums is a tough one because you will have phasing to a degree no matter what you do. Hitting anything with 11 mics around it is going to have some issues.
You can measure the distance from the snare and kick to be exactly the same with Oh's but everything else you can't. tom mics, hihat, top and bottom snare, inside and outside kick.

They all will have different timing unless you do a mono mix.. if you want a full stereo mix you will have phasing.

If I hit a crash on the left side of the kit, everything else is picking that up with different timing if they are panned,... phasing occurs to a degree with or without prism converters.

Do you have some drum tracks you've recorded that don't have swirly's in them audiokid?

I have a la 610 signature edition.

I also have some custom made pre's that compete with stuff like Great River easily. In the 1500 to 2000 a pre range.
The custom pres crush the La 610. I use the 610 for vocals mostly.

Why do I get the feeling you don't understand much of this?

You don't need to spend 28 grand.
The orion32 is under 3 grand for 32 adda. Rme under 2 grand
Either would be a huge improvement.

I'm still trying to discover what high end custom pres you are using?

You don't need my examples to improve what is obvious. I would think being a drummer and having the love for clear in phase transients would be of more interest, you are obviously not interested in doing this on a more serious commercial level? Which is why I am still with you, I understand its more a hobby, right? We should move this to the Affordable Recording Forum.
Being in business like you are, selling drum tracks (correct?), no disrespect but I wouldn't pay you to provide the drum tracks for me because I can clearly hear they aren't tight. They don't glue well with higher end music. I would be forced to try and make bigger sound music fit into a smaller sounding drum tracks. Follow?
If you need comparisons, listen to commercial recordings and shoot for that sound?

I do have an example of some drums using a bricasti added to the snare.
If I would remix this, I would tame the verb down a bit but I'm from the 80's and love reverb so it's more a plug for the bricasti than me.

I'm a mixer, not a recordist. I don't have the luxury to record what I mix.

Here is a squashed MP3 that I use as an example for clients interested in how my"Mp3" sounds, and it still came out pretty decent: I don't know what the client used for gear but its not as swirly. It was pretty easy to mix as well.
(Dead Link Removed)

An MP3 should sound clean as well. If yours don't, then I would look at what you are doing during the bounce? Something isn't right if it creates this much phase.

Well each one of those examples can be directly compared to the original that was professionally done. In each case I think my version holds its own fideltity/swirly wise..

good for you (y)
if you are happy, that's whats counts the most.

That song example sounds great. It does however not have much of a stereo spread cymbal wise.

I will do an X/Y of my overheads when I get home. I'll also do an X/Y of The X into one ADA and the Y into the another to see if there's any weird stuff going on between the 2 phaze/jitter wise. I'll post here. My feeling is all your issues with swirly's will disappear.. I have no idea though as I've never tried.. You may be right and the issues are converter related.
I'm into putting the ADA's through their paces.

About 5 years ago I was thinking of upgrading my converters. I did many tests.. nothing like this or to see if there's drift or jitter when recording a mono track routed to 8 channels... I did hear differences in higher end converters. Not enough to justify upgrading though.

BobRogers, post: 393126, member: 28855 wrote: If you are considering the Apollo, I would definitely consider the quad. I really like the UAD plugins, and the ability to track with those plugs at minimal latency is a very big feature and an important part of the price. If there is any way for you to try the UAD plugins I would check them out. (They require a DSP card or the Apollo, so it's not simply a trial download.)

I assume you are running a Mac. The PC version is not out yet.

audiokid, post: 393585, member: 1 wrote: Wow, smoke

Right in your face.

Trying to get the same sound after vocals are printed doesn't compare. What a glorious sound tracking with an LA-2A.
It makes me wonder how the Apollo and the LA-2A plug-in would stack up to the hardware. My guess is no contest to the real deal but if you have an Apollo, please chime in and let us know what you think.

Serpentarius, post: 396016, member: 45049 wrote: As soon as I've got the stuff I'll let you know. By the end of next week I should have it in the flat and like I said, I intend to re-record the vocals for "Eagle". At least, I want to record another set of vocals and compare to the original. The difference in overall sound should be substantial, with the Peluso mic and the Apollo versus the TSM mic and the Babyface.

audiokid, post: 404742, member: 1 wrote: The Gearfest puremix contest was recorded using the Apollo.

I'm curious to learn what your opinion would be on the "sound" of those tracks in comparison to how your Apollo sounds? In other words, are those tracks an accurate representation to how the Apollo converter and plug-ins sound?

You can download the tracks from [="http://www.puremix.net/"]pureMix.net | Online Video Tutorials - Mixing, Recording, Mastering and Producing Music[/]="http://www.puremix…"]pureMix.net | Online Video Tutorials - Mixing, Recording, Mastering and Producing Music[/]

kmetal, post: 416965, member: 37533 wrote: The studio live actually surprised me how good it was for recording when I used it. The effects are kinda weak, IMHO, but it's a solid buy.

I have heard my cousins and it was a huge step up from the digi 002. Which could be the worst. I really haven't messed w it on my own so I'll have to do a track before I truly decide, but the fab DuPont demos where they supposedly use just the UAD Apollo and plug-inssounds killer. So based on both, my best guess is you've heard some badly recorded stuff, and the demo is exceptionally recorded?
As far as the plug-inssounding like the real thing, I wish companies would just give up on that stuff. Maybe something like a digital reverb emulation or something could come close, but really? A 2u tube compressor? I don't ever believe them. Basically at best I think you get attack/release tendencies and eq curve, but having not heard a real la2a I can't say. I know the any 1176s emulations I've used don't sound like the hardware one I use.

To be fair, a lot different hardware models sound different, I've owned 2 Mesa triple rectifiers and they sound distinctly different. But still why do pluggin company's try to say how close they sound to the hardware? They really should stop w those claims, I've never met anyone who has felt they were true.

I still think less plug-insof any type yield better recordings, but for me to really speak on this thing, I'll have record an acoustic track or something and post it.

audiokid, post: 416966, member: 1 wrote: Kyle, this may be the first time we disagree. :) I'm not winning any friends over my UAD opinion either, but who's listening anyway. Its a big world and a very affordable product that people seem to love.

The Fab stuff I heard through that was horrible. Full of headroom crush and distortion. The converters sound like metal. Download the Liza Colby tracks and take a good listen. I tried mixing that stuff from the contest he had a year back and my ears hurt from the processing. The upper mids are horrendous and bass was mush.
Being able to dissect those tracks told me the truth on that system.
Latency : Try lining up the tracks and you'll see what tracks are effected from the processing in comparison to the others where he went direct. Listen to how those converters break up when she starts pushing her voice. I'm not the only one that mentioned this but it sure didn't get any press.

I'm sure it is a fun system and better converters than the digi stuff but but far from pro sounding.
Is there an A/B comparison online anywhere? I'd love to hear another example because I really don't want to be slamming it this bad.

Man, there are dozen of comments giving praise to the plug-in BS. You couldn't give me an Apollo to use and I could care less if I ever loose a dime advertising UAD or Pro Tools or the long list of members caught up in this BS. What a bunch of crap people are buying into.

Love it.
Someone slipped this in my PM this morning. I haven't even watched the video but I bet its interesting.

[[url=http://="

[/]

My next quest is to only use Samplitude and challenge anyone using Pro Tools or UAD. I just have to see if that stuff really works like they say it does. I'm really thinking the GUI is all you are really buying into. Nothing like buying into a UAD graphic card thinking its the VOG .

Can't wait for the end to come..

i remember demoing the vog when i was still posting regularly at the uad forums.
i thought the vog was pretty worthless and got shot full of holes... not using it right, not hearing it... blah blah blah.

ill grant with the ridiculous amount of plugins ua is shitting out, no way all are useful or needed, but you cant cover them all with one blanket.
their la2a and 1176 are magic for me. and i want you to read "magic" with one of the weird voices like the dude in the video uses too.

there are a few others i cant live without, but like any tools, you either have and can use them properly... or not.

I don't believe we need any of this company and most of code. We all start learning with something and think its doing way more than what it really is. Blind leading blind.

If you really want to know where it all went wrong (or right), it started with Midi and drum samples and 25 years of the blind thinking they can make a real drum kit sound like Billy Jean lol. That is a friken LM2 done behind closed doors. Ya I know Bruce said he tracked it. I don't believe thats how it ended up though. ;) The cabassa is the LM2. Michael used the Emulator II, a synclavier and an MPC 60 all the time. Why would he settle for a dated acoustic sound when his audience wanted subs and tight snares right down the middle. He isn't the only one.

For 25 years recordists are still trying to get a drum kit to sound like samples and so many are buying into UAD plugins to do what for you? EQ a vocal or snare? Whats wrong with it tracked natural and some basic shelving or filters?

We are buying into candy thinking all these plug-ins are going to help the sound most will never acquirer. I can't believe how naive everyone is.

It takes too much time to start over and trust simple ears. We buy into a formula (just like Amway lol) and they have us by the balls for years. Look at Avid. Now its UAD.
Of course we are going to keep telling others its working for us. We support our purchases and want everyone else to do it just like us.
We even pay to put logos of companies on our tee shirts to advertise them. This industry knows human behavior. UAD is more an image to trick our hearing and feed into our Delusional Vulnerabilities that we are going to be able to get that sound with one more plug-in that needs more CPU.

audiokid, fuck off . It really can't be this simple.

and so continues...

I could sell out here, and fill this place up with software ads. I could get endless freebees and "had" UAD in my box too. But ya know what, I passed on this hype because its a joke.

If I want to sound like the LM2, I'll buy the real deal and quit fooling myself into thinking everything can be emulated to sound like the days of yesteryear.

Sorry all, I finally said it.

are you saying if we cant afford "real" we shouldnt try at all?
c'mon, that seems awfully darth vader ish

Not at all. I am ITB. I just happen to use a few extra things that I could live with out no problem and get better results without UAD. Guaranteed. One DAW and no UAD.

Why do you need more than what is in your DAW?

I can't help but ask the most obvious questions to us all right now:

We have a band in the studio. They all sounds great and have their amps. I place mics accordingly and record them into a computer. Now that its done, what do I need to do next?

Members say I need Pro Tools , UAD cards and a big Apple that will host it all. This is Pro Audio right?

Now that I have the songs ITB I start loading all these plug-ins and begin shifting the audio to create a mix. How come the band doesn't sound like they do in the studio?

I'm sorry but I'm calling it all BS.

I just packed up my entire studio and all I have left is Samplitude (Sequoia) here. Nothing else. We should ask Donny to provide the tracks to his last mix and see what it would sound like without any hardware and just the basic tools within Samplitude vs UAD believers.
I have No big Apple. Just a simple PC on Windows 7, my DAW and no third party plugs or hardware. All 100% ITB.
You go ahead and use all the UAD software you can. I'll use the basics , no third party. No outside mastering.
I bet my mix will sound way bigger and clearer than UAD inflicted any day of the week. I'm not talking about taste here so its not about that. Some may have a different level of one track more liked, bla bla. I'm talking sound and we all know, if you can get the sound, the rest can be had by simple choices of levels and mastering.

Who's game?

I would love to put all this UAD crap to bed. I'm calling it redundant BS. Totally distracting.

Then, if we really wanted to step up the game after this phase, see how it would all change via replacement software (no UAD). That would get interesting.

I challenge audiokid to a mix off.
Donny's track. 1 week.
im all uad. you're all mean old guy :) jk.