Why do you want to trade? The Focusrite ISA 430 MK1 are a Neve Flavour yes?

And its just a hunch but my gut tells me not to do it. But I know nothing about either product.

Yes, Focusrite told me that Rupert Neve works on the 110 circuits (same as 430 ISA mk1) and Lundhal transformers ,I like the sound of them but I don't know why I always thought that SSL 6000 E was better.
Someone else think I better keep my Focusrite?
Thanks

Something about the image you posted looks unsettling to me, disturbing. Like its not well put together or home made casing?

Some extra advise, you should only be buying gear because you know you need it, or are thinking to flip it to make more money. Not everything SSL makes is great either. Personally, I would go with a Neve flavour but big SSL consoles are something many top producers in the world prefer too. But these are BIG consoles in studios that rent the studio out for that console. Anyway, my vote is stay with what you have and use it.

Follow your heart.

Good luck.

While a lot of people have made great incomes and terrific recordings using SSL consoles, it's something that really involves an acquired taste and recording technique. And those modules have no converters to plug into your computer with.

In the SSL 4000, 5000 and 6000 series consoles, there microphone preamps were really not something to write home about. Certainly not in comparison to Neve, API. Actually not much different from an old American-built Auditronics 501/110. Virtually the same Transformers and cheap IC chip op amps. Which no doubt, have a classic sound that you heard on plenty of Simple Minds, Tears for Fears, Sting and countless others. But they wanted the auditory foibles that came from those SSL consoles of the time.

When it came to audio beauty, it was the API and Neve stuff. But when you want a console that had everything and did everything that, which also require a lot less external patching of external devices such as compressors, limiters and noise gates. And it gave you that on every input. Whereas you may only have a few 1176's, LA-2 or 3's and a couple of KEPEX's. But you certainly didn't have 24 or 32 of those devices and a lot of guys depended on that on everything to tailor their mixes just so. And so if you want that flavor, I'd say go for it. But you certainly can't do wrong by the Rupert Neve designed Focusrite stuff because it absolutely sounds sweet. And the 6000 was never really one of the popular recording and mixing desks. It found most of its life in television production studios along with the 5000 and the 8000. Whereas the 9000 actually had better sounding microphone preamps than most of the previous consoles they made. I've used them in television but I'll still take a Neve or API for recording any day. Though I wouldn't mind mixing on an SSL provided I got the front end and I wanted from the API and the Neve. Nothing wrong with their microphone preamps but nothing that I would chase after to purchase unless a client said they absolutely positively had to have that. And unless you are a very competent technician, you should never touch one of those SSL's. Because in an SSL analog desk, nothing switches audio except FET transistors. You might have at push button but it's only to turn on or off a transistor and no audio is actually passing through that switch. Which, while actually convenient to do that way at the time, your audio has to pass through many additional transistor junctions. And every time your audio goes through any transistor Junction, there is an extra price to be paid with its own distortion artifacts. And as I said, many engineers utilized those kinds of distortions to produce a certain characteristic sound of their own. And if you don't know how to get that sound, you'll generally not be happy with that task and there's nothing in any Focusrite that will make you unhappy, as they are very fat and solid sounding. Not quite like an actual Neve but certainly not an SSL.

When ya take a look at the microphone preamp in those early SSL 4000/5000/6000 series desk, you're actually looking at an inexpensive microphone preamp. It's got a decent input transformer. It goes into a couple of late 1970s style IC chips most predominately, Signetics 5534's. The same chip you find in all of these cheap PA consoles and other budget recording consoles like MCI and Auditronics. And while I think those had a truly good sound, it certainly wasn't the best sound. They worked and they worked well but they certainly weren't something you could get excited about. You couldn't push them because they would get crunchy quite quickly. Not like the discrete transistor componentry of the API and other Neve products. Those discrete transistor circuits have a magical quality with a magical sound that you can actually manipulate and even push its envelope. And that's where all the fun and sonic coolness really starts to happen and where it comes from. And that Focusrite would have more of that vintage vibe than a worn-out relatively obscure SSL 6000 would have.

I will tell you this, Bob Clearmountain personally preferred his SSL 4000 E over at the G, even though he used plenty of G's. He certainly didn't mind using most any Neve but told me he could never get HIS sound out of an API and actually hates them. And I think he's the only person I know that hates API's? No matter what it can do or sound like, he can't get his signature sound and the desk that I cut my teeth on what I was only 17 and I love 'em. I mean I once had 8 API original 550 equalizers and well over 24 API microphone preamps along with the multitude of summing amplifiers and line drive output amplifiers. And almost build myself up my own API console. The one I discovered how much extra money it was going to cost for 16 more of their equalizers, I sold off all the stuff I had. That gave me virtually enough money to buy an entire 40/32 input Sphere Eclipse C, with VCA automated subgroup faders, nine band ferrite core inductor graphic and quasi-parametric, virtually American made SSL that was designed more like a combination between a Neve and an API with most of the functionality of an SSL 4000 without the dynamics on each channel. But just out of this world sound! And relays and discrete transistor circuits instead of IC chips and switching transistors.

The bottom line in your equipment selections really come down to what kind of the sound you want to go for. Which really doesn't have much to do necessarily with any flashy features unless those features are important. For instance, back in the mid-1980s, I upgraded from 8 to 16 track. And while I had a really lovely sounding console, it could not be expanded to accommodate 16 inputs. So my console choice was based both upon budget and precisely what I needed that console to do. I didn't give a damn really about its technical specifications. I knew it would pass audio. I knew what IC chips were used through out and it was Signetics 5534's. I didn't care about how it sounded. I only cared about how it worked. I'm the one that makes it sound a certain way. I'm the one that knew what that IC chip console could and could not do in comparison to my all germanium transistor console that was made in Holland by Philips/Norelco. And sonically, this new Sound Tracs 16-8-16 was no worse and no better than a MCI had to offer. Certainly not my favorite but it worked and didn't sound much different from those MCI's that the Bee Gees, KC and the Sunshine Band, the Eagles, Jimmy Buffett and others who were making their hits upon. Just no microphone input transformer, differential IC chip microphone input instead. No output Transformers. But it provided the operational features I needed and up to 32 channels of mix down that even included high/low EQ's on those 16 additional free tape return line inputs which I thought was pretty groovy. I knew it was geared at the low end entry-level professional market but I also knew what it could and could not do sonically so it was never a problem. No it wasn't my favorite sound but it worked nonetheless. And I can still listen to some of those recordings I made back in the mid-1980s on that thing without cringing too badly and still able to rather enjoy it despite its sonic shortcomings. So I'd base my purchases upon what I thought my needs might be and not worry about the dumb ass specifications of chips I already knew about. I mean their response might be not identical to a competitor because they used a 25 µF output capacitor instead of a 20 µF output capacitor. And for that kind of nonsense, I say BFD. So one device may only have a low-frequency response to 25 Hz while the other one goes all the way down to 20 Hz. And I never let specifications like that influence my purchasing decisions.

A standard was set in the United States back in the 1950s by this organization called the National Association of Broadcasters a.k.a. the NAB. And the standards set forth was that to be of professional quality for recordings and broadcast purposes, the equipment should have a specification of ± 2 DB from 50 Hz to 15,000 Hz. And while most everybody knows that human hearing may extend from 20-20,000, most of the gear everybody and anybody uses never really has to worry about passing much below 50 much less anything above 15,000 because anything beyond that won't hit broadcast. And most decent quality stereo systems aren't going to reproduce much of anything below 50 or beyond 15,000. Yes, you can hear a difference between a recording that stops at 15,000 and one that carries out to 20,000. But it's only people who hear that difference that want to hear that difference that can hear the difference and nobody else gives a damn. And when you mix, you roll most everything off between 50 and 80 Hz most of the time anyhow. Whereas maybe .05% of the listening audience might want to hear that lowest note a large church pipe organ might be able to reproduce. And a frequency that will make most speakers sound like they are passing gas. Oh boy! I always wanted to hear Michael Tilson Thomas, play that lowest note. And also, when you knew that FM and television did not pass any high frequencies beyond 15,000 Hz because they used a brick wall filter to stop everything at 15,000 Hz. And while they could cut vinyl out to 20,000 Hz, and they were doing it while also passing these fabulous mixes through high-frequency limiters and splitting off the low frequencies to monaural. And so when you knew all of those things, I would look at my audiophile friends as just being extremely anal kooky hobbyists. Then they could proudly present their $40,000 ultimate stereo playback system and it would sound glorious... kind of. And you would just wonder why anybody need to spend $40,000 to play a record with? I mean talk about priorities in life?

And where folks like audiokid need to have the finest in analog to digital conversion. Anything less than that would be unacceptable. No doubt those things sound nice. And where perhaps my Neve and API stuff would sound a lot better, I'm just as happy using a cheap IC chip converter. Because it still retains that API/Neve character of sound while it might not be of the highest quality. But what does that actually mean? Only you can decide what's important to you.

I've made my decisions and stand by them.
Mx. Remy Ann David

Thanks a lot Remy, but I think I don't mean about SSL or Neve sound because I always get Neve fans who says SSL sound isn't that good. I mean about quality because I love my Focusrite and I understand from your reply that they are best buildt than SSL 6000? don't have much information about my ISA 430 MK1, there's a lot about MKII and new products wich (in my personal opinion) makes Focusrite lost the "pro" word and make chinese made and "popular" series (affordable and low cost stuff are necesary , even Neve built their domestic Portico products, built they?.
Do you know something about Focusrites ISA 430 mk1 hystory? Lundhal transformers? has it one or more? What did Mr Neve in ISA 430?
Everybody tell me not to trade so I think i will keep my ISA's.

To hold dynamic of a recording facility has fundamentally changed in recent times. It used to be, you knew your console was going to be the centerpiece of your studio control room. And that was going to be the only piece of equipment you were going to record and mix with. Of course he wanted the very best. But the very best was only obtainable by those with significant nearly unrestricted budgets. So you either have to settle for something that was less than the best board design and build your own, to your own specifications and requirements. And if you had an API board, you might also have a couple of Neve modules? If you had a Neve console, you might have a couple of extra API modules? And if ya had a compromise on your console and purchase something as budget oriented as a Son of a 36 Grand, 501, Auditronics budget console, you might have a couple of API & Neve modules also. Or, if all you had was a homebrew and nothing else, that was all you were going to use. Then you had one or two compressor limiters, a dozen microphones, a single special effects device and if you are lucky, a halfway decent reverb.

Today, the home recording enthusiast that wants that big control room sound from the premium equipment need only purchase a 500 series powered rack from companies like API, Radial and others. You can only afford to start with one or two modules but ya get to build it up over time without having to make four major replacements and complete new rewiring of everything. And then your only other choice than need be made will be how you choose to get those devices into your computer. And where you also have a huge broad range of products allowing for 8 and more tracks of recording simultaneously. This can be a single device or it can be multiple devices.

So let's say, you need to capture live 24 channel productions? Your choice will be made based upon a wide budgetary difference between pieces of equipment. And that will be the bulk of your decision-making based on that alone. It won't be the specifications but rather what is the device capable of doing for you. Every piece of entry-level professional equipment today far exceeds the performance and specifications of similar equipment just 10 years ago. And while the top shelf equipment shall always have better specifications, it becomes no different than the folks who own Toyotas as compared to those few that own Maseratis are Lamborghinis, Aston Martin, Rolls-Royce. We all know what their incomes are and it's not like our incomes are. So that helps you make decisions real easy because you already know, it's professional, it will perform professionally. It's specifications are professional. There will always be other pieces with different specifications and I say BFD if it doesn't do what you want it to do, which really has nothing to do with specifications but operational features. And sometimes ya have to make that decision that way. And that's called a compromise and compromise is not a four letter word neither is it a three letter word... thank God. (Just an example of a three letter word that does nothing for your audio). And you could still make perfectly professional recordings on equipment that was more costly that didn't have the specifications that the cheap stuff has today.

Of course we all want to have a little piece of the action called the good stuff. And you don't have to purchase 24, 32, 48 of them anymore. You could buy one or two of your all-time favorite console from the 1970s. And then you could buy your other favorite two from your other favorite console of the 1970s. And then you could purchase another favorite two, that a prospective client asked if you had and you said yes because you could. And that's your choices today. It's almost choices you don't have to make because they're all good choices. They all have their own flavors just like the candy at the counter at the drugstore when you were a kid. And your parents would let you have but one or two. Although I've been told by Chris that I should not talk about mommy or daddy anymore? So I guess I'm being bad? You might want to put me in my control room and lock the door? That would be punishment enough with all of that old dusty equipment.

So I don't have to know anything about any of those particular pieces of equipment as they are all quite good, quite professional, you'll have no problems using them. And you'll always be able to sell it if you don't like it but you won't know what it sounds like until you get it. Some of these affirmation companies like you are inquiring about, don't build crap. History of equality transformer is that it's history is that of equality transformer and it sounds like the Transformers they've always made. Whereas a different company's transformer that's just as good, will sound slightly different. As will all the rest. So your question is really not valid to the application as it's already established ain't made in China. Don't want one of those? Request a Reichenbach or a Jensen, Marinair, St. Ives, UTC, Triad, Hammond. They are all 100% perfectly adequate and lovely sounding. So what do you really want to know about?

I'm one of those people that was not sonically impressed by the SSL 4000 E, when it came out in 1978 or was that 77? But ya had to be impressed by what could be accomplished with that console. Which also helped to bring about certain kinds of stylistic engineered sounding mixes by those that fully embraced what those SSL's could do, can still do. And where you still find a lot of guys with gold and platinum working on old 1978 consoles still, yet, no need to change as that's how they get their signature sound. But that was not my sound. Though I used those consoles in the control rooms that had them. And they make great recordings if the engineer is just as great. My favorite? Hell no it's not. It's a favorite of other guys that use the detrimental sound destructive quality of the VCA (voltage controlled amplifier's) and all of the hundreds of FET switching transistor junctions that gave them their signature sound. So they relied on the detrimental qualities of that SSL to make them millionaires. And I wouldn't consider that a bad thing even if I didn't like the sound of the console, I like the sound of their mixes and recordings from a console I did not much care for. I choose different consoles and a different signature sound that my recording techniques offer up. And I preferred the old school transformer coupled, all discrete transistor type circuitry. Though I've used plenty of consoles and own plenty of consoles that used IC chips instead of discrete transistors and I still made lovely recordings. I just couldn't play as many games with those as I can with transistors. So you don't play games when you know you can't. And you pull out all the stops when you know you can.

If you really want to know about the performance of the transformer, you could always look up the data. Now if you don't know how to interpret that data hall that affect your purchasing decisions? Every Transformers going to have something bad about it in comparison to an active circuit designs of today. This was the popular thought back in the late 1970s and throughout most of the 1980s. Transformers are bad and you can prove it through test data in comparison to a well-designed active circuit. But we all know that the active circuit just does not offer up what those lousy Transformers now have to contribute to awful PCM digital recording technologies.

So to be concerned about the transformer and a quality piece of professional equipment, you should be just as concerned about recording with linear PCM digital technologies. This is where I think everybody and I mean everybody really misses the boat here? People demand perfection in their microphones, front end preamps and everything else in the signal chain. These devices are outputting the most gorgeous continuous waves of electrons. And you want to put it through a meat grinder called a high quality, professional, 32-bit float, 192 kHz sampling meatgrinder. WTF with that? That's BS. PCM digital sucks. It's only the manufacturers that will tell you it doesn't because they are in business to make money from you. And while there are incremental improvements to be sure that are worthy, it's all succotash. PCM audio is just as awful as fluorescent lighting which I cannot stand. But they tell you you can't see the flicker. Again, isn't that nice they are telling me that my brain doesn't go crazy from 50/60 Hz strobe lights? And when anybody of authority tells you what you can't see or can't hear you must agree you must conform. Otherwise what would everybody think of you? Quite frankly my dear... I don't give a damn what they think. They are the morons. I am the professional. She can't let morons influence you without becoming one yourself. So it's up to you to decide which Transformers you like and dislike. So you're going to have to shell out some money like we all have throughout our entire careers to find out firsthand so that you can call yourself a professional. If you don't want to do that? Then it really makes no difference what you choose as it all works and it works well. If it doesn't sound good? It's not the equipment.

Now it is just history you want to know about, there is quite a bit of history to each and every one of these transformer companies. These guys were dealing in black magic. They were making wires that were not connected together magically transferring between them. Like pulling a rabbit out of a hat, they could even create passive amplifiers. Passive amplifiers what a concept. Did anybody tell Tesla about this? I think they did? And I think he was trying to tell everybody else? And the only guy they didn't think he was a nutcase was Mr. Westinghouse. Obviously the most brilliant guy in the world, Tommy Edison certainly didn't agree with his wacko ideas and concepts. And he was right? They both were. But they certainly didn't see it that way back then. They didn't know that they would always have to play together. That one was necessary to create the other. And it was the other that created the direct connection with us. So it's a transformer and the root word of courses that it transforms everything passed through it in one way or another. All of which these have been designed for professional gas passing. So it's a Ford or a Chevy or a Volkswagen or a Volvo or a Gorky and Rolls-Royce and Aston Martin and BMW and all the rest.

In another instance for another example, I've got 3 API microphone preamps (I actually have a lot more than that but we are using this for an example). Each one of these particular three API preamps are identical to each other except for one thing and that's the transformer. All Transformers utilized are of identical 1:10 winding ratios providing for 10 DB of passive gain before looking into the non-inverting input on the 2520. One preamp has the modern day Jensen. The other has the original API microphone transformer. The last one has the Beyer microphone transformer. And where the differences are extremely subtle none of which are bad and it still sounds like an API because it is. Do I consider anyone to be better than the other? No. But I can't say there are subtle differences which may influence my selection of microphones? But that's the normal course of events anyhow. You're not choosing equipment based on its technical accuracy. You're basing it upon its sound and whether that sound coincides with your sound.

I'm sure there is more in depth history to be known about how each one of these Transformers, the material they use for the core, the length, types and diameter of wire they used and how they wound it might be of some technical interest? And I don't know their particular history. So it's a rhetorical question about history you're going to need someone that knows the inside story. If you want to know the history to base your decision on whether the transformer is worthy to you and for your purposes or not, only you can decide that. There are plenty of Transformers I don't personally care for. There are others I like better. Sometimes I get what I want, other times not. It doesn't stop me. It doesn't change anything. The mix still sounds great. Job professionally accomplished. It's Miller time.

What I would really like to know his, with the proliferation of a lot of the professional audio equipment now being manufactured in China, when will the Chinese come up with some decent Transformers that, like all of the rest of their stolen circuit technologies, will at least mimic the Transformers that we demand. And that's probably not far off at the rate things are going considering we already get our neodymium magnetic material from them for our microphones and speakers made in the US of A. They managed to reasonably quality clone so many other things. It's probably a small metallurgy difference in the Transformers? And maybe they'll figure out how to embed some core material with neodymium making for Super Transformers? Who the hell knows before those might become the bees knees? Nickel mixed with iron and neodymium. Something here that electromagnetic induction a little extra kick? So maybe you should just stay transformer less until that day comes? Because then it will become something that everybody must have.

A slight boost in quality control will make them the world leaders in everything. You can't see it coming?
Mx. Remy Ann David

try it before you buy it, in your usual recording room. i bought 2 low end condensers one day. one cuz i like the sound in my buddies studio, and the store, one cuz i liked it in the store. well the Australian one sees the light of sound hardly ever. talking about 'sound qualities' is like 'listening to text'. i can't read w/ my ears, or listen w/ my eyes. sure, there is tried and true, i have 12 yr old 57, a 5yr one, and a 2 yr, they are interchangeable as far as i'm concerned. but those are not esoteric delicate mics. i never did a shoot out, cuz they all sound so close, on loud sources, and upfront vocals, i've never cared to.

old, used high-end gear (vintage) is different. how much they are used, where, for what, repairs? all that stuff comes into play, and certainly hasn't much relevance to their 'projected, or tested' numbers from 40 years ago. it's not even a bad thing, but w/ stuff like that, you gotta hear it to decide. i mean it'd take some serious research, to determine qualitative data, on the wear effects of transformers, i mean you'd basically have to do a thirty year experiment where two of the same pre had the same source split to them, but different transformers. even then it'd be tough. same thing w/ cables, there is no real way to get an agreed on scientific test. maybe one transformer drags a bit more on the power supply over the years. it's like a good song, it's the components working together.

my brother in law has an almost magical touch w/ motorized things. i spent hours, and hours, trying to get my old suzuki to start. i had the book, him on the phone, nada. so he comes by literally after i 'couldn't start it' electrically. he sits on the thing pushes the button. vrooom vroom. it's happened so many times on all types of my vehicles. i got his bmw sound system to sound better than he could, but it's about instinct. he's got the touch on motors.

i assist sometimes for a dude who just absolutely thinks the best sounds come from e 3/4000 series. he's worked w/ bob clearmountain. but when you listen to his mixes, you can hear why he likes them. besides the obsessiveness/convenience to have a comp on every mix channel, he loves very clean,clear defined,separated sounds. very bright. he also patched in a ton of comps/eqs on the way in to get the sound from scratch. i think that those early boards were so innovative for mixers cuz they had a whole signal chain accessible on the board. and remy said that, and i've talked to alot of people, and that seems to be the consensus. i know phil says the first few were crap, i'm not sure if it was the chips, (i think he said it was, i have to double check), but then they got it better. now you add in automation, in the 80's. pretty damn cool. plus it had a bus comp too. ain't leaving much for the mastering guy then.

so now your comparing feature set vs overall quality. as a busy professional, would you want to recall your mix in an hour, or for however long it took the assistant to rough it back from notes.?

like i've said before, i don't care if it's a gerbil running in a wheel inside the unit, i'f it sounds cool, it's cool w/ me. if you really like the ssl offer, get it. why not? part of the magic of vintage is how it's worn, which is why i think people get too hung up on ads, like from UA, where their like "we use the same components", and it's like, if i really want that old "sound" i should been there 30 years ago. old stuff is gonna sound different today than it did when it was newer. same w/ plug-insadds. i could care less how 'true' it sounds. rack up ten pultecs, get ten different sounds. they seems to ignore the fact that it was the combination of all those similar units creating the vibe, and that most of us buying plugins, haven't used 30 different versions to even pick our fav. they say hey we picked 'the best'. OK. now if i try to stack that 10 times, it's just stacking the same thing over and over. which is off topic, but so far to me, the less dsp i use, the more rich my recordings sound. it's not that dsp is bad. it's more selective, and i think people use the same thing over and over.

take a console. as it gets used consistently, it's channels are going to evolve differently. i mean if ch is always bass, ch2 kick, chanel 15 vocs. it's gonna wear on them differently, and not even really in a bad way. i just watched a promo vid for waves where they guy says the same thing about his 'magic' ssl. said all the channels sound mildly different, and he works w. the way they distort. good for him. but there's no specs for wear and tear in the manual.

so we listen. as far as converters go, i may be misinformed by my (mildly insane) co-worker, but his opinion was that there are only a handful of converter chips being manufactured, and what your paying for in ADCs is the superior clocking in the conversion chain.

which to my learning self makes some sense in theory, as i hear the difference in the normal stuff and the high end as more phase coherent. either way none of it sounds bad unless you make it bad, i can't blame the equip, just myself.

it's so funny to me, now that tape hiss is gone, people by plug-insto do it. maybe around 2030, sterile will come back? i have a buddy who actually does gigs w/ three other cats on linked-up gameboys. strait up 8 bit techno. he thinks that sounds good. so, OP get what you think sounds the best. the studio i use has better rooms than anyone around our area. less equipment. just standard fare, plus a couple treats. try ordering some new rooms, vs equip. i'm not half as experience as my mentors or established competition, but i ab'ed some mixes today, and not too shabby. got a lot to learn, but, it convinced me yet again, equipment isn't as important as people try to brag about.

to end my chapter, i'll say that chineese manufacturers are as/more capable than americans/british at making high end gear. they have American money, and are making state of the art facilities. i looked at some audio gear plants on video out there. they're better than ours. out stuff is old, there's is new. it's CHOICE that makes them have loose quality control. mass-production is henry fords concept. so it is theirs because they are profitable. have it any way you want it, as long as it's cheap. do you think for a second, that a kid who went to school 361 days a year for their whole life wants to make crap? i doubt it. it's profit margins, not capabilty. even the germans are competeing, altho not as compromising, still, are they making the 'best products they can' like they used to? i dunno my german headphones sound dope, and only cost me 100. miy $1000 mic sounds nice. but are they just resting on their rep, instead of trying to be innovative. which is what got them their clout?????