Please help with purchase advice on used Toft ATB 24...
Hi,
I am about to buy this but dont know as well as others here how much this is worth, considering there are multiple versions and its modified. Please let me know potential issues with what i am about to paste per owners description and $ its worth. Thank you!
"it's been completely recapped with beefier Panasonic caps everywhere, it's not the latest model with all the I/O, the inserts have been hard bybassed, the monitor section is basically worthless also, the whole mix used to have to pass through the entire monitor switching section and i wasn't using it for monitoring so i just hard bypassed it. it comes with the meter bridge and the argosy desk, parting with it cause mixing in the box now and it just collects dust. The inserts on channels 9 and 10 i believe are still in tact, and the master insert is still intact and has a bypass switch now also, (before it was always inserted) can get photos. "
I am about to buy this but dont know as well as others here how much this is worth, considering there are multiple versions and its modified. Please let me know potential issues with what i am about to paste per owners description and $ its worth. Thank you!
"it's been completely recapped with beefier Panasonic caps everywhere, it's not the latest model with all the I/O, the inserts have been hard bybassed, the monitor section is basically worthless also, the whole mix used to have to pass through the entire monitor switching section and i wasn't using it for monitoring so i just hard bypassed it. it comes with the meter bridge and the argosy desk, parting with it cause mixing in the box now and it just collects dust. The inserts on channels 9 and 10 i believe are still in tact, and the master insert is still intact and has a bypass switch now also, (before it was always inserted) can get photos. "
Comments
Doubtful. His insert bypass sounds like what I'd imagined - whi
Doubtful. His insert bypass sounds like what I'd imagined - which would be a short wire jumping from the tip conductor to the ring conductor on the back of the TRS jack.
The monitor section I'm not as clear on what he bypassed, why he did it, and how. A board of that caliber is going to be modular and have a dedicated circuit board for most functions. I've got nothing to base this on, but I still have a hunch it's a wiring harness re-routing signal rather than modified traces. Or again, it could be a simple jumper wire(s) that hardwire bypasses a switch. I'm just unclear on whether he bypassed the inline monitoring return on each input, the switch in the master section, or both.
In any case, if you got a good price - you should be very happy. Nice mixer, nice desk.
The monitor section I'm not as clear on what he bypassed, why he did it, and how. A board of that caliber is going to be modular and have a dedicated circuit board for most functions. I've got nothing to base this on, but I still have a hunch it's a wiring harness re-routing signal rather than modified traces. Or again, it could be a simple jumper wire(s) that hardwire bypasses a switch. I'm just unclear on whether he bypassed the inline monitoring return on each input, the switch in the master section, or both.
In any case, if you got a good price - you should be very happy. Nice mixer, nice desk.
Thank you for the info... Yeah after to talking my co-worker who
Thank you for the info... Yeah after to talking my co-worker who is a 2 channel audiophile at this AV company i work at, he says sometimes he gets into units and changes on the board where signal paths go as well as changes caps for sound preference. My co worker said it would be quite a bit of work to resolder the traces to go through the flow the way this unit was designed originally if he changed. He said he was trying to reduce signal paths possibly and get it straight to his preference of monitoring section... The guy who is trying to sell the unit doesnt know a whole lot but is relaying what the owner has to say. So he is gonna have him call me tonight.... Too me it seems like if you didnt want to run audio back through the unit, than through summing through monitoring than just dont use it and mix "ITB" but not back to console...So i guess he was running from DAW back into unit than to?...I dont get it either. Hopefully he will call me and make sense of it?. Any clarifications to me or suggestions to me what to ask would be appreciated... My reasoning for purchasing is to use as front end into Pro Tools 9, than out of Pro Tools 9 to console so i can mix there with the nice EQs and Toft quality sound im hearing about... Thx guys
There arent many 'different' models as they havent been out too
There arent many 'different' models as they havent been out too long....So, no telling what this might really be.
They have lots of I/O and as far as I know always have had......a really good sounding medium level mixer. Better than my Ghost in some ways.......
I would be careful If they have made all these changes to something that hasnt been in release for very long.
They have lots of I/O and as far as I know always have had......a really good sounding medium level mixer. Better than my Ghost in some ways.......
I would be careful If they have made all these changes to something that hasnt been in release for very long.
Yeah thats what im afraid of after researching and reviewing pos
Yeah thats what im afraid of after researching and reviewing posts with issues in the early versions. I didnt get that about what he said about the IO either as i have seen no change in that at any point. They just have different channel models all with same features. Maybe he was talking of the ADAT card that was being talked about or released.
If this is one from the first batch Dave (4 years ago), you think it was recapped because of issues or he really thought they could be improved?. I know, just making educated assumptions but i trust you and others here versus the salesman thats selling it. I noticed the faders are yellow too, newer ones are white. Oh what do you think he means by bypassing the monitor section and inserts?. Does this mean internally or with a user feature?. I will shoot a email to Toft support as well to get any info but appreciate any opinions or expertise on you recording vets. ;)
Im thinking i will get some of that stoner rock punch and mid range (Queens of the Stone Age etc.) that originated from of our desert scene here with this mixer... After i log several hours into it of course.
If this is one from the first batch Dave (4 years ago), you think it was recapped because of issues or he really thought they could be improved?. I know, just making educated assumptions but i trust you and others here versus the salesman thats selling it. I noticed the faders are yellow too, newer ones are white. Oh what do you think he means by bypassing the monitor section and inserts?. Does this mean internally or with a user feature?. I will shoot a email to Toft support as well to get any info but appreciate any opinions or expertise on you recording vets. ;)
Im thinking i will get some of that stoner rock punch and mid range (Queens of the Stone Age etc.) that originated from of our desert scene here with this mixer... After i log several hours into it of course.
Here is the actual owners decription to summarize modifications
Here is the actual owners decription to summarize modifications which it seemd it was a early version that wasnt all balanced...
"If you wanted to use all the inserts on the desk, then yes.
the reason i took out the inserts is cause they were unbalanced, and it makes for better signal path with balanced gear since you can just patch out of pro tools into your outboard and then into the line in of the channel. going from pro tools to the desk to outboard and back makes less sense because 1) the inserts on the desk are not balanced and most outboard gear is, so a more efficient way to connect it would be before audio even hits the channel and 2) even if you are using the inserts on the desk, the eq always comes after the insert, there is no way to put the eq before the insert, it is always last. the only reason i left 9/10 was because i had unbalanced compressors that i had inserted across those channels. so unless you had a ton of unbalanced stuff i would say just leave it how it is now and patch from DAW to outboard and then into desk. this also is less noisy since all the signals are balanced.
yea power supply is good, the monitoring section was a pretty interesting deign they had going, if i switched sources to the 2 track mix instead of the monitor mix, if i had nothing playing through the 2 track mix, the desk output would still bleed into the speakers. basically i just took all that out so that no switches or poor grounds could mess with the audio signal and i bought a central station. it has a digital input so if you want to feed your mix back into pro tools and don't have any extra analog outputs, you can just use something like the SPDIF output to monitor your mix and then you don't lose any outputs for channels."
"If you wanted to use all the inserts on the desk, then yes.
the reason i took out the inserts is cause they were unbalanced, and it makes for better signal path with balanced gear since you can just patch out of pro tools into your outboard and then into the line in of the channel. going from pro tools to the desk to outboard and back makes less sense because 1) the inserts on the desk are not balanced and most outboard gear is, so a more efficient way to connect it would be before audio even hits the channel and 2) even if you are using the inserts on the desk, the eq always comes after the insert, there is no way to put the eq before the insert, it is always last. the only reason i left 9/10 was because i had unbalanced compressors that i had inserted across those channels. so unless you had a ton of unbalanced stuff i would say just leave it how it is now and patch from DAW to outboard and then into desk. this also is less noisy since all the signals are balanced.
yea power supply is good, the monitoring section was a pretty interesting deign they had going, if i switched sources to the 2 track mix instead of the monitor mix, if i had nothing playing through the 2 track mix, the desk output would still bleed into the speakers. basically i just took all that out so that no switches or poor grounds could mess with the audio signal and i bought a central station. it has a digital input so if you want to feed your mix back into pro tools and don't have any extra analog outputs, you can just use something like the SPDIF output to monitor your mix and then you don't lose any outputs for channels."
To enhance sound quality it seems, or if one or more go out he p
To enhance sound quality it seems, or if one or more go out he probally figured to try better ones and make them all the same..... The manual shows the internal signal flow which is good, i can always have my coworker worker unmodify it back to stock... Id just leave the caps though
The Toft consoles get gushing reviews from guys that own them.
The Toft consoles get gushing reviews from guys that own them. And the Argosy desk is probably worth a pretty penny as well.
Just guessing, but I wouldn't think the insert bypass would be hard to undo. The monitor section bypass is the one I'd be most worried about.
As far as it's value given it's age and modifications, that's harder to say. New with a meter bridge the Toft retailed for around $6700, the Argosy 50 series desk specifically for the Toft (no sidecar racks) well over a grand.
Just guessing, but I wouldn't think the insert bypass would be hard to undo. The monitor section bypass is the one I'd be most worried about.
As far as it's value given it's age and modifications, that's harder to say. New with a meter bridge the Toft retailed for around $6700, the Argosy 50 series desk specifically for the Toft (no sidecar racks) well over a grand.
From a quick read, it sounds as though the insert strapping was
From a quick read, it sounds as though the insert strapping was done in the mistaken belief that it is not useful in a balanced environment so had to be bridged out. It could be that it's simply the switching on the jack that is modified, and would be relatively easy to re-instate.
Your correspondent is mistaken about the postion of the EQ. As long as the "EQ to Mon" switch is in the input and not the tape return position, the EQ is positioned before the insert point. This is not normal practice, but at least it can be switched out of circuit for recording.
Your correspondent is mistaken about the postion of the EQ. As long as the "EQ to Mon" switch is in the input and not the tape return position, the EQ is positioned before the insert point. This is not normal practice, but at least it can be switched out of circuit for recording.
Thanks for the input. Im still waiting for details from seller o
Thanks for the input. Im still waiting for details from seller on whats working and not... Im worried maybe patchbays were connected and phantom power or something could of ruined circuits on the mixer if patching things incorrectly. Maybe i should just bring a couple pieces of gear or tone generator and monitors to check all circuits....Ugghhh, lot of testing but its worth it.
Its certainly not going to be a throw-away purchase. Probably so
Its certainly not going to be a throw-away purchase. Probably something you intend to live with for quite a while, so there's really not a thing as "too much testing". Its good you can get access to it to even feel the faders.
Since you want to use the pres AND remix you're going to have to have the second bus for monitoring the input FROM the PT. Not a big deal going in but a really big deal coming out and going back in.
These boards were made for this. In fact, probably the first major release for analog to digital and the precurser to compact mixers like the newest Neve and API's and the cut-down SSL. Really, before this one, you had all the mid-range stuff, Soundcraft, Mackie, a lot of higher end broadcast boards, etc etc...and though very usable in the right hands, not a lot to be said for the sonics (I do get by with my old Ghost)...The Toft's are all about that real clean upfront pres and really really good EQ and just an overall great sounding compact mixer. At only four years, its probably the thought that you could extend the headroom and the soundfield a bit with recapping. Certainly not failures....I'm thinking originally they were decent quality components.
You will certainly get a lot of miles/dollar with a properly set-up and maintained Toft. I like em a lot and would have one except its almost a side-wise jump for what I have now. If I was to get something new it would have to be something old. A-Range Trident, Harrison, Even a Sony/MCI with a bunch of John Hardy's in the pre section.
Let us know how it goes and how it sounds.
BTW....Look up the Sound on Sound review from 2008. It is very clear on the 'monitor' path as originally intended. It could be what the variation is on this one.....
Since you want to use the pres AND remix you're going to have to have the second bus for monitoring the input FROM the PT. Not a big deal going in but a really big deal coming out and going back in.
These boards were made for this. In fact, probably the first major release for analog to digital and the precurser to compact mixers like the newest Neve and API's and the cut-down SSL. Really, before this one, you had all the mid-range stuff, Soundcraft, Mackie, a lot of higher end broadcast boards, etc etc...and though very usable in the right hands, not a lot to be said for the sonics (I do get by with my old Ghost)...The Toft's are all about that real clean upfront pres and really really good EQ and just an overall great sounding compact mixer. At only four years, its probably the thought that you could extend the headroom and the soundfield a bit with recapping. Certainly not failures....I'm thinking originally they were decent quality components.
You will certainly get a lot of miles/dollar with a properly set-up and maintained Toft. I like em a lot and would have one except its almost a side-wise jump for what I have now. If I was to get something new it would have to be something old. A-Range Trident, Harrison, Even a Sony/MCI with a bunch of John Hardy's in the pre section.
Let us know how it goes and how it sounds.
BTW....Look up the Sound on Sound review from 2008. It is very clear on the 'monitor' path as originally intended. It could be what the variation is on this one.....
I am going up to pick up in a few days but i was confirming a co
I am going up to pick up in a few days but i was confirming a couple things and this is what i got....I asked how can i unbypass the changes he made so i can mix through the console instead of just using as a front end. This was his reply...He thought i was talking about the recapping which i wasnt....
"to undo everything would really just be a lot of work, the insert bypass on the channel is just a jumper wire so you would just have to reconnect the traces, i'm not sure what brand the original caps are or how much they'd cost but the new caps are way better than the originals. it definitely sounds better than the original setup, the guys at toft had to check it out once for what turned out to be a faulty power cable and they thought the mod was awesome"
"to undo everything would really just be a lot of work, the insert bypass on the channel is just a jumper wire so you would just have to reconnect the traces, i'm not sure what brand the original caps are or how much they'd cost but the new caps are way better than the originals. it definitely sounds better than the original setup, the guys at toft had to check it out once for what turned out to be a faulty power cable and they thought the mod was awesome"
Finally!!!!.... I met up with the guy in Hollywood. $3500 for at