x
hueseph 1 November 2010

I just got GAS in the worst way. Maybe unduly.

Topic Tags

Comments

audiokid Mon, 11/01/2010 - 21:27

Ya, very sweet indeed. I want it!
I think we are going to start seeing converters in the majority of pre's of this quality too. And this comes standard. Oh... so nice.
And a lot of 8 channel stuff becoming more standard.

Change is coming and sound shaping is getting better. Hybrid daw systems, hybrid preamps, hybrid hybrid hybrid musicians I'm singing.

Cool, thanks for sharing.

audiokid Wed, 11/03/2010 - 19:54

I wonder who is making their built-in AD ? Anyone know? Are these companies setting up their own independent AD shop or buying/partnering with third party AD/DA companies like Lavry, Lynx, Prism ... ? That would make sense to me.

Millennia HV-3R has an optional 8 channel 24/96 AD in it too, that's coming my way next month. I've wondered if that is a Lavry AD in it because of the 24/96 being Lavry's mark. SPL has an AD option for their Gold Mic. What other pre's are installing AD? I sure like where this is going.

Big K Thu, 11/04/2010 - 03:11

UA has an excellent converter in its portfolio:
[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.uaudio.c…"]Universal Audio | 2192[/]="http://www.uaudio.c…"]Universal Audio | 2192[/]

Since they also do the UAD plugins I think, it is "homemade"...

-----

If I bought this 4-710 ontop of the other gadgets I am planing to purchase till Christmas ...no present I could affort will keep my wife from biting my throat.
But, since I am sensible and provident...I will buy it next year....February...lol...
;-)

Big K ( Rainer Klaeger )
Digital Audio Studio

hueseph Tue, 11/09/2010 - 16:43

Just to clarify, I got curious and contacted Universal Audio. I can't quote them directly but from what I was told, the A/D converter is not proprietary but designed by AKM. Regardless, they seem confident in the quality of the unit and I highly doubt they would use anything that might be considered sub standard.

BobRogers Wed, 11/10/2010 - 08:52

No, to me the digital out is a great feature. I'm like many people who have interfaces with a limited number of analog channels and have not made the jump to buy standalone converters. This would give four excellent preamps and space for four more purely analog preamps. Seems like a great candidate for pairing with a Fireface800 or something similar. Definitely would like to give this a listen.

hueseph Fri, 02/11/2011 - 12:07

It's really hard to judge by a video. Even at High Def. The UA seemed to sound brighter than the SSL Alpha channel. Without knowing what the settings were for both, it's really hard to make any sort of assessment. The SSL sounded more familiar to me. I don't know if that's better or worse. There were things they did with the UA that I didn't like. There certainly some nice things they did with the piano and that they were able to demonstrate solid state as opposed to tube was cool. I wish I could understand what they were saying but in that same respect, not understanding leaves me to form my own opinion based on what I hear.

It sounded nice enough at points but I have to admit, I'm a little under impressed. The Alpha Channel sounds pretty thick in comparison but again, it's so hard to really make that judgment from what seems at points to be a third generation representation of the sound. IE: the mic through the preamps, through their monitors and into the camera mic. I'm sure they must have edited the recorded sound into the video.

They must have an idea what they're talking about. They can certainly afford to know. There's a DW Fearn in there that's probably twice as much as the 4-710d for only two channels.

BobRogers Wed, 03/16/2011 - 05:37

Davedog, post: 364297 wrote: Look into the ISA 428 and its converter. The specs will blow yer mind! So will the sound. UA is different ....both high quality build and sound.

BTW The Focusrite does 8 channels of conversion at a time....So other pres you might have can become part of a front end.

Both the ISA 428 and the 4-710d are 4 preamp/8 channel conversion. So when are you going to get a 4-710d so you can do a shootout?

BobRogers Sun, 07/03/2011 - 16:14

I'm giving this thread a bump because I really want to get more reaction to the comparison between the 4-710d and the ISA 428. I'd love to do a shootout on this. Has anyone tried both yet? I recently got an AEA TRP, so the high gain of the ISA 428 is not as important to me. (I have not even opened the box of the TRP. Finished teaching my summer class yesterday. My next six weeks should be better.) My general inclination is toward more color from a pre and I suspect that the UA would deliver that. Also, either unit would be replacing a Focusrite Octopre which I found somewhat disappointing. (I know this is not fair to Focusrite. Different prices, different places of manufacture, etc. But it's there in the back of my mind.)

Davedog Wed, 07/06/2011 - 08:09

Bob, the Octopre and the ISA might as well be two different manufacturers. All of my research when I did my upgrade eventually centered around both of these pres. ie: the 710 and the 428. If its color then the 710, if its soundscape and clean with an attitude then the 428. Both will be great additions. The 710 tends to hold its resale a bit better due to Focusrite having their name on stuff like the Octopre.....

BobRogers Wed, 07/06/2011 - 11:27

Davedog, post: 373695 wrote: Bob, the Octopre and the ISA might as well be two different manufacturers.

I know it's not rational, and in general I don't hold it against manufacturers for building stuff to a price point that will give them a lot of sales. Worse - I don't really know of anything other than the Octopre that delivers those features at that price. It's just that the Octopre purchase is one where I should have been patient and waited to buy at a higher level. It's not their problem, it's mine, but it still nags at me.

All of my research when I did my upgrade eventually centered around both of these pres. ie: the 710 and the 428. If its color then the 710, if its soundscape and clean with an attitude then the 428. Both will be great additions. The 710 tends to hold its resale a bit better due to Focusrite having their name on stuff like the Octopre.....

As a rule, I'm a color guy; so I'll probably end up with the 710. If the stuff on eBay sells, the bills get paid, and I come out clean in a couple of months then some studio upgrades will be in order.

vasillah Fri, 09/28/2012 - 16:22

Focusrite vs UA

BobRogers, post: 373704 wrote: I know it's not rational, and in general I don't hold it against manufacturers for building stuff to a price point that will give them a lot of sales. Worse - I don't really know of anything other than the Octopre that delivers those features at that price. It's just that the Octopre purchase is one where I should have been patient and waited to buy at a higher level. It's not their problem, it's mine, but it still nags at me.
As a rule, I'm a color guy; so I'll probably end up with the 710. If the stuff on eBay sells, the bills get paid, and I come out clean in a couple of months then some studio upgrades will be in order.

Hi Guys !

I own Focusrite Liquid4pre and UA 4-710. Liquid4pre is not ISA 428 but my friend owns one, these units are not that different. I'd say Liquid is a bit better, "cleaner". I like Liquid for it's clarity. Even without it's "liquid" hardware snapsots it is worth it's price - you may not use Liquid emulations if you don't like. By the way it already has great DAC for which you need to pay xtra in case of ISA.
UA is a different beast, it adds more "color" but it is by no means worse. And surprise: it is made in China ! ("designed in California" whatever it means). Focusrite is assembled in Europe.

It is good to have both onboard. In general, when you have quality preamps and compare them with budget stuff like Presonus Digimax, which I own ( and which is GOOOD for the money) - the difference is huge. These are two difference worlds. Frankly speaking, with Presonus I had to add a lot of eq/comp to make it sound good. When you record with good preamps you need to do virtually nothing.

Summary: both units are great. Since we need 8 preamps to record a drumset it is good to have two 4-ch preamps, maybe two different ones. Both are excellent choice.

Tom

vasillah Sun, 10/28/2012 - 10:04

Few more words about 4-710 d

I am still happy with my 4-710 but after few sessions I can say more than few weeks before. First, the minuses. The quality of attenuators (rapid jumps of volume with a small movement of pot) and their plastic covers - they make me think about cheap chinese sfuff rhather than UA product I used to. In fact, unit was manufactered in China. The rest of the unit is ok. You must think about this unit like about "tone mangling" device because range of tones, especially with slightly overdriven tube stage - is vast. The key is to use tube stage as a colour tube for your sound. Slightly overdriven gives some "sparkle" but heavy driven gives a lot of artistic expression. This techniqe works great for a snare drum. An addition of fast attack limiter works well here.
Regarding "surgicaly clean sounds" they are difficult to obtain. Therefore, unlike other reviewers I find it not well suited for toms. My Liquid4pre works perfect treat for toms as they are very clean and dynamic.

That's it. Tom.

KurtFoster Sun, 10/28/2012 - 11:26

this from the UA site;

At the core of the 4-710d are four channels of tone-blending “Twin-Finity” mic preamps with true-bypass 1176-style compression, including specially tuned "fast" and "slow" settings. Each of the four mic preamp channels allows for continuously variable phase-aligned tone, between a 100% tube and 100% solid-state signal path.

the 4-710 is not a 610 pre. different animal. also not an 1176. again a different animal. 1176 style? yes. 1176 ? no. never heard one but i would bet they sound very good.

isa 428 again sounds great. different than a UA.

liquid pre ... i would like to own one but i don't really think it would be a go to piece. more like try this instead. modeling in general gets me there about 89%. the real thing always seems better to me.

BobRogers Sun, 10/28/2012 - 15:07

I know I've posted it elsewhere on the board, but obviously I didn't put a review in this thread. I bought the 4-710 d after the discussion here, and I'm quite pleased with it. Last session I recorded I used it rather than my API 3124+ for kick and snare top and bottom. I also use the UA as my bass DI on just about every session now. It's highly colored, not that versatile (more on that below), but I've found it extremely useful.

The unit has two volume knobs: input (gain) and output (level). With the compressor engaged, this is what they mean by "1176 style" - fixed threshold, input controlled compression. Unlike the 1176, the ratio is fixed (I think about 4:1) and you have a choice of fast or slow rather than adjustable attack or release. (Not a big deal to me. I find myself using either a very fast or a very slow setting on my 1176 plugins.) Nice sounding compressor, but nothing to make me sell an 1176 (if I owned one) or stop using my nice upsampled UAD 1176 plugins.

What's quirky about the unit is that even with the compressor bypassed (they claim true bypass) the gain knob will drive the input stage to distortion at a lower level than any other preamp I own. Now once I realized this, i put it in the "feature, not a bug" category. On both the tube and solid state circuits (or a blend) the distortion is very nice. A rather smooth analog compression. But it does mean that if you want this to be a transparent amp you have to sent the gain pretty low and the level pretty high. Contrast this with the API 3124 with its fixed (and powerful) output stage where if you want to drive the input stage you have to pad the output and crank the heck out of the input. As a result, I basically use this only for bass and drums. I have enough other gear that this is no big deal, and it is definitely a great amp for those applications. Something like (for instance) the API 3124 is a better all around amp (with a 35% higher price tag, no conversion, no compression.)

vasillah Mon, 10/29/2012 - 01:46

Kurt Foster, post: 395299 wrote: this from the UA site;

liquid pre ... i would like to own one but i don't really think it would be a go to piece. more like try this instead. modeling in general gets me there about 89%. the real thing always seems better to me.

I just wanted to say that 4pre is out of stock in most stores but sometimes you can buy one for very attractive price. Sonically it is totally oposite to 4-710. I can compare it to isa 428 as I used it a lot. While ISA is rather on the warm side (but still very clean), 4pre remains "cold" and analytic. I think that the goal was to have neutral sounding pres so these convolutions could be heard. Anyway, I barely use these digital convolutions, I use preamp "as it is" and it sounds awesome on overheads and toms. Like 4-710 it has digital conversion onboard, with ISA you need to buy i/o card extra. And last but not least: 4pre looks very sexy ;) I highly recommend this preamp. It is not very popular and perhaps that is why you can buy one cheap these days.
The only disadvantage of 4pre is lack of insert.

Tom

vasillah Mon, 10/29/2012 - 11:30

BobRogers, post: 395327 wrote: For that style of preamp I have four channels of AEA TRP (the ribbon preamp). Tons of clean gain (84dB). Great on ribbons on low spl sources and for rather low output dynamics like the Shure SM7b. Not that expensive either - a bit over $400 per channel.

Thanks, I will check it.

T

x

User login