Skip to main content

Hey everyone! Where could I figure out the equipment used in certain popular recordings topping the charts right now, without having to contact the label and finding the engineers/producers that worked on that particular project, etc.

For instance, some of my favorite engineering and use of equipment for a vocal is Adam Levine's vocal for R City's "Locked Away" Been digging and can't find anything...

If you know anything that might be useful, I would love to hear it. Thanks!


pcrecord Fri, 01/15/2016 - 11:48

Most top chart productions are done in professional studios and engineers use what ever they feel like the day they record and mix etc..
If your goal is to identify what could be good for you, stop right there. Success isn't about gear. (maybe a very small part).
Good writings, good performances in the right room with the right mic and pre and converters and etc.. you get the point.
Also the best gear isn't necessary the best gear for you because your room and instruments (including voice) is different.

For any other reason, the best way to know what was used is to contact the engineer because labels mostly don't care about gear... just how it sells..
Other thing to do is check the gear list of the studio it was made in and investigate the engineer habits (if any)

Even videos are tricky because they are often staged. That U87 looks good and Professional.. but they might have used a Sm57...

DonnyThompson Sat, 01/16/2016 - 01:05

DKAUDIO, post: 435359, member: 49673 wrote: For instance, some of my favorite engineering and use of equipment for a vocal is Adam Levine's vocal for R City's "Locked Away" Been digging and can't find anything...

If you know anything that might be useful, I would love to hear it. Thanks!

It's a valid-enough question; especially with newer engineers, those who are entering into the craft and are thirsty for knowledge, and certainly understandable that you'd want to know what makes a certain song "tick", as many engineers have had the same kinds of questions over the years...

But it's not always easy to dissect certain songs - some are easier than others, as in, "well that's quite obviously a B3 with a Leslie stack on that part"...or, "those are Mellotron flutes"... or even "They've got a 1 second delay on the voice..."
Those things are easier to determine. But subtle textural nuances, like tone, or sonics as the result of particular signal chains, preamps, etc. can be difficult - if not impossible - to say for absolute certain just by listening. ( Contacting the label would be pretty much pointless - the labels don't care what the studios/engineers did; all they care about is that the record sounds good, and that it was brought in on time and at or below budget... and even if they did have that information available, they probably wouldn't understand what any of it actually means anyway).

There are guys here on RO who could take educated and experienced guesses, and knowing the caliber of the studio(s) can allow for certain presumptions as to what particular gear might have been used, just by knowing the caliber of the studio...but it's impossible to say for certain just by listening, that they used "X mic through Y preamp".
Different studios have different gear - although at that pro level, they're all using very nice gear. And on that level, those pro caliber pieces - Neve, SSL, API, Millennia, Grass Valley, Neumann, AKG, Telefunken, racks of high-dollar peripheral processing, uber-high quality conversion, not to mention the ITB processing they might have available ... are expected to be available and accessible by those who choose that studio - whether by a hired-gun freelance engineer or a known producer... or even by lesser known individuals of either of those positions.

( from here on out, to save time, when I mention the words "gear" or "equipment", I'm combining both hardware and ITB processing, because so many releases these days use just as much ITB processing as hardware/peripheral... often even more).

If I'm producing an artist, and the budget allows me to book time at a "real" studio like Ocean Way or Criteria; because of those studio's reputations ( and their $ rates), I expect certain things. I expect there to be Neumann and other pro level mics to be in their locker. I expect their pre amps to be of the highest quality, I expect the acoustics of both their tracking room(s) and their control room to be acoustically balanced, their performance areas to sound great, and their monitors to be top-notch and accurate, and I expect their conversion system to be the very best available.

The obvious thing with this song is that you have a very good singer. It all starts there. And, Levine is a very good singer.

But, as far as the equipment that was used; they could have had him singing into a Neumann U87 ... or not. Or they could have used a U47 ... or not. They might have used extrenal hi end preamps, like Millennia's, or, Grass Valleys or SPL's... or not.
They may have used the stock preamps in an SSL console (or Neve/API/etc.) or, these days, it's possible that a console wasn't even used at all.
It could have been the result of recording the vocal through any - or none - of the above, and maybe they used a 414 through a Focusrite ISA... or even a 58 into a Presonus pre, directly into Pro Tools- but on that note, maybe they didn't even use Pro Tools at all. It's an industry standard, and a safe bet, but they aren't the only pro-level and industry accepted DAW platform available anymore, so perhaps they used Logic instead... you can't tell those things just by listening.
And, it might not have even been recorded ( or mixed) at a "big" studio at all ... but was perhaps recorded or mixed in someone's well-built home studio. That scenario is not as far-fetched now as it once was.

The final sound could have also been the result of heavy Pro Tools ( or Logic, or Samplitude, or FL or S1 ) based production, relying more on post-pro editing, construction, track comping, phrase/pitch correction and plug-in processing.

But, even if you did have all that information, and even if you did have the exact same gear as what they used on the session, it's still unlikely that you'd get the same results.

First, LOL, because you're not Adam Levine, second, because your recording/mixing environment's acoustic signature wouldn't be the same, (and which aren't usually even the same rooms), third, the accuracy of your monitoring rig in relation to your space's acoustics, and fourth - and perhaps most importantly of all - because you're not the same engineer. ;)

There's no doubt that the quality of the equipment makes a big difference in the ultimate sound of a song. So does the environment(s) in which you track and mix. But those things are only a part of the picture... they're big parts, but not the only parts.
Human skill, talent, and experience in arrangement, performance, critical listening, engineering and production, are HUGE factors in how a mix turns out.
Simply using the same gear guarantees nothing, other than the gear is of a quality that doesn't present bad things - like noise, buzz, hum, or overall cheap and nasty sonics.

But, if you really are curious about it, then probably your best bet is to research the engineer who worked on it, along with the studio(s) where it was recorded and/or mixed ( and it's not at all unlikely that these were two separate studios, maybe even three); this may provide certain clues, at least as to what particular gear was at least available... But just knowing what gear was available doesn't tell you what gear they actually used, or even if it was used at all, nor would it tell you how it was used, how it was routed in the workflow, or what particular settings were used.

And - even if you were able to reach the engineer, and if they were okay with sharing their personal black-bag engineering chops - which are sometimes kept closely guarded - these guys work on different stuff all the time, to the extent that they might not even remember exactly what they used, or what they did specifically on one song. There are some engineers who do remember what they did, or those who will keep a log, but usually, when an engineer explains what he or she did on a particular song, it's usually connected with a song that has become famously huge, iconic... but in the course of routine, day to day engineering with a variety of pop acts, on that level, it's entirely possible they wouldn't be able to recall the exact gear they used - or explain in detail what they did. All pro studios have all kinds of great gear, and these guys get so accustomed to using gear of that caliber, that to them it's no big del that they used an LA2 on a vocal track, because they do that all the time without even giving much thought to it.... they get to a point that all the gear that we find as being so incredible just becomes rather "routine" for them to use. Asking them to remember what they did specifically on a session 6 months - or even 6 weeks ago, might be difficult for them to answer, because they've done 100 different sessions since then.

Much of this could be Pro Tools chops, too... there are engineers out there who are "PT Wizards"; they know Pro Tools inside and out, top to bottom, every little nook and cranny, and have even done things with PT that it wasn't even designed to do. Some of these guys have not only discovered little hidden tricks, but they've gone as far as to have invented some of those tricks themselves. Very often, these individuals know more about PT than the engineers who actually work at Avid do; and who have developed their own little PT tricks, their own PT formulas, and "sounds" based on little things that they've come up with themselves over time.

In relation to that with this song, the engineer might not be as forthcoming about telling others what they used and how they worked as you'd like or hope them to be. Engineers build their reputations on their sound, and become known for a certain sonic "vibe" that producers and artists like and want; and they might not want their process(es) to become public knowledge, as it then becomes accessible to everyone. By protecting their chops, they're protecting their own careers. So, it's not always out of a sense of selfishness or arrogance that they don't explain some things ... it's simply economic. It's their "secret recipe", and they don't want other cats to know how they make the sausage... LOL

Of course, they're not all like this. Many are happy to share their ideas and explain their formulas to others; they like to talk about what they do and how they do it, they enjoy passing on what they know to younger upstarts ... Andrew Scheps, Butch Vig, and CLA have all been very open about many of their processes and workflows. Although... we don't really know for sure that they're telling us everything - they might be holding some things back... ;)

Start by researching the engineer, listen to other songs they've done; then research where they work. Look up the studio(s) online; (most pro studios love to brag about the gear they have). If the engineer and the producer aren't one in the same, do the same thing(s) with the producer... and start to put the pieces of the puzzle together.


audiokid Sat, 01/16/2016 - 05:11

Other than what the others have put so well,

Specifically POP
I have been into pop music all my life. Pop to me has always been about youth and a sound. Learn the sound, avoid the dated bloat that is out of sync with the current trends. Learn what not to do. Use electronics. Be different but the same.
Some people spend their entire life trying to record like pop, building the best studio, going to insane lengths to do everything perfect when all you need is a good front end and a computer. Its team work with pop goal in mind. Old farts with their head up historical lust to keep convincing us their way is better, ... will kill it every time.

DonnyThompson Sun, 01/17/2016 - 01:34

audiokid, post: 435385, member: 1 wrote: I have been into pop music all my life.

I've come across musicians in my life who, through a sense of self-righteousness (arrogance), or who, after having completed a year of theory at Berkelee, have felt that pop music was an "illegitimate" form of music - that "no true musician would ever really want to write or play it", that it's "far too simplistic", and that "it doesn't require any talent" and that "anyone can do it"...

That because it's usually never more than 3 or 4 chords, with such simple and basic melodies, that it was to be looked down upon like some bastard stepchild of "true" music...

"True Music" requires many different time sigs, a multitude of complex chords and intervals, chained together to form something "intelligent'.

My response to those people has always been the same... have you ever tried to write a pop song?

Have you ever sat down, and written something that is hooky, melodic, rhythmic... with lyrics that convey a story... that has people singing it or whistling it 5 minutes after they hear it? .... and all at under 3 minutes?

If it's really that simple, if you find music like that to be that basic, that easy, and requiring virtually no thought or labor to accomplish? ... then go ahead... try it yourself. Show me.

I don't care if it's "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" by The Beatles, or " You Oughta Know" by Alanis Morrisette, or "Hot Blooded" by Foreigner, or "Found Out About You" by The Gin Blossoms ... go ahead... try and write a song like those; my guess is you're gonna find out pretty fast just how very NOT easy it actually is to do. I don't care if you know your theory in your sleep, or if you can play a raised ninth against a sus'd 2 resolving to a new key sig coming off of an 11th...

You wanna impress me? Go ahead and write me a good pop song. ;)



audiokid Sun, 01/17/2016 - 08:24

DonnyThompson, post: 435428, member: 46114 wrote: You wanna impress me? Go ahead and write me a good pop song.

I think we are getting off topic here so I will steer it back.

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://recording.or…"]Equipment used in Consumer pop music[/]="http://recording.or…"]Equipment used in Consumer pop music[/]
Personally I do think there are formulas which also include a sound. There is a recognizable sound to every generation or style of music. At least that's what I hear and believe.

Also, would we market a Jazz trio with an 808 kick in it? I certainly wouldn't. But I may take some classic jazz parts of a song and spin it into a modern pop beat. That would work! ;)

Pop music generally has the sounds of the current crop of culture that is also related to buzz.

I think we've proven this simply by hearing what the Wrecking Crew did for pop. Obviously we need the song but I wonder if half the songs would have even charted had the pop brilliance of those people not been involved.
Also, I doubt a lot of pop songs that made it over the years, would make it today. So the idea that a great song is a great song, that it would make it regardless of the timing, is simply not true to me.
Pop music is a business and if people thought about music, more as a business, we would have a lot more great pop songs.

Can I write a hit song, maybe. I could have sang in one in my youthful days. But today I would sound like an older man (old fart). Not too pop friendly if you ask me.
If I ever get that song, I most definitely wouldn't be singing in it. I would get someone young, with a sound that was suited for it. I would also carefully choose what instrumentation I would put it it. Most likely 90% would be electronic with some real guitar for colour. The guitar would be heard or not heard so well. But that would also be depending on if it suited it or not. And this is now, not next year. Next year may change.

How do we know what is right for a song? Imho, I guess that's the difference between someone who is like Carol Kaye, QJ or some old fart that wants a B3 in everything.

I think good producers know what belongs in what better. All to tell the story of what its all about. Who is part of your team... I think this is a vital part to creating a pop superstar.

But I think the OP isn't asking most of what we are discussing right now.

Equipment used in Consumer pop music

I have a feeling the OP is asking about gear and the more technical aspects of recording. The sound and how to get it. Which I personally think includes electronics.
Get a good front end.
If your tracks are recorded well (up to standards)... , you can fit into a circle of friends of as good. When tracks sound sonic-ally similar, they glue better. Which may help collaborate and market something more successfully.

My studio and business concept is perfect for collaborating with others on a global scale. Or lets put it this way. I wouldn't be overly motivated to shop my tracks to someone with a crappy system. Thus, birds of a feather, flock together. Or... where there is quality, there is a certain level of talent too. At least I would hope so. I mean, some guy that has been studying cello, piano etc for 30 years, invested in a beautiful recording system for his work to be presented well, isn't likely going to be overly motivated collaborating with a really bad sounding vocal collaboration. Its going to be a turn off when the tracks are loaded and the first thing you hear is bla.
I would expect collateral damage from that as well. Meaning, if you want to hang with pro's, you should also have a professional sound. But we all know, if you hear a gem, you hear past the bla too. But just saying...

Another Example: If my vocal chain sounds great, its easier for me to shop out my higher quality tracks (collaborate) to a certain scale. Or, attract talent looking for the best place to record their work (swings both ways).
From my mixing experience, top level sonics fit into a mix with a more modern, glued sound. Samples and replacement, drum machines, fat analog keyboards etc all sound awesome on their own. Put in a poor recorded track and you are instantly cutting bass because its so over powering.
This is also why Pro Tools was so successful. If everyone is using the same system, it all flows from one studio to the next, within the "Pro Tools" sound. No one is really complaining about the sound, because it all sounds like pro tools. (Another topic).

Imho, if the vocal chain is really good sounding, then its much easier for everything else in the mix to glue better. If the vocals sound terrible (all tinny and ess'y, then as an example, "modern" well recorded samples stand out like a sore thumb and it never glues well. You are then forced to degrade the sound quality to match to the weakest link in the chain. At least that's how I mix.

This why most home audio music doesn't sound that good with samples. The samples usually sound great, and the vocals or low end micing just sounds wrong. Often people blame the sample, when it really is, imho, the opposite. Everything sounds phasy, out of place, pieced together. Bad vocals mixed together with great sounding samples.
A nightmare for the mixer. Boring, unreal, unnatural to the listener.

There really is no one answer, but you'll never go wrong investing in excellent mics, conversion, pre-amps, at least one LA2A and an 1176 and a good DAW that you are able to get around on without too much trouble.
Lets not forget to add top quality acoustics that are suited for your talent and the very best monitoring system you can afford.
If you can't hear it, all the gear in the world won't matter.

Fun topic.

DonnyThompson Sun, 01/17/2016 - 19:26

audiokid, post: 435438, member: 1 wrote: I think good producers know what belongs in what better. All to tell the story of what its all about. Who is part of your team... I think this is a vital part to creating a pop superstar.

That was Phil Spector's formula...

His method of layering and combining instruments
Using bleed to his advantage
Having a great arranger ( Jack Nitzsche )
Having talented assistants ( Sonny Bono, backing vox and harmonies arranger)
Great musicians, (The Wrecking Crew)
Great gear at Goldstar Studios ( U47's, U67's, RCA's, Pultec EQ's, LA2's and Fairchild's, Ampex Tape Machines ( two 3 tracks) ,a custom-designed console by Dave Gold, who also designed their unique sounding echo chambers
Great engineers ( Larry Levine and Stan Ross)
... and a good song, with young, vibrant people to sing them.
(There were also a few occasions that he was able to make a less than great song still sell successfully because of the sound he got... his "wall".)
And having the experience of studying under highly successful writers and arrangers Leiber and Stoller ( Elvis, The Drifters, The Coasters, Connie Francis, Ben E. King)

Success breeds success. ;)

Davedog Sun, 01/17/2016 - 20:03

My Guru who is a seasoned POP producer very rarely uses more than one or two pieces of outboard gear. The preamps are sterling, the compression is incredible and the mics are too. He uses many more mics than anything else. He tracks a multitude of tracks. His sound library is substantial and always being updated. He shares stuff with lots of other POP producers on the planet. ALL of the current guys seem to be using a specific monitor system. This where it gets interesting. The monitoring is the MOST EXPENSIVE part of their rigs. And the record companies are looking for the stuff to come in with that edge that they all get....the best ones do anyway. There's five pieces of outboard on his desk. Five. And his vision for next years upgrade includes a simple summing box and two computers. When you listen to his stuff it doesn't matter whether you're into POP Princess dance music or affected vocal runs....the FIDELITY KILLS every time. It is superb.

When he works in big rooms he brings a computer and turns on the SSL/Neve/ API for monitoring the tracking. Seriously. And the FIDELITY KILLS.

Imagine sitting amoungst the sound. The deep parts affecting how you feel about your dinner....the upper end giving you thoughts of floating with Angels...the midrange slamming you around in the Herman Miller.

Anyone that thinks that making current POP music is easy is an idiot.

DonnyThompson Sun, 01/17/2016 - 21:01

I recently watched an interview with Jack Puig, from his "home base" studio, Ocean Way.

There's no doubt that the studio is seriously laid-out; if you've ever seen pics or videos of the CR, you can see there are racks and racks... and racks and racks... and racks and racks.... of every conceivable piece of OB gear imaginable; it's like a "what's what" of peripheral gear... and as I watched the video with all that gear behind him, I thought, "I wonder how much of that stuff he actually uses..."

I was hoping that he would show a typical PT session, showing the mixer GUI so that I could freeze the vid and try to get even a rough count of the VST's he had inserted, but he never did.

Maybe he does use all that gear all the time... I can't say. But I'm dubious. My suspicion tells me he can have any VST he wants - especially because of his relationship with Waves. I doubt very highly that there's any plug he wants that he doesn't own.

Ocean Way has an incredible collection of OB pieces as the result of just simply being round for so long - before it was OW, it was United-Western Recorders, and that studio had been the result of a merger between two studios - Western and United
( United was originally Universal, owned by Bill Putnam so there was all of his now famous gear) , so between those two very successful studios, there were hundreds of hits recorded there ( United-Western held the record for years for most Grammys awarded) there was a lot of equipment.

Western was around for quite some time, eventually becoming Ocean Way in '84 when Putnam sold the complex to Allen Sides.

That's a long time to be around and in business - and plenty enough time to acquire a lot of gear on top of what was already there with Putnam's inventory. ;)

But ... I don't know how much of it actually gets used anymore. It'd be interesting to find that out.

audiokid Sun, 01/17/2016 - 21:09

Personally I think once ITB, stay ITB, but as far as tracking goes, the sky is the limit. Use whatever turns us on.

for my personal vocals.
Mic choice to fit, big rail pre (millennia m-2b), an LA2A/1176, and if you can include a new Pulse Techniques Pultec MEQ-5, nothing touches that chain. The difference is - absolute cream and glorious pleasure.

Davedog Sun, 01/17/2016 - 21:58

It's funny. A large format console has always been my Mecca. My aspiration. I've worked on a few in well-tuned rooms and always thought that "this is where its at"....My room has enough pres and outboard and conversion to do 24 tracks at a time. With no problems. It all fits and it all sounds great. I've worked out most of the isolation things and have a personal headphone monitoring system that lets the artist get pretty much what they want in their phones. I have six stations of that in a room that barely fits 6. I have some rather choice preamps. Things I've loved for a long time. A lot of nice mics. More than a lot of home studios. Several in the high-end section of the store.

In the last year I've made a couple of records. Its all I really want to do. I'm not really "open" for business except projects I like.

Through it all I find myself getting smaller and smaller in my selection of the pres and the comps. I sold my DBX 900 rack full of nice Aphex compellors and DBX Over easy comps. I didn't use them. I've been keeping all this outboard stuff as "choices". When I start dubbing I only use a couple of pres. For vocals I only use one. For compression I use more than two but the ones that aren't LA-2A and the 1176 are VERSIONS of these. Except the Retro. Its more of the Sta-Level school of compression.

The point is my fidelity has gone way up in the interim. I only round trip something if I'm looking for an effect that I can't get from the library of plugs. I have real LA-2A's. My UAD Quad card has LA-2A's that sound almost as good. And certainly quieter. In a mix with these added you can't tell the difference ESPECIALLY if its been tracked really well. THAT will never change.

I used to be so picky about the drum capture. Since I do a lot of blues and Americana based stuff I thought it was important. Now I only want as good a signal as I can get from the initial hit. With the Slate Trigger and a good sized library of sounds I can get whatever is needed and it still passes the blues and retro sound tests.......Go figure.

DonnyThompson Sun, 01/17/2016 - 23:19

It's all about what works best for you, and what best allows you to fulfill your vision.

I've been strictly ITB for quite some time now. With the exception of one piece ( an original '83 Rockman Sustainor/Chorus/Delay), there's nothing I have in my OB racks that I can't emulate ITB.

My focus has narrowed to the capture, and my signal path is simple: I choose a good mic, of which I have several; U87, U89, 414EB's, RE20, 421's 57's, 58's 409's ... I use the ADK AP1 Mic Pre when I want the transformer "sound", and I have a variety of input and output XFO's that I can pop and swap to tweak that sound even further; and I have the Presonus VSL 1818, which is an 8 channel version of their Studio/Live AI console in a rack. Presonus conversion has always sounded fine to that I don't hear them. If I want a "cleaner" capture, I bypass the ADK and go directly into the Presonus. And that's my chain, that's all. Everything is balanced, there's no adapters anywhere, and I use Mogami Gold cables to connect the stages together.

If I don't get it right while recording, if I don't get it the way I want it when the red light is on, then there's nothing I have in my arsenal, either ITB or OB, that's gonna fix that.

My next - and likely my final step, will be one more mic - likely the Cathedral Pipes Ribbon, and a very clear mic pre, perhaps a Grace, or a Millennia. After that, I'm done.
I'm not making enough money with this anymore to justify investing huge amounts of money back into it. I need gear sufficient in quality to record and produce albums for solo artists... and I've already proven that I can do that, and with a solid measure of fidelity.

If I'm asked to engineer or produce an act that's bigger than what I can accommodate, then they can book time at a bigger studio, or, they can give me their money and let me book the time for them, ( as long as I'm still getting paid to engineer or produce) because of my relationship with many area studios; in most cases I can get much better rates than they ever could on their own.

I doubt I'll ever really be cured of G.A.S., I'll always see and hear things that I'd love to have... but at my age, and at this time in my life, I have to look at doing things that are going to make me money, not cost me money, especially in this business; that is hemorrhaging more and more as the months and years pass. It presents the very real question if this business ever really will come back to where you can make a living at it... I don't see that happening. There may be a few exceptions, for those who have an established track record of making hits... but as far as mid-level commercial studios go, I think their time has passed, and I doubt that those of us who are now in our 50's (or older) will ever see a resurgence of what the studio business once was in our lifetime.

The big, pro, well-known rooms are dying off... at what some would consider to be an alarming rate. There has even been recent word in audio circles whispering about a very famous and very historic studio* which recorded huge, some would say even "Iconic" albums over the years, that has been forced to take a serious look at their options for the near future, as their revenue has decreased so much in the last couple years...The structure itself will always be safe, as it's ( thankfully) been declared a national historic landmark - which means that the structure as it stands now cannot be altered in any way, either internally or on the exterior; so it's never gonna end up as a parking lot, or as condos or a Starbucks, like so many other famous studios have become .... but as far as remaining a functioning studio - well...

The only way to stay in business these days is to find - or create - a specialized niche'. I used to have one, and it served me very well, and allowed me to make a good living in this business for a very long time; but those days have passed... with the advent of progs like Garage Band, Real Band, etc., and the cost of basic entry into this business being so very cheap - the result being that far too many people have such easy access to it and are involved with the business when they really have no skills or talent, and they clog the gears for those of us who really are good at what we do.


*I'm not gonna say the name. Don't ask me to, and if you know the studio I'm talking about, please don't mention it in a reply, either.
The main reason is that I really don't want to put their name out there in connection with the news of the financial difficulty they are having, as it's not been mentioned much in the press thus far...
It's been written about a little bit, here and there, ( but not everywhere) and I'd like to avoid having search engines making that info so easily available on a massive global scale.
It will probably come out soon enough anyway but I'm not gonna be the one to propagate the news... my own knowledge of this is from a very reliable source, but I'm not going to say which studio it is.

Plus ... well, I just can't bring myself to say it. I just can't. :(


Davedog Wed, 01/20/2016 - 13:22

My G.A.S. has become one of a necessary addition rather than an obsession to have.
That being said........

NAMM 2016 booth 6869. Cathedral Pipes Abbey preamp..........Circuit is based on the REDD47. Knowing what I know about Charles' builds....this is gonna blow some minds. So, now that it's clear what my purchases will be in 2016, I can move forward with stuff........

Cathedral Pipes Saint Jean Baptiste> Abbey pre> .....okay I see where this going.

Sean G Wed, 01/20/2016 - 23:25

Hmmmmm....I wonder what studio that may be???

- Please Please Me Donny....Iv'e been dying to know since Yesterday....Don't Let Me Down....I know I should just Let It Be, but Something tells me with a few clues it would all Come Together and we would all know which one you mean....

But I suppose its just A Day In The Life of this particular studio, its been A Long And Winding Road with its history if its the one I'm thinking of...

And I suppose it won't be the last one to close In My Life...Iv'e Got A Feelin' we will all say Hello Goodbye to a few more in the near future, studios are closing down Here, There And Everywhere...It Won't Be Long...

I have a lot of respect for the work of that particular studio, And I Love Her ;)

DonnyThompson Thu, 01/21/2016 - 04:14

I did give you guys a clue in my fist post about it, you just missed it apparently.

DonnyThompson, post: 435464, member: 46114 wrote: *I'm not gonna say the name. Don't ask me to, and if you know the studio I'm talking about, please don't mention it in a reply, either.
The main reason is that I really don't want to put their name out there in connection with the news of the financial difficulty they are having, as it's not been mentioned much in the press thus far...
It's been written about a little bit, here and there, ( but not everywhere) and I'd like to avoid having search engines making that info so easily available on a massive global scale.
It will probably come out soon enough anyway but I'm not gonna be the one to propagate the news... my own knowledge of this is from a very reliable source, but I'm not going to say which studio it is.