the watmm GAS thread

[hello spiral]

On 5/13/2022 at 1:17 AM, cern said:

Hahah your music is shit! What are you trying to do? Retard Techno 

someone with an analord av has no business criticising another’s music. 

[d-a-m-o]

 

[marf]

Im obsessed with the best quality sound I can get. Mixer wise. I can't afford top end mixers. I want discrete Class A design. Or at least discrete. I dont need too many channels, Just want thick beautiful sound. 

[xox]

46 minutes ago, marf said:

Im obsessed with the best quality sound I can get. Mixer wise. I can't afford top end mixers. I want discrete Class A design. Or at least discrete. I dont need too many channels, Just want thick beautiful sound. 

mini-lol

Like if you’ve been on gearslutz (or similar mostly delusional places) for too long but at the same time not long enough 

Class a doesn’t matter, especially it doesn’t matter if something’s discrete or not, at least not as much as you believe it does, and in many instances discrete is a disadvantage bc it can just introduce more unwanted noise into the system 

Do you use hw synths in music production? Analog synths? 

What ever you use imo you should firstly invest in your monitoring system; have you? 

…after that only listen and practice… some of the best sounding records have been recorded with the gear that’s of mediocre fidelity at best  

Edited May 14, 2022 by xox

[marf]

 

"best sounding records have been recorded with the gear that’s of mediocre fidelity "

That doesn't make sense. 

I agree a good musician and the music is the most important thing .Of course without question

Why do people like Neve ? I have golden ears. I dont like the sound of records today. To clean and crisp. I can tell its all computer. 

I like the sound of old records. 80's, 70's. I know there was tape, etc. I can't get into it with a tech. Ive been talking to techs all month and Im exhausted. They all differ in their opinions too, I might add. Funny since its all math at the end of the day.

Sure there is noise with discrete but there is a softness and color I like with that stuff.

I have dynaco A25's and a quad 303 33 amplifier. 

Nope. Not transparent. But I plan on using neutral headphones for the final mix.

Getting into room acoustics and all that is a rabbit hole too.

Edited May 14, 2022 by marf

[chim]

2 hours ago, marf said:

Im obsessed with the best quality sound I can get. Mixer wise. I can't afford top end mixers. I want discrete Class A design. Or at least discrete. I dont need too many channels, Just want thick beautiful sound. 

Mixers don't need a lot of fluff, just a decent transformer pair at the output. What about Neve 5059 Satellite or the little brother 5057 Orbit? How much mixer do you need in your mixer, something like Radial Space Heater might work? 

1 hour ago, xox said:

mini-lol

Like if you’ve been on gearslutz (or similar mostly delusional places) for too long but at the same time not long enough 

Class a doesn’t matter, especially it doesn’t matter if something’s discrete or not, at least not as much as you believe it does, and in many instances discrete is a disadvantage bc it can just introduce more unwanted noise into the system 

Do you use hw synths in music production? Analog synths? 

What ever you use imo you should firstly invest in your monitoring system; have you? 

…after that only listen and practice… some of the best sounding records have been recorded with the gear that’s of mediocre fidelity at best  

The right sound might be anything from some grungy toy to a Steinway. Loads of people on GS and beyond confidently claim that discrete and class A don't matter, and it's probably true, but whenever the sound of something wows me, those two terms tend to pop up in the specs. I'd love for the naysayers to be right as Class A is pricey, power inefficient and generates heat.

There are loads of exceptions of course. 

Prologue, P6, OB-6, OB-X8 - didn't wow me. 

Old Roland, AJH Minimod, latest ISE-NIN demo - certainly wows me. 

 

Edited May 14, 2022 by chim

[marf]

Yeah, I get laughed at. But the best sounding stuff is discrete and through hole design. Maybe its the faults that make it better. I dont know. 

 

I own an old ems synthi. It's the best sounding synthesizer Ive ever heard. Ever. Ive been told it's the Fet distortion. It's a discrete machine with quality components. Its just lovely, So I go with that mind set. How can I follow the sound that entrances me? Thats what keeps me sitting in front of something twiddling a knob back and forth for an hour and wondering where the time went.

 

Chim; Right now I have a Sienhiesser m8 Im selling.

It sounds great, Really nice. Lots of transformers. Nice eq, not enough channels for me. And a tech Im talking to says I need to go line level and just use outboard eqs and stuff. And I kind of agree with him.

here's the sale if anyone wants it;

https://reverb.com/item/54790862-sennheiser-m8-1987-black

 

Im currently looking at the tonelux (nice price)

https://vintageking.com/tonelux-otb-16

or the 

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MFTwenty5--purple-audio-mftwenty5-summing-mixer

Im going to run everything through a bae 1073 on the master for that harmonic saturation.

https://www.baeaudio.com/products/1073mp

 

[xox]

Once you find the right mixer, everything will be alright 

[chim]

1 hour ago, xox said:

Once you find the right mixer, everything will be alright 

No more stuff to buy, ever again! 

[Nil]

Lovely mixer you’re selling, somehow similar to the small Studer / Revox I’ve always drooled for.

Quality ADC + a selection of great outboard seems the wisest choice indeed.

I’m an ITB guy, but I’d happily make room for a Synthi hehe. The raw tone is sublime.

[Squee]

I've got so much shit in my studio that I can't even fit in my new rear speakers. So now I'm looking at ceiling mounts. Probably should have thought of this before buying them. FFS.

[xox]

3 hours ago, chim said:

No more stuff to buy, ever again! 

And the music will magically be perfect 

[thawkins]

18 hours ago, marf said:

Chim; Right now I have a Sienhiesser m8 Im selling.

It sounds great, Really nice. Lots of transformers. Nice eq, not enough channels for me. And a tech Im talking to says I need to go line level and just use outboard eqs and stuff. And I kind of agree with him.

After watching the Beatles Get Back documentary and seeing some of the most iconic - and well sounding - tracks being recorded pretty much straight on 8 channels (4 stereo pairs) on what seemed like surplus WW2 radio gear, I feel like all these good results were like 5% gear, 25% talented studio engineers, and 70% talented musicians.

So in my opinion you can buy whatever magical legendary analog console, but you can't avoid putting in the 95% perspiration effort into what your ideal end result will be.

[chim]

36 minutes ago, thawkins said:

After watching the Beatles Get Back documentary and seeing some of the most iconic - and well sounding - tracks being recorded pretty much straight on 8 channels (4 stereo pairs) on what seemed like surplus WW2 radio gear, I feel like all these good results were like 5% gear, 25% talented studio engineers, and 70% talented musicians.

So in my opinion you can buy whatever magical legendary analog console, but you can't avoid putting in the 95% perspiration effort into what your ideal end result will be.

Beatles aren't the greatest example for that, EMI made history building that ww2 surplus looking gear and inventing designs for them (stuff from that REDD console is still being cloned today)... But other than that you're right, people played tight back then and didn't need fancy signal chains or a gajillion tracks. Stevie Wonder's Superstition always astounds me as out of 16 tracks, 8 were Clavinet overdubs and everything else had a pair of channels each at most, from drums to horns. I think back then it was so hard to record in the first place that you had to pull off the maximum S/N and sound just in the soundbooth. 

[marf]

9 hours ago, xox said:

Once you find the right mixer, everything will be alright 

Suggestions?

 

1 hour ago, thawkins said:

After watching the Beatles Get Back documentary and seeing some of the most iconic - and well sounding - tracks being recorded pretty much straight on 8 channels (4 stereo pairs) on what seemed like surplus WW2 radio gear, I feel like all these good results were like 5% gear, 25% talented studio engineers, and 70% talented musicians.

So in my opinion you can buy whatever magical legendary analog console, but you can't avoid putting in the 95% perspiration effort into what your ideal end result will be.

The Beatles Gear is the most high end gear ever made. A Fairchild compressor costs 60 thousand dollars. Their mics were all high end valve mics. Probably the best studio ever made.Theres a 100 dollar book about it

The better the gear the less instruments you need. Everything is fuller and thicker and clearer and occupies each place in the spectrum .

[chim]

21 minutes ago, marf said:

The Beatles Gear is the most high end gear ever made. A Fairchild compressor costs 60 thousand dollars. Their mics were all high end valve mics. Probably the best studio ever made.Theres a 100 dollar book about it

The better the gear the less instruments you need. Everything is fuller and thicker and clearer and occupies each place in the spectrum .

The main reason that stuff is expensive unobtanium today is because every studio threw their units right into the trash once solid state gear appeared and made tubes uncool... See the pattern here? Also there's that cultural osmosis factor of what we expect a record to sound like. 

I've spent plenty of time with a Fairchild clone and it's very woolly and 3D but sucks a lot of presence right out.. The Beatles mainly parallel processed vocals thru theirs if I remember correct. Wouldn't hate a Chandler REDD preamp though. 

[psn]

35 minutes ago, marf said:

Everything is fuller and thicker and clearer and occupies each place in the spectrum .

Isn't this a bit of a contradiction? I've always thought that the colourisation from vintage gear has partly to do with limited bandwidth and dynamics. Like how tubes and tape seem to shave off some top end, some low end and some transients. 

[marf]

40 minutes ago, chim said:

The main reason that stuff is expensive unobtanium today is because every studio threw their units right into the trash once solid state gear appeared and made tubes uncool... See the pattern here? Also there's that cultural osmosis factor of what we expect a record to sound like. 

I've spent plenty of time with a Fairchild clone and it's very woolly and 3D but sucks a lot of presence right out.. The Beatles mainly parallel processed vocals thru theirs if I remember correct. Wouldn't hate a Chandler REDD preamp though. 

Didn't they put the drums through them? Yeah. value is perception for sure.

So we've decided that discrete vintage tube gear is thin sounding and narrow. I don't know. Im no expert at all. But a software synth doesn't come close to a real analog minimoog or the like. Or a huge sounding preamp. 

I don't think I agree with you after using a lot of gear. Now the tape is what's missing. Thats what makes everything so tiring to listen to these days. I need those transients squashed. Limited bandwidth? Really?

On paper maybe you are right. Ill have to ask some techs. My ears say no

 

33 minutes ago, psn said:

Isn't this a bit of a contradiction? I've always thought that the colourisation from vintage gear has partly to do with limited bandwidth and dynamics. Like how tubes and tape seem to shave off some top end, some low end and some transients. 

Analog gear isn't just for colourisation. Its paper or plastic. Meat or Vegan burger

[marf]

Im also reading the Beatles put their whole mix through the Fairchild.

One thing about Get Back that I didn't know was the album was recorded on the roof. I thought it was just a promo show. Totally impressed with John too seeming too not give 2 shits about anything, but Yoko pulling it off.

[thawkins]

2 hours ago, marf said:

The Beatles Gear is the most high end gear ever made. A Fairchild compressor costs 60 thousand dollars. Their mics were all high end valve mics. Probably the best studio ever made.Theres a 100 dollar book about it

The better the gear the less instruments you need. Everything is fuller and thicker and clearer and occupies each place in the spectrum .

You only know about this stuff because the John and Paul spent years writing songs together and the band itself spent years playing shitty gigs in Hamburg to build their chops.

Just like every midlife crisis dad who bought a Marshall stack and a Gibson Les Paul, you'll end up sounding like a midlife crisis dad, not like Hendrix or Santana.

1 hour ago, marf said:

Analog gear isn't just for colourisation. Its paper or plastic. Meat or Vegan burger

My dude, you should stop eating the wrapping paper along with your burger.

In my opinion, if you don't like the music that's produced today it's not because of the transients or the tubes or the lack of tubes or computers. It's just because you don't like the music, full stop. And that's fine, really, because if you know what you want, you can make the music that you yourself like to listen to.

But there's a reason why it's called rock, jazz, or blues music, and not Gibson, Fender, or Gretsch music, and that's because it's not really the gear that matters. Maybe it used to matter a lot more back in the day when you had to bet the farm on a professionally made instrument, but it sure as hell does not matter now.

[thawkins]

3 hours ago, chim said:

Beatles aren't the greatest example for that, EMI made history building that ww2 surplus looking gear and inventing designs for them (stuff from that REDD console is still being cloned today)... But other than that you're right, people played tight back then and didn't need fancy signal chains or a gajillion tracks. Stevie Wonder's Superstition always astounds me as out of 16 tracks, 8 were Clavinet overdubs and everything else had a pair of channels each at most, from drums to horns. I think back then it was so hard to record in the first place that you had to pull off the maximum S/N and sound just in the soundbooth. 

There was some show where Paul McCartney and Rick Rubin spent 6x30 minutes talking about the tracks and fading elements in and out on a console. And most of the time it was just 4 or 8 tracks of stuff, even for the really complex sounding tracks like Tomorrow Never Knows.

To me that was 100% a sign that what the artist plays and how they play it matters an insane amount, and the recording gear is just there to capture it as best as it can. Dollars to donuts we would probably still be listening to The Beatles if they did not have the Fairchild compressors.

[marf]

Ah. Agiesm. Nice touch. Im done. Not getting into it. I'll go sit in my rocking chair

[TubularCorporation]

I don't know, the drums sound kind of thin.

Edited May 16, 2022 by TubularCorporation

[Taupe Beats]

On 5/14/2022 at 1:28 PM, d-a-m-o said:

 

Surprised this isn't getting more attention. Wild concept, awesome developer, results sound like Boku Mo Wakaran.

Unrelated, but I despise the MIDI implementation on the Sherman Filterbank (mk1, unsure if it's different on mk2).

[acid1]