So, I've been a bit absent...

...and I come back for a few days and end up forking over some scratch for Mercury (thanks Larry), but that's another story... :)
 
I'm here (in this sub forum :P ) because I've been messing around more with hardware than plugins lately. I was just wondering if I'm the only one...
 
As some of you know I bought a Midas console to use as an analog summing unit feeding it with a UAD 16 Silverface. I have since added a Stam Audio SSL G bus clone, so I feed the Midas to the SLL and then back into the DAW. I also added a pair of Neve 1073 pre-amps (from Stam), and an 1176 (also form Stam, I think there is a pattern). My LA2A clone is supposed to ship from a builder (I'll let you guess who) and I should have that in a few weeks. I plan to use the 1073 > 1176 > LA2A together for my vocal chain.
 
My most recent acquisition is a pair of Dorrough 40A2 meters that I just got yesterday and I'm hooking up now with some clever routing (I think). They are bigger than I expected them to be, and while I've used the Waves version and love it, the hardware is even more mesmerizing... :)
 
So, any of you got the hardware bug lately?
 
James

Hi Bob,
It sounds like we have gone done a similar path. :) I haven't gotten into a 500 series yet as I'm concerned that will be a rabbit hole for me. I took the drums out of my studio in the last six months and believe the days of recording bands are behind me, so it's mostly going to be vocals that get recorded by mics. Probably my guitar cab at times but most of the guitar recording is digital through a Fractal Axe FX II.
 
I've heard good things about Warm and had got to hear their Pultec clone first hand and it was pretty awesome. I'd love to have a pair of Stam Pultecs on the master, but that's $2k that I can't justify. 
 
If you had to pick one hardware EQ to use in your vocal chain, which would it be?
 
James

All digital is analog going in - and out.  So it kinda makes sense that good analog will help your sound - or at least get out of the way.
 
And rather than getting into an in- and out-side the box arguments, let us just say that using good outboard hardware to record is play time in recording (and or mixing).  It has less to do w/ sound, than learning how to control sound before it hits the converters.  Like an audio engineer.  Any professional guitarist (and many that aren't) have a huge collection of expensive guitars, each guitar a tool for a specific sound.  Engineers can get the same way.  Just like the apocryphal 60's keyboardist that taped down the knobs on their Moog (ARP, etc.) for that one specific "preset" they needed in each song.  A big room full of black taped synths he'd have to take on tour.

I just have a small home studio and the digital works for my application. 
But I have a friend that started up a recording studio and its all retro Tascam.  Tascam 4 track tape recorder, Tascam board. Hardware plate reverb, etc.  It reminds me of the studio I maintained (and staff steel guitar player) in late 70's, Tascam tape deck, Tascam board, Ampex 2 track tape for masters, etc.
 
 
 
 

Whether it's in the box or not, I think there's fun to be had trying to use different tools.
 
Last week, I delivered a polished mix to a band.
 
Today, I've spent the day trying to re-master one of the tracks with just eq's in the RME UCX and my DBX doing multiple bounces to try to get a version I like more than the one I did in the box.
 
I'm not there yet, but I've done a ton of listening and know more now than I did this morning.
 
:-)
 
Some of the differences come from not using multiband compression. With just one compressor, I can't do different bands.
 
Also, using my hardware, it's harder to get a precise average loudness. it's also interesting to hear a loud part from a vocalist push down the rest of the band. Same can happen for a loud lead guitar. The multi-bands increase the compression just on the notes required while leaving the rest of the recording untouched.
 
Because you're compressing all bands at once, to get the same average loudness, I have to compress the track harder. When the compression eases off, the other music bounces into the front. It's almost like a vocal rider in reverse. :-) It pushes up whether it in the back of the leads as soon as the leads go quiet.
 
Super interesting. And also something I'm sure I've heard in a thousands of pro recordings without realizing what was driving it.
 
Next, I tried mixing the two recordings together, normalizing so the peak was at -0.2 and taking an average volume on the EBU meter. Interestingly, it was a full 2 Db quieter than either recording alone.

World-class front-end analog gear can make a HUGE difference to your recordings.
Getting a Neve Portico-II was one of the best musical purchases I've made.
Literally everything I run thru it sounds better (both mics and DI instruments).
DI electric bass is now sounds great (straight off the preamp)... whereas before (using inexpensive DI) it sounded anemic.

Jim Roseberry
DI electric bass is now sounds great (straight off the preamp)... whereas before (using inexpensive DI) it sounded anemic.

I am rewiring my patch bay now so that I can play bass through the Stam 1073 into the UAD Apollo with a bass amp on monitor (so recording dry).
 
Curious as to how that will sound...
 
James
 

smallstonefan 
So, any of you got the hardware bug lately?
 
James

 
Yep.  I bought and sold and bought a few pieces of gear - it's fun to experiment.  Btw, after reviewing your summing experience, I'd all but given up on a summing box, but then Revive Audio listed a modified Whirlwind Mix-8S so I thought I'd try it going into a compressor and an eq, both of which I've yet to acquire.  Considering a Revive Audio modded ART Pro VLA II and possibly a Vintage Audio (Revive Audio) Skyline M3D Mastering EQ (seems to be similar in design to a Maag Audio EQ4M.)  We'll see.

smallstonefan

Jim Roseberry
DI electric bass is now sounds great (straight off the preamp)... whereas before (using inexpensive DI) it sounded anemic.

I am rewiring my patch bay now so that I can play bass through the Stam 1073 into the UAD Apollo with a bass amp on monitor (so recording dry).
 
Curious as to how that will sound...
 
James
 

I have the UAD Ampeg plugin.
I think it sounds pretty good.
(If you've got an Axe-FX or Helix, there are some great bass amp models in those devices.)
You might want to try running straight into the Apollo vs. hitting the 1073 first.
The UAD amp-sim plugins simulate impedance of the front end of the amp.
 
Running Helix Native with a Presonus Quantum (1ms total round-trip latency), I haven't decided which I prefer;

• Going straight into the Quantum
• Hitting the Portico-II first

For straight DI electric bass (no amp-sim), it's absolutely the Portico-II.

Hi Jim,
 
I've been recording bass direct through the Apollo using Unison - I'd just like to see if the 1073 adds anything to the equation for fun. :) I haven't tried the Fractal bass models since I have all the UAD amps and I really like that. I like that I can monitor through an amp sim but record dry so I can play with the sim later. Amazing toys we have!

Thanks for watching. I was really just experimenting. I was definitely not trying to make the compressor transparent. Just the opposite.

I've mostly used the compressor when doing live stuff. For small acoustic groups, I use it to compress inputs. I have enough inputs that I can often record compressed and uncompressed. Maybe half the time I don't use the compressed tracks later.

I agree that it helps to perform into the compressor. It can change how you sing a little. Like mixing into it rather than applying after the fact.