ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
Post by ericn on Mar 22, 2019 15:19:42 GMT -6
Every bedroom hip-hop artist can afford 1.5k for an "ssl desk"! I’m waiting for somebody to post a photoshopped IKEA desk with the SSL logo😁
|
|
|
SSL Six
Mar 22, 2019 15:39:27 GMT -6
via mobile
Guitar likes this
Post by jcoutu1 on Mar 22, 2019 15:39:27 GMT -6
Every bedroom hip-hop artist can afford 1.5k for an "ssl desk"! Plenty of them have Avalon channel strips and U87's.
|
|
|
SSL Six
Mar 22, 2019 19:33:23 GMT -6
Post by donr on Mar 22, 2019 19:33:23 GMT -6
Every bedroom hip-hop artist can afford 1.5k for an "ssl desk"! Plenty of them have Avalon channel strips and U87's. What do you figure the market is for that application? 1000/yr? I still have a vintage Mackie 24/4 in its box in storage. I've been tracking to DAW with and without outboard at my home demo/project studio, largely without processing since retiring my ADAT machines, and processing later. Can't say it's made creating, recording and mixing easier. Maybe that's why I'm active in this thread. Something similar to the SSL 6 with a little more capacity and and ease of use would be attractive to me. Tascam was showing a nice mixer at NAMM this year, but it seemed like more than I would need or want. But I definitely felt the tug.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 23, 2019 19:04:51 GMT -6
Plenty of them have Avalon channel strips and U87's. What do you figure the market is for that application? 1000/yr? I still have a vintage Mackie 24/4 in its box in storage. I've been tracking to DAW with and without outboard at my home demo/project studio, largely without processing since retiring my ADAT machines, and processing later. Can't say it's made creating, recording and mixing easier. Maybe that's why I'm active in this thread. Something similar to the SSL 6 with a little more capacity and and ease of use would be attractive to me. Tascam was showing a nice mixer at NAMM this year, but it seemed like more than I would need or want. But I definitely felt the tug. I dunno, Don - in my experience you always wind up needing more mixer than you thought you did.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2019 3:07:48 GMT -6
^ Yes, patchbays and cabling too..
|
|
|
SSL Six
Mar 24, 2019 8:01:27 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by 000 on Mar 24, 2019 8:01:27 GMT -6
Plenty of them have Avalon channel strips and U87's. What do you figure the market is for that application? 1000/yr? I still have a vintage Mackie 24/4 in its box in storage. I've been tracking to DAW with and without outboard at my home demo/project studio, largely without processing since retiring my ADAT machines, and processing later. Can't say it's made creating, recording and mixing easier. Maybe that's why I'm active in this thread. Something similar to the SSL 6 with a little more capacity and and ease of use would be attractive to me. Tascam was showing a nice mixer at NAMM this year, but it seemed like more than I would need or want. But I definitely felt the tug. I’ve had a chance to mess around a bit w/ the Tasman Model 24. For about a $1,000 retail - it’s a good sounding board for a project studio. Preamps are definitely a step above your standard Mackie/Yamaha and the routing on it is really cool. Still if it was me I would be looking at one of the Allen and Heath QU series boards or even an X32 if budget mixer was what I was after. This SSL is simply not marketed for recording full bands. Maybe it sounds great as a summing mixer - but I imagine those who are looking into this budget - are also those who may have trouble with the complicated routing.
|
|
|
SSL Six
Mar 24, 2019 9:07:54 GMT -6
Post by Martin John Butler on Mar 24, 2019 9:07:54 GMT -6
So, it's seems to me that it's basically two SSL channel strips with a 2 bus compressor, which is pretty cool for someone like me with an Apollo X6 in my living room. If I didn't have my Stam SA73 and Dizengoff D4, I'd think pretty hard on it right now. I happen to like the SSL preamps when I've heard them used on major productions. I would love to have seen this expanded a little more. I think they picked a sweet spot for a certain kind of production that's become very common now.
I would really like to see them design a board for advanced home/basement/small room users that's easier to follow than their other various small desks. I can't keep up with all their models and what they do. I'd love for them to use their clout and experience to see how far they could go with this same concept for 3k. That would be enough to make me rethink much of my setup, and just use the desk for recording and insert some choice outboard.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Mar 27, 2019 16:59:54 GMT -6
I was impressed when the guy in the video dialed in some eq and comp on the drum tracking, and put the summed mix through the bus compressor. Sounded good, and analog. Better than plug-ins, and right there on the desktop. But the routing options are not at all intuitive. And how would you recall how you did stuff if you had to go back and change something? Still, lot of tools for the bucks. And it sounded good. I agree about the routing options. I took a look through the manual last night and honestly it made my head hurt. My D&R Vision console is way easier to understand. I feel like a pretty smart guy most days, but I feel like I would need to sit down with that manual, study it for a few hours, watch some tutorial videos, and draw out signal flow diagrams to ensure I understand it all. If that's what it takes for a guy that designs gear to fully understand how the device works then I can only imagine how their target market might struggle a bit. Then again maybe I'm just not smart enough to use this thing. Strictly speaking from the perspective of what might be the target market...it seems like if I owned a UAD Apollo and used the Apollo console software with UAD SSL emulations I'd get to a very similar place with a more intuitive user experience. Someone tell me I'm nuts. Brad SSL has been well modeled at this point by plugin companies. Stupidly so, I have several version on my PC and I don't even have all of them. The ones I have sound really good. I can't help but think that this little "mixer" looks like a toy. Even compared to a Mackie or whatever it seems emasculated. It looks like a child's toy.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
Post by ericn on Mar 27, 2019 18:45:44 GMT -6
I agree about the routing options. I took a look through the manual last night and honestly it made my head hurt. My D&R Vision console is way easier to understand. I feel like a pretty smart guy most days, but I feel like I would need to sit down with that manual, study it for a few hours, watch some tutorial videos, and draw out signal flow diagrams to ensure I understand it all. If that's what it takes for a guy that designs gear to fully understand how the device works then I can only imagine how their target market might struggle a bit. Then again maybe I'm just not smart enough to use this thing. Strictly speaking from the perspective of what might be the target market...it seems like if I owned a UAD Apollo and used the Apollo console software with UAD SSL emulations I'd get to a very similar place with a more intuitive user experience. Someone tell me I'm nuts. Brad SSL has been well modeled at this point by plugin companies. Stupidly so, I have several version on my PC and I don't even have all of them. The ones I have sound really good. I can't help but think that this little "mixer" looks like a toy. Even compared to a Mackie or whatever it seems emasculated. It looks like a child's toy. Little Tykes presents Baby’s First SSL😎
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 27, 2019 19:12:33 GMT -6
I think like donr this is aimed at a certain market segrnrnt and it is very well designed and priced but it’s not for everyone. I absolutely agree that this is aimed at a specific (and gullible) market segment.
I also firmly believe that it's high quality snake oil.
Is it really two real, full featured channel strips?
No, it is not. It doesn't have the real EQ of a true SSL channel strip, not to mention other features.
Does it have a real SSL buss compressor?
No, it does not. It has a stripped, dumbed down "buss compressor" devoid of (nearly) all the key adjustments.
The summing buss is a nice touch - or would be if it had enough inputs to do some serious OTB summing - which it does not.
The market it's aimed at is one that can recognize the SSL marque but doesn't have the faintest idea of what it is that the big name guys use SSL for -
Automation of everything
A VERY full featured EQ.
Full featured compression on every channel, plus the 2 buss.
None of which does this boondoggle have.
|
|
|
SSL Six
Mar 27, 2019 19:30:26 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by kcatthedog on Mar 27, 2019 19:30:26 GMT -6
But the market this is aimed at wouldn’t pay for those full fledged features ? Dimes to doughnuts, ssl sells an awful lot of these !
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Mar 27, 2019 21:08:44 GMT -6
[/quote]“I would really like to see them design a board for advanced home/basement/small room users that's easier to follow than their other various small desks. I can't keep up with all their models and what they do. I'd love for them to use their clout and experience to see how far they could go with this same concept for 3k. That would be enough to make me rethink much of my setup, and just use the desk for recording and insert some choice outboard. [/quote]
SSL could easily make a 16 channel desk that had full channel strips and a mic/line button, flying faders, DAW intergration, their mixbuss compressor and the talkback circuit all for $5k if they wanted. With how good they’ve gotten at baking boards and the fact they have all that technology that all need be done is copy and paste into the main board schematic, it could be done and they’d make good profit too. If there was a 16 channel desk and they used the circuits that made them famous, that was $5k id sell my rig and buy it.
They don’t need to do modular in something like that so it could literally just be a main PCB that had it all. And their buss comp doesn’t cost that much to make...... in this board they’ve already learned the new VCAs are just fine. They could do it, and a lot of guys like me would buy it. I’d prefer the super analogue pres too, but make the rest off a 4000 or 6000. 16 channels hitting their mixbuss and to the comp would give the feel of a large format 4000/6000. Be cool if they put a stereo channel in with the “wide” knob too. They could do it, I think in my lifetime they will at some point, they’re going to have to. ITB is sounding better and better and a lot of high up pros are full out going there, and guess what, still putting #1s on the chart. If I got handed a song that was as good as what they get handed I’d be on the charts right now, it’s all about the talent and song. They mix themselves.
|
|
|
SSL Six
Mar 27, 2019 21:20:07 GMT -6
Post by Martin John Butler on Mar 27, 2019 21:20:07 GMT -6
This is exactly what I'm thinking and talking about Jerome!
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Mar 27, 2019 23:24:26 GMT -6
Even at 10k a real 16 channel ssl with channel strips and daw integration would be amazing, but we just described their aws 16, which is 50k and only gives you limited compressors.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
SSL Six
Mar 28, 2019 6:40:56 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by ericn on Mar 28, 2019 6:40:56 GMT -6
“I would really like to see them design a board for advanced home/basement/small room users that's easier to follow than their other various small desks. I can't keep up with all their models and what they do. I'd love for them to use their clout and experience to see how far they could go with this same concept for 3k. That would be enough to make me rethink much of my setup, and just use the desk for recording and insert some choice outboard. [/quote] SSL could easily make a 16 channel desk that had full channel strips and a mic/line button, flying faders, DAW intergration, their mixbuss compressor and the talkback circuit all for $5k if they wanted. With how good they’ve gotten at baking boards and the fact they have all that technology that all need be done is copy and paste into the main board schematic, it could be done and they’d make good profit too. If there was a 16 channel desk and they used the circuits that made them famous, that was $5k id sell my rig and buy it. They don’t need to do modular in something like that so it could literally just be a main PCB that had it all. And their buss comp doesn’t cost that much to make...... in this board they’ve already learned the new VCAs are just fine. They could do it, and a lot of guys like me would buy it. I’d prefer the super analogue pres too, but make the rest off a 4000 or 6000. 16 channels hitting their mixbuss and to the comp would give the feel of a large format 4000/6000. Be cool if they put a stereo channel in with the “wide” knob too. They could do it, I think in my lifetime they will at some point, they’re going to have to. ITB is sounding better and better and a lot of high up pros are full out going there, and guess what, still putting #1s on the chart. If I got handed a song that was as good as what they get handed I’d be on the charts right now, it’s all about the talent and song. They mix themselves. [/quote] Not with moving faders, while it might be possible to build it the service and support the cheap motor faders would need would be impossible to deliver with the current dealers and their reputation would take a major hit. Now you could maybe do it with a VCA system and Encoders but I’ll bet SSL knows the importance of the feel of a P&G fader to their brand. I think if they want to expand the brand a SSL version of that Audient / Focusrite brand would be a good place to start. I think the thinking at SSL is one of a Modular SSL studio and products that stand on their own and can intergrate with SSL’s summing systems. In my mind this is the dumbest thing SSL did since dumping the Xpanda. I would think that an expandable small mixer that you could add and easily intergrate EQ and comps with labeled SSL, Neve or API would be money in the long run. To most and the target for this it’s not Just the brand that’s going to sell it, it needs the look and feel.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Mar 28, 2019 6:58:06 GMT -6
Not with moving faders, while it might be possible to build it the service and support the cheap motor faders would need would be impossible to deliver with the current dealers and their reputation would take a major hit. Now you could maybe do it with a VCA system and Encoders but I’ll bet SSL knows the importance of the feel of a P&G fader to their brand. I think if they want to expand the brand a SSL version of that Audient / Focusrite brand would be a good place to start. I think the thinking at SSL is one of a Modular SSL studio and products that stand on their own and can intergrate with SSL’s summing systems. In my mind this is the dumbest thing SSL did since dumping the Xpanda. I would think that an expandable small mixer that you could add and easily intergrate EQ and comps with labeled SSL, Neve or API would be money in the long run. To most and the target for this it’s not Just the brand that’s going to sell it, it needs the look and feel. I agree. I'd probably go toward that modular system if I could grab the x-desk and x-panda for 24 channels of mixing. Then I could grab an x-rack or even a 500 series rack and build modules as I go. Of course DAW integration would be amazing too, particularly some kind of recall system. I know the X-Rack has that, but fader recall on the board would be good as well, even if it wasn't motorized.
One of the things I've noticed about their analogue products is that they almost over complicate them with digital controls. It just looks overly complex and still requires you to be in the box to control the pieces. At least that's how it seems whenever I research it.
|
|
|
SSL Six
Mar 28, 2019 7:25:12 GMT -6
via mobile
ericn likes this
Post by Quint on Mar 28, 2019 7:25:12 GMT -6
The Focusrite 2802/Audient ASP2802 is/was the type of product that some of y'all are talking about here. Granted, it doesn't have 16 channels of moving faders (it has 8 moving faders) or EQs, but it does have everything else being mentioned here and has 28 channels of inputs at mixdown. It also sold for $5k, so it was definitely priced right. It's a shame they don't make them anymore.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
SSL Six
Mar 28, 2019 7:41:00 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by ericn on Mar 28, 2019 7:41:00 GMT -6
Not with moving faders, while it might be possible to build it the service and support the cheap motor faders would need would be impossible to deliver with the current dealers and their reputation would take a major hit. Now you could maybe do it with a VCA system and Encoders but I’ll bet SSL knows the importance of the feel of a P&G fader to their brand. I think if they want to expand the brand a SSL version of that Audient / Focusrite brand would be a good place to start. I think the thinking at SSL is one of a Modular SSL studio and products that stand on their own and can intergrate with SSL’s summing systems. In my mind this is the dumbest thing SSL did since dumping the Xpanda. I would think that an expandable small mixer that you could add and easily intergrate EQ and comps with labeled SSL, Neve or API would be money in the long run. To most and the target for this it’s not Just the brand that’s going to sell it, it needs the look and feel. I agree. I'd probably go toward that modular system if I could grab the x-desk and x-panda for 24 channels of mixing. Then I could grab an x-rack or even a 500 series rack and build modules as I go. Of course DAW integration would be amazing too, particularly some kind of recall system. I know the X-Rack has that, but fader recall on the board would be good as well, even if it wasn't motorized.
One of the things I've noticed about their analogue products is that they almost over complicate them with digital controls. It just looks overly complex and still requires you to be in the box to control the pieces. At least that's how it seems whenever I research it.
My Guess was SSL always new there was no magic sauce in their designs and somebody like Behringer or Stam could clone the analog path but the recall would always set them apart and command the SSL price. Remember, in the early days people bought SSL 4k’s for the recall and automation not the sound and as SSL big board clients moved ITB they had to compete with plugins that offered recall. These customers were used to SSL giving them recall so this was a smart move.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
SSL Six
Mar 28, 2019 7:43:40 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by ericn on Mar 28, 2019 7:43:40 GMT -6
The Focusrite 2802/Audient ASP2802 is/was the type of product that some of y'all are talking about here. Granted, it doesn't have 16 channels of moving faders (it has 8 moving faders) or EQs, but it does have everything else being mentioned here and has 28 channels of inputs at mixdown. It also sold for $5k, so it was definitely priced right. It's a shame they don't make them anymore. Yeah, it’s a piece I always felt flew under the radar, it and the Audient Zen are products I would look at and say “ how can we do this thing better” if I were at SSL.
|
|
|
SSL Six
Mar 28, 2019 8:07:33 GMT -6
via mobile
ericn likes this
Post by Quint on Mar 28, 2019 8:07:33 GMT -6
The Focusrite 2802/Audient ASP2802 is/was the type of product that some of y'all are talking about here. Granted, it doesn't have 16 channels of moving faders (it has 8 moving faders) or EQs, but it does have everything else being mentioned here and has 28 channels of inputs at mixdown. It also sold for $5k, so it was definitely priced right. It's a shame they don't make them anymore. Yeah, it’s a piece I always felt flew under the radar, it and the Audient Zen are products I would look at and say “ how can we do this thing better” if I were at SSL. The thing is, could they? I would argue that the Audient stuff sounds every bit as good as SSL, so it would come down to features, and Audient kind of knocked it out of the park on that front, at least for the $5k asking price. Other than EQs, the 2802 wouldn't leave me wanting for much, at least for something in that price range.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
SSL Six
Mar 28, 2019 8:13:53 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by ericn on Mar 28, 2019 8:13:53 GMT -6
Yeah, it’s a piece I always felt flew under the radar, it and the Audient Zen are products I would look at and say “ how can we do this thing better” if I were at SSL. The thing is, could they? I would argue that the Audient stuff sounds every bit as good as SSL, so it would come down to features, and Audient kind of knocked it out of the park on that front, at least for the $5k asking price. Other than EQs, the 2802 wouldn't leave me wanting for much, at least for something in that price range. A couple of more aux sends, set it up to line up with either X- Rack or 500 rack, an expander. The SSL logo! They might have brought the noise and distortion down slightly.
|
|
|
SSL Six
Mar 28, 2019 8:49:50 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Quint on Mar 28, 2019 8:49:50 GMT -6
The thing is, could they? I would argue that the Audient stuff sounds every bit as good as SSL, so it would come down to features, and Audient kind of knocked it out of the park on that front, at least for the $5k asking price. Other than EQs, the 2802 wouldn't leave me wanting for much, at least for something in that price range. A couple of more aux sends, set it up to line up with either X- Rack or 500 rack, an expander. The SSL logo! They might have brought the noise and distortion down slightly. An expander for an additional 8 channels would have been cool for the 2802.
|
|
|
SSL Six
Mar 28, 2019 10:13:16 GMT -6
Post by jeromemason on Mar 28, 2019 10:13:16 GMT -6
Not with moving faders, while it might be possible to build it the service and support the cheap motor faders would need would be impossible to deliver with the current dealers and their reputation would take a major hit. Now you could maybe do it with a VCA system and Encoders but I’ll bet SSL knows the importance of the feel of a P&G fader to their brand. I think if they want to expand the brand a SSL version of that Audient / Focusrite brand would be a good place to start. I think the thinking at SSL is one of a Modular SSL studio and products that stand on their own and can intergrate with SSL’s summing systems. In my mind this is the dumbest thing SSL did since dumping the Xpanda. I would think that an expandable small mixer that you could add and easily intergrate EQ and comps with labeled SSL, Neve or API would be money in the long run. To most and the target for this it’s not Just the brand that’s going to sell it, it needs the look and feel. Man, I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I examined some of these new brushless stepper motors the other day, it was at a hobby shop (Yes, I fly RC, I'm a total geek) and these things were next to nothing and the precision that they had was insane. I really should say resolution, I don't know how they did that, but I honestly could not feel any dead space in the steps of that motor, I was blown away. I think technology will allow this to happen. P&G's are great, but technology will allow companies like SSL to use something exponentially cheaper with the same exact feel. In my lifetime I believe there will be the board I described, made by SSL, with flying faders, with DAW control/automation and it will be under $5k.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
SSL Six
Mar 29, 2019 7:20:57 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by ericn on Mar 29, 2019 7:20:57 GMT -6
Not with moving faders, while it might be possible to build it the service and support the cheap motor faders would need would be impossible to deliver with the current dealers and their reputation would take a major hit. Now you could maybe do it with a VCA system and Encoders but I’ll bet SSL knows the importance of the feel of a P&G fader to their brand. I think if they want to expand the brand a SSL version of that Audient / Focusrite brand would be a good place to start. I think the thinking at SSL is one of a Modular SSL studio and products that stand on their own and can intergrate with SSL’s summing systems. In my mind this is the dumbest thing SSL did since dumping the Xpanda. I would think that an expandable small mixer that you could add and easily intergrate EQ and comps with labeled SSL, Neve or API would be money in the long run. To most and the target for this it’s not Just the brand that’s going to sell it, it needs the look and feel. Man, I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I examined some of these new brushless stepper motors the other day, it was at a hobby shop (Yes, I fly RC, I'm a total geek) and these things were next to nothing and the precision that they had was insane. I really should say resolution, I don't know how they did that, but I honestly could not feel any dead space in the steps of that motor, I was blown away. I think technology will allow this to happen. P&G's are great, but technology will allow companies like SSL to use something exponentially cheaper with the same exact feel. In my lifetime I believe there will be the board I described, made by SSL, with flying faders, with DAW control/automation and it will be under $5k. I don’t doubt that the tech is available today for somebody to possibly build a better cheap motorized fader, I don’t think the market is there to recoup the development and manufacturing costs to justify doing it. The only markets left for these faders are Audio and some mil-spec replacement. I’ll bet even P&G is selling their lowend digital encoders at least 100 to one for every motorized fader, probably closer to 1000 to 1. While yes in the hobby area you are looking at retail pricing so you probably would get a better brake wholesale, you are probably looking at units bought as lots from wholesalers. For consistency and QC most would want in a fader your going to want to deal direct with a manufacturer and I don’t think your going to hit the numbers for that. Through in the cost of rejects that hit the manufacturers QC marks but not yours, the fact that your still going to need to buy Fader mechanisms from TKD, P&G or who ever now owns what was ALPs because a Fader factory build would bankrupt you. Why wouldn’t one of the established fader makers do it? A significant amount of their market wants what they already have so they want to hit the numbers they hit now to keep those clients happy and again the market just isn’t that big.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Mar 29, 2019 14:01:00 GMT -6
Man, I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I examined some of these new brushless stepper motors the other day, it was at a hobby shop (Yes, I fly RC, I'm a total geek) and these things were next to nothing and the precision that they had was insane. I really should say resolution, I don't know how they did that, but I honestly could not feel any dead space in the steps of that motor, I was blown away. I think technology will allow this to happen. P&G's are great, but technology will allow companies like SSL to use something exponentially cheaper with the same exact feel. In my lifetime I believe there will be the board I described, made by SSL, with flying faders, with DAW control/automation and it will be under $5k. I don’t doubt that the tech is available today for somebody to possibly build a better cheap motorized fader, I don’t think the market is there to recoup the development and manufacturing costs to justify doing it. The only markets left for these faders are Audio and some mil-spec replacement. I’ll bet even P&G is selling their lowend digital encoders at least 100 to one for every motorized fader, probably closer to 1000 to 1. While yes in the hobby area you are looking at retail pricing so you probably would get a better brake wholesale, you are probably looking at units bought as lots from wholesalers. For consistency and QC most would want in a fader your going to want to deal direct with a manufacturer and I don’t think your going to hit the numbers for that. Through in the cost of rejects that hit the manufacturers QC marks but not yours, the fact that your still going to need to buy Fader mechanisms from TKD, P&G or who ever now owns what was ALPs because a Fader factory build would bankrupt you. Why wouldn’t one of the established fader makers do it? A significant amount of their market wants what they already have so they want to hit the numbers they hit now to keep those clients happy and again the market just isn’t that big. I don't know man, I think there is already the tech there...... And a company like SSL would be investing in the future, putting up the R&D for a miniature high resolution motor would be peanuts to what they'd save and also what they'd be able to offer. Bottom line is this. Companies like SSL are losing not only the hobbyist and bedroom producers, they're losing the big fish now. When a guy that used to have a giant SSL4000E in his room now has a little desk with a few choice outboard pieces and a summing rig, and had to build a special shelf to put his grammy's on instead of all over that SSL console, they've got a problem. And that same guy is still getting grammy's, so now SSL has to build something that doesn't cost much more than the summing rig he's got but gives him the exact euphonic feeling his old SSL gave him. That's what SSL has to do now. I had a SSL6000E...... It took me 5 years to come up with something that gave me a sense of what that console would do, just enough to make me happy with my product, and for me not the customers sake. Hell I could do it in the box all day and still have happy customers, they don't listen to that stuff, but I do and I want my mixes to have a certain flavor and feel to them. They'll come up with something like I described and in that price range or they'll wither and die, and that'll be sad because those consoles made a shitload of references we use today to sculpt our mixes to.
|
|