|
Post by noah shain on Feb 6, 2023 22:25:53 GMT -6
Howdy gang. I changed careers a few years ago and I’ve finally prepared myself to sell all my gear. Im gonna put a list here and see if anyone is interested in any of it. I know this is annoying but im not gonna price everything. Reasonable offers will probably sell. I’ll eat the PayPal and you add a little for shipping and Bob’s your uncle.
They’re all used and probably all have a little rack rash but they all work. I don’t have any original boxes.
If I’m violating the rules I apologize!
List: 2ea. Distressor 2ea. Overstayer Audio M. A. S. 1ea. Overstayer Audio Modular Channel Stereo 8755DS 1ea. Overstayer Audio Modular Channel Stereo 8755DM 1ea. Retro Instruments 176 Limiting Amplifier 1ea. Retro Instruments Doublewide Tube Limiter 2ea. BAE 10DC Comp/Limiter w/power supply 1ea Spectrasonics V610 1ea UA 2/1176 1ea Zod Audio ID DI Tube Pre amp/DI 2ea Purple Audio Sweet 10 500 series chassis 2ea CAPI VP28 mic pre 2ea Hairball Audio Lola mic pre 3ea AWTAC mic pre/eq 2ea XQP de-esser 1ea dbx 520 deesser 1ea Radial EXTC
I also have a heavily modded gen 1 API 1608. I did the CAPI mods to all the channels, put Litz x formers in it and replaced almost every dang op amp in the console with a Blue Dot. Message me if you wanna talk turkey on this beast.
Hope you’re all well!!
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 21, 2018 22:57:38 GMT -6
That's not too bad. Can you mix and match the channels? Like the single stereo channels you have with pan control with the dual stereo channels? As of now...no. It would require additional faceplate skins and a new rear input panel. Everything else would work fine internally. If there is enough demand I will but believe me, this has already been an undertaking of massive proportions as it is. Will they be scalable Jeff? Start with 16 and add as you want, say?
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 17, 2018 15:11:56 GMT -6
Maybe he’s just having fun and doing what brings him joy? I, for one, appreciate the concept of someone maybe bowing out of the race for market dominance.
Dude is sitting on piles of cash already...why bother?
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 16, 2018 22:02:53 GMT -6
I’d guess I’m a pretty average producer/engineer who owns his own, private use Studio in Los Angeles.
I’ve had a couple 2-5k years but I’d guess the average year for his average guy is around 12-15k.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 15, 2018 21:33:14 GMT -6
Sometimes the first days work acts as a demo but 100% of the time that I’ve finished the song myself the “demo” is the foundation of the final track. If it ends up being just a writing session and I dont do the production then it’s just a demo.
So...I do make demos but I never intend for them to be demos.
I would guess the Nashville guys make more demos than any other people on the planet. I have friends in Nashville who’s entire livelihood is demos.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 15, 2018 21:25:21 GMT -6
Can you get in to the modeling of mechanical and/or physical reverbs? Things like plates, springs and chambers vs. digital reverb? Is there a standard for “good” in that realm? Like, do you folks in the reverb business believe you have equaled the hardware counterparts? Are you still chasing something that you haven’t caught yet? Are you there? I still think of hardware as superior in this area, though I am totally open to the possibility that it’s only psychological/romantic bias. I own a few mechanical reverbs that I love. They are not yet replaceable with software but it may be because they are very limited in their functionality, they have certain “filter” characteristics, they’re obscure and nobody has attempted model them. M7 vs ITB reverb is still digital vs digital. "Modeling" can mean all sorts of things. Something like a spring or a plate will vary from example to example. If you try for an exact duplication of a particular one, that's the only one it will sound like. My own approach for anything is to go for an idealized version that you can tweak toward a more particular example. I've done that with plates, but am unlikely to do it with springs. Spring reverbs were my only reverb option for a number of years (way back when) and I simply don't like them. The only one I ever heard that wasn't completely awful was an oil-damped can in a Hammond B2. But that was nearly 50 years ago. If you really want a 140, make some space and go find a good one. Chambers and halls are somewhat different, since they're real acoustic spaces. I've been lucky enough to stand inside some of the best chambers in the world (a little place on Vine street) and I really have that sound in my head. But again, I've gone for a flexible, idealized version based on what happens acoustically. Same with halls. Make the algorithm flexible enough to help the engineer solve problems. A 'modeled' reverb can only match the model. That's rarely the absolute perfect solution for a given mix. I won't get much into the topic of how you actually hear reverbs. But suffice to say that the brain does tremendous data reduction on what hits your eardrums. Understanding what it does with this is the key to making any kind of reverb. The pure math and physics are only part of the story. The neurology is the rest. I'm still working on that part. And I know I sound like a broken record on this (what's a record?) but let's let go of the idea that there was something magical about the processors in those old hardware reverbs. They all consisted of an address generator and a very crude math processor. By crude, I mean inaccurate math for most filters. I mean extremely limited dynamic range with noise rising as the signal recirculated. I mean quantization errors and zipper noises whenever you made any sort of change. I lived in those processors for years. People grew accustomed to those artifacts and imprinted on that as being a favored sound. Most of us in the business were always trying to minimize that stuff and move toward something cleaner and less compromised Thanks for the considered answer. FWIW I own dozens of plug in reverbs and zero hardware digital verbs. I believe my next verb purchase will be one of yours. I will also get more Zerotronics units. I really love the one I have.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 15, 2018 21:22:04 GMT -6
I thought the real BX20 sucked! Agree. Don’t like the model in Altiverb either. I’ve never tried the uad one. I do have a couple springs I LOVE though. They don’t always work and they’re rarely a featured sort of element but they have a certain pleasing quality. When they’re right they’re right.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 14, 2018 19:58:09 GMT -6
jsteiger these LOOK like a pretty simple build. Are they?
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 14, 2018 19:55:16 GMT -6
I think the original underlying question I was getting at was, “can itb verbs be as good as their External HW counterparts...” I’ve been really happy with itb verbs - so not an indictment... The question here is "what do you mean by good?" Is that an objective or a subjective measure? I think in objective terms that ITB reverbs have been better for several years. They are quieter and they sound (or can sound) much more like a real acoustic space. I was never interested in trying to duplicate a 480L, because it had so many unnatural artifacts (I think Martin at Relab has done a pretty good job of it). Acoustic reality has always been my touchstone. Having said that, my latest generation of reverbs has some optional stuff to put the crud back in. Some people love that part and others wouldn't go anywhere near it. 'Good' as a subjective measure is another thing entirely and I suspect that's where you're coming from. It means whatever you want it to mean and it's perfectly legitimate to have your artistic preferences. I've long thought there was a strong generational component to what people think of as good sound, and I suspect that there's a lasting emotional attachment to sounds that were in the air during important events for a person. For me--even though I don't have the slightest interest in going back to analog--there's still something magical about the smell of a fresh pancake of Scotch 206 on a machine that's just gotten warmed up. That was a 'good' smell. Can you get in to the modeling of mechanical and/or physical reverbs? Things like plates, springs and chambers vs. digital reverb? Is there a standard for “good” in that realm? Like, do you folks in the reverb business believe you have equaled the hardware counterparts? Are you still chasing something that you haven’t caught yet? Are you there? I still think of hardware as superior in this area, though I am totally open to the possibility that it’s only psychological/romantic bias. I own a few mechanical reverbs that I love. They are not yet replaceable with software but it may be because they are very limited in their functionality, they have certain “filter” characteristics, they’re obscure and nobody has attempted model them. M7 vs ITB reverb is still digital vs digital. How about digital vs (shhhhhhhh, I’m embarrassed to even use the word these days) analog😬 Thx
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 13, 2018 23:06:07 GMT -6
Ir's are just sound files that are read by a convolution plugin. You load the ir file (a .wav) into altiverb or space designer or any convolution reverb and off you go. Ahhhhh...how embarrassing that I don’t know that. Well now I do... And....cut.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 9, 2018 23:14:53 GMT -6
So how do you use these?
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 4, 2018 22:22:52 GMT -6
I’m using the heck out of it across a handfull of vocals on a record now. It’s really good.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Dec 22, 2017 0:44:25 GMT -6
Why do the eq models have xlr on the front?
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Dec 22, 2017 0:30:53 GMT -6
Watched those vids...pretty amazing...I might drive myself insane with Neutron/Masking...I kept thinking during that video "everything is going to mask at some level..." Well I bought ozone waaaay back and I didn’t have to pay full price for this version. Is it 2 grand?!?! It’s really good. The masking thing isn’t really doing anything for me...its as vague as...as...well...as masking is. The way it meters is not super super fine resolution. It kinda confirms for you the general area of masking but it’s not an automatic masking fixer. You still gotta fuss around like you always do and inch your way towards unmasking like always. The workflow, inter connectivity of the plug ins and modules within the plug ins is REALLY good. The plugs themselves are good and their connection is EXTRA good. Ozone is great and Neutron is great. Get em both. The tonal balance thing is effing cool too. I’m a reference chaser all the way and it helps a lot. There’s a review of Neutron in tape op that is illuminating. I am using the heck out of these on a really tricky record right now and I feel like they helped me up my game for sure. I could almost ditch most of my other plug ins. I say thumbs up big time.
|
|
|
FF Limiter
Dec 21, 2017 12:14:40 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by noah shain on Dec 21, 2017 12:14:40 GMT -6
I have Logic, but don't use it... I’ve been an Ozone hater for years but I can’t do it no more... it’s so good. Neutron too. I’m tempted to say game changing. The workflow is incredible. Seriously worth watching an iZotope tutorial vid.
|
|
|
FF Limiter
Dec 20, 2017 23:12:26 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by noah shain on Dec 20, 2017 23:12:26 GMT -6
Maybe sacrilege but I just got the new N2O8 bundle from isotope, which includes Ozone8...
Holy schnikes guys...are any of you on this?
It’s ridiculous useful and good.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Dec 3, 2017 12:09:46 GMT -6
Besides stereo vs mono and physical form factor there are some routing differences, the filters are different, the eqs are different, the output fader matrix(?) is different... There’s more differences I’m missing too. They’re def in the same family. The imperial channel is basically a single console channel and the Modular you could think of as a return or bus master kinda thing. What isn’t really clear from reading the site (but Jeff can explain quite eloquently) is that he has designed a console in pieces. There’s a whole Ethernet based routing system and automation is in the works, etc. If you were just getting into the Overstayer stuff, what would be more appealing to you, the Modular or a pair of Imperials? When I bought the Modulars I was wanting bus processing so it was an easy decision. I want 2 more. But maybe check out the imperial. Less up front $$. I’m sure you’ll be stoked.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Dec 3, 2017 11:36:13 GMT -6
I have 2 stereo Modular Channels but I’ll be acquiring some imperials as well. What's the difference? They seem very similar. Besides stereo vs mono and physical form factor there are some routing differences, the filters are different, the eqs are different, the output fader matrix(?) is different... There’s more differences I’m missing too. They’re def in the same family. The imperial channel is basically a single console channel and the Modular you could think of as a return or bus master kinda thing. What isn’t really clear from reading the site (but Jeff can explain quite eloquently) is that he has designed a console in pieces. There’s a whole Ethernet based routing system and automation is in the works, etc.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Dec 3, 2017 11:16:14 GMT -6
Yep. It’s so unique and so flexible. I could (and might) use an entire console of these. It’s unbeatable You're talking their Modular Channel? Or the Imperial Channel? I have 2 stereo Modular Channels but I’ll be acquiring some imperials as well.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Dec 2, 2017 10:08:32 GMT -6
Yep. It’s so unique and so flexible. I could (and might) use an entire console of these.
It’s unbeatable
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Oct 15, 2017 12:40:43 GMT -6
Following this
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Oct 13, 2017 13:23:21 GMT -6
I have once or twice. I honestly never have a pair around. People are always taking my personal ones for demos. I can't keep enough built up and around to do it. When I have it sounded really cool. I want to use them as one of the busses on my console. So, I can have a killer tube sounding buss. I could put them on the back end of my folcrom or something like that and then dump that into my Neve. I will do it more once I can keep a few of them around. Yeah...I’d have to have 3 of them because I am not taking mine off the bass.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Oct 9, 2017 10:17:51 GMT -6
dandeurloo do you ever put a pair of Zods on the 2 bus?
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Sept 21, 2017 16:52:38 GMT -6
1k boost on an electric guitar is pretty good. Q is so wide that it reaches well up toward 3k ish. A little crafty cut/boost/filter settings and it's useable. I bet Dan D could turn it in to something cool.
$149
It's chock full of transistors and has an output transformer.
It's useable. Not graceful. Not worth the trouble to sell so I'll keep it.
Didn't fit in the 1608 or the sweet 10. Pulled off the housing and it slid in to the sweet 10. There it will stay.
That's probably all the investigating I'll do.
It'll end up on a Tom or a guitar during tracking.
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Sept 21, 2017 16:31:58 GMT -6
Quick test drive...
This is not a Neve eq.
Couple db boost just running through it. Q on the cut is very wide...this won't be my cut eq @ 700hz like a Neve.
Kinda same on kick. The cut 300 boost 35 is not great.
*edit*
It's actually working on a kick right now. Hi pass at 50>cut 300>boost 50. Not bad.
I'll try some mid band additive next and see what happens.
Go figure. Hahaha
|
|