Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2021 18:08:07 GMT -6
The Daking 4 channel 19” rack pres I was going to buy were discontinued and it’s really hard to buy an RNP right now. So I figure 500 series is the way but I’m not big on anything API; most of it sounds almost bandpassed to me. If you’re building my a remote rig don’t underestimate how heavy a 500 series rack can be, especially when filled with transformer coupled mic Pres. I had a 10 channels of CAPI vp26’s, a 1u interface, and an Audient ASP 880 in a 6u rack as a mobile rig. That thing was like 85lbs! Not an easy lift. Edit: if I was building a new mobile rig I’d look at a more compact 8channel mic pre like the Phoenix audio DRS-8 or go back to the Audient. Way smaller, lighter and still baddass. Thanks! Good to know. I was thinking about maybe some Avedis or Spectrasonics stuff so yeah I guess it can get super heavy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2021 18:18:15 GMT -6
And that Phoenix audio thing looks crazy! What’s it like? Nevey when pushed? Cleaned up Neve? It’s certainly cheaper than 8 MA5 or 8 STX100!
|
|
|
Post by jmoose on May 3, 2021 17:13:08 GMT -6
I've always wondered why people would get say.. 8 or 16 lunchbox preamps instead of just buying a nice board. Wouldn't it be less expensive? I can see the value in slowly adding to a lunchbox, this way you could get one at a time, but spending $8,000 on eight 500 series preamps doesn't make sense if a board can do that, and more. Exactly! Although some people can't physically fit a medium or large format desk into their space. Aircraft carrier 56 channel SSL aside, for a soundcraft or whatever that often means the "studio space" might be too small to begin with, even just for proper monitoring & low frequency extension. Spare bedroom syndrome... That aside a lot of 19" rack gear is still more compact and less expensive then the 500 equivalent if your aiming for multiples of the same piece. Fer instance. If someone wanted 8 channels of API 512 preamps why not get a pair of 3124's? It'd be 2 rack spaces not 3 and there'd be money left over. Couple years ago I needed a compact 4 channel preamp, ended up with a Black Lion Auteur quad which is one rack space. They also make the same preamp in a 500 box but 4 of them? That'd have been 3 rack spaces vs 1 and a lot more weight to carry on location gigs. Didn't make sense. At one point I thought about loading up the BAE chassis with "fun mangling" stuff like Radial reamp boxes... but then I just bought the DI sized Radials. Figured that as a freelancer boxes are easier to carry around. And even in my own shop its easier to put 'em where I need them, closer to whatever's being fed signal vs running super long cables all over the shop from the desk. Annnnd... they were less expensive!
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,934
|
Post by ericn on May 3, 2021 18:05:49 GMT -6
I've always wondered why people would get say.. 8 or 16 lunchbox preamps instead of just buying a nice board. Wouldn't it be less expensive? I can see the value in slowly adding to a lunchbox, this way you could get one at a time, but spending $8,000 on eight 500 series preamps doesn't make sense if a board can do that, and more. Exactly! Although some people can't physically fit a medium or large format desk into their space. Aircraft carrier 56 channel SSL aside, for a soundcraft or whatever that often means the "studio space" might be too small to begin with, even just for proper monitoring & low frequency extension. Spare bedroom syndrome... That aside a lot of 19" rack gear is still more compact and less expensive then the 500 equivalent if your aiming for multiples of the same piece. Fer instance. If someone wanted 8 channels of API 512 preamps why not get a pair of 3124's? It'd be 2 rack spaces not 3 and there'd be money left over. Couple years ago I needed a compact 4 channel preamp, ended up with a Black Lion Auteur quad which is one rack space. They also make the same preamp in a 500 box but 4 of them? That'd have been 3 rack spaces vs 1 and a lot more weight to carry on location gigs. Didn't make sense. At one point I thought about loading up the BAE chassis with "fun mangling" stuff like Radial reamp boxes... but then I just bought the DI sized Radials. Figured that as a freelancer boxes are easier to carry around. And even in my own shop its easier to put 'em where I need them, closer to whatever's being fed signal vs running super long cables all over the shop from the desk. Annnnd... they were less expensive! Like I said it’s all about designs that work in the 500 format! One thing I’m surprised nobody has marketed yet is a 10 space 500 rack with an outboard PSU & here is the inventive part, a little extra space between modules! Would sure make a bunch of EQs easier to dial in.
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on May 3, 2021 21:00:49 GMT -6
I enjoy the price savings of 500 series, not having to pay for the psu, box every time....but honestly wish it was a bit taller/wider format.
Just a bit bigger would make a world of difference. Something to properly fit both preamp and EQ... like original NEVE 1073 format size would be great.
|
|
|
Post by centralpark on May 5, 2021 0:08:40 GMT -6
I enjoy the price savings of 500 series, not having to pay for the psu, box every time....but honestly wish it was a bit taller/wider format. Just a bit bigger would make a world of difference. Something to properly fit both preamp and EQ... like original NEVE 1073 format size would be great. Completely agree. 500 could be better. SSL X-rack was much nicer. 4u instead of 3u. Maybe still a little too small for both pre and eq. What was smart was the X-rack chassis was open in the back with the modules plugging at the bottom of the rear. This meant the rear top of the modules was accessible and allowed for different connectors. The stereo compressor X-rack module is 1 unit wide but with two 1/4 ins, two 1/4 outs, and another 1/4 inch input for sidechain. You just can't do that with 500 series. The SSL 8 input modules, are again just 1 unit wide, but have two DB25 connectors on the back. With more manufacturers making 500 modules with usb connections, those connections have to take place on the front. With 500 that is really ugly. With the X-rack format, usb could easily have connected to the back. Much much more flexibility in that design. 500 Series design is basically 50 years old. And that's the standard we're going to have forever as there's too much invested in it now for it to ever change.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on May 5, 2021 11:29:37 GMT -6
I enjoy the price savings of 500 series, not having to pay for the psu, box every time....but honestly wish it was a bit taller/wider format. Just a bit bigger would make a world of difference. Something to properly fit both preamp and EQ... like original NEVE 1073 format size would be great. Completely agree. 500 could be better. SSL X-rack was much nicer. 4u instead of 3u. Maybe still a little too small for both pre and eq. What was smart was the X-rack chassis was open in the back with the modules plugging at the bottom of the rear. This meant the rear top of the modules was accessible and allowed for different connectors. The stereo compressor X-rack module is 1 unit wide but with two 1/4 ins, two 1/4 outs, and another 1/4 inch input for sidechain. You just can't do that with 500 series. The SSL 8 input modules, are again just 1 unit wide, but have two DB25 connectors on the back. With more manufacturers making 500 modules with usb connections, those connections have to take place on the front. With 500 that is really ugly. With the X-rack format, usb could easily have connected to the back. Much much more flexibility in that design. 500 Series design is basically 50 years old. And that's the standard we're going to have forever as there's too much invested in it now for it to ever change. I have two 500 racks that have literally 3 inputs per channel and 4 outputs. One set of which is an option insert send and return loop if the card supports that. Plus feed switches and channel linking. And a front power switch(thank god, seriously every rack should have this) www.totalaudiocontrol.com/pr/show/11There are also several 500 racks with built in usb rails now. The main problem there is coming out with a standard for the cards and racks so everyone can just be happy and talk across chassis/cards. Which isn't about to happen. Plus I wouldn't want something 4u high personally. That's what double wide 500 is for. Is it a bummer when you loose a channel of your chassis? Sure. But it's still an option.
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on May 5, 2021 11:53:44 GMT -6
And that Phoenix audio thing looks crazy! What’s it like? Nevey when pushed? Cleaned up Neve? It’s certainly cheaper than 8 MA5 or 8 STX100! Have 3 channels of Phoenix at my spot, they have something of that pushed class A transistor thing on tap for sure. But, they don't have input transformers so they're kind of their own thing. I'd rather have a TG2, but it wasn't my purchase to make.
|
|
|
Post by ab101 on May 5, 2021 11:55:22 GMT -6
Anyone know of a stand for a 500 series rack that does not take up much floor space (not a big tripod type base). I would like to locate it just above my mixer meters and close to my inserts. (Maybe this is far afield from this thread - but I am not sure it is worth of its own thread.)
Heritage has the 80 series units. But I am not sure they are that popular.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,934
|
Post by ericn on May 8, 2021 11:54:57 GMT -6
I enjoy the price savings of 500 series, not having to pay for the psu, box every time....but honestly wish it was a bit taller/wider format. Just a bit bigger would make a world of difference. Something to properly fit both preamp and EQ... like original NEVE 1073 format size would be great. Completely agree. 500 could be better. SSL X-rack was much nicer. 4u instead of 3u. Maybe still a little too small for both pre and eq. What was smart was the X-rack chassis was open in the back with the modules plugging at the bottom of the rear. This meant the rear top of the modules was accessible and allowed for different connectors. The stereo compressor X-rack module is 1 unit wide but with two 1/4 ins, two 1/4 outs, and another 1/4 inch input for sidechain. You just can't do that with 500 series. The SSL 8 input modules, are again just 1 unit wide, but have two DB25 connectors on the back. With more manufacturers making 500 modules with usb connections, those connections have to take place on the front. With 500 that is really ugly. With the X-rack format, usb could easily have connected to the back. Much much more flexibility in that design. 500 Series design is basically 50 years old. And that's the standard we're going to have forever as there's too much invested in it now for it to ever change. You have to remember the actual origins of the 500 series, actual console modules, not console modules redesigned for a portable format. I do agree for a lot of EQ’s 4 space would be better, but that’s the thing you have the make sure the module is workable in the format or if a simple change of knobs wil make it so.
|
|