|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 1, 2014 10:17:23 GMT -6
I initially was gonna sell because I needed the money...but now that I don't (well, I can always use the money) I'm still thinking about selling. I just don't know if I've ever been as bowled over as others. Its sounds great - just not sure it sounds that much greater than the Symphony... The biggest difference I noticed with the Burl was the sheen on top...and I'm not sure that I dig that. Kind of like a top end sheen you get with an opto compressor. It definitely adds punchiness - and even some width/depth - when running the 2 mix back through it...but I'm not so sure I can't achieve the same thing with the VP28's I have. (Yes, Tony, I know...you have said that  ). The bigger attraction to selling the Burl for a Symphony again is - the DA. I miss the Symphony DA. I could use it in standalone and pair it with the functionality of the Apollo. Not even sure if I want to keep the Apollo - although, I like the workflow and it's cool to be able to have the plugs...especially the verb right there at your fingertips. |
|
|
|
Post by formatcyes on Aug 1, 2014 15:53:43 GMT -6
OmG you may have developed reverse GAS. Not to worry it will soon pass.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,967 
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Aug 1, 2014 16:25:34 GMT -6
The problem is after the wow factor of the new piece wears off you often realize the attributes of the old piece. You now have to decide what's best for you and you know you want both, but can you justify both is the real question.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Aug 1, 2014 17:43:14 GMT -6
I'd just buy some nice transformers!
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 1, 2014 18:19:28 GMT -6
why not hang on to what you've got for now, buy a RM super beast, and when it gets delivered 7 months from now lol, do a shoot out for us showing how superior it is to both the S and B, then sell the S and B and the apollo, then u can use your RM dac for monitoring and round trip with your super beast, have $5k+ in your pocket, and live happily ever after....... you buy the next piece of gear8)
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 1, 2014 18:24:51 GMT -6
Yeah - shit...I don't know. I had been running it through the VP28's and then into the Burl...and it was just too much I think. Went back to just printing the 2 mix through the Burl and it was beautiful. So...maybe this thread is a moot point now More reason to think before I post. |
|
outuvphaze
Full Member
Riders on the storm... Riders on the storm...
Posts: 33
|
Post by outuvphaze on Aug 1, 2014 18:32:39 GMT -6
I have very little experience with the Burl, John.I'm still using the Lynx Aurora. The AD/DA that I still had the most fun with if only in terms of routing was the old RME Fireface 800. It had it's sonic limitations but signal routing was not one of them. The Lynx smokes it in terms of clarity but I often miss the software of the RME. Funny how life goes. You dream, you search for that extra 2%, and in so doing keep an entire industry afloat.
For awhile, I was seriously contemplating Lavry Gold or Prism, but in the end did I really need it?
No, not really.
So, I'll stick with the Aurora.
Cheers,
John
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Aug 1, 2014 18:48:03 GMT -6
Yeah - shit...I don't know. I had been running it through the VP28's and then into the Burl...and it was just too much I think. Went back to just printing the 2 mix through the Burl and it was beautiful. So...maybe this thread is a moot point now More reason to think before I post. but when using the vp28 how hot are you driving the burl, you could go the other way and reduce the drive into the burl to minimize driving its transformers I find depending on the source 2 extra db into the burl can be too much, so maybe its kind of like reverse gain matching, when using the vp28 reduce the drive into the burl by an equivalent negative amount of the gain of the vp28: start with 1 to -1 and maybe try 1 to - 2 ? |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 1, 2014 18:59:11 GMT -6
Yeah - shit...I don't know. I had been running it through the VP28's and then into the Burl...and it was just too much I think. Went back to just printing the 2 mix through the Burl and it was beautiful. So...maybe this thread is a moot point now More reason to think before I post. that's cool, but for selfish reasons i want you to do it! i wonder how printing through the vps into the RM super beast would sound? then you could also forgo the vps and possibly get extremely accurate and pristine AD conversion? i'd love to hear that shoot out! I say you should go for it  |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 1, 2014 19:28:25 GMT -6
Heavy. Just heavy. For me, no Burl, no bueno. Don't do it JK.
But, if you decide to sell, let me know. I'm thinking about adding two more channels of Burlness to my AD.
|
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Aug 1, 2014 19:32:28 GMT -6
just for giggles.
do a mix without all that stuff.
one A to D on the way in during capture, no outboard afterwards. and bounce ITB
be interesting to see what you thoughts are
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 1, 2014 21:30:12 GMT -6
I claim momentary insanity.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,967
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Aug 1, 2014 21:46:17 GMT -6
Momentary! Certifiable ! Your a songwriter!
|
|
|
|
Post by jimwilliams on Aug 2, 2014 10:07:52 GMT -6
Wait and compare to the RMA. Then you will hear what it is doing/adding to the stew.
I've always been of the mind that the converters should not be an extra spice to the stew. I prefer total transparency and neutrality for that stage. We have enough color devices without throwing the entire mix into another one.
Once you finish getting a mix just the way you want it adding one more euphonic stage seems counterproductive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2014 10:13:45 GMT -6
Wait and compare to the RMA. Then you will hear what it is doing/adding to the stew. I've always been of the mind that the converters should not be an extra spice to the stew. I prefer total transparency and neutrality for that stage. We have enough color devices without throwing the entire mix into another one. Once you finish getting a mix just the way you want it adding one more euphonic stage seems counterproductive. Wouldn't you monitor post A/D? When I was working OTB I would always monitor post A/D, I don't remember how I had it set up in Cubase to do that but I would never finish a mix and then feed it through something like a Burl. I'm sure the Burl is nice if you mix to it, I would generally agree with you on transparency on the conversion stage but this is a 2 channel A/D that's designed to impart a bit more colour that almost everyone wants. |
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Aug 2, 2014 21:02:22 GMT -6
The problem is after the wow factor of the new piece wears off you often realize the attributes of the old piece. You now have to decide what's best for you and you know you want both, but can you justify both is the real question. I can... |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 3, 2014 1:22:42 GMT -6
Wait and compare to the RMA. Then you will hear what it is doing/adding to the stew. I've always been of the mind that the converters should not be an extra spice to the stew. I prefer total transparency and neutrality for that stage. We have enough color devices without throwing the entire mix into another one. Once you finish getting a mix just the way you want it adding one more euphonic stage seems counterproductive. When I was working OTB I would always monitor post A/D, I don't remember how I had it set up in Cubase to do that but I would never finish a mix and then feed it through something like a Burl. I'm sure the Burl is nice if you mix to it, I would generally agree with you on transparency on the conversion stage but this is a 2 channel A/D that's designed to impart a bit more colour that almost everyone wants. I think you mean post DA? not sure? doesn't matter, you can only monitor after DA right... My standard OTB protocol has been/will be, Tracking AD, DA back into the console, mix/route into the stereo buss to 2 tracks of AD, and monitor the last stereo DA the entire time, i'm not going to want to plug in a ADDA after mixing/monitoring the console output and risk changing the sound, the stereo master tracks of ADDA will be feeding the monitors the whole time. As of now, my plan will be to use a pair of DA channels of the FM192's into a woolymammoth passive atten, which will leave me with 30 channels of console feeding DA, until i can get a RM superbeast delivered mid 2016 8), or i may never need it? 30 channels should be plenty...though i have 32 console input channels. I'm curious, has there been any big time records done through the burl? i'd like to give a listen. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Aug 3, 2014 9:10:27 GMT -6
Beware that passive attenuators are only better with some but not all D to A line stages due to loading. Digi mix converters sounded great feeding a 2 meg load and like utter poop feeding the average recording console's 10k load. Line stages are a big deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 3, 2014 10:15:03 GMT -6
Wouldn't you monitor post A/D?When I was working OTB I would always monitor post A/D, I don't remember how I had it set up in Cubase to do that but I would never finish a mix and then feed it through something like a Burl. I'm sure the Burl is nice if you mix to it, I would generally agree with you on transparency on the conversion stage but this is a 2 channel A/D that's designed to impart a bit more colour that almost everyone wants. I think you mean post DA? not sure? doesn't matter, you can only monitor after DA right... My standard OTB protocol has been/will be, Tracking AD, DA back into the console, mix/route into the stereo buss to 2 tracks of AD, and monitor the last stereo DA the entire time, i'm not going to want to plug in a ADDA after mixing/monitoring the console output and risk changing the sound, the stereo master tracks of ADDA will be feeding the monitors the whole time. As of now, my plan will be to use a pair of DA channels of the FM192's into a woolymammoth passive atten, which will leave me with 30 channels of console feeding DA, until i can get a RM superbeast delivered mid 2016 8), or i may never need it? 30 channels should be plenty...though i have 32 console input channels. I'm curious, has there been any big time records done through the burl? i'd like to give a listen. Plenty. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 3, 2014 10:44:01 GMT -6
^helpful  |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 3, 2014 11:00:49 GMT -6
Have you looked at the website?
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 3, 2014 12:35:22 GMT -6
derp 8/ i just did... some great E's there!
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 12, 2014 21:33:49 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Sept 13, 2014 5:40:05 GMT -6
|
|
). The bigger attraction to selling the Burl for a Symphony again is - the DA. I miss the Symphony DA. I could use it in standalone and pair it with the functionality of the Apollo. Not even sure if I want to keep the Apollo - although, I like the workflow and it's cool to be able to have the plugs...especially the verb right there at your fingertips. 
