|
|
Post by swurveman on Jun 28, 2015 19:04:41 GMT -6
I've owned all three synths you listed and all three are underwhelming for making music. For about the same price ($1400) you can score a nice Moog Source. There's a big difference going analog and vintage Moog. I've owned a number of vintage Moogs, absolutely no problems with maintenance etc and the sounds just contribute more than any outboard gear to the process of creating songs. Much like an amazing guitar or acoustic piano. Can't go wrong with a 70s/80s Les Paul either. Maybe a Rhodes? Thanks for your advice. The guy I was a partner with sold his Rhodes for a song when we shut down. Shoulda grabbed that sucker. |
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Jun 28, 2015 19:09:12 GMT -6
GML is an eq regarded for its super tight lows, but for general work I would think DMG Equilibrium combined with either a Sontec for smooth curves and the 12.8k sheen or a Massive Passive for mids especially on vocals and elsewhere would go further. BTW I just got one of those Warm Pultecs and quality wise it's pretty much as good as any of my more expensive gear. The Moog Sub 37 is what I would get over the Little Phatty. But there are a lot of vintage synths to consider too that sound great (e.g. Juno 60, Prophet 600). And the reissue Odyssey sounds pretty close to the old one. But all that depends on the sound you're after. 4. is to me a big waste of money. Frankly I don't get the point of transparent summing mixers and the Burl stuff is a little overkill when you can just combine Capi or anything with transformers with your normal converters. That money would be enough to get a vintage rack mixer or a bunch of compressors or mics that can do things that have a lot more general utility. Custom Les paul... a nice used Les Paul + Lollars or another boutique set would be a lot cheaper and probably sound and play better. And you'd have money left over for another amp. Thanks for your response Joseph. I really want a Les Paul, but I go down to Guitar Center and the new off the rack Standards sound like crap to me. There are so many varieties of Les Paul- and Norland years etc. etc.- that it's hard to cut the wheat from the chaff, which is why I am considering the R8/R9 VOS models. What year/type Les Paul would you say is a good buy at a reasonable price? |
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Jun 28, 2015 19:20:17 GMT -6
Here's what I do.. I keep some money aside for studio needs. When I'm in sessions and find something I need, I get it. I've stopped attempting to guess what I'll need or use in the future, because I've almost always been wrong! I've always had eyes bigger than my needs and tended to buy or build things that were cool as hell, but ultimately never got used too much. I'd say keep the cash handy and next time you realize that you need something, buy it. The cash seems to work better for you like that. Thanks for your thoughts Svart. I'm doing a lot more of my own stuff. So, it isn't a matter of problem solving, for example if I was doing a lot of band tracking I know I need a better cue mix system, it's more matter of how can I go a notch up in fidelity for my songs. A great Les Paul has that sound and has earned it's reputation. The GML has earned it's reputation. I have nothing like either piece. So, it intrigues me. And I must say, I have not felt let down by gear like my Smart C2, my API 2500, my Tele and Strat, my LA2A-all gear that has considerable acclaim and gear which I think has helped my sound. |
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Jun 28, 2015 19:27:32 GMT -6
For 500 series eq's, few can hang with the RTZ 1549. They are my go to's and I am getting more soon. Open, airy for clear and detailed sounds and tight when you want those punchy toms or snares. They really carve well for singers with odd voices. For $4,000, you can have 5 of them. About the only eq I haven't compared them to are the Avedis 27's. I hear those are really great as well and I may eventually get a pair. My next purchases after the 1549's will be a Hippo comp, as I need some stereo comps for mix inserts, and those sound great. I really got to try them a lot and really dug them. To my ears, they sound better than the other SSL style comps being sold. Serpent Audio is on my radar also. Thought their LA-3 and 4001 sound like comps that would get a lot of use here. I did take advantage of the DBX super sale on their 560's and scored a pair. Anyway, lots of good gear that I believe will hold their value and are built to the highest of quality now. Jeff's 526's should be something to consider as well. $4,000 can go a long ways to having quite a bit of new gear. That can get you 5 built 526's. It can also buy you one very nice piece from many top makers. So, look at your needs vs wants and see if getting several pieces would help your workflow better allowing more creative options, or if some heavy lifting from one piece is more to your suiting at the time. It certainly depends on what you are doing musically as to what you buy. If I didn't have commercial clients, I would have chose my purchased gear differently. I would have made two very different sounding stereo chains and concentrated on 2-buss pieces first.Thanks for your thoughts Randy. I'll check out your recommendations. I'm curious, if you were just producing your own songs and wanted two very different stereo 2-bus chains, what would you choose? I have an API 2500 for a punchier sound and a Smart C2 for a smoother sound.I also have two Distressors that i can link. I have Vintech pairs and API 3124 pairs if I want to send my mix through different preamps on its way to the end result. I don't have any mix bus stereo EQ's. Curious to hear your thoughts. |
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Jun 29, 2015 7:35:05 GMT -6
Sounds like you could use some colorless or less colored preamps. Getting something like some Millenia or Forssell preamps might give you some diversity. I personally am an enormous fan of RTZ and would recommend getting their preamps and eq's. They have some color, but nothing over the top. I use them every day over all of the other choices that I have. cowboycoalminer picked some up recently and he can chime in as well to his use of them. I use their 1549 eq's for lots of uses. 2-buss, when needed. I usually don't have to put anything on my 2-buss, as I try to get everything I want before that stage. They are stepped though, so you can match and recall. You can also get in between the steps when needed and that is a huge plus for me. Give them a try! |
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Jun 29, 2015 8:09:06 GMT -6
I'm thrilled with the RTZ's. Easily the best sounding pre I've used. It's like a hi fi Neve. A sound all it's own. If you dime the output it's very clean. I run it like this a lot for vocals. Backing it off about half and cranking the input is great too for certain things. I would imagine that would be nice on a buss.
I'm still itching to try a Pueblo Audio pre. Supposingly pristine and polished. Maybe demo a pair of those too Swurve?
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107 
|
Post by ericn on Jun 29, 2015 10:48:52 GMT -6
My 2 cents , put the money in instruments first, but I prefer the Heritage stuff to Modern Gibson, heck it's the real Modern Gibson, You can find nice used Heritages $1500-1700!
EQs you want clean You won't find cleaner than GML!
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jun 30, 2015 20:43:12 GMT -6
I don't know if you're interested in cheaper guitars, but I bet if you fixed up an Agile 3000 series les paul from Rondo Music, you would probably have a pretty killer instrument for under $600 ish. As has been said there are some good synth bargains out there too, if you expand your search.
Rack gear is a pretty great thing to think about too, but I might put that second after the instruments and the core system (computer, software, monitors). Unless you specifically do a lot of mixing work, or are already well-equiped in the core areas.
I have a nice summing mixer but I hardly ever use it, maybe that speaks towards that. I just bought the UAD Ampex plugin, I think it might do what I want with less work. By the way, I disagree with Tony. I think the mix buss is a great place for processing.
I wish I had $4,000 to spend!
|
|
|
|
Post by LesC on Jul 13, 2015 15:20:00 GMT -6
I'm thrilled with the RTZ's. Easily the best sounding pre I've used. It's like a hi fi Neve. A sound all it's own. If you dime the output it's very clean. I run it like this a lot for vocals. Backing it off about half and cranking the input is great too for certain things. I would imagine that would be nice on a buss. I'm still itching to try a Pueblo Audio pre. Supposingly pristine and polished. Maybe demo a pair of those too Swurve? Cowboy, would you please elaborate on the differences between the RTZ's and your Heritage DMA73? I'm especially interested in the differences on female vocals and DI bass. The others I'd be curious about are the NPNG and the Awtac, if anyone has any comparisons? |
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Jul 13, 2015 17:05:35 GMT -6
I'm thrilled with the RTZ's. Easily the best sounding pre I've used. It's like a hi fi Neve. A sound all it's own. If you dime the output it's very clean. I run it like this a lot for vocals. Backing it off about half and cranking the input is great too for certain things. I would imagine that would be nice on a buss. I'm still itching to try a Pueblo Audio pre. Supposingly pristine and polished. Maybe demo a pair of those too Swurve? Cowboy, would you please elaborate on the differences between the RTZ's and your Heritage DMA73? I'm especially interested in the differences on female vocals and DI bass. The others I'd be curious about are the NPNG and the Awtac, if anyone has any comparisons? Les, The Heritage sounds more like a real Neve. Closest I've heard. It adds some heft of its own but can seem boomy. The RTZ sounds pristine all the way across the spectrum. It translates perfectly what is in front of it. Paired with a great mic, it's quite stunning the realism it has. Then add the 1073ish sizzle to that and you've got an RTZ. I too would like to hear the NPNG. I'm into stunning realism. But uber clean press Ive used in the past have left me a bit wanting. That's why this RTZ is right for me. Realism with just the right character. Try one and see fellas. You won't be disappointed. |
|
|
|
Post by LesC on Jul 13, 2015 17:10:39 GMT -6
Cowboy, would you please elaborate on the differences between the RTZ's and your Heritage DMA73? I'm especially interested in the differences on female vocals and DI bass. The others I'd be curious about are the NPNG and the Awtac, if anyone has any comparisons? Les, The Heritage sounds more like a real Neve. Closest I've heard. It adds some heft of its own but can seem boomy. The RTZ sounds pristine all the way across the spectrum. It translates perfectly what is in front of it. Paired with a great mic, it's quite stunning the realism it has. Then add the 1073ish sizzle to that and you've got an RTZ. I too would like to hear the NPNG. I'm into stunning realism. But uber clean press Ive used in the past have left me a bit wanting. That's why this RTZ is right for me. Realism with just the right character. Try one and see fellas. You won't be disappointed. Thank you for an insightful answer! I really appreciate it. |
|
|
|
Post by jimwilliams on Jul 14, 2015 9:27:19 GMT -6
Open up a Roth IRA with it. You will need that money some day when you are tired and old.
Or, blow it all in Vegas and have some fun?
Audio gear that doesn't make money for you is a financial loss in the end.
|
|
