|
Post by bricejchandler on May 14, 2017 4:04:57 GMT -6
I'm always interested in people's definition of "major difference." It makes me laugh. I hear a difference. I just take into account the price/result ratio and it makes no sense. 90% of the population doesn't give a flying shit. I guess I'm just sold on hybrid mixing and see the value of some of the cheaper stuff. I don't think anybody is saying that the Apollo is bad and what you get for 2 grand is amazing, I've had UAD stuff since it was on Mackie so I think most people would say I'm a UA fanboy, the EMT140 is my go to reverb, over some hardware; but I heard a huge difference and I'm not hardware biased. I think too, like you were saying earlier, people are using different words to describe the same thing. All my favorite records were recorded before 1975 and I love that more mid forward sound so my ear gravitates towards the Neve mix. With budgets today everybody has had to adapt obviously, I'm a small indie artist so for most of my stuff I've gone the hybrid mixing way but whenever budgets allow, I go to a nearby studio that's got a BCM10 and would love to own one one day.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on May 14, 2017 8:05:28 GMT -6
I'm not sure how many of you have actually used the unison 1073 preamp, but I can tell you why the Apollo sounds so beefy and like it's overloading a bit. The whole plugin is based on an entire neve channel, and operates like one. You have the gain stage, EQ, a fader, then UAD added a clean gain knob. The problem is the fader allows you to hit the console hard, effectively saturating the signal. In order to compensate and get a more even sound from the plugin, which I believe would be closer to the actual neve sound, you need to lower the fader and compensate using the clean gain knob. I had this issue for a while and couldn't seem to figure out why the plugin sounded so thick all the time. I stared using the stock preamp and adding the plugin during the mix. After playing with the plugin for a little bit I discovered this trick. This is not to say the UAD will be just as good, just closer to the real deal.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 14, 2017 9:02:14 GMT -6
I'm not sure how many of you have actually used the unison 1073 preamp, but I can tell you why the Apollo sounds so beefy and like it's overloading a bit. The whole plugin is based on an entire neve channel, and operates like one. You have the gain stage, EQ, a fader, then UAD added a clean gain knob. The problem is the fader allows you to hit the console hard, effectively saturating the signal. In order to compensate and get a more even sound from the plugin, which I believe would be closer to the actual neve sound, you need to lower the fader and compensate using the clean gain knob. I had this issue for a while and couldn't seem to figure out why the plugin sounded so thick all the time. I stared using the stock preamp and adding the plugin during the mix. After playing with the plugin for a little bit I discovered this trick. This is not to say the UAD will be just as good, just closer to the real deal. But you can gain stage the hardware the same way, cleaner or more saturated. I'd be really surprised if they didn't gain stage the Unison plug and the hardware the same way.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on May 14, 2017 9:13:52 GMT -6
I didn't see them show that they did. So I don't know. If they didn't then it explains a lot.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 14, 2017 9:20:00 GMT -6
drbill Yes I definitely pick up what knowledge / experience you are dropping. For someone like me who can barely stay booked up with Beat leases, 2 trk Vocal mixes and masters ( to make $, while focusing on artist 😎) It takes forever to save for the gear I need much less what I want.. However when I do get that gear ( like the singer with the vintage 47 ) I am inspired and motivated... So far this has lasted five years with my current setup ( HW added later on ) and I am still inspired every day when I do what I love.. I am working on improving the room and monitoring first... Do you use a pair of outputs off of one of your HD I/ O's or do you have a dedicated DAC like a crane song avocet / Dbox ? I know you mentioned you Monitors... Hoping Barefoot monitors will negate the need for DAC however my guy makes me feel I will want a higher quality DAC for monitoring... Well there you go. You're there already!! It's a never ending path though. Best to embrace that there is stuff you want to get and implement into your work flow instead of feeling like there's a "set goal" that you can achieve. After 30+ years of chasing it, I know that pretty well. I use the 16X16 DAC.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 14, 2017 9:24:49 GMT -6
In the end we need to create something that touches the listener. If we fail there its not worth any expensive gear. Today we live in blessed times. If you dont have much money its not stoping you from beeing creative with music. Speaking the language of souls. Amen! Well said.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 16, 2017 18:46:03 GMT -6
It was sort of a split for me. On the softer passages I liked the hardware Neve, seemed very crisp and open.
The UAD Unison neve I heard a bigger low end, which I actually preferred over the hardware, on the loud energized sections of the song.
Sort of a basic tilt of high/low going on to my ear. Which Rabea confirmed with his own comments after the listening.
I have 6 Apollo preamps here, and I haven't purchased any of the unison plugins yet. So this video has got me thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on May 16, 2017 23:56:34 GMT -6
It was sort of a split for me. On the softer passages I liked the hardware Neve, seemed very crisp and open. The UAD Unison neve I heard a bigger low end, which I actually preferred over the hardware, on the loud energized sections of the song. Sort of a basic tilt of high/low going on to my ear. Which Rabea confirmed with his own comments after the listening. I have 6 Apollo preamps here, and I haven't purchased any of the unison plugins yet. So this video has got me thinking. Personally, I like the Unison preamps. I use the UA610 A&B & the Neve 1073 all the time. I also have the Neve 88RS which I use a lot too. It's very clean. I really want to pick up the API. I'm going to demo the SSL channel strip this weekend. It comes with the Unison preamp, so I'll check that out as well. The Unison tech gives me four very usable, versatile preamps, and no worse than a decent preamp clone.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 17, 2017 10:39:40 GMT -6
@vincent R. The UAD Neve 1073 is $99 right now. That's 16.5 dollars per each of my unison preamps... think I know what to do.
|
|
|
Post by donr on May 17, 2017 10:44:17 GMT -6
Slighty OT, has anyone done the Black Lion upgrade for UAD interfaces? I'm thinking of upgrading my Sliver Apollo Twin's analog just to use the pre's with Unison software and the Townsend Sphere software, and to get spdif out (instead of in.) I've got a T-bolt Octo for general UAD processing.
|
|
|
Post by javamad on May 17, 2017 11:31:14 GMT -6
Slighty OT, has anyone done the Black Lion upgrade for UAD interfaces? I'm thinking of upgrading my Sliver Apollo Twin's analog just to use the pre's with Unison software and the Townsend Sphere software, and to get spdif out (instead of in.) I've got a T-bolt Octo for general UAD processing. I've always read that the Apollo pre and converters are just fine. What does the BLA mod change exactly? On their web page they talk about proprietary converter decoupling .... not sure I'd want someone messin' around with that...
|
|
|
Post by donr on May 17, 2017 11:46:14 GMT -6
Slighty OT, has anyone done the Black Lion upgrade for UAD interfaces? I'm thinking of upgrading my Sliver Apollo Twin's analog just to use the pre's with Unison software and the Townsend Sphere software, and to get spdif out (instead of in.) I've got a T-bolt Octo for general UAD processing. I've always read that the Apollo pre and converters are just fine. What does the BLA mod change exactly? On their web page they talk about proprietary converter decoupling .... not sure I'd want someone messin' around with that... The Apollo Twin's pre's are functional, but the Metric Halo ULN-8 pre's and ADC are plainly cleaner. I've never heard any Black Lion mods of UAD hardware, was why I was asking.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 17, 2017 12:20:22 GMT -6
The vocal was 2D with the Apollo, and 3D with the Neves. Bass was better with the Neve. Still, the Apollo is impressive. I think 75% of the difference is UAD's converters. If they put a better converter in the Apollo, I'd bet that gap closes fast.
I'm getting the Stam SA73 single channel preamp in a couple of weeks. I plan to do a shootout between it the Apollo 1073. I assume I'll use the Unison pres. I'll do a simpler, cleaner test. Acoustic guitar, bass, vocal. It should be interesting. I'll keep you guys posted once it arrives.
I like the feeling the Symphony II has. It's cinematic, high, wide and deep, the Apollo misses in that regard a little. My next album will have been all Apollo though, so it's clearly more than good enough, just not top of the line.
|
|
|
Post by nobtwiddler on May 19, 2017 16:09:03 GMT -6
Hey Don, My silver Apollo 16's all have the Black Lion mods, and they do sound & work great! Definitely worth the $.
That being said, I as you, still believe my UNL-8's have a bit more of everything!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2017 22:41:45 GMT -6
The studio in this demonstration recently sold off all the Neve equipment from this room on GS and Ebay to purchase an API console..
The 1073's were newer AMS units.
|
|
|
Post by mjheck on May 21, 2017 12:46:35 GMT -6
HI Don R,
I have done BLA Mods to both a silver face Apollo 8 and a silver Apollo Twin. At the time, I had a variety of options to compare with:
Benchmark DAC1 Antelope Zodiac UA 2192
I have also owned (but not at the same time as when the mod occurred:
Prism Burl Apogee (Ensemble, both duets, Symphony)
Prior to the mod, I just used the Apollo as the interface, preferring the 2192 for AD and the Benchmark, then Antelope for DA.
After the mod, the Apollos were equal to the Benchmark. I liked the sound of the Antelope better, but found mixes translated better when I mixed listening through the Apollos.
For what its worth, I found the Headphones sounded better on the BLA Twin than on the BLA Apollo 8. It could be because attenuation is done through the same control as monitors on the Twin.
I sold everything else and now just use the Twin for DA and a combination of the 2192 and the Twin for AD (I only do tiny projects for a few people).
So in summary, I certainly thought it was worth it, and found it more notable on the Twin than the 8.
MJH
|
|
|
Post by donr on May 21, 2017 13:02:13 GMT -6
Thanks MJH. I'm particularly interested in what the mod does to the analog inputs on the Twin.
|
|
|
Post by mjheck on May 21, 2017 13:58:03 GMT -6
I don't have a real technical answer for the inputs - I did not love the stock version so much, which is why I ended up trying the BLA Mod.
It's been a few years since I did a real shootout with a splitter - at that time I used a Radial JS2 and two signal paths:
1) Apollo using the API Vision Strip (pre and EQ) > Blue Stipe 1176 > 2192
vs.
2) API "The Channel Strip" (pre and EQ) > 500 series Blue 1176 (I forget which one) > UA 2192
While they were different, there was not a night and day difference. In fact, after messing with a couple more routing tests, I though the 2192 was the most distinct part of the chain - so much so that for about two years I just used the Apollo and Unison preamps and round tripped it through the 2192 for color (go figure, right?).
Right now I tend to use a Silver Bullet though the 2192 or the Apollo Twin with the 1073 Unison plug - much like the real Neves I've owned, pushing the gain knob is kind of the key. Whereas I used to have to control the input via a compressor on my 1066's (or, like on the Joel Cameron stuff, use the dedicated output knob) The 1073 Unison does allow good level control via either the large fader or the small knob at the bottom (circling this thread back around I suppose).
At any rate, I like the bloom and harmonics Im getting from those tracks - especially on acoustic guitar, dobro, dulcimer, etc.
I also had good luck with the 88RS in this capacity.
I think I own all of their Unions plugs, but I end up doing this more often than not. That may simply be that it feels more familial with the Silver Bullet N (or A>N) tracks that are coming in.
I guess I think it was well worth it, but I do realize it is awfully contingent on the whole rest of the the workflow.
MJH
|
|
|
Post by donr on May 21, 2017 18:35:40 GMT -6
I've considered the new Twin, but I'd just like to use Unison pre's with the Townsend Sphere that's coming or as an alternative to MH's clean pre's and character DSP. I've got enough Sharc chips for the UAD plugs I use. Ten in all. So an upgrade to the analog path is tempting.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 21, 2017 19:19:34 GMT -6
Slighty OT, has anyone done the Black Lion upgrade for UAD interfaces? I'm thinking of upgrading my Sliver Apollo Twin's analog just to use the pre's with Unison software and the Townsend Sphere software, and to get spdif out (instead of in.) I've got a T-bolt Octo for general UAD processing. I did the full bla mod to my sf apollo a few year's ago, definitely made it more linear, but long story short I preferred the BF sound to both the stock sf and bla sf. personally I would sell your sf twin and get the quad bf Bare in mind, when I sold my sf bla modded apollo 8, I didn't get offered 1 cent for my roughy $1,000 cdn full cost for the bla mod Perhaps I am misunderstanding your post but what prevents you from using the sphere with your current twin ?
|
|
|
Post by donr on May 21, 2017 19:42:54 GMT -6
Slighty OT, has anyone done the Black Lion upgrade for UAD interfaces? I'm thinking of upgrading my Sliver Apollo Twin's analog just to use the pre's with Unison software and the Townsend Sphere software, and to get spdif out (instead of in.) I've got a T-bolt Octo for general UAD processing. I did the full bla mod to my sf apollo a few year's ago, definitely made it more linear, but long story short I preferred the BF sound to both the stock sf and bla sf. personally I would sell your sf twin and get the quad bf Bare in mind, when I sold my sf bla modded apollo 8, I didn't get offered 1 cent for my roughy $1,000 cdn full cost for the bla mod Perhaps I am misunderstanding your post but what prevents you from using the sphere with your current twin ? Nothing really. Of course I'm anticipating how to use the Sphere. I can use any two channel mic pre. I could use the Apollo Unison to audition mic models and pickup patterns, but I plan on using whatever pre's are suited to the task. The Sphere mic models can be changed after the recording. I don't need to monitor with the final sound. I figured the BL upgrade cost wouldn't be recoverable. Your advice is good. I was wondering if the analog upgrades made a significant difference. The Twin is a great design for desktop recording.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 21, 2017 20:06:28 GMT -6
The bla mod definitely made the apollo much more linear. I think you would appreciate it as you lose that apollo mid low bloom.
Just compare the total cost to just getting a bf twin though or is the adat i/o more important ?
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on May 22, 2017 0:01:26 GMT -6
K cat has a lot of the experience besides with all of the Apollo interfaces! Ragan has also used the BF and SF extensively. If K Cat says the BF Apollo is a step up from the BLA SF mod then maybe the BF twin would be a better path than the BLA $$$... Sounds like the SF twin may have some of the same short comings of it big bro the SF Quad...
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on May 24, 2017 16:19:04 GMT -6
The biggest thing I hear is the stereo image "collapsing" with the plugin stuff. And I question if the UAD mix isn't a hair louder - listen to the switch at 15:01. The Apollo seems to have somewhat of a buildup in the lower mids to me. Like 300-400 Hz...and a little brighter too. The biggest thing being the stereo image. But I really don't get the "OMG - listen to the differences" crowd. I mean, it's objective, but come on, it's not like the UAD sounds like shit. Couldn't you match some of those things in the mix? The bass, the width, etc. To me, the difference doesn't justify the extra $100K+ we're talking about here. Mix in some hardware elements and I would imagine it could be indistinguishable. Listen on an iPhone. I'm betting you'll hear the OMG
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 24, 2017 17:36:10 GMT -6
The most definitive article I am aware of concerning what bla mods on the apollo SF was done by our thread friend Cat 5. This is the same gen of mod I had done. The decoupling isn't much to worry about but apparently it does increase the S/N ration so in effect the converters seem quieter. gearautopsy.com/bla-finally-lets-the-lion-out-of-uas-apollo/
|
|