Dangerous 2 bus vs Speck Xtramix?
Branislav
Before Dangerous 2 bus was introduced, I wanted to buy Xtramix and use it
just as Dangerous 2 bus is supposed to be used, as a two bus mix for
summing the outs from a DAW. Now there's Dangerous 2 bus and everyone
agrees that it's a great sounding unit, but I'm still thinking of using
Xtramix, because it has more inputs that I can use for synths and returns
from analog (or digital with only analog outs, like PCM 70) outboard FX
boxes. I know that Xtramix is good, but would I be compromising sonic
quality with Xtramix, as two many channels are a strain for any mix buss? I
don't want any compromises, so if I have to I would buy both Dangerous 2
bus, for summing and Xtramix for synths and FX returns, but I would like to
know your opinion if just Xtramix would be OK.
Thanks, Branislav
P.S. Needless to say that there's not a single Dangerous 2 bus, nor Xtramix
in Yugoslavia, so I can't test them and decide for myself.
Rob Reedijk
this application. It simply is not clean enough for this. I guess it
depends on the DAW, but I suspect that you will have a better sounding
mix in your DAW.
Rob R.
rickymix
I'm curious what you're basing this opinion on. By "clean", do
you mean the noise floor? I have a Speck SSM mixer, which I believe
to be sonically the same as the Xtramix, the difference being that the
SSM has faders and is not as miniaturized as the Xtramix. (Correct me
if I'm wrong, Vince). Anyways, the Speck SSM is ridiculously quiet,
way quieter than the API which I used to own, or any other analogue
console I've ever used.
The problem I have with the SSM is headroom. It can just barely
handle full volume out of either ProTools or my MCI 2" analogue tape
machine. If I do any pre-console, additive EQ with my API 550's it
overloads the channel inputs on the SSM.
I'm thinking of having Vince put 20 db pad switches on the
channel inputs. The SSM is so insanely quiet that I'm not the least
bit worried about raising the noise floor. It'll still be super
quiet.
Cheers, Rick.
BTW, there's no problem with the summing headroom of the 2-buss. It's
the inputs, which were originally intended for synthesizer level
devices. R.N.
Rob Reedijk wrote >...
> With apologies to Vince, I don't think that the Speck Xtramix cuts it for
> this application. It simply is not clean enough for this. I guess it
> depends on the DAW, but I suspect that you will have a better sounding
> mix in your DAW.
> Rob R.
> Branislav <au...@eunet.yu> wrote:
>
> > Before Dangerous 2 bus was introduced, I wanted to buy Xtramix and use it
> > just as Dangerous 2 bus is supposed to be used, as a two bus mix for
> > summing the outs from a DAW. ....I would like to
Vince @ Speck
not clean enough about the Xtramix. A 72 input, 8-bus mixer with -90dBu
noise, .0002% THD+n, freq. response around 8Hz to120kHz. What isn't clean
enough?
Let me say this quickly and to the point. You're wrong! The Xtramix "cuts
it" just fine with DAW's.
In fact, about 75% of Xtramix's we sell get used as the back-end or
front-end to a DAW. I've lost count with how many PT rigs in LA and NYC use
the Xtramix.many of which are owned by the Who's-Who list of TV/film
composers in our industry.
If a customer is looking for an application specific mixer for a DAW, and
the Xtramix isn't a good fit for that application, I'm the first to
recommend something else. But when a potential customer is running low on
options when looking for a high quality 4-rack space, 72 x 8 bus line mixer,
I think to the Xtramix cuts it just fine.
Regards,
Vince Poulos
Speck Electronics
"Rob Reedijk" <ree...@hera.med.utoronto.ca> wrote in message
news:atl4i9$887$1...@news1.chem.utoronto.ca...
Vince @ Speck
One of the issues with the SSM, as you point out, is that the inputs that
were originally designed to handle synth levels. These inputs can be
modified to handle higher line levels without increasing noise. I wouldn't
recommend a pad but rather, eliminate the synth gain stage. The other issue
is that you're hitting these synth inputs with increased level from the
output of your 550's. Again, that problem would be solved if the current
synth inputs were modified to "line only" inputs.
Regards,
Vince Poulos
Speck Electronics
http://www.speck.com
"rickymix" <sno...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:5b0ae9b9.02121...@posting.google.com...
Neve 8068
what I have read on this thread its a hard descision. Speck electronics makes
great gear that preserves the sonic integrity of your source signal and just
plain sounds good, and the Speck also offers more features as far as routing is
concerened also. Here is what I can add about the Dangerous 2 Bus . The 2-bus
is a 16X2 summing amplifier designed to help the users of digital audio
workstations achieve better mix performance through the use of the existing
equipment in their studios. The designers and their colleagues have noted that
while digital audio workstations (DAW's) offer unprecedented flexibility in
multitrack recording and editing, the mixing buss in these systems generally
doesn't perform up to the quality of most analog recording consoles in terms of
sound quality and preservation of spatial detail.
In today's portable environment, and with the cost of maintaining and housing
legendary recording equipment, the choice of the big mixing desk is impossible
for many users of DAW's. It is in this spirit that the Dangerous engineering
team is designing and manufacturing an exciting array of mic pre amps, summing
amps, monitoring, and metering equipment designed to meet the challenge of
today's recording environment.
Specifications
Frequency Response: 1 Hz-100kHz within 0.2dB
Total Harmonic Distortion: 0.005% in audio band
Intermodulation Distortion: 0.005% IMD60 4:1
Crosstalk @ 1kHz: -97dB
Crosstalk @ 10kHz: -91dB
Noise floor: -80dBu total energy in audio band
Max level: +26dBu
Nominal operating level: +4dBu (1.228 volts)
Input impedance: 25kohm balanced
Output impedance:
Gain accuracy: better than .05dB @ 1kHz for any gain setting
Power consumption: 20 watts
Justin Ulysses Morse
I think it's a stretch to say everybody agrees the Dangerous sounds
great simply because few people have actually heard it. It may very
well sound great, and the specifications look fairly decent, but it's
made by a relatively unknown company without a track record. Speck on
the other hand has a longer track record of building reputable gear.
But they're both going to give you the same basic thing: A very
simple, stripped-down mixing console that makes up for its cheap op-amp
topology by eliminating (almost) as much extraneous circuitry as
possible from the signal path. My bet is they would both sound fine
and work well.
ulysses
In article <atl15g$427$1...@news.eunet.yu>, Branislav <au...@eunet.yu>
wrote:
Solid Rock Recording
> it" just fine with DAW's.
Vince, you go boy!
Ricolian
Solid Rock Recording
Roger W. Norman
equipment they build inhouse for their own studios. That they've brought
the best of the concepts out as consumable products is a good thing. Then
again, perhaps the only people that really know how good their products are
would be the people that tend to use their recording studios. The GUYS
aren't newbies. Just the fact that they realized a product that makes up
for most DAW mixing busses says they have some serious ideas about equipment
as the debate continues to rage about PT's mixing bus being just fine vs
sounding like ass. Ok, not just Pro Tools but most DAW mixing busses. At
least it's a piece of equipment that answers a perceived need, depending on
one's viewpoint. Personally, prior to getting Samplitude (using SAW Pro) I
found I liked mixing much better on my Soundtracs console. It just sounded
bigger, but the concept of a large piece of real estate taking up space in
some people's control rooms/mixing rooms is foreign because of limited
space. Something like the Dangerous or the Speck meet the problems.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Ro...@SirMusicStudio.com
301-585-4681
"Justin Ulysses Morse" <uly...@rollmusic.com> wrote in message
news:161220022236220125%uly...@rollmusic.com...
Rob Reedijk
I have spent a lot of time working on mixes with a composer who uses
an Xtramix for his wall of samplers. Now, I admit, he has it set up his
way but still I have spent enough time with it that I think I have a
sense of what it sounds like. Perhaps when I said that it isn't clean
enough I should have clarified a bit. I find that the mixes sound
small. They sound veiled. They lack a certain dynamic (the punch
is weak). The clarity could be better.
But then I am spoiled. If you ask me how does it rate against a Mackie?
Well it is certainly better than that. But I am comparing it to my
own line mixer which is a Mixing Suite. Of course, the Suite is a lot
more money---in fact if you try to put together the same number of channels
it is possibly 10 times the price. But the improvement? I don't see it
as diminishing returns. If I wasn't used to the Suite, I might have
thought the Xtramix was decent.
Anyway, the poster wanted to know if the Xtramix was appropriate as
a summing mixer for a DAW. Maybe I should be more specific. If your
DAW is Protools, Logic, Performer, or Cool Edit Pro (which I think sounds
terrific) the Speck will be step down from the internal mix. But maybe
for something like VST, it will be an improvement.
These are just the opinions of one person, and seeing as so many people
like the Speck, I am probably wrong. I have a lot of respect for
Rick's opinions so I hope the poster considers what he has to say.
Rob R.
Fletcher
> Before Dangerous 2 bus was introduced, I wanted to buy Xtramix and use it
> just as Dangerous 2 bus is supposed to be used, as a two bus mix for
> summing the outs from a DAW.
You get more features/flexibility with the Speck... like being able to use
analog outboard gear without a struggle... the Dangerous 2 buss will give you
no level controls [aside from the +6db switch for each of the 8 pairs, or the
'master level' control for the 2 buss output]... but will sound a bit larger.
I don't know what Rob R. has up his ass about the Xtramix he's used... perhaps
it's in need of repair, or is not interfaced properly with the other equipment
in the facility where he has been using it... but I have never found it to be
'veiled' nor 'small' sounding. I will grant that I have found the Dangerous 2
buss "larger" sounding... but frankly, I would use the Xtramix in the
application you have outlined in a heartbeat with absolutely no trepidation's.
--
Fletcher
Mercenary Audio
TEL: 508-543-0069
FAX: 508-543-9670
http://www.mercenary.com
"this is not a problem"
or playing the Dr. Laura of hum at:
http://recpit.prosoundweb.com
Mike Rivers
> The problem I have with the SSM is headroom. It can just barely
> handle full volume out of either ProTools or my MCI 2" analogue tape
> machine. If I do any pre-console, additive EQ with my API 550's it
> overloads the channel inputs on the SSM.
> I'm thinking of having Vince put 20 db pad switches on the
> channel inputs.
Why not just drop the output level of your MCI on all the channels?
Unlike today's cheep multitiracks, it has output level trimpots. The
ProTools system is a little more difficult. Most people will scare you
into leaving the output level at the unity gain point because of
threats of losing resolution when you change levels, but it might not
hurt if they've figured out how to dither properly by now.
Or you could always just add fixed pads at the inputs, or perhaps
bypass the input stage, which was designed for keyboard levels (6 to
10 dB lower than a "full headroom" +4 dBu output). If you always
need less gain, there's no need for switches. 20 dB is probably too
much. You probably need to drop it no more than 10 dB unless you
really crank the EQ on frequencies that are already prominent.
--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mri...@d-and-d.com)
WideGlide
Xtramix for his wall of samplers. Now, I admit, he has it set up his way
but still I have spent enough time with it that I think I have a sense of
------------------
I think it would be hard to really make a fair comparison unless you brought
your Mixing Suite to the same location and inserted all the same samplers in
the same exact way, etc. There may be other reasons for the "small, veiled"
sound you are detecting other than just the Xtramix itself.
As well, you are comparing the Xtramix to a Mixing Suite, a system that in
order to get anywhere near matching the versatility of the Xtramix would
cost at least 10 times as much (as you pointed out). That is considerable.
Even if the Xtramix does sound a bit "smaller" than the Mixing Suite, it
surely does not mean that the Xtramix is not adequate for hi-end DAW use.
What it may mean though is that the the Mixing Suite is just that much
"better", above and beyond an excellent acceptable level, and you are paying
for that.
I'd say that all this stuff is excellent, it all has its own place and price
point. No need to pit one against another. No need to insult a guy like
Vince who is in the trenches making great gear for all of us to use. I
don't think you meant any harm in your original post, but such an opinion,
one not even heavily supported, may have been best kept under wraps, merely
out of respect for Vince. Rappers need to stick together, we need to
protect our valuable players, not hurt them.
-wg
Rob Reedijk
> I'd say that all this stuff is excellent, it all has its own place and price
> point. No need to pit one against another. No need to insult a guy like
> Vince who is in the trenches making great gear for all of us to use. I
> don't think you meant any harm in your original post, but such an opinion,
> one not even heavily supported, may have been best kept under wraps, merely
> out of respect for Vince. Rappers need to stick together, we need to
> protect our valuable players, not hurt them.
What---are you kidding? I am not going to pull any punches just because
Vince is a nice guy (and he is---especially since he is a valued contributer
to RAP). As for whether or not I am qualified to make an opinion on
the Xtramix---as I said, I have spent fair bit of time listening to mixes
through it, and while I never A/B'd it with the Mixing Suite, I have an
idea of what it sounds like.
Some regulars like Vince, Mark McQ, and Dan K happen to be likeable people
because they are gracious and furthermore make a positive contribution
to the NG. I am glad that they are here not only to answer questions about
their products but also contribute their knowledge.
But if someone comes in asking if the Xtramix is going to fit their
application and I don't think it will, I am sure they are glad to
hear opinions from everyone. Don't forget, this poster is thinking
about plunking down $3K on this particular unit.
Anyway, I am just one individual with an opinion. Seeing as so many of you
have lept to Vince's defense, it doesn't matter does it. Personally,
I NEVER let one opinion, epecially from a stranger in Cyberspace
totally influence a decision.
Rob R.
Lorin David Schultz
>
> [...] I don't think you meant any harm in your original post, but
> such an opinion, one not even heavily supported, may have been best
> kept under wraps, merely out of respect for Vince. Rappers need to
> stick together, we need to protect our valuable players, not hurt
> them.
I respectfully disagree, and I suspect Vince would too.
I like Vince. He seems like a great guy. I believe he takes his work
very seriously and values his reputation. If I were him, I wouldn't
want to be perceived as trying to "cover up" anyone's opinions, even if
they weren't glowingly flattering. That would be much worse for
business than one negative opinion in a sea of praise.
My experience with Vince is that he takes user feedback seriously. I'm
a little surprised by Rob's experience and can't help but wonder if the
sources aren't more the problem than the mixer, but I don't think
anyone's interests are served by asking him to suppress his opinion.
Constructive examination of unsatisfying outcomes always results in some
kind of improvement somewhere.
--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the audio booth
making even bad news sound good
Nathan Eldred
If your
> DAW is Protools, Logic, Performer, or Cool Edit Pro (which I think sounds
> terrific) the Speck will be step down from the internal mix. But maybe
> for something like VST, it will be an improvement.
That's golden Rob...Samplitude (now VST based with 7.0) and Steinberg
Nuendo both sound far better than Protools any day of the week.
That's why engineers are flocking over to it by the droves. If you
want names I can give them, but the sonic differences are immediate
even with just non processed tracks. Once the 2 bus is used the
differences are even more apparent. Obviously YMMV.
Best Regards
Nathan Eldred
Atlas Pro Audio, Inc.
http://www.atlasproaudio.com
Neve 8068
great simply because few people have actually heard it. It may very
well sound great, and the specifications look fairly decent, but it's
made by a relatively unknown company without a track record. >>
As far as track records go with designing top notch equiptment. Speck does
have a great one and Vince is a great designer. Both products are very good at
what they do and it becomes very hard to decide when you have two very good
sounding products. It all comes down to the features you desire. At the same
time it should be noted that the Dangerous Music gear is designed by a very
well respected equiptment desiginer by the name of Chris Muth. And you have
probabally have heard some of his other equiptment he has designed in the past
such as the Sterling Sound mastering desks. And you can ask anybody who is
knowledgeable about mastering equiptment and you will hear his name mentioned
on neumerous occasions. I am not stateing that we are manufacturing mastering
equiptment . But it is to be noted that our design team does have a very well
proven track record for building top quality gear, and that fact should not be
looked over.
Mark Owen-Dangerous Music NYC
Justin Ulysses Morse
> Both products are very good at what they do and it becomes very hard
> to decide when you have two very good sounding products.
There are several other choices out there to meet this need, at both
higher and lower price points than these units.
> At the same time it should be noted that the Dangerous Music gear is
> designed by a very well respected equiptment desiginer by the name of
> Chris Muth. And you can ask anybody who is knowledgeable about
> mastering equiptment and you will hear his name mentioned on
> neumerous occasions. But it is to be noted that our design team does
> have a very well proven track record for building top quality gear,
> and that fact should not be looked over.
Interesting, and good to know. I haven't had access to any of the
Dangerous products so I haven't heard any of them directly. Several of
their boxes intrigue me.
ulysses
Bob Olhsson
wrote:
>ProTools system is a little more difficult.
Not much. They aren't 10 or 20 turn trimpots but there ARE trimpots.
In fact 888s sound better with them turned down.
--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery Recording Project Design and Consulting
Box 90412, Nashville TN 37209 Tracking, Mixing and Mastering
615.352.7635 FAX 615.356.2483 Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
40 years of making people sound better than they thought possible!
BlacklineMusic
>higher and lower price points than these units.
I have a custom made 16 x 2 mixer that was made for me by an up and coming hot
shot designer.... We've had it for a few months but I won't comment much on it
until the current production we are doing (which is finishing tracking in the
next week or two) is mixed through it. I will say that it is more versatile
then either the Speck or Dangerous piece, it has many different flavors to it,
endless actually, and in our small tests so far, its better then what you get
in the box. We use SX/Nuendo/Pro Tools btw...
Steve
Solid Rock Recording
Audio. Inward Connections, the VAC RAC guy makes a product called the
SBM-2 which is a 16x2 summing mixer. It has a couple of more features
like pan pots and a 2 bus insert switch but I have no idea what it
sounds like. I found them on Boutique Audio's site:
www.boutiqueaudio.com . I couldn't find any specs on their site. A
search on this newsgroup also turned up zilch.
Has anyone heard this box?
Ricolian
Solid Rock Recording
lanis lebaron & hank alrich
The original question is exactly what can never be answered sensibly.
Take two very good pieces of kit, stuff that nearly any pro would say
they could use to deliver stellar product, remembering GIGO. <g> Now
which one is going to work better _for somebody else_? Hell if I know.
Send me the Speck, send me the Dangerous box. I'll like them both.
They'll both work for me.
One way or another the original poster needs to get a listen to both
products. That's the only way he'll know he made the correct choice _for
himself_.
BYW, Mark, nice to have your input. Thanks.
--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"
Michael Lawrence
Flet...@mercenary.com wrote on 12/17/02 10:27 AM:
> I don't know what Rob R. has up his ass about the Xtramix he's used... perhaps
> it's in need of repair, or is not interfaced properly with the other equipment
> in the facility where he has been using it...
you mean, like, that "cool edit pro?" yuk, yuk... funny, nathan, i thought
the exact same thing re that software commemt. but seriously, i bought
vince's speck m72 from a mate who replaced that with an xtramix, and he's an
awarded film composer that's running alsihad (yeah, it is a step down from
cool edit pro & steinbug;-)), not to mention a few grammies, too boot! he
had the m72's 1st 24 inputs balanced, and IT don't sound "thin & veiled" by
ANY stretch of the imagination, irreguardless of the software choice. and
aside from being stoopitly quiet, this board has a whole heap o' headroom.
nuendo never sounded better. vince, you da man!!!
ml
Michael Lawrence
> cool edit pro & steinbug;-))
oops! i didn't mean to include steinbug in this sentiment. nuendo is the
shite! can't wait to hear sx, as it's usin' the nuendo audio engine.
ml
Neve 8068
You have all brough up stong points about all of the pieces of gear that
are manufatured that do the job of analog summing of a DAW. I am glad to see
that in one of the posts that there is a new guy also designing gear also. That
brings much hope to the future of the design of analog equiptment that is to be
interfaced into the digital world . At the same time it to be noted as far as
the Dangerous gear that is manufactured, is we do accept custom orders but once
somebody sees the time and R&D and cost they bow out of doing it, it is not
cheap to design high quality equiptment that sounds great anybody can tell you
that . But when analog ruled the spectrum of recording, when API,NEVE etc built
desks there was no cost in mind they just built the best and everybody paid for
that type of workmanship. At Dangerous we do keep price points in mind, but at
the same time we are out to build top quality gear with the consumers best
interest in mind as far as sonic integrity goes also so we try to figure out a
happy medium as far as what is will cost you without comprimising our
workmanship. As far as features go we do offer a stereo insert switch on our
units, and soon we are to unvail the Dangerous mixer which has level controls
and pan pots. Just ask us and we can and will build it for you and it will
sound great. At the same time there are a lot of other companies that offer
great equiptment and also has the same design goal in mind as we do or vice
versa. Hopefully this will bring upon us a new generation of great designers of
top notch recording equiptment.-
Kind Regards-Mark Owen-Dangerous Music NYC
Fletcher
>
> But if someone comes in asking if the Xtramix is going to fit their
> application and I don't think it will, I am sure they are glad to
> hear opinions from everyone. <snip>
>
> Anyway, I am just one individual with an opinion. Seeing as so many of you
> have lept to Vince's defense, it doesn't matter does it. Personally,
> I NEVER let one opinion, epecially from a stranger in Cyberspace
> totally influence a decision.
>
Fair enough... we're all "just one individual with an opinion"... and frankly, I
couldn't agree more with the "I NEVER let one opinion, especially from a stranger
in Cyberspace totally influence a decision." line. It makes absolute and total
sense to me.
I may not agree with your assessment of the Xtramix... I'll support your right to
your opinion on the unit every fucking minute of every fucking day.
Roger W. Norman
that DAWs aren't the solution, but part of the solution. Easy to use,
editing out the butt, but when it comes to that final mix, probably there's
a reason to look towards getting it back into the analog domain, even though
things are going to be put back into the digital domain for distribution.
Hey, if Julian Standen has found new breath in his Pro Tools setup because
of the Dangerous 2 Bus then there's hope. I've consistently kept a hybrid
system because of the advantages of working with analog as an output from a
digitally based recording. But it's really the idea of a marriage between
the two, not the crossmix of the child.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Ro...@SirMusicStudio.com
301-585-4681
"Neve 8068" <neve...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021218034351...@mb-fx.aol.com...
Roger W. Norman
for digital without taking into consideration what each does for the music.
I've gotten some really good recordings from the marriage. Before I kinda
thought about it as a hybrid child, but I don't any longer believe that. I
believe, as I put to Mark, that is the marriage of the two, not the
offspring. The better digital gets, the more there's no real reason to
concern oneself with the how, but the what, which is always the music.
Every time we get involved with equipment it degrades the music. If we keep
the music as the focus, then anything that works, by god, works.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Ro...@SirMusicStudio.com
301-585-4681
"lanis lebaron & hank alrich" <walk...@thegrid.net> wrote in message
news:1fncftb.1wrveodv0pm42N%walk...@thegrid.net...
Roger W. Norman
pond, aren't you? More there for the midi world than here.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Ro...@SirMusicStudio.com
301-585-4681
"Michael Lawrence" <vze4...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:BA258886.1B87%vze4...@verizon.net...
Justin Ulysses Morse
<rockstea...@attbi.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:51:58 -0600, Justin Ulysses Morse
> <uly...@rollmusic.com> wrote:
>
> >There are several other choices out there to meet this need, at both
> >higher and lower price points than these units.
>
> Care to give a few examples?
I was thinking of the Inward Connections box distributed by Boutique
Audio primarily, and there's also the Mix Suite stuff that Rob
mentioned. I don't know anything about that one. And there's the box
Steve (Blackline Music) mentioned, the RMS FolcroM. I would have
mentioned that one first since I built it, but I haven't actually used
it myself (Steve has the first one) so I can't say for sure how good it
is. In theory, it's good. When he reports his findings, or when I
finish more boxes and use one myself (whichever comes first) I'll have
more to say about it. Give it a couple of weeks.
ulysses
WideGlide
Cyberspace totally influence a decision...>>
That is surely wise, and I fully agree. But, in some cases, an opinion or
two planted on this newsgroup CAN influence some people. I have seen it
first hand, and I'm sure you all have too.
<<..."such an opinion may have been best kept under wraps, merely out of
respect for Vince". Response: I respectfully disagree, and I suspect Vince
would too. >>
If you look at Vince's reply to the original post, I don't think he was too
thrilled about the posting of that opinion, understandably... and he
provided a well supported rebuttal.
<<...but I don't think anyone's interests are served by asking him to
suppress his opinion... Constructive examination of unsatisfying outcomes
always results in some kind of improvement...>>
Absolutely... I do fully agree. I can see everybody's point here, and
respect everyone's opinions, Rob's, Lorin's, etc.
I guess finally we need to look at the bare facts, and put all the theory
and philosophy aside for a moment. Vince works hard to maintain a business,
doing what he loves, building and selling great gear. To my knowledge,
Speck is a relatively "smaller" company, unlike say... Mackie. Speck caters
to the "pro" market, which means largely the type of people that visit RAP.
A few even mildly "negative" opinions of a product, even opinions that are
unsupported, COULD potentially hurt business. It surely makes sense that
one or two "negative" opinions on this group might cause the loss of at
least several unit sales. Should potential Speck customers be so influenced
by one person's opinion on the group? Certainly NOT... but some will be,
and that's just a fact, as sad as it may be.
While the loss of just a few sales may seem completely insignificant, I'm
sure to a smaller company, it IS significant. The sale of say three units
may pay the rent that month or whatever. If this was Mackie we were talking
about, none of this would apply of course.
With all the above in mind, my personal opinion would be: when in doubt, do
NOT do anything that might in any way "harm" one of our brothers here. It's
just not necessary. Speck gear is excellent, Vince is a great guy, everyone
here seems to agree with that... so I'm sure no one wants to cause Speck any
loss of business. And I'm SURE that Rob did NOT intend for that with his
opinion at all... I know Rob was only trying to be helpful... but, I really
believe that opinions may carry more influence here than a lot of us may
realize... that's just the way it is, good or bad. I guess this may be my
main point.
I sympathize with Speck because I know what it's like to try to create a
product, market it and sell it. It is indeed very hard to actually do what
you LOVE to do and make a living from it. I have the greatest respect for
people that attempt to do this, and I would always wish to only help and
support such people, and certainly not cause any hindrance at all, even
mildly. If I had a slightly negative personal opinion about a product, say
from a small respectable company like Speck, I might personally elect to
keep it to myself... or at least not post it on a board where hundreds of
potential Speck customers might see it... that's just me, I try to be a team
player and support the guys I respect. But, I do understand the severe
importance of freedom of opinion and expression. And I do appreciate Rob's
well-intended offering of a "helpful" opinion to a fellow RAP poster.
If one did indeed have a comment or opinion for Speck that might help to
"improve" Speck products, then perhaps one would be best contacting Speck
directly. I'm sure Vince would appreciate any type of feedback in this way,
and find it very helpful, no doubt.
In conclusion, I respect ALL the opinions of everyone here... that's why I
come here and spend valuable time eagerly reading as many posts as I can as
often as I can. Above is just one of my own opinions, and I surely mean no
offense or disrespect to anyone in anyway. I greatly appreciate everyone's
input at the group.
wg
Rob Reedijk
> I was thinking of the Inward Connections box distributed by Boutique
> Audio primarily, and there's also the Mix Suite stuff that Rob
> mentioned. I don't know anything about that one.
The Suite is an expensive way to go if you try to put one together the
"regular" way. However, I hope John will forgive me for suggestion
another way that could save a lot of bucks.
The genius of the Mixing Suite lies in the summing amps. (I suspect
that they are a variation on his mic amps or his replacement for the
Jensen 990 op amp.)
Method 1:
Buy a Mixing Suite with one master module and 8 passive stereo modules,
chassis, and power supply. This will run you about $7k, but gives
you 16 channels, panning capability and very little hassle.
Method 2:
Same thing but instead of the normal passive modules with I think go for
$450 each, get the truly passive ones which are essentially a card
with multipin connector, two XLR inputs, and a couple of resitors.
I think these are $100 each, but I am not sure if John will do this.
This brings the price down to under $4.5K. But now you have no
panning capability, or soloing/muting etc. The only level control is
on the stereo outputs.
Method 3: (for the more adventurous)
Just buy a master module, and configure the whole thing yourself. You
will need to build/buy your own power supply, set up your own interface
and be able to figure out what the resistor values need to be etc.
This gets you in at $1.5K and the cost of the parts. What is nice about
it is that you avoid some expenses like the chassis which is expensive
for the company to make. You will need a good power supply, though
and you might want to buy the one from Millennia.
Method 4: (for gluttons for punishment)
Just order the 990 replacement op amp (definitely not a real 990,
but it probably is very good. I would also like to suggest, if you are
going this route, consider the real Jensen 990 that John Hardy uses---I
am not saying one or the other is better).
Now, you are going to have to build the whole damn thing, just like
Ulysses.
I am going to copy this to John at Millennia. The Mixing Suite didn't
sell very well because there wasn't a big market for it. But hopefully
he can apply this technology to a version tailored for the DAW market.
Rob R.
John La Grou
<ree...@hera.med.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>Rob R.
Hi Rob,
The main reason Mixing Suite's high cost is modularity. Make it
non-modular and the cost comes down by around 30%. The Suite's high
headroom discrete summing amplifiers are one reason (among many) for
its respected sonic performance, and many customers are indeed using
Suite summing for analog mixing of multi-channel DAW, though its main
applications remain as acoustic music recording, film scoring,
surround stem mixing, and lab use.
As you've pointed out, we've created a number of custom products based
on Mixing Suite modules, but these tend to be -more- costly than
standard product configuration. We do assist those who are adventurous
enough to buy indivudual Mixing Suite modules and build their own
systems around +/- 28 VDC rails. We've even been known to sell raw bus
/ backplane PCBs for those building a custom enclosure. Note that the
GML 9100 mixer and the Mixing Suite share the identical backplane, so
custom-minded engineers could combine GML and Millennia modules into
one system.
Best wishes,
**********************************************
* John La Grou
* Millennia Music & Media Systems
* Tel 530-647-0750 Fax 530-647-9921
* http://www.mil-media.com
* Makers of Fine Audio Recording Equipment
**********************************************
Analogeezer
Might be that the Xtramix was hooked up to a "wall of samplers". I'm
not suggesting that the Xtramix is not up to it, but my experience
with synths/samplers/keyboards is that when you get a bunch of them
going it makes for good "soup".
Could it be that the "veiled" sound is coming from surplus of cheap
analog output sampler stages?
Then again I wasn't there so I have no idea what they were doing.
Rob is usually pretty spot on with his opinions, but as with all of
us, they are still opinions.
Analogeezer
p.s. I've asked Vince a few times about making a cut down version of
the Xtramix, like a 16 channel version for live use with keyboard
rigs. I don't think there is the market for such a thing (most people
are too busy running their keyboard rigs through Mackies) I guess, the
people that would pay the extra dollars for the Xtramix need more
inputs.
Might be a good DAW summing product though...16 channels in a smaller
rack?
Roger W. Norman
accomplished making me drool and have my ass pucker at the same time! <g>
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Ro...@SirMusicStudio.com
301-585-4681
"John La Grou" <j...@jps.net> wrote in message
news:3e020303....@news.jps.net...
Roger W. Norman
quality line mixer and Vince specifically asked who'd REALLY be interested
and proceeded to prototype out the LiLo. As far as I know the effort has
gone largely unnoticed, or perhaps the timeframes were too different.
People want when they have money and the time between the expressed desires
and the product being completed ranged, I believe, from before to after
9/11, and I don't think any of us has been positively affected by that
event. So maybe wish lists are great, but my guess is that Vince and other
designers/manufacturers won't jump on a perceived "nice product to have"
again. At least for a while. The nice thing is that there are a couple
already out there.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Ro...@SirMusicStudio.com
301-585-4681
"Analogeezer" <analo...@aerosolkings.com> wrote in message
news:bfb37ea9.02121...@posting.google.com...
Rob Adelman
"Roger W. Norman" wrote:
>
> I believe, from before to after
> 9/11, and I don't think any of us has been positively affected by that
> event.
I am in the mortgage business and interest rates have remained extremely
low, so maybe I have been positively effected? Of course I don't own any
stocks....
-Rob
Roger W. Norman
Audix mics in the last little while. Guess you do! <g>
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Ro...@SirMusicStudio.com
301-585-4681
"Rob Adelman" <rade...@mn.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3E033AFF...@mn.rr.com...
Rob Adelman
"Roger W. Norman" wrote:
>
> Do you make commissions on refi's? Oh yeah, you bought a Hardy pre and 2
> Audix mics in the last little while. Guess you do! <g>
Gosh, I wish I could say that is all I bought..
And yes may salary is 100% commission based.
But I can justify all these purchases. My wife thinks I should have more
money in savings account (currently at about .5% interest)
I can think of all this gear as a savings account I can use. I can
always sell gear off when if I need the money. In fact when we moved
back to MN and got in over our heads, and the house in Boulder took 6
months to sell at a huge drop (after 911) I sold off a lot of gear to
make ends meet. You could say I am just replenishing my "savings
account". <g>
-Rob
Analogeezer
> Well, one thing is that there were a number of people looking to get a high
> quality line mixer and Vince specifically asked who'd REALLY be interested
> and proceeded to prototype out the LiLo. As far as I know the effort has
> gone largely unnoticed, or perhaps the timeframes were too different.
> People want when they have money and the time between the expressed desires
> and the product being completed ranged, I believe, from before to after
> 9/11, and I don't think any of us has been positively affected by that
> event. So maybe wish lists are great, but my guess is that Vince and other
> designers/manufacturers won't jump on a perceived "nice product to have"
> again. At least for a while. The nice thing is that there are a couple
> already out there.
>
> --
>
>
> Roger W. Norman
> SirMusic Studio
> Ro...@SirMusicStudio.com
> 301-585-4681
Yeah I remember the LiLo, but I was thinking of a different
product...not necessarily a DAW summing mixer but it could still be
used that way.
Maybe Vince will make enough off the new pre and the EQ's to fund
R&D/production of the LiLo, I'd be more interested in a smaller
rackmount 16 channel unit tho...but I realize that small companies
like Speck can't just make new products because a few people want
them.
Analogeezer