Alesis NanoCompressor vs. RNC
Jerry Fletcher
How do the two compare to each other? Are they similar, the same or
what?
Jerry Fletcher
djfl...@concentric.net
Harvey Gerst
Jerry Fletcher <djfl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>How do the two compare to each other? Are they similar, the same or
>what?
Jerry,
You're kidding, right?
Harvey Gerst
Indian Trail Recording Studio
http://www.ITRstudio.com/
David J. MacKenzie
Jerry Fletcher <djfl...@concentric.net> writes:
> How do the two compare to each other? Are they similar, the same or
> what?
Well, they're about the same size....
(Hmm, that's the only similarity I can think of :-)
hank alrich & lanis lebaron
Jerry Fletcher <djfl...@concentric.net> wrote:
> How do the two compare to each other? Are they similar, the same or
> what?
They don't. One is the bottom of the compressor barrel. The other kicks
the crap out of stuff costing multiples of its own price. An RNC is the
real thing, a seriously capable compressor/limiter. I'm over the lack of
sticker-shock.
--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"if laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"
Marvin Humphrey
lxh2 <lx...@netaxs.com> wrote:
> I was waiting for this.
Did you manufacture this controversy? Are you Ben & Jerry & lxh2, all
rolled into one? This thread does seem like a conspicuously good setup
for your eccentric evangelism on behalf of a highly dubious piece of
gear. I might be allowing myself to be manipulated, but it's worth it
if I can save some hapless newbie from being led astray.
> Now the truth be told. The Alesis nano
> compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
> RNC. I know you did not want to hear this. I am not the only one who
> says this. Many have been silent. The fear of being hung out to dry by
> the regulars of this newsgroup is too much for the faint of heart. I and
> many others have found the Alesis compressors to be more musical and
> natural sounding than the well touted RNC.
- RNC: more transparent than any compressor I've used except the
Cranesong STC-8 ($3000)
- Alesis: grey, tearing distortion, especially at high compression
settings.
RNC: very squishable, few artifacts, even when applying maximum control.
Alesis: nasty clicking artifacts, especially obvious when compressing
bass on hard knee.
Ben - Harvey's advice to search www.dejanews.com will illustrate how few
people agree with Alex.
>
> -----
> > Sorry Ben and Jerry, I really thought it was a joke.
> >
> > WAIT A MINUTE - BEN & JERRY?? I BEEN HAD!!!
> >
> > Harvey Gerst
> > Indian Trail Recording Studio
> > http://www.ITRstudio.com/
--
Marvin
Rectangular Recording
(remove SPAMMAJAMMA from email for reply)
hank alrich & lanis lebaron
Lyle Caldwell <cald...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Your inventive schematics aside, you're a sick bastard, ain't ya?
>
> Lyle
>
> lxh2 wrote in message <352D84...@netaxs.com>...
> <SNIP>
> >I was waiting for this. Now the truth be told. The Alesis nano
> >compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
> >RNC. I know you did not want to hear this. I am not the only one who
> >says this. Many have been silent. The fear of being hung out to dry by
> >the regulars of this newsgroup is too much for the faint of heart. I and
> >many others have found the Alesis compressors to be more musical and
> >natural sounding than the well touted RNC.
Thanks, "lxh2". Nothing like a good laugh before a good night's sleep.
Ah, yes, the "musicality" of the 3630. Actually, that's something I
would have liked to have heard, but didn't.
"Now the truth be told". Yes, but is it really the _correct_ truth? The
"faint of heart"? Whew. I guess they use a Nanny comp to keep the blood
pressure in the green zone? "Okay, we gotta get one more gitar overdub
outta this guy. Prop him up in the corner over there and we'll hook his
aorta to the NannyComp and dial-up _Pump_."
Ooooh, those scary regulars! Better watch my mouth 'round here or
somebody'll take the words right out of it. It's downright intimidatin',
I tell ya. "Help! They hung me out to dry! Bring me another ale!!"
I think I'm getting religion. It's scary.
Ben Torrence
Harvy,
Why can't you just be nice? Nobody (not even you) is born knowing the
difference between a Pinto and a Porsche. No need to condesend.
Jerry,
To be honest, I have not listened to either the nanocomp. or the RNC with
my own ears, however, most consider Alesis compression to be damn low in
the food-chain, and tons of people (especially Harvey here) will tell you
that the RNC is the best single channel (or stereo) comp. you can get for
$175, and is probably worth a great deal more. Maybe someone else can be
specific about differences in features between the two, but I doubt anyone
arund here would tell you to go with the Alesis, no mater how much $ it
saves you. Right Harvey?
:o) Ben
Harvey Gerst <har...@ITRstudio.com> wrote in article
<722F7BAE9E92F7E8.C3A4C86A...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
t>...
> Jerry Fletcher <djfl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> >How do the two compare to each other? Are they similar, the same or
> >what?
>
> Jerry,
>
> You're kidding, right?
>
Harvey Gerst
"Ben Torrence" <monke...@seanet.com> wrote:
>Harvy,
> Why can't you just be nice? Nobody (not even you) is born knowing the
>difference between a Pinto and a Porsche. No need to condesend.
Ben, I really did think it was a joke until Jerry emailed me. Here is the
response I sent to him:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, 09 Apr 1998 19:28:50 -0400, Jerry wrote:
>Harvey Gerst wrote:
>>
>> Jerry Fletcher <djfl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>>
>> >How do the two compare to each other? Are they similar, the same or
>> >what?
>>
>> Jerry,
>>
>> You're kidding, right?
>
>For the sake of not looking too stupid I'm quite new to this field and
>yes I am curiously serious.
Jerry,
OK, assuming this isn't a joke, you need to do a search of Deja News referring
to the RNC. It's been favorably compared to compressors costing in the $1,500 to
$2,000 price range. It's an incredible bargain at $175. The nano compressor is
not in the same league, ballpark, or even the same sport as the RNC.
I didn't mean to come down on you, but it's like asking how the Honda Civic (the
Alesis) compares to a new car that just came out (the RNC) that's as good as a
lot of Ferraris.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry Ben and Jerry, I really thought it was a joke.
WAIT A MINUTE - BEN & JERRY?? I BEEN HAD!!!
Harvey Gerst
DCMagnuson
In article <352D4D...@concentric.net>, Jerry Fletcher
<djfl...@concentric.net> writes:
>
>How do the two compare to each other? Are they similar, the same or
>what?
>
Want a fire extinguisher?
Dave
DCMag...@AOL.com
****************************************************************************
http://members.aol.com/DCMagnuson
Reviews for indie CD releases, Concert Listings
Database of Studios, Music Links, Home Recording Tips
lxh2
Harvey Gerst wrote:
>
> "Ben Torrence" <monke...@seanet.com> wrote:
>
> >Harvy,
> > Why can't you just be nice? Nobody (not even you) is born knowing the
> >difference between a Pinto and a Porsche. No need to condesend.
>
> Ben, I really did think it was a joke until Jerry emailed me. Here is the
> response I sent to him:
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 09 Apr 1998 19:28:50 -0400, Jerry wrote:
>
> >Harvey Gerst wrote:
> >>
> >> Jerry Fletcher <djfl...@concentric.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >what?
> >>
> >>
> >> You're kidding, right?
> >
> >For the sake of not looking too stupid I'm quite new to this field and
> >yes I am curiously serious.
>
> Jerry,
>
> OK, assuming this isn't a joke, you need to do a search of Deja News referring
> to the RNC. It's been favorably compared to compressors costing in the $1,500 to
> $2,000 price range. It's an incredible bargain at $175. The nano compressor is
> not in the same league, ballpark, or even the same sport as the RNC.
>
> I didn't mean to come down on you, but it's like asking how the Honda Civic (the
> Alesis) compares to a new car that just came out (the RNC) that's as good as a
> lot of Ferraris.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was waiting for this. Now the truth be told. The Alesis nano
compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
RNC. I know you did not want to hear this. I am not the only one who
says this. Many have been silent. The fear of being hung out to dry by
the regulars of this newsgroup is too much for the faint of heart. I and
many others have found the Alesis compressors to be more musical and
natural sounding than the well touted RNC.
rnc
Lyle Caldwell
Your inventive schematics aside, you're a sick bastard, ain't ya?
Lyle
lxh2 wrote in message <352D84...@netaxs.com>...
<SNIP>
Harvey Gerst
lxh2 <lx...@netaxs.com> wrote:
>I was waiting for this. Now the truth be told. The Alesis nano
>compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
>RNC. I know you did not want to hear this. I am not the only one who
>says this. Many have been silent. The fear of being hung out to dry by
>the regulars of this newsgroup is too much for the faint of heart. I and
>many others have found the Alesis compressors to be more musical and
>natural sounding than the well touted RNC.
lx,
I'm glad you like the sound of those two compressors. Would you like to sell me
your RNC for $150? Plus shipping, of course.
If you expect me to flame you, you're gonna be disappointed. If the nano
compressor and the 3630 work best for you, that's fine with me.And I won't fault
you for your choice. But if someone wants my opinion, I think the RNC is better
and a very good unit for the money. And of course you're perfectly free to
disagree, without insults or flames from me.
Jon Best
lxh2 wrote:
> I was waiting for this. Now the truth be told. The Alesis nano
> compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
> RNC. I know you did not want to hear this. I am not the only one who
> says this. Many have been silent. The fear of being hung out to dry by
> the regulars of this newsgroup is too much for the faint of heart. I and
> many others have found the Alesis compressors to be more musical and
> natural sounding than the well touted RNC.
Well, I'm not the guy to flame anyone over preferences, but it's probably a little
heavy handed to come in and say something portentios like, "Now the truth be told."
In my estimation, having used both the 3630, the RNC, and a slew of other cheap
compressors, the RNC does a better job of clean, clear uncolored compression. It is
also a great deal more precise, in terms of doing what the knobs say it's going to do-
the Alesis, like my old Behringer (for example), isn't as fast as the attack knob says
it is going to be, especially at extreme settings. I can hear the Alesis working at a
much lower gain reduction than I can with the RNC. The super nice mode on the RNC is
a great deal cleaner, to me, than hard _or_ soft knee of the Alesis. Now, if you or
anyone else likes the tone of the3630 better (and damn it, like it or not, it _does_
color a lot more than the RNC), then that is great. I have no problem with that; my
Behringer Multicom (four channels of bad compression for not much more than $200) is
still around, and will be, because it does some smeary thing to guitars or bass that
can be really cool sometimes. However, I would encourage anyone in the market for
inexpensive compression to try both out, as I really think that the RNC is going to do
more jobs better with less fuss.
As for 'not wanting to hear this,' I would be ecstatic if Alesis or anyone else came
out with a $119 list compressor that trounced the RNC. Mark is a great guy, but I
would have 4 or 5 channels of good compression instead of three, or at least a couple
of each for different flavors. I have used my ears, and not heard that happen yet.
--
Jon Best
Recording Guy
http://www.falstaff.com
Jerry Fletcher
> compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
> RNC. I know you did not want to hear this. I am not the only one who
> says this. Many have been silent. The fear of being hung out to dry by
> the regulars of this newsgroup is too much for the faint of heart. I and
> many others have found the Alesis compressors to be more musical and
> natural sounding than the well touted RNC.
>
>
>
> -----
> > Sorry Ben and Jerry, I really thought it was a joke.
> >
> > WAIT A MINUTE - BEN & JERRY?? I BEEN HAD!!!
> >
My apologies to everyone for stirring up the bees nest. I only asked an
honest question.
Jerry
marty lester
In article <352E0B...@concentric.net>, Jerry Fletcher
<djfl...@concentric.net> wrote:
>My apologies to everyone for stirring up the bees nest. I only asked an
>honest question.
>
no appologies required...you asked a question, and it was answered...
ignoring the "bees nest" of replies, i think you'll find the RNC much
more flexible, sonically better, and (my theory only) more durable
than the alesis unit...don't believe us; call mr RNC (mark) for a
demo...see dejanews for his phone #/email address...
marty.
________________________________________
Thymatron Productions: making the world a noisier place
che...@tequilamockingbird.com
Eleven Shadows
> >My apologies to everyone for stirring up the bees nest. I only asked an
> >honest question.
None required. In my humble opinion, the RNC sounds noticeably better
and cleaner than the 3630 that I also have. My assumption is that the
3630 sounds at least as good as the Alesis NanoCompressor. The Super
Nice Mode on the RNC is stunning for vocals.
--
Ken/Eleven Shadows
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* Eleven Shadows * ES songs on Real Audio * Music Reviews
* Travels-India * Tibet * Real Audio Radio Shows * More...
http://www.theeleventhhour.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
lxh2
> > Now the truth be told. The Alesis nano
> > compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
> > RNC. I know you did not want to hear this. I am not the only one who
> > says this. Many have been silent. The fear of being hung out to dry by
> > the regulars of this newsgroup is too much for the faint of heart. I and
> > many others have found the Alesis compressors to be more musical and
> > natural sounding than the well touted RNC.
MORE ABOUT MY FINDINGS
RNC: Snapping artifact especially when used with bass guitar or any
other transient program matereal made more obvious at high compression
settings. Un-natural release charicteristics. You can hear this thing
even at the most mild settings.
3630: very squishable, few artifacts, even when applying maximum
control, very musical and natural sounding. No dulling effect,very clean
and transparent.
It seems rather amusing to me that many of you embrace the RNC as you
do. I have done the comparisons. I conducted listening tests on various
monitoring equipment with various other recording engineers. I wanted
these tests to be really fair. I read so much about this little gem, and
I really wanted to demonstrate the night and day difference between
these compressors.
I am really saddened by the results of these listening tests. I am not
blindly a follower of Alesis. As demonstrated with my writings at my web
page and my postings here, I am not a follower of anything. If many of
you think that the rnc sounds better, then that is fine with me. That is
what makes the world go round. However, I am very dubious about some of
you and your endless praise for the rnc. This rnc story sort of reminds
me of the that old story about the emperor's new clothes.
I would suggest that anyone wanting to buy a compressor do the
comparison between these two compressors yourself. I believe that Mark
offers a money back guarentee and you can do the same with the 3630 form
any number of mail order houses. Then you can keep the one you like
best. You may find as I did!
Just a little more on the subject.....
This spike at the beginning of a compressed waveform is caused by an
insufficient attack time. This, of course can be minimized by letting
analog tape compression chop off these spikes in a rather uncanny
inaudible way. I designed an analog tape saturation circuit, and when
used just ahead of the compressor, improves the situation. It is at my
website. I find the 3630 to suffer from the lack of speed as well but it
is less noticable than with the rnc. The solution would be to improve
the rnc by making the attack time much faster (less than 5 microseconds)
and changing the release charicteristic to a more natural rc type of
decay. One that matches better to the auditory acoustic reflex of the
ear/brain. If these things can be done, than the rnc will will indeed
blow away all others. It would be wonderful if Mark could incorporate
this into an improved rnc.
Chris Gieseke
Hmmm facinating! But all I know is that I compared my Behringer
Composer side by side with an Alesis 3630 and the Composer walked all
over the 3630 which just pumped and breathed way too much and just didnt
give the control and smoothness I was looking for like the Composer did.
The RNC is apparently from all I hear, much better then the composer and
if so, I too would be raving about it. But like you said the 3630 has
its own sound and if you like that sound and get good recordings with
it, then roll with it. But anways I still found your comments pretty
interesting. Oh...and I'm still going get an RNC. I havent heard this
much hype about a product in quite awhile so it must do something
interesting. If it doesnt then I'll probably post a similiar review.
I keep saying I'm going to get one, but keep running into other neat
audio toys and blowing my wad (of money). This times for real...soon as
that $200 bonus check comes in, I'm finally going to pick the phone and
order that puppy.
Anyone done any side-by-side comparisons with the Behringer Composer? I
beleive a couple of poeple posted on that a while back but I dont
remember the results.
Chris G.
Ben Torrence
It's okay, I forgive you Harvey... and though this thread has gotten a
little out of hand (conspiracy theories and all) I'm afraid I'm going to
keep the ball rolling (in a slightly different direction):
Any opinions on the ART Pro VLA? Comparisons to RNC (of course)?
gottfried
I have both a 3630 and RNC in my rack...they both have their uses and
place. Normally I will try both and see which one I like more, but the
RNC quite often ends up being chosen. I just ordered a second RNC so I
can have dual mono with them.
I don't hate the 3630, but when I listen to both, I like the RNC more
unless I need the 3630's particular coloration.
On vocals, I rarely use the 3630 now that I have the RNC.
--
...cruising down the Information Superhighway at 33,600 BPS...
....without a license! Wolfram Gottfried
!gott...@acca.nmsu.edu
(when replying, take out the "!") Team AMIGA
David J. MacKenzie
Chris Gieseke <chri...@txdirect.net> writes:
> Anyone done any side-by-side comparisons with the Behringer Composer? I
> beleive a couple of poeple posted on that a while back but I dont
> remember the results.
I did. The Composer was dull, muddy, and imprecise compared to the RNC.
I tried it on vocals, bass, and 2-bus mix. Way preferred the RNC in
every application.
Mark McQuilken
Alex:
I'm sorry the RNC hasn't helped your musicmaking process. To me, if a
tool doesn't enhance THE MUSIC, then I don't use it. Please feel free to
send the unit back and I'll, (a) give you your money back (including
shipping) or, (b) send you my last 3630 (that I've been using for taking
measurements) in exchange. You could also call me when you're trying to
use the RNC (if you want to waste any more time on it) and I'll gladly
help you get through some of the problems you described! But, at the
very least, I'll CHEERFULLY give you your money back! Thanks for your
feedback!
Kindest regards,
Mark McQ.
Mark McQuilken
Ben:
Even though you didn't ask me, I thought that I'd give you my
impressions of the ART Pro VLA: It's an tube-based opto-compressor
designed to give you some of that edgy, classic sounding compression. I
think it sounds quite good! (I'm thinking about picking up one for
myself...). It's not an LA series nor a Neve (2254 type), but
bang-for-the-buck, it's pretty hard to beat. It's particularly suited
for things like bass guitar (so far that's all I've used it on), where
you want some control WITH the coloration of that more "classic" sound.
I've got a friend who uses it occasionally on his two mix and he rather
likes it too.
With regard to comparisons to the RNC, I don't think that they're
comparable: the RNC is supposed to sound "neutral" while the VLA
deliberately colors the sound (in an appealing way). If you haven't
tried the Pro VLA, do!
Later,
McQ
Jay Kadis
In article <lo1zv5b...@catapult.va.pubnix.com> d...@catapult.va.pubnix.com
If you use the Composer for small amounts of compression or use both channels
in series for more extreme squashing, it can sound pretty good (avoid the peak
limiter). More than 5 dB or so of compression will start to degrade the sound.
The RNC seems to deliver much more compression without signal coloration. The
RNC gives the user much more range of adjustment than most compressors I've
used, so it is rather easy to set it up in ways that allow audible overshoot,
etc. To me that's a feature, but you've got to be careful. I'm looking
forward to giving the RNC a real workout.
I get the impression that the RNC shares some similarity with the digital
compressors in the Yamaha DMR-8, for example, where the usual analog detection
problems are obviated by digital signal level detection.
-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Garage Studio ----x
x CCRMA/Music x Dexter Records x
x Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x-------- http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jay/ ----------x
Harvey Gerst
Mark McQuilken <ed...@flash.net> wrote:
>lxh2 wrote:
>>
>> > > Now the truth be told. The Alesis nano
>> > > compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
>> > > RNC.
>
>Alex:
>
>I'm sorry the RNC hasn't helped your musicmaking process. To me, if a
>tool doesn't enhance THE MUSIC, then I don't use it. Please feel free to
>send the unit back and I'll, (a) give you your money back (including
>shipping) or, (b) send you my last 3630 (that I've been using for taking
>measurements) in exchange. You could also call me when you're trying to
>use the RNC (if you want to waste any more time on it) and I'll gladly
>help you get through some of the problems you described! But, at the
>very least, I'll CHEERFULLY give you your money back! Thanks for your
>feedback!
>
>Kindest regards,
>Mark McQ.
Hey Mark,
You could at least wait to see if he goes for my $150 offer before you top it.
Mark McQuilken
Harvey Gerst wrote:
>
> Mark McQuilken <ed...@flash.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Alex:
> >
> >I'm sorry the RNC hasn't helped your musicmaking process. To me, if a
> >tool doesn't enhance THE MUSIC, then I don't use it. Please feel free to
> >send the unit back and I'll, (a) give you your money back (including
> >shipping) or, (b) send you my last 3630 (that I've been using for taking
> >measurements) in exchange. You could also call me when you're trying to
> >use the RNC (if you want to waste any more time on it) and I'll gladly
> >help you get through some of the problems you described! But, at the
> >very least, I'll CHEERFULLY give you your money back! Thanks for your
> >feedback!
> >
> >Kindest regards,
> >Mark McQ.
>
> Hey Mark,
>
> You could at least wait to see if he goes for my $150 offer before you top it.
>
> Harvey Gerst
> Indian Trail Recording Studio
> http://www.ITRstudio.com/
Sorry Harvey! I didn't mean to steal your thunder...
McQ
ark
>lxh2 wrote:
>>
>> > > Now the truth be told. The Alesis nano
>> > > compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
>> > > RNC. I know you did not want to hear this. I am not the only one who
>> > > says this. Many have been silent. The fear of being hung out to dry by
>> > > the regulars of this newsgroup is too much for the faint of heart. I and
>> > > many others have found the Alesis compressors to be more musical and
>> > > natural sounding than the well touted RNC.
>>
>> MORE ABOUT MY FINDINGS
>>
>> RNC: Snapping artifact especially when used with bass guitar or any
>> other transient program matereal made more obvious at high compression
>> settings. Un-natural release charicteristics. You can hear this thing
>> even at the most mild settings.
I have found that the release RNC *is* pretty touchy on ratios over
2:1, but that it can be tweaked pretty easily. And it does sound
really nice.
Al
"There's no money in poetry, but then there's no poetry in money, either."
-- Robert Graves
Remove "NOSPAM" from the header to reply to a...@aa.net
lxh2
Mark McQuilken wrote:
>
> lxh2 wrote:
> >
> > > > Now the truth be told. The Alesis nano
> > > > compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
> > > > RNC. I know you did not want to hear this. I am not the only one who
> > > > says this. Many have been silent. The fear of being hung out to dry by
> > > > the regulars of this newsgroup is too much for the faint of heart. I and
> > > > many others have found the Alesis compressors to be more musical and
> > > > natural sounding than the well touted RNC.
> >
> > MORE ABOUT MY FINDINGS
> >
> > RNC: Snapping artifact especially when used with bass guitar or any
> > other transient program matereal made more obvious at high compression
> > settings. Un-natural release charicteristics. You can hear this thing
> > even at the most mild settings.
> >
>
> I'm sorry the RNC hasn't helped your musicmaking process. To me, if a
> tool doesn't enhance THE MUSIC, then I don't use it. Please feel free to
> send the unit back and I'll, (a) give you your money back (including
> shipping) or, (b) send you my last 3630 (that I've been using for taking
> measurements) in exchange. You could also call me when you're trying to
> use the RNC (if you want to waste any more time on it) and I'll gladly
> help you get through some of the problems you described! But, at the
> very least, I'll CHEERFULLY give you your money back! Thanks for your
> feedback!
>
> Kindest regards,
> Mark McQ.
Greetings Mark,
I wish that the jerks at alesis were as nice as you. I mean no
disrespect to you or your endeavor. What I found troubled me. Is there a
way you can make the changes I recommended to the rnc. If you would like
to discuss circuitry just email me. I am not asking for my money back. I
intend to use the rnc.
DJ George
lxh2 wrote:
> I was waiting for this. Now the truth be told. The Alesis nano
> compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
> RNC. I know you did not want to hear this. I am not the only one who
> says this. Many have been silent. The fear of being hung out to dry by
> the regulars of this newsgroup is too much for the faint of heart. I and
> many others have found the Alesis compressors to be more musical and
> natural sounding than the well touted RNC.
I got my RNC today and spend two hours playing with it and beating
myself for having bought a DBX-166A in the past. The DBX-166A and the
3630 are the same pile of sh*t, and this is no different than the
nanocompressor (backup compressor in case everything fails). The sound
of the RNC is clean and transparent even in high compressions. Lots of
compressors can deliver acceptable performance under light compression,
but a soon as you use the limiter or get close to 10:1, the distortion
is very noticeable, not so with the RNC. The RNC is warm, easy to
control and very transparent. I am ordering my second RNC this comming
week. It is a total classic compressor.
DJ George,
>
>
> rnc
>
> -----
> > Sorry Ben and Jerry, I really thought it was a joke.
> >
> > WAIT A MINUTE - BEN & JERRY?? I BEEN HAD!!!
> >
EveAnna Manley
> Mark McQuilken wrote in message <352E8B...@flash.net>...
> >Ben:
> >
> >Even though you didn't ask me, I thought that I'd give you my
> >impressions of the ART Pro VLA: It's an tube-based opto-compressor
> >designed to give you some of that edgy, classic sounding compression. I
> >think it sounds quite good! (I'm thinking about picking up one for
> >myself...). It's not an LA series nor a Neve (2254 type), but
> >bang-for-the-buck, it's pretty hard to beat. It's particularly suited
> >for things like bass guitar (so far that's all I've used it on), where
> >you want some control WITH the coloration of that more "classic" sound.
> >I've got a friend who uses it occasionally on his two mix and he rather
> >likes it too.
> >
> >With regard to comparisons to the RNC, I don't think that they're
> >comparable: the RNC is supposed to sound "neutral" while the VLA
> >deliberately colors the sound (in an appealing way). If you haven't
> >tried the Pro VLA, do!
> >
> >Later,
> >McQ
Lyle Caldwell wrote:
>
> Wow. Praising his competition. Mark may have a dubious business sense for
> the 90s, but I for one applaud his candor. Though I've decided to get 2
> RNCs instead of the Pro VLA, it is a wonderful thing when you need that
> sound. I've used it and a Summit compressor for a mix project, and for some
> instruments (like bass, as Mark said), I preferred the ART to the Summit.
> For the main stereo buss, the Summit was the hands-down winner (except for
> one "raw" song, where the ART made the track). My game plan right now:
> I've got one RNC on order, will get another RNC 2 pay checks from now, then
> a few pay checks later the ART Pro VLA, then some indefinite number of
> paychecks later I'll get the Distressor. By then I hope to have enough work
> in my studio to allow me to get some of EveAnna's crazy stuff. Until then,
> the RNCs and the Pro VLA will be good complements to each other.
>
> Lyle
Yeah, Mark is taking lessons from me... don't talk bad about your
competition. And keep that sense of humour coming Mark!!
Lyle, you're gonna be up to your ears in compressors soon! You've made
some good choices.
--
Cheers, EveAnna Manley
Manley Laboratories, Inc. 13880 Magnolia Ave. Chino, CA. 91710
Tel: (909) 627-4256 Fax: (909) 628-2482
<http://www.manleylabs.com>
>
Larry Seyer
>
> RNC: Snapping artifact especially when used with bass guitar or any
> other transient program matereal made more obvious at high compression
> settings. Un-natural release charicteristics. You can hear this thing
> even at the most mild settings.
>
> 3630: very squishable, few artifacts, even when applying maximum
> control, very musical and natural sounding. No dulling effect,very clean
> and transparent.
>
You kidding, right? If you're not, then I find it very hard to put much trust
in what you have written below...
> It seems rather amusing to me that many of you embrace the RNC as you
> do. I have done the comparisons. I conducted listening tests on various
> monitoring equipment with various other recording engineers. I wanted
> these tests to be really fair. I read so much about this little gem, and
> I really wanted to demonstrate the night and day difference between
> these compressors.
>
As good tests demand...
> I am really saddened by the results of these listening tests. I am not
> blindly a follower of Alesis. As demonstrated with my writings at my web
> page and my postings here, I am not a follower of anything. If many of
> you think that the rnc sounds better, then that is fine with me. That is
> what makes the world go round. However, I am very dubious about some of
> you and your endless praise for the rnc. This rnc story sort of reminds
> me of the that old story about the emperor's new clothes.
>
I don't go to my clothing store for my compressors... and I don't
listen with my eyes... (ok, this was a cheap joke)
However, the Alesis 3630 compressor sounds like "dog do do" compared
to the RNC (to my ears... not to my eyes)
> I would suggest that anyone wanting to buy a compressor do the
> comparison between these two compressors yourself. I believe that Mark
> offers a money back guarentee and you can do the same with the 3630 form
> any number of mail order houses. Then you can keep the one you like
> best. You may find as I did!
>
Anyone who does a BLIND comparison will HAVE to be honest with
themselves and choose the only one that clearly sounds better...
Better is a subjective term... I'll call it personal preference...
If one likes to set the attack and release times to some unrealistic
settings (as you described in your post) then one WOULD
expect any compressor to sound strange...
However, when the attack and release times are set to REALISTIC
settings, then the RNC will win hands down.
Let me explain further... I think what you're saying is that when you
set the 3630 to an extremely fast attack and fast release, you like
the sound of the 3630 better than a similar setting on the RNC... right?
All you're really doing to comparing one's leftmost attack and release setting
to the others... which (by the way) may or may not have ANY relationship
to ACTUAL attack and release times.
All of this discussion is mute when comparing the 3630 to the RNC
while in Super Nice Mode. The RNC in SuperNiceMode is virtually
non-existant... One has to REALLY TRY to hear it compressing
while in SuperNiceMode.
> Just a little more on the subject.....
>
> This spike at the beginning of a compressed waveform is caused by an
> insufficient attack time. This, of course can be minimized by letting
> analog tape compression chop off these spikes in a rather uncanny
> inaudible way. I designed an analog tape saturation circuit, and when
> used just ahead of the compressor, improves the situation. It is at my
> website. I find the 3630 to suffer from the lack of speed as well but it
> is less noticable than with the rnc. The solution would be to improve
> the rnc by making the attack time much faster (less than 5 microseconds)
> and changing the release charicteristic to a more natural rc type of
> decay. One that matches better to the auditory acoustic reflex of the
> ear/brain. If these things can be done, than the rnc will will indeed
> blow away all others. It would be wonderful if Mark could incorporate
> this into an improved rnc.
>
Insufficient attack time? Don't think so...
The reason you do not hear the 'spike' that you mention in the 3630 is
that the combined "speed" of the chips used in the 3630 is WAY slower
than the RNC total speed.
If you look inside of the RNC you will find 1 (that's ONE) chip in the signal
path and ONE VCA... that's it... no more.
Look at the insides of the 3630 and you'll find many more... and slower
devices at that! These combined slow devices are "rounding" out the
spikes you're talking about...
That spike you're mentioning that "sounds" better with the 3630 is being
chipped away slowly but surely by the "slow" devices inside of the 3630...
While it is TRUE that ALL devices COLOR sound... I have found that
the RNC colors MUCH LESS than the 3630 and that the color that
it DOES impart is pleasing...
Just a friendly ALTERNATIVE opinion....
sj-ryan
What i found... and i have both 3036's and RNC's, (no nano-comp's) is
that the 3036's have a specific sound that some people don't like. It does
very particular things with particular material, none of which could be
called transparent (natural sounding). Alternately, the RNC exibits a very
natural sound throughout it's range of settings. It can alter the dynamic range
of the material without changing the 'sound' of it. This accounts for the
comments of some who 'had to check to see if it was turned on'. If you
check your meters, you'll see it is.
So if you're looking for something to give you a compressed sound... and
compression artifacts... look towards the 3036 type product (the're lots of
others in this price range). If you want something that provides dynamic
control without changing your material, the RNC can't be beat for five times
the price..nothing comes even close.
good luck,
Steve
Jerry Fletcher wrote in message <352D4D...@concentric.net>...
>How do the two compare to each other? Are they similar, the same or
>what?
>
>Jerry Fletcher
>djfl...@concentric.net
Lyle Caldwell
Wow. Praising his competition. Mark may have a dubious business sense for
the 90s, but I for one applaud his candor. Though I've decided to get 2
RNCs instead of the Pro VLA, it is a wonderful thing when you need that
sound. I've used it and a Summit compressor for a mix project, and for some
instruments (like bass, as Mark said), I preferred the ART to the Summit.
For the main stereo buss, the Summit was the hands-down winner (except for
one "raw" song, where the ART made the track). My game plan right now:
I've got one RNC on order, will get another RNC 2 pay checks from now, then
a few pay checks later the ART Pro VLA, then some indefinite number of
paychecks later I'll get the Distressor. By then I hope to have enough work
in my studio to allow me to get some of EveAnna's crazy stuff. Until then,
the RNCs and the Pro VLA will be good complements to each other.
Lyle
Mark McQuilken wrote in message <352E8B...@flash.net>...
>Ben Torrence wrote:
>>
>> It's okay, I forgive you Harvey... and though this thread has gotten a
>> little out of hand (conspiracy theories and all) I'm afraid I'm going to
>> keep the ball rolling (in a slightly different direction):
>>
>> Any opinions on the ART Pro VLA? Comparisons to RNC (of course)?
>>
>> > Sorry Ben and Jerry, I really thought it was a joke.
>> >
>> > WAIT A MINUTE - BEN & JERRY?? I BEEN HAD!!!
>> >
>> > Harvey Gerst
>> > Indian Trail Recording Studio
>> > http://www.ITRstudio.com/
>> >
>
ark
On 10 Apr 1998 16:43:21 -0400, d...@catapult.va.pubnix.com (David J.
MacKenzie) wrote:
>Chris Gieseke <chri...@txdirect.net> writes:
>
>> Anyone done any side-by-side comparisons with the Behringer Composer? I
>> beleive a couple of poeple posted on that a while back but I dont
>> remember the results.
>
>I did. The Composer was dull, muddy, and imprecise compared to the RNC.
>I tried it on vocals, bass, and 2-bus mix. Way preferred the RNC in
>every application.
I sold my Composer after getting the RNC.
Li G Tsai
lxh2 wrote:
> MORE ABOUT MY FINDINGS
>
> RNC: Snapping artifact especially when used with bass guitar or any
> other transient program matereal made more obvious at high compression
> settings. Un-natural release charicteristics. You can hear this thing
> even at the most mild settings.
>
> 3630: very squishable, few artifacts, even when applying maximum
> control, very musical and natural sounding. No dulling effect,very clean
> and transparent.
>
> It seems rather amusing to me that many of you embrace the RNC as you
> do. I have done the comparisons. I conducted listening tests on various
> monitoring equipment with various other recording engineers. I wanted
> these tests to be really fair. I read so much about this little gem, and
> I really wanted to demonstrate the night and day difference between
> these compressors.
>
> I am really saddened by the results of these listening tests. I am not
> blindly a follower of Alesis. As demonstrated with my writings at my web
> page and my postings here, I am not a follower of anything. If many of
> you think that the rnc sounds better, then that is fine with me. That is
> what makes the world go round. However, I am very dubious about some of
> you and your endless praise for the rnc. This rnc story sort of reminds
> me of the that old story about the emperor's new clothes.
>
> I would suggest that anyone wanting to buy a compressor do the
> comparison between these two compressors yourself. I believe that Mark
> offers a money back guarentee and you can do the same with the 3630 form
> any number of mail order houses. Then you can keep the one you like
> best. You may find as I did!
>
> Just a little more on the subject.....
>
> This spike at the beginning of a compressed waveform is caused by an
> insufficient attack time. This, of course can be minimized by letting
> analog tape compression chop off these spikes in a rather uncanny
> inaudible way. I designed an analog tape saturation circuit, and when
> used just ahead of the compressor, improves the situation. It is at my
> website. I find the 3630 to suffer from the lack of speed as well but it
> is less noticable than with the rnc. The solution would be to improve
> the rnc by making the attack time much faster (less than 5 microseconds)
> and changing the release charicteristic to a more natural rc type of
> decay. One that matches better to the auditory acoustic reflex of the
> ear/brain. If these things can be done, than the rnc will will indeed
> blow away all others. It would be wonderful if Mark could incorporate
> this into an improved rnc.
Hey, maybe you wanna buy my dbx-166A. It is for sale. As for me, I will
be using my RNC. Great sounding and affordable. Not to flame, but in
my experience Alesis comps, all suck. The only thing that sucks about
the RNC is the walwart power supply (which, btw is made in China......)
But again, it is my opinion.
Good luck
Dj George,
Voodoo Butter
I wound the Pro VLA to be nice sounding but a little weak in it's ability
to really squash things. The compression ratio seemed to stay at about
6:1. I liked the sound I just couldn't get it to give me enough of it.
Voodoo Butter
> 3630: very squishable, few artifacts, even when applying maximum
> control, very musical and natural sounding. No dulling effect,very clean
> and transparent.
Wow! do I disagree! My experience with the Alesis (about 5 years of it
being my only compressor) is quite different. Once I was able to begin
using a better compressor, I realized what was wrong with the Alesis.
Overall, I would describe the sound as " the grey mush cloud". It DOES
dull signals... It drops a veil on anything you put into it. Not
transparent at all.
It's was a decent first compressor but I would easily recommend the RNC
instead to a prospective first compressor buyer. For the same money the
RNC provides a much more tranparent, quieter and powerful (in terms of
intensity) compressor.
Steve Cook
I guess I will have to add my two cents here. Since not a single person
has come to the defense of lxh2, I must tell the readers of
rec.audio.pro that they may want to examine what lxh2 is saying.
Remember, It was not long ago that I thought that lxh2 was a crackpot
too. But I have learned otherwise. I get many emails regarding lxh2's
circuits. They have all been quite satisfied. I built his tape
compression circuit, and I am amazed that someone had not already
marketed one of these. The bugger really does sound like when you push
the tape. This has proven very useful on the drums. Honestly, Ithink
that lxh2 feels bad that he bought a bunch of 3630's before he heard of
the rnc, and now he is just trying to justify in his own mind that the
rnc is not as good. I have not heard his band nakedchurch. But he says
he used the 3630 extensively. I would think this recording would sound
like crap.
I think lxh2 should stick to designing innovative circuits, and leave
equipment reviews to those more qualified. Think of it this way,
hundreds of people are happy with the rnc, and lxh2 is not. I say
majority rules. Maybe if lxh2 and Mark could get together and put their
respective minds to work on some really cool products that are available
to the public and not just some badly drawn schematics on a web site,
then that would be great.
I mean, who would have thought to use the EL84 as a mic preamp? I still
get alot of emails about this preamp.
Lxh2..........cool your jets
Don P.
lxh2 <lx...@netaxs.com> wrote:
->I was waiting for this. Now the truth be told. The Alesis nano
->compressor is, or for that matter the 3630 wins hands down against the
->RNC. I know you did not want to hear this. I am not the only one who
->says this. Many have been silent. The fear of being hung out to dry by
->the regulars of this newsgroup is too much for the faint of heart. I and
->many others have found the Alesis compressors to be more musical and
->natural sounding than the well touted RNC.
->
So you're saying that all of that nasty distortion (especially in RMS mode)
from the 3630 on bass is _musical_and_natural_sounding?_
Hmmm, maybe I'll buy another one!
Don P.
--
"China is a big country, inhabited by many Chinese"
-Former French President Charles De Gaulle
E-mail address scrambled to foil bots..........
dandd (at) enteract (dot) com
http://www.enteract.com/~dandd
Don P.
Mark McQuilken <ed...@flash.net> wrote:
->Harvey Gerst wrote:
->>
->> Hey Mark,
->>
->> You could at least wait to see if he goes for my $150 offer before you top
it.
->>
->
->Sorry Harvey! I didn't mean to steal your thunder...
->
->McQ
1.) Thou Shalt Not Step On the Pope's Robe.......
Don P.
--
"A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on."
-Samuel Goldwyn
Mark McQuilken
VB:
Actually that's very astute of you...if I remember correctly, the
measured maximum compression ratio was around 6:1 (Isn't the panel
marked "10:1" as the max?). Although not as critical on a levelling amp,
it's frustrating to have front panel markings NOT match actual
performance parameters OR to have such great variation from
unit-to-unit, manufacturer-to-manufacturer that such markings become
meaningless...
Cheers,
McQ
Robert E. Smith
lxh2 wrote:
>
> Mark McQuilken wrote:
> >
> > lxh2 wrote:
> > >
snip
>
> I wish that the jerks at alesis were as nice as you. I mean no
> disrespect to you or your endeavor. What I found troubled me. Is there a
> way you can make the changes I recommended to the rnc. If you would like
> to discuss circuitry just email me. I am not asking for my money back. I
> intend to use the rnc.
Now why on earth would Mark want to change his design to sound like the
3630? Each compressor has it's own character. You like the sound of the
Alesis design, so you have found the product that suits you. Buy more of
them. Lots more. Leave the RNC alone as it suits the needs of a great many
recordists/project studios. I personally have both, listened to both VERY
CAREFULLY, use both regularly and not just for recording music. My day job
is as a research scientist in acoustics as applied to the medical industry.
I find the RNC a most useful compressor for both my professional work
and my project studio. The Alesis is a great learn-the-knobs/entertainment
tool those clients that need it.
--
Bob Smith - BS Studios
rsm...@oz.net
To reply please remove the NOSPAM from the address
Jon Best
Well, if he hears it that way, then he's got every right to say what he
hears. I may disagree, but that's OK. I am glad my favorite sounds and
gear are different than others' favorite sounds and gear- I can truthfully
say I think my recordings are better! (tongue firmly in cheek)
Steve Cook wrote:
--
Jon Best
Recording Guy
http://www.falstaff.com
Eleven Shadows
> Now why on earth would Mark want to change his design to sound like the
> 3630? Each compressor has it's own character. You like the sound of the
> Alesis design, so you have found the product that suits you. Buy more of
> them. Lots more. Leave the RNC alone as it suits the needs of a great many
> recordists/project studios.
Well, I would imagine that lxh2 may want to modify *his* RNC, not all of
them. In either case, suggestions about modifications aren't so bad.
Obviously lxh2 has a preference for the Alesis design as well, and
that's fine -- if I had a preference for the Alesis design, I would
state so, although I wouldn't couch them in "let the truth be known" or
"emperor's new clothes" verbage, but rather, as my own personal
opinion.
--
Ken/Eleven Shadows
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* Eleven Shadows * ES songs on Real Audio * Music Reviews
* Travels-India * Tibet * Real Audio Radio Shows * More...
http://www.theeleventhhour.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WaveBurner Recording
I second that emotion. One of the first things I noticed about the RNC was
that the knob legends actually meant something. Secondly, and probably what
confuses new members of the "real" compressor club, is that one has to
unlearn the behavior of cheap compressors. Imagine, a 6:1 ratio actually
antenuating the signal 1db for every 6db of input! It's no wonder that
every band I've ever seen that was talked into buying a 3630 for their P.A.
never knew how to use it right.
Thanks Mark for a great product at a great price. two more please!
Mark McQuilken <ed...@flash.net> wrote in article
<352F99...@flash.net>...
hank alrich & lanis lebaron
Mark McQuilken <ed...@flash.net> wrote:
> Although not as critical on a levelling amp,
> it's frustrating to have front panel markings NOT match actual
> performance parameters OR to have such great variation from
> unit-to-unit, manufacturer-to-manufacturer that such markings become
> meaningless...
Just one more good reason not to look at the panel markings. That way we
can see what's going on...with our earballs.
(ho ho ho)
"Now, _that_ setting looks _really_ good!"
--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"if laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"
Mark McQuilken
Hank:
I recently had to mix sound at a friend's wedding (at the very last
minute...as I was walking through the door, they sprung it on
me...within 10 minutes I was behind the console). So here I was, never
seen the mixer, amps, nor the signal routing setup, etc., and I had to
not disappoint my friend on a very important day. Fortunately, there's
markings on the EQ section that: a) are pretty standardized (maybe not
accurate, but at least in the ballpark), and, b) seemed to track very
well with other consoles that I've used. Because of this
"standardization" I was able to dial-in reasonable settings quickly...it
was a combination of a priori knowledge about particular sound
sources/frequency ranges _combined with_ the feedback that my ear
provided. IF I had relied strictly on real-time aural feedback to
determine control settings (let's see: 24 channels x 20 controls per
channel = 480; many settings dependent upon the other thereby making the
process interative) the "tweak and listen" only approach, I believe,
would have lengthened the time it took to get a decent sound. If these
EQ and gain markings on the console were as "well standardized" as
compressor panel markings, I would have been making adjustments long
after the band went home. So, yes, the settings _did_ look reasonable
(and, oh yes, it sounded fairly nice too). It situations like this that
I've personally experienced that has biased me toward a
"what-you-see-is-what-you-get" approach. In the extreme, could you
imagine not having any markings at all on a mixer, with each control
type for each channel located in a different position on each channel
strip? Sure, you could eventually become adept at running it by _only_
using your ears, but don't you think that having some markings, with
some ballpark-type accuracy a better approach? I think you can tell what
my vote would be...
Regards,
Mark
Rob Hoffman
Mark McQuilken wrote:
>
> hank alrich & lanis lebaron wrote:
> >
> > Mark McQuilken <ed...@flash.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Although not as critical on a levelling amp,
> > > it's frustrating to have front panel markings NOT match actual
> > > performance parameters OR to have such great variation from
> > > unit-to-unit, manufacturer-to-manufacturer that such markings become
> > > meaningless...
> >
> > Just one more good reason not to look at the panel markings. That way we
> > can see what's going on...with our earballs.
> >
> > (ho ho ho)
> >
> > "Now, _that_ setting looks _really_ good!"
> > --
> imagine not having any markings at all on a mixer, with each control
> type for each channel located in a different position on each channel
> strip? Sure, you could eventually become adept at running it by _only_
> using your ears, but don't you think that having some markings, with
> some ballpark-type accuracy a better approach? I think you can tell what
> my vote would be...
>
Anyone who's used the new SSL 9000 can tell you what hell it is to have
a 90 input console without markings on the EQ. Apparently because of the
ability to switch between "E" and "G" type EQ they were only able to
mark the high and low point of each freqeuncy pot. Yeah, you should use
your ears but it's freaky not to have a reference point.
Rob
hank alrich & lanis lebaron
Mark McQuilken <ed...@flash.net> wrote:
> Hank:
>
> I recently had to mix sound at a friend's wedding (at the very last
> minute...as I was walking through the door, they sprung it on
> me...within 10 minutes I was behind the console). So here I was, never
> seen the mixer, amps, nor the signal routing setup, etc., and I had to
> not disappoint my friend on a very important day. Fortunately, there's
> markings on the EQ section that: a) are pretty standardized (maybe not
> accurate, but at least in the ballpark), and, b) seemed to track very
> well with other consoles that I've used. Because of this
> "standardization" I was able to dial-in reasonable settings quickly...it
> was a combination of a priori knowledge about particular sound
> sources/frequency ranges _combined with_ the feedback that my ear
> provided. IF I had relied strictly on real-time aural feedback to
> determine control settings (let's see: 24 channels x 20 controls per
> channel = 480; many settings dependent upon the other thereby making the
> process interative) the "tweak and listen" only approach, I believe,
> would have lengthened the time it took to get a decent sound. If these
> EQ and gain markings on the console were as "well standardized" as
> compressor panel markings, I would have been making adjustments long
> after the band went home. So, yes, the settings _did_ look reasonable
> (and, oh yes, it sounded fairly nice too). It situations like this that
> I've personally experienced that has biased me toward a
> "what-you-see-is-what-you-get" approach. In the extreme, could you
> imagine not having any markings at all on a mixer, with each control
> type for each channel located in a different position on each channel
> strip? Sure, you could eventually become adept at running it by _only_
> using your ears, but don't you think that having some markings, with
> some ballpark-type accuracy a better approach? I think you can tell what
> my vote would be...
>
> Regards,
> Mark
I agree ("humor" aside...). Reasonably accurate setting indications are
a boon. But in the studio I often don't look at the markings when
setting dynamics units. (I certainly would if I had to pull something
out of the hat in a live situation. Then the accuracy of the RNC's marks
would make such decisions more reliable. Need I say thanks? No? Thanks,
anyway!)
However, I'm reminded of a visit to a friend's studio shortly after he
gotten one of those "limiters" of which I am not so fond. He'd set it up
according to the markings according to a description he'd read in one of
the audio-and-music-for-the-masses magazines of how these gizmos should
be set for given signals. It sounded awful. (And I mean awfuller than
usual for that box.) I told him the thing was a musical instrument and
he would do himself a favor to think of it that way and start by
listening to the results of settings. The guy has a very good ear, is a
superb musician and right away was able to hear the results of
re-tweaking.
Then again, if the settings' indicators on his limiter were more
indicative of what the box was going to do maybe the magazine settings
would have worked better...
(And it was through doing session work for him that I came to dislike
the Alesis 3630.)
lxh2
As I said, the rnc has that nasty artifact at any setting in the normal
mode. Depending on how you adjust it, you can lessen the artifact, but
then you get less compression too. And what do you call a "realistic
setting"?
> Let me explain further... I think what you're saying is that when you
> set the 3630 to an extremely fast attack and fast release, you like
> the sound of the 3630 better than a similar setting on the RNC...
> right?
Wrong. I said that the attack time of the rnc is not fast enough to
effectively track sharp transients. This is as compared to bypass and
not the 3630. I did not say that I set the release time to minimum. The
rnc really sounds like crap with the release time set to minimum, so I
did not use this setting to make things fair. The 3630 also exhibits the
slow attack time. My main complaint about the rnc is the completely
un-natural release time charicteristic.
> All you're really doing to comparing one's leftmost attack and release
> setting
> to the others... which (by the way) may or may not have ANY
> relationship
> to ACTUAL attack and release times.
I tried all setting combinations to make things fair. I compared each
unit to no compression at all.
> All of this discussion is mute when comparing the 3630 to the RNC
> while in Super Nice Mode. The RNC in SuperNiceMode is virtually
> non-existant... One has to REALLY TRY to hear it compressing
> while in SuperNiceMode.
One really has to try to get any real control in the super nice mode. My
scope says the super nice mode does not provide the control that is
needed. Another thing about the super nice mode is that the release time
is multiplied by a factor of three.
> > Just a little more on the subject.....
> >
> > This spike at the beginning of a compressed waveform is caused by an
> > insufficient attack time. This, of course can be minimized by
> letting
> > analog tape compression chop off these spikes in a rather uncanny
> > inaudible way. I designed an analog tape saturation circuit, and
> when
> > used just ahead of the compressor, improves the situation. It is at
> my
> > website. I find the 3630 to suffer from the lack of speed as well
> but it
> > is less noticable than with the rnc. The solution would be to
> improve
> > the rnc by making the attack time much faster (less than 5
> microseconds)
> > and changing the release charicteristic to a more natural rc type of
> > decay. One that matches better to the auditory acoustic reflex of
> the
> > ear/brain. If these things can be done, than the rnc will will
> indeed
> > blow away all others. It would be wonderful if Mark could
> incorporate
> > this into an improved rnc.
> >
>
> Insufficient attack time? Don't think so...
I certainly do think so, and my trusty scope confirms what I hear.
> The reason you do not hear the 'spike' that you mention in the 3630 is
> that the combined "speed" of the chips used in the 3630 is WAY slower
> than the RNC total speed.
>
Speed of chips? I don't even want to get into that pissing match. That
is hogwash.
As I said, I am comparing the rnc to no compression at all!!!
> If you look inside of the RNC you will find 1 (that's ONE) chip in the
> signal
> path and ONE VCA... that's it... no more.
My God, Now we are going at it about the number of chips in the audio
path. Next thing you know, you will start in about special
interconnects!
> Look at the insides of the 3630 and you'll find many more... and
> slower
> devices at that! These combined slow devices are "rounding" out the
> spikes you're talking about...
This is also hogwash.
> That spike you're mentioning that "sounds" better with the 3630 is
> being
> chipped away slowly but surely by the "slow" devices inside of the
> 3630...
Hogwash again.
> While it is TRUE that ALL devices COLOR sound... I have found that
> the RNC colors MUCH LESS than the 3630 and that the color that
> it DOES impart is pleasing...
>
> Just a friendly ALTERNATIVE opinion....
How dare I suggest that Mr McQuilken improve his design. I never said
for him to make it sound more like the 3630. I only suggested that he
make some improvements. But from the posts here, he need not bother
because you all seem to love the current design. This is probably why he
did not bother to email me about my suggestions. Can you blame him?
Lyle Caldwell
lxh2,
How many RNCs have you tested? It's possible you have a bad one (everyone
makes mistakes). If so, I'm sure Mark wiould be glad to exchange your unit
for another. If you've just tested one, it's not scientific to say that
*all* RNCs have compression artifacts. That said, in my experience, *all*
3630s are overcolored and generally yucky. I much preferred the dbx 266 to
the Alesis unit.
Lyle
lxh2 wrote in message <353030...@netaxs.com>...
lxh2
Jon Best wrote:
>
> Well, if he hears it that way, then he's got every right to say what he
> hears. I may disagree, but that's OK. I am glad my favorite sounds and
> gear are different than others' favorite sounds and gear- I can truthfully
> say I think my recordings are better! (tongue firmly in cheek)
>
> Steve Cook wrote:
>
> > I guess I will have to add my two cents here. Since not a single person
> > has come to the defense of lxh2, I must tell the readers of
> > rec.audio.pro that they may want to examine what lxh2 is saying.
> > Remember, It was not long ago that I thought that lxh2 was a crackpot
> > too. But I have learned otherwise. I get many emails regarding lxh2's
> > circuits. They have all been quite satisfied. I built his tape
> > compression circuit, and I am amazed that someone had not already
> > marketed one of these. The bugger really does sound like when you push
> > the tape. This has proven very useful on the drums. Honestly, Ithink
> > that lxh2 feels bad that he bought a bunch of 3630's before he heard of
> > the rnc, and now he is just trying to justify in his own mind that the
> > rnc is not as good. I have not heard his band nakedchurch. But he says
> > he used the 3630 extensively. I would think this recording would sound
> > like crap.
Hey Steve, How about I send you a tape of nakedchurch and then tell me
what you think. I do not feel bad at all. We are quite happy with our
3630's. We only use them very judiciously and only where needed. We
found the rnc not as good as everyone here says it is. That is just our
opinion.
> > I think lxh2 should stick to designing innovative circuits, and leave
> > equipment reviews to those more qualified.
Gee thanks.
Think of it this way,
> > hundreds of people are happy with the rnc, and lxh2 is not. I say
> > majority rules. Maybe if lxh2 and Mark could get together and put their
> > respective minds to work on some really cool products that are available
> > to the public and not just some badly drawn schematics on a web site,
> > then that would be great.
I don't think Mark has any interest in anything I have to offer. What a
shame.
> > I mean, who would have thought to use the EL84 as a mic preamp? I still
> > get alot of emails about this preamp.
> >
> > Lxh2..........cool your jets
>
Now my jets are completely cooled down now..........until someone else
gets them going again
Thanks for your glowing review of my EL84 mic preamp.
lxh2
Lyle Caldwell wrote:
>
> lxh2,
> How many RNCs have you tested? It's possible you have a bad one (everyone
> makes mistakes). If so, I'm sure Mark wiould be glad to exchange your unit
> for another. If you've just tested one, it's not scientific to say that
> *all* RNCs have compression artifacts. That said, in my experience, *all*
> 3630s are overcolored and generally yucky. I much preferred the dbx 266 to
> the Alesis unit.
>
> Lyle
If indeed I have a defective rnc, which I very much doubt, then the QC
department at FMR laboratories would leave alot to be desired. I
honestly do not think there is any defect here. Mark is trying to build
a good reputation, and I highly doubt he would let one get by without
extensive testing.
I am pretty sure this rnc is not defective. That said, it just isn't my
cup of tea.
I have found all of the dbx compressors not to be of my liking either.
Albert Thistlewaite
I agree with lxh2. Last week I had a band come into my studio with a few
of these rnc's. I had not gotten around to hearing this compressor
before this. I heard the same things as lxh2 describes when we tried
them on just about everything. The band's singer owned these rnc's and
said he uses them with his 4 track and loves them. Well, they did not
exactly blow me away.
THISTLEWAITE
Bill Gribble
"WaveBurner Recording" <bra...@dcacheNOSPAM.net> writes:
> Imagine, a 6:1 ratio actually antenuating the signal 1db for every
> 6db of input!
I'd be a little disappointed if I set my compressor for 6:1 and it gave me
a (1/6):1 compression ratio.
Bill Gribble
DJ George
Buy yourself a box of Q-tips, then try again. Cerum in the ears might
be a problem...not the equipment!
Dj George
note: to be taken as sarcasm.
>
> THISTLEWAITE
Bill Jones
Hey EveAnna,
When is Manley going to come out with a product to compete with the RNC
;~)
Regards,
Bill Jones
EveAnna Manley wrote:
> > Mark McQuilken wrote in message <352E8B...@flash.net>...
> > >Ben:
> > >
> > >Even though you didn't ask me, I thought that I'd give you my
> > >impressions of the ART Pro VLA: It's an tube-based opto-compressor
> > >designed to give you some of that edgy, classic sounding
> compression. I
> > >think it sounds quite good! (I'm thinking about picking up one for
> > >myself...). It's not an LA series nor a Neve (2254 type), but
> > >bang-for-the-buck, it's pretty hard to beat. It's particularly
> suited
> > >for things like bass guitar (so far that's all I've used it on),
> where
> > >you want some control WITH the coloration of that more "classic"
> sound.
> > >I've got a friend who uses it occasionally on his two mix and he
> rather
> > >likes it too.
> > >
> > >With regard to comparisons to the RNC, I don't think that they're
> > >comparable: the RNC is supposed to sound "neutral" while the VLA
> > >deliberately colors the sound (in an appealing way). If you haven't
>
> > >tried the Pro VLA, do!
> > >
> > >Later,
> > >McQ
>
> Yeah, Mark is taking lessons from me... don't talk bad about your
> competition. And keep that sense of humour coming Mark!!
>
> Lyle, you're gonna be up to your ears in compressors soon! You've made
>
> some good choices.
> --
> Cheers, EveAnna Manley
> Manley Laboratories, Inc. 13880 Magnolia Ave. Chino, CA. 91710
> Tel: (909) 627-4256 Fax: (909) 628-2482
> <http://www.manleylabs.com>
> >
Lyle Caldwell
*All* of the dbx compressors? You make huge, blanket statements that I find
hardly credible. dbx makes some really great products. Alesis makes some
good to great products, though I don't put the 3630 on the list. I'm not a
fan of 414s, though I haven't tried the TL II, so I can't say that *all*
414s are harsh. Before you reveal "the truth," it better be backed up by
evaluations of more than one example of a product. What if I order your
band's album, and for whatever reason the copy I get is defective and has no
high end? Should I conclude that this is what you sound like?
Lyle
lxh2 wrote in message <353037...@netaxs.com>...
Voodoo Butter
I think it may actually be infinity:1 (!!).
Mike Rivers
In article <352EA5...@netaxs.com> lx...@netaxs.com writes:
> I wish that the jerks at alesis were as nice as you. I mean no
> disrespect to you or your endeavor. What I found troubled me. Is there a
> way you can make the changes I recommended to the rnc.
I might have gotten your recommendations lost in the attributions in
this thread, but as I recall, you had suggested a faster attack time.
This is a feature that can be useful if what you want is peak limiting,
or if your intent is to change the timbre of the sound as if you were
using a phaseless equalizer.
This is an accepted application for a compressor these days, but it goes
against the classical definition of what a compressor does - reduce
dynamic range. A good example of a compressor with an attack time which
can be adjusted down to a couple hundred nanoseconds is the gawdawful
expensive dbx 160S (the new blue one) or their new, less expensive
digital one.
As far as the shape of the release curve is concerned, this is what
gives each compressor its characteristic flavor - why an LA2 is
different from an RNC which is different from a dbx or a Joemeek or an
lhx2. The Distressor tries to cover more than one base by using
different curves for its different settings and some people find that to
be useful.
I've never listened to an RNC, but apparently its curve is well suited
for vocals as that's what people seem to oooh and aaaah most about.
Change that and it might work better on some style of bass playing, or
maybe on drum overheads. This is a decision that the designer makes and
he hopes he's made a choice that appeals to enough potential users so
that he can pay off his boat. Mark should be able to do that after just
about 2,000 RNC sales. <g>
------------
I'm really mri...@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) On the road.
Somewhere east of Lost Angeles and west of the moon
Chris Gieseke
Jay Kadis wrote:
>
> In article <lo1zv5b...@catapult.va.pubnix.com> d...@catapult.va.pubnix.com
> (David J. MacKenzie) writes:
> > Chris Gieseke <chri...@txdirect.net> writes:
> >
> > > Anyone done any side-by-side comparisons with the Behringer Composer? I
> > > beleive a couple of poeple posted on that a while back but I dont
> > > remember the results.
> >
> > I did. The Composer was dull, muddy, and imprecise compared to the RNC.
> > I tried it on vocals, bass, and 2-bus mix. Way preferred the RNC in
> > every application.
>
> If you use the Composer for small amounts of compression or use both channels
> in series for more extreme squashing, it can sound pretty good (avoid the peak
> limiter). More than 5 dB or so of compression will start to degrade the sound.
> The RNC seems to deliver much more compression without signal coloration. The
> RNC gives the user much more range of adjustment than most compressors I've
> used, so it is rather easy to set it up in ways that allow audible overshoot,
> etc. To me that's a feature, but you've got to be careful. I'm looking
> forward to giving the RNC a real workout.
>
> I get the impression that the RNC shares some similarity with the digital
> compressors in the Yamaha DMR-8, for example, where the usual analog detection
> problems are obviated by digital signal level detection.
>
> -Jay
>
Wow! This thread is absolutely fascinating. Great replies and info
going on here. I originally asked the question about the Behringer Vs.
RNC. I also noticed that my Composer can be muddy or dull on extreme
compression settings but I also noticed that it only does this on
certain sounds and instruments more then others. On some bass sounds
for example, it will sometimes tighten up the bass sound rather nicely,
but with bass sounds where the bass player insists on having extreme
amounts of bass frequencies on his eq, the Composer kinda makes it sound
boomy (muddy). Also that high end roll-off sometimes gives mixes a
kinda smooth processed sorta sound, at least on mixes that sound very
harsh like for example with alot of trebly guitar tracks or screeching
vocals. Then again on other mixes where maximum clarity is desired, it
does dull them a little bit. Thank you very much for that tip on
running one channel into the second channel on the Composer. I beleive
someone mentioned that tip on an another thread awhile back but I've
never gotten around to trying it and this last post reminded me of it.
Since I generally rarely compress entire mixes now except on the
computer, I'll probably set up my Composer today to be used in that
manner as I'll be testing out some mics today in my home/project studio
(old Bogen cardoid dynamic SM-58 clones..probably junk but ya never
know what they might sound good on). I also by the way will be ordering
a RNC and eventually an ART VLA single channel compressor pretty soon.
The RNC sounds just like what I need to smooth out some rowdy drum kit
tracks without making them sound squooshed.
Again thanks for the great informative (and polite) replies and keep all
these great posts coming! You too lxh2! Its always good to have some
negative feedback to keep everything in perspective and make you think a
little using your own ears instead of those of others.
Chris G.
lxh2
Hi, Mike.
I may perhaps try to elaborate what I expect limiters/compressors to do.
Perhaps my application of compression differs from the way most of the
readers in this group use compression.
What I use compression for, is to prevent musical transients from
exceeding a given level without creating the all too common snappy
artifact associated with most compressors. If a compressor is fast
enough to grab even the sharpest transients, this artifact goes away.
However, the release time must be adjusted to be long enough to prevent
the compressor from tracking the low frequency waveforms. This is easily
done by ear.
Why is it so hard for manufacturers to make availible a really fast
compressor at a reasonable price?
Obviously, There other uses and applications for compression which
benifit from slow attack and reaease times. One that comes to mind is a
gentle gain riding. Or perhaps when one wants to add the transient
spikes to percussion instruments or the drums. Set the rnc to 10 ms and
really crunch the kick, the toms, or the snare and you will get some of
the most snappy results. If that is what people want, then that is fine
with me. You can set the rnc for really slow attack and release and set
the threshold really low and get a really punchy type of control for
certain vocalists and styles of music. I intend to keep my rnc and use
it for those applications that call out for that particular sound. It
also can make a really nice doorstop or paperweight.
Lets not expect too much from this much overhyped rnc compressor. This
overhyping is not mark's fault either. It is just the readers of this
newsgroup who discovered a really nice value and wanted to spread the
word. I suggest you all buy the rnc and be happy with it. I, on the
other hand have been very happy with my 3630's and expect to get a
couple more. Any of you thinking of unloading this piece of junk for
really cheap?
Do any of you want Mark to make available faster attack time on the rnc?
E.G. Wad
I was probably one of the earlier posters referred to who did A/B
comparisons of the RNC and the Composer and can generally confirm the
above impressions the RNC is way more transparent both in terms of tonal
colouration and pumping noise. It is capable of faster attacks and more
extreme compression settings. I find the composer to add a fair amount
of muddiness to the sound, although I think it is better than other
units in its price range.
That being said the previous poster alludes to an important point: to
each gear its own. I think the composer would make a fantastic guitar
compressor, and in that role what I hear as its limitations might well
be assets.
But if you are looking for something to level out vocals as
transparently as possible before going into a digital recorder or
compressing an entire mix, the RNC sounds better to me.
Plus you get unparalleled support from Mark McQuilken, who is just a
gosh darn nice guy who happens to stand 100% behind his product.
Apparently, Herr Behringer stands 100% behind dbx and Mackie's
designs... I mean his product.
(Oh no not this thread again. Stop me before we kill again...)
hank alrich & lanis lebaron
lxh2 <lx...@netaxs.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your glowing review of my EL84 mic pream
We note the comment that the quality of your schematics leaves something
to be desired... I do hope you'll address this aspect of quality
control.
hank alrich & lanis lebaron
Mike Rivers <mri...@d-and-d.com> wrote:
> I've never listened to an RNC, but apparently its curve is well suited
> for vocals as that's what people seem to oooh and aaaah most about.
> Change that and it might work better on some style of bass playing, or
> maybe on drum overheads. This is a decision that the designer makes and
> he hopes he's made a choice that appeals to enough potential users so
> that he can pay off his boat.
So far with my RNC I have attempted the following with results that
pleased me
- cut an acoustic guitar track: 000-28 to Beyer M160 to Neve 33122 to
RNC to DA88
- cut an electric bass track: Fender-esque Jazz clone - Alembic F2B -
RNC- DA88
- mixed a singer-songwriter album with the RNC on the stereo buss
inserts
- used the RNC on stereo drum tracks that had been poorly compressed in
the recording stage and this was by far the most interesting experience.
The attack had been too quick and same for the release, so the cymbals
in the OHs were crunched and then released into ugliness due to the
extremely unrealistic level of the decay. I recompressed those tracks
using an attack time long enough to spare the initial rise of the
signals yet step on the cymbal's "after-swell", and a release time that
would hold the decay of those OHs in a more realistic perspective. I
have never tried this before and I was surprised that it worked, just as
I was surprised to restore some sense of dynamics to an overly
compressed bass track with the EL8.
The RNC's Super Nice Mode is killer for vocals and it's also what I used
on the mix buss.
For me, the versatility of the RNC is most welcome.
Mark McQuilken
lxh2 wrote:
>
(snip)
> ...certain vocalists and styles of music. I intend to keep my rnc and use
> it for those applications that call out for that particular sound. It
> also can make a really nice doorstop or paperweight.
>
Alex:
It's actually more versatile than that! Here are some other suggested
uses:
a) Tire block -- to keep your car from rolling down hill.
b) Drink coaster -- for the entertaining engineer...help keep those
watermarks off yer console and nice pieces of outboard gear
c) Flower vase platform -- display those beautiful flowers that people
occasionally send you with a little audio _style_
d) Child's toy -- put strings on two RNCs and let your kids use them to
walk on...also keeps their muddy feet from ruining your carpet.
e) A kitchen cutting board -- it doesn't slice, it doesn't dice! BUT use
it to keep from marring your kitchen counter tops
f) A birth control device -- just have your honey hold this between
their legs and...well, you can fill in the blanks...
g) Competitive frisbee -- this puppy is for REAL MEN! Not one of those
flimsy, cheap plastic things. This is for the Arnold's of competitive
frisbee golf!
I'm sure that there are some other imaginative uses for an RNC...as we
think of them we'll be sure to post some!
Cheers,
McQ
John O
Monte P McGuire wrote:
>
> In article <352E46...@netaxs.com>, lxh2 <lx...@netaxs.com> wrote:
> > RNC: Snapping artifact especially when used with bass guitar or any
> >other transient program matereal made more obvious at high compression
> >settings. Un-natural release charicteristics. You can hear this thing
> >even at the most mild settings.
>
> things you dislike about the RNC, I think I can offer some insight.
> That snapping sound could be because you're using way too fast of an
> attack or release time with a low frequency rich signal.
>
> > 3630: very squishable, few artifacts, even when applying maximum
> >control, very musical and natural sounding. No dulling effect,very clean
> >and transparent.
>
>
> >I really wanted to demonstrate the night and day difference between
> >these compressors.
>
> 163's lone "more" slider, how was it set up? A good compressor should
> give you enough rope to hang yourself and perhaps you did??? Again,
> perhaps you're used to running the attack and release time knobs near
> minimum because the 3630 minimum time constants are generously long
> and they only sound good when set near minimum. Try working in the
> upper 1/2 range and see if it sounds any different.
>
> >However, I am very dubious about some of
> >you and your endless praise for the rnc. This rnc story sort of reminds
> >me of the that old story about the emperor's new clothes.
>
> Again, what settings did you use?
>
> >This spike at the beginning of a compressed waveform is caused by an
> >insufficient attack time.
>
> fact, if you use a _longer_ attack time, they turn from spikes into
> little bits of tasty, punchy signal attacks and that stuff can make a
> recording sound more exciting. In fact, it's a great way to use a
> compressor to make a signal _more_ punchy while controlling the
> average level. Too fast of an attack time and the tasty pumpy signal
> scales down to pumped up portions of a waveform, and those can sound
> like clicks. Again, use a longer attack time!!!
>
> If you make the attack time _extremely_ short, you can avoid the
> spikes completely, but then your signal is hammered flat and probably
> sounds uselessly smooth and dull. You also get a lot of modulation
> artifacts. The digital way to avoid overshoot is to use lookahead,
> but that simply doesn't work well on analog.
>
> I'd like to suggest that you try a few different types of compression
> settings and see if there are others that are more appropriate. From
> what I've heard here, the RNC wants to be run as a full program
> compressor with a low ratio, low threshold and medium time constants.
> By 'medium', I'd say 20-100ms attack, 10-100ms release, or something
> like that. Again, I don't know the RNC and I'm completely guessing as
> to what the time constants really mean; the scaling of that parameter
> is definitely not comparable across different compressors. But, try
> using that sort of a setting instead of sub ms. time constants with a
> high ratio setting and see if it sounds better.
>
> If you still don't like it, I'll buy it off of you. I've been meaning
> to try one and now I'm really curious!
>
> Take care,
>
> Monte McGuire
> mcg...@world.std.com
I cant believe all the debate over low priced compressors. Thats right I
said low priced, whats your studio gear worth (mixing board, recorders,
mikes) $5,000.00, $7,0000.00, $10,000.00 plus !!!!. And we all want a
$250.00 compressor to preform miracles, Well ya get what you pay for!!!
yes its nice to get a great piece of gear for a great price but lets be
realistic about is limitations if you want a great compressor ya gonna
hafta spend the bucks for one,end of story.
lxh2
Read on and I will insert my comments
Monte P McGuire wrote:
>
> In article <352E46...@netaxs.com>, lxh2 <lx...@netaxs.com> wrote:
> > RNC: Snapping artifact especially when used with bass guitar or any
> >other transient program matereal made more obvious at high compression
> >settings. Un-natural release charicteristics. You can hear this thing
> >even at the most mild settings.
>
> Although I've never heard or used an RNC, from your description of the
> things you dislike about the RNC, I think I can offer some insight.
> That snapping sound could be because you're using way too fast of an
> attack or release time with a low frequency rich signal.
This is where we get into the area of psychoacoustics. It is my findings
that the spike is due to the inability of the compressor to respond to
the sharp transients.
Setting the attack time much slower results in a different type of
effect that allows the transient through unaltered but changes the
relationship of the transient with respect to the rest of the note.
However, the transient is as a result not limited at all. This not the
effect of limiting that I need. I have heard some very expensive
compressors that actually have an attack time sufficient to do the job.
I guess it comes down to the fact that you get what you pay for.
To answer your question, I tried all types of settings in my evaluation.
I know you would not do a review of a product having tried it using one
setting.
> > 3630: very squishable, few artifacts, even when applying maximum
> >control, very musical and natural sounding. No dulling effect,very clean
> >and transparent.
>
> Dulling effect is a symptom of too fast of an attack time...
>
There is no actual dulling happening when you have a sufficient attack
time. It is a result of the spike being entirely dealt with. This
quickness just does not happen with cheap compressors. If you ever heard
a compressor that has an attack time of 5 microseconds and an adjustable
release time, you will experience the most incredible drum sound. Gosh,
we hear it all the time on commercially released cd's. These are the
compressors that the mastering houses use to do their magic. One should
never think that a $200 compressor is going to do that.
> >I really wanted to demonstrate the night and day difference between
> >these compressors.
>
> Given that the RNC has a few more operating parameters than the dbx
> 163's lone "more" slider, how was it set up? A good compressor should
> give you enough rope to hang yourself and perhaps you did??? Again,
> perhaps you're used to running the attack and release time knobs near
> minimum because the 3630 minimum time constants are generously long
> and they only sound good when set near minimum. Try working in the
> upper 1/2 range and see if it sounds any different.
As I said, We tried all variations.
> >However, I am very dubious about some of
> >you and your endless praise for the rnc. This rnc story sort of reminds
> >me of the that old story about the emperor's new clothes.
>
> Maybe they know something more about how to use the RNC than you do?
> Again, what settings did you use?
Perhaps not. And since YOU never even heard the rnc yourself, how can
you make such a statement?
> >This spike at the beginning of a compressed waveform is caused by an
> >insufficient attack time.
>
> If you see spikes, you're using _way_ too short of an attack time. In
> fact, if you use a _longer_ attack time, they turn from spikes into
> little bits of tasty, punchy signal attacks and that stuff can make a
> recording sound more exciting.
.....and less control of the transient therein.
In fact, it's a great way to use a
> compressor to make a signal _more_ punchy while controlling the
> average level.
......and again we lose the control that we use a compressor for anyway.
Too fast of an attack time and the tasty pumpy signal
> scales down to pumped up portions of a waveform, and those can sound
> like clicks. Again, use a longer attack time!!!
I think you're wrong here....
>
> If you make the attack time _extremely_ short, you can avoid the
> spikes completely, but then your signal is hammered flat and probably
> sounds uselessly smooth and dull.
.....this is your subjective opinion, isn't it?
Sometimes it is desired to lop off the transient and only leave the
remaining meat of the sound. You hear this all the time on commercial
releases.
You also get a lot of modulation
> artifacts.
Not if you set the release time properly to remove the modulation
distortion.
The digital way to avoid overshoot is to use lookahead,
> but that simply doesn't work well on analog.
Again this only your opinion.....
> I'd like to suggest that you try a few different types of compression
> settings and see if there are others that are more appropriate. From
> what I've heard here, the RNC wants to be run as a full program
> compressor with a low ratio, low threshold and medium time constants.
> By 'medium', I'd say 20-100ms attack, 10-100ms release, or something
> like that.
you are correct here...But this limits the usefulness of the rnc doesn't
it?
Again, I don't know the RNC and I'm completely guessing as
> to what the time constants really mean;
Indeed, the time constant markings refer only to what the manufacturer
views as his standard. For example: Does the attack or release time
refer to the actual time it takes for the signal to be reduced by given
number of db's? There is no standard here. and that is why different
manufacturers produce products with differing charicteristics even
though the markings on the front panel are the same. This kind of puts
that front panel calibration thing on it's ear, doesn't it?
> If you still don't like it, I'll buy it off of you. I've been meaning
> to try one and now I'm really curious!
I have had many offers, but I am going to keep the rnc. I show it as an
example of what can be had for $200 and what everyone on this newsgroup
is absolutely evangelistic about.
Rob Hoffman
lxh2 wrote: >
> There is no actual dulling happening when you have a sufficient attack
> time. It is a result of the spike being entirely dealt with. This
> quickness just does not happen with cheap compressors. If you ever heard
> a compressor that has an attack time of 5 microseconds and an adjustable
> release time, you will experience the most incredible drum sound. Gosh,
> we hear it all the time on commercially released cd's. These are the
> compressors that the mastering houses use to do their magic. One should
> never think that a $200 compressor is going to do that.
>
> > >I really wanted to demonstrate the night and day difference
I'd like to know what compressors you're refering to. Most studios are
filled with DBX, Urei and if you're lucky the GML compressor. Which one
has a 5 microsecond or less attack ? Maybe the GML. You started off
comparing the RNC to the 3630, now you want to compare it to compressors
that cost upwards of $2000 - $4000. It just doesn't do what you want and
I'm not sure it's realistic given the cost.
Rob
E.G. Wad
lxh2 wrote:
>
> Hi, Mike.
>
> I may perhaps try to elaborate what I expect limiters/compressors to do.
> Perhaps my application of compression differs from the way most of the
> readers in this group use compression.
>
> What I use compression for, is to prevent musical transients from
> exceeding a given level without creating the all too common snappy
> artifact associated with most compressors. If a compressor is fast
> enough to grab even the sharpest transients, this artifact goes away.
> However, the release time must be adjusted to be long enough to prevent
> the compressor from tracking the low frequency waveforms. This is easily
> done by ear.
>
> Why is it so hard for manufacturers to make availible a really fast
> compressor at a reasonable price?
>
> Obviously, There other uses and applications for compression which
> benifit from slow attack and reaease times. One that comes to mind is a
> gentle gain riding. Or perhaps when one wants to add the transient
> spikes to percussion instruments or the drums. Set the rnc to 10 ms and
> really crunch the kick, the toms, or the snare and you will get some of
> the most snappy results. If that is what people want, then that is fine
> with me. You can set the rnc for really slow attack and release and set
> the threshold really low and get a really punchy type of control for
> it for those applications that call out for that particular sound. It
> also can make a really nice doorstop or paperweight.
>
> overhyping is not mark's fault either. It is just the readers of this
> newsgroup who discovered a really nice value and wanted to spread the
> word. I suggest you all buy the rnc and be happy with it. I, on the
> other hand have been very happy with my 3630's and expect to get a
> couple more. Any of you thinking of unloading this piece of junk for
> really cheap?
>
> Do any of you want Mark to make available faster attack time on the rnc?
>
I don't mean this as a flame and have followed your various threads re:
the RNC and the 3630...
But are you trying to say that the Alesis has faster attack than the
RNC?
Apart from your other qualitative comparisons, I find this one
particularly strange, although I have the same two pieces of gear and
the exact opposite subjective response. I have also found the RNC
capable of really fast attacks. Really fast.
I have used a 3630 for about 4 years and the RNC for about 6 weeks and
the RNC to my ears sounds:
1. More transparent. Little tonal coloration. This really stands out.
2. No pumping noise. This is something the 3630 really gives me fits
with.
3. Capable of much greater compression before sounding unnatural or
"effecty".
4. Capable of faster attacks
5. More predictable settings.
I don't think the 3630 is as bad as many people say, particularly when
compared to what else was available at that price point when Alesis
introduced it. I am also always suspicious of something touted as "worth
10 times the money". I think that many people's rational reaction is "To
get something comparable to the RNC would cost 4 or 5 times what I paid
for it. The 3630 is worth about what I paid for it. They cost about the
same. Which one would I recommend? Which one would I buy again?"
For some of us who have a limited use of outboard compression it is
merely a question of finding the cleanest, most transparent compressor
within a finite (and low) price range. I had one question that I wanted
answered in my purchase decision making process:
"Does the RNC sound better than the 3630, Behringer Composer, cheap dbx
thing or anything else in that price range?"
After doing the comparisons my answer is a big yes. Your mileage may
differ, but that does not mean the rest of the world is deaf.
Lyle Caldwell
Mark,
You rock.
Lyle
Mark McQuilken wrote in message <35314A...@flash.net>...
>lxh2 wrote:
>>
>(snip)
>> ...certain vocalists and styles of music. I intend to keep my rnc and use
>> it for those applications that call out for that particular sound. It
>> also can make a really nice doorstop or paperweight.
>>
Monte P McGuire
In article <352E46...@netaxs.com>, lxh2 <lx...@netaxs.com> wrote:
> RNC: Snapping artifact especially when used with bass guitar or any
>other transient program matereal made more obvious at high compression
>settings. Un-natural release charicteristics. You can hear this thing
>even at the most mild settings.
Although I've never heard or used an RNC, from your description of the
things you dislike about the RNC, I think I can offer some insight.
That snapping sound could be because you're using way too fast of an
attack or release time with a low frequency rich signal.
> 3630: very squishable, few artifacts, even when applying maximum
>control, very musical and natural sounding. No dulling effect,very clean
>and transparent.
Dulling effect is a symptom of too fast of an attack time...
>I really wanted to demonstrate the night and day difference between
>these compressors.
Given that the RNC has a few more operating parameters than the dbx
163's lone "more" slider, how was it set up? A good compressor should
give you enough rope to hang yourself and perhaps you did??? Again,
perhaps you're used to running the attack and release time knobs near
minimum because the 3630 minimum time constants are generously long
and they only sound good when set near minimum. Try working in the
upper 1/2 range and see if it sounds any different.
>However, I am very dubious about some of
>you and your endless praise for the rnc. This rnc story sort of reminds
>me of the that old story about the emperor's new clothes.
Maybe they know something more about how to use the RNC than you do?
Again, what settings did you use?
>This spike at the beginning of a compressed waveform is caused by an
>insufficient attack time.
If you see spikes, you're using _way_ too short of an attack time. In
fact, if you use a _longer_ attack time, they turn from spikes into
little bits of tasty, punchy signal attacks and that stuff can make a
recording sound more exciting. In fact, it's a great way to use a
compressor to make a signal _more_ punchy while controlling the
average level. Too fast of an attack time and the tasty pumpy signal
scales down to pumped up portions of a waveform, and those can sound
like clicks. Again, use a longer attack time!!!
If you make the attack time _extremely_ short, you can avoid the
spikes completely, but then your signal is hammered flat and probably
sounds uselessly smooth and dull. You also get a lot of modulation
artifacts. The digital way to avoid overshoot is to use lookahead,
but that simply doesn't work well on analog.
I'd like to suggest that you try a few different types of compression
settings and see if there are others that are more appropriate. From
what I've heard here, the RNC wants to be run as a full program
compressor with a low ratio, low threshold and medium time constants.
By 'medium', I'd say 20-100ms attack, 10-100ms release, or something
like that. Again, I don't know the RNC and I'm completely guessing as
to what the time constants really mean; the scaling of that parameter
is definitely not comparable across different compressors. But, try
using that sort of a setting instead of sub ms. time constants with a
high ratio setting and see if it sounds better.
If you still don't like it, I'll buy it off of you. I've been meaning
to try one and now I'm really curious!
Monte P McGuire
In article <35310A...@netaxs.com>, lxh2 <lx...@netaxs.com> wrote:
>What I use compression for, is to prevent musical transients from
>exceeding a given level without creating the all too common snappy
>artifact associated with most compressors. If a compressor is fast
>enough to grab even the sharpest transients, this artifact goes away.
>However, the release time must be adjusted to be long enough to prevent
>the compressor from tracking the low frequency waveforms. This is easily
>done by ear.
Isn't that usually called a limiter??? The RNC isn't an RNL!!! ;-)
>Obviously, There other uses and applications for compression which
>benifit from slow attack and reaease times. One that comes to mind is a
>gentle gain riding. Or perhaps when one wants to add the transient
>spikes to percussion instruments or the drums. Set the rnc to 10 ms and
>really crunch the kick, the toms, or the snare and you will get some of
>the most snappy results. If that is what people want, then that is fine
>with me. You can set the rnc for really slow attack and release and set
>the threshold really low and get a really punchy type of control for
>certain vocalists and styles of music. I intend to keep my rnc and use
>it for those applications that call out for that particular sound. It
>also can make a really nice doorstop or paperweight.
D'oh! I guess I should have read the rest of the new messages posted
to this thread before I replied to your original post! You just
outlined what I usually do with a compressor and what I suggested you
try with the RNC... see my last post for the details...
>Do any of you want Mark to make available faster attack time on the rnc?
I personally hate fast attack times. Fast _release_ is another thing,
but fast attack is useless to me...
Regards,
Monte McGuire
mcg...@world.std.com
hank alrich & lanis lebaron
John O <jol...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> I cant believe all the debate over low priced compressors. Thats right I
> said low priced, whats your studio gear worth (mixing board, recorders,
> mikes) $5,000.00, $7,0000.00, $10,000.00 plus !!!!. And we all want a
> $250.00 compressor to preform miracles, Well ya get what you pay for!!!
> yes its nice to get a great piece of gear for a great price but lets be
> realistic about is limitations if you want a great compressor ya gonna
> hafta spend the bucks for one,end of story.
Well, my rig's not loaded with the big guns, but I have an LA2A, a pair
of API 525s, a Distressor, a DL241 and an old Ashly. Do I want more and
better? Yes, indeed. Does my RNC hold its own in this league, IMHO? Yes,
it does. Which ain't too damn shabby and still wouldn't be if it cost
five or six times what it does.
lxh2
Rob Hoffman wrote:
>
> lxh2 wrote: >
> > There is no actual dulling happening when you have a sufficient attack
> > time. It is a result of the spike being entirely dealt with. This
> > quickness just does not happen with cheap compressors. If you ever heard
> > a compressor that has an attack time of 5 microseconds and an adjustable
> > release time, you will experience the most incredible drum sound. Gosh,
> > we hear it all the time on commercially released cd's. These are the
> > compressors that the mastering houses use to do their magic. One should
> > never think that a $200 compressor is going to do that.
> >
> > > >I really wanted to demonstrate the night and day difference
>
> filled with DBX, Urei and if you're lucky the GML compressor. Which one
> has a 5 microsecond or less attack ? Maybe the GML. You started off
> comparing the RNC to the 3630, now you want to compare it to compressors
> that cost upwards of $2000 - $4000. It just doesn't do what you want and
> I'm not sure it's realistic given the cost.
>
> Rob
Oh yes it is. Because I find the 3630 to do a better job with peak
limiting.
I could only get the rnc to sound decent at low ratios and slow attack
and release times.
TransamAG
Hey- has anyone tried the MX30 (Drawmer) with RNC? This is a new piece down in
this category ($399-$425 street price) for a 2 channel compressor. I really
don;t know the answer but would like to. The reviewers all loved it but I
don;t know if they've heard the rnc.
Brad.
transamerica audio group, inc
Drawmer USA, Soundfield Mics USA, Brauner Mics USA
Brian Redmond
E.G. Wad wrote in message <35312E...@interlog.com>...
>
>That being said the previous poster alludes to an important point: to
>each gear its own. I think the composer would make a fantastic guitar
>compressor, and in that role what I hear as its limitations might well
>be assets.
>
I can back that. I pulled my composer out of the rack for a show I was
offered to play guitar for this weekend. I was going for a very extreme,
midrangy distortion. I grabbed a very noisy, static-y rocktek stomp box for
distortion and threw the composer on. it crunched it just enough to smooth
out the distortion and the gate responded perfectly. I've been very happy
with it for small amounts of compression on vocals, snare and mixes, but it
could be better on bass and kick drum.
Brian Redmond
Commercial Pain Studios
http://www.dreamscape.com/idea/index.html
hank alrich & lanis lebaron
lxh2 <lx...@netaxs.com> wrote:
> I could only get the rnc to sound decent at low ratios and slow attack
> and release times.
I am not having this problem.
Mike Rivers
In article <35310A...@netaxs.com> lx...@netaxs.com writes:
> I may perhaps try to elaborate what I expect limiters/compressors to do.
> Perhaps my application of compression differs from the way most of the
> readers in this group use compression.
>
> What I use compression for, is to prevent musical transients from
> exceeding a given level without creating the all too common snappy
> artifact associated with most compressors.
If they're transients and if they're musical, then the way to prevent
them from exceeding a given level is to turn down the volume. But
generally, to preserve the timbre of the instrument, we try to keep the
transient even if it distorts, in hopes that the distortion (which is
really there whether it comes from a limiter or a recorder) will be
breif enough so that we percieve it as a real kick, not an unpleasant
blap. If, before the limiter, you have the sound you want, you're
destroying that by using too fast of an attack time. A slower attack
time will allow the waveshape of the transient to remain. A faster
attack time will essentially change the attack of the waveform into the
attack waveshape of the compressor - which isn't necessarily musical.
Or maybe it is. But one thing it definitely isn't is the same as the
original waveform only at a lower level.
The action you're describing is a peak limiter, not a compressor. That
sits on the peaks that exceed a given level (assuming that they're
sticking well above the average level) and get out of the way fast
enough so that they don't affect the average level. This lets you raise
the average level without clipping the peaks in an uncontrolled manner.
But the peaks are still clipped. There's no way to avoid that when
they're short enough. But our ears let us get away with this.
> Why is it so hard for manufacturers to make availible a really fast
> compressor at a reasonable price?
Because there's no way to know what's coming until it comes. A digital
dynamics processor has it all over an analog one because it can store
the incoming waveform long enough to figure out what to do with it, then
control the gain gracefully and spit it out. If it knows how far up the
peak goes, it can calculate just how much gain reduction is required and
for how long so that the waveshape is preserved and only changed in
amplitude for a short time. The Waves L1 is an excellent example of the
kind of "compression" that you're looking for. But as far as I know, it
hasn't been implemented in hardware as an in-and-out box.
> I intend to keep my rnc and use
> it for those applications that call out for that particular sound.
That's exactly as it should be. LA2's and 670's are on the premium list
these days, but everyone who wants one wants it for a very specific
purpose, not to be the one compressor in the studio.
> It also can make a really nice doorstop or paperweight.
Naw, too light. You need a good ADAT for that.
> Do any of you want Mark to make available faster attack time on the rnc?
Not necessarily, but it would be neat if he could make a $200 compressor
with a crest factor control like the GML has. Ever play with one of
those? I'll bet you could find the sound you're seeking just by turning
that one knob.
Rob Reedijk
: E.G. Wad wrote in message <35312E...@interlog.com>...
: >
: >That being said the previous poster alludes to an important point: to
: >each gear its own. I think the composer would make a fantastic guitar
: >compressor, and in that role what I hear as its limitations might well
: >be assets.
Agreed. In fact, I now like putting the composer between the preamp and
main amp of the guitar amp. Two channels in series (but not linked!) I
can get some massive crunch this way. If I ever play guitar in a band
again, the composer will go into the live rig.
Rob
Andrew Tonry
Where is a good place to pick up the RNC? Mail-order..
sj-ryan (sj-...@email.msn.com) wrote:
: What i found... and i have both 3036's and RNC's, (no nano-comp's) is
: that the 3036's have a specific sound that some people don't like. It does
: very particular things with particular material, none of which could be
: called transparent (natural sounding). Alternately, the RNC exibits a very
: natural sound throughout it's range of settings. It can alter the dynamic range
: of the material without changing the 'sound' of it. This accounts for the
: comments of some who 'had to check to see if it was turned on'. If you
: check your meters, you'll see it is.
: So if you're looking for something to give you a compressed sound... and
: compression artifacts... look towards the 3036 type product (the're lots of
: others in this price range). If you want something that provides dynamic
: control without changing your material, the RNC can't be beat for five times
: the price..nothing comes even close.
: good luck,
: Steve
: Jerry Fletcher wrote in message <352D4D...@concentric.net>...
: >How do the two compare to each other? Are they similar, the same or
: >what?
: >
: >Jerry Fletcher
: >djfl...@concentric.net
--
- d r e w -
ka...@bluemarble.net
(stuff deleted)
>> devices at that! These combined slow devices are "rounding"
>> out the spikes you're talking about...
>
> This is also hogwash.
>> That spike you're mentioning that "sounds" better with the
>>3630 is being chipped away slowly but surely by the "slow"
>>devices inside of the
>>3630...
> Hogwash again.
----------------------
Excuse the newbie question. I also have an RNC that I purchased
from Mark amidst the (justifiable) usenet hype several months
ago. I also have a hog which I rarely wash. Should I have bought
a 3630? I really had no idea that this was even possible with a
compressor. Someone should have mentioned this in a shootout
before now!
Kate.
(not a user of DejaNews) I just had to this time because our
newsserver is down.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
R Krizman
mri...@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers)
>but it would be neat if he could make a $200 compressor
>with a crest factor control like the GML has. Ever play with one of
>those? I'll bet you could find the sound you're seeking just by turning
>that one knob.
That is a great compressor, but I couldn't figure out exactly what the crest
factor control was supposed to do. Can you explain what's happening there?
Rick Krizman
KrizManic Music,
Venice, CA
Li G Tsai
ka...@bluemarble.net wrote:
>
> ----------------------
> Excuse the newbie question. I also have an RNC that I purchased
> from Mark amidst the (justifiable) usenet hype several months
> ago. I also have a hog which I rarely wash. Should I have bought
> a 3630? I really had no idea that this was even possible with a
> compressor. Someone should have mentioned this in a shootout
> before now!
Hi Kate,
First of all, the RNC is a cheap compressor and so does the 3630. I
have to admit that there is a good hype around the RNCs, but it is
justifiable. One of the things you have to understand is that the RNC is
a compressor, not a limiter. It also aims to compress signals the most
natural way possible and at the same time, give the user total control
to shape the mode of operation. If you want quick attacks on peaks, you
need a limiter. The rnc is not a limiter, as there is still some slope
to the curve (25:1 instead of infinity:1). But yes, I have to agree
that I have a craving for a faster attack time. But you need a
compressor, not a pollutant (that's what the 3630 is). Maybe you should
talk to Mark and clarify with him your point of application for the
unit, etc. One thing for sure is that the 3630 is shit in the box. The
rnc sounds nice.
George,
Jerry Fletcher
hank alrich & lanis lebaron
Mike Rivers <mri...@d-and-d.com> wrote:
> I'll bet you could find the sound you're seeking just by turning
> that one knob.
Is that the $6K knob? <g>
Miklin Halstead
Li G Tsai wrote:
> ka...@bluemarble.net wrote:
>
> > Excuse the newbie question. I also have an RNC that I purchased
> > from Mark amidst the (justifiable) usenet hype several months
> > ago. I also have a hog which I rarely wash. Should I have bought
> > a 3630? I really had no idea that this was even possible with a
> > compressor. Someone should have mentioned this in a shootout
> > before now!
>
> Hi Kate,
> First of all, the RNC is a cheap compressor and so does the 3630. I
> have to admit that there is a good hype around the RNCs, but it is
> justifiable. One of the things you have to understand is that the RNC is
> a compressor, not a limiter. It also aims to compress signals the most
> natural way possible and at the same time, give the user total control
> to shape the mode of operation. If you want quick attacks on peaks, you
> need a limiter. The rnc is not a limiter, as there is still some slope
> to the curve (25:1 instead of infinity:1). But yes, I have to agree
> that I have a craving for a faster attack time. But you need a
> compressor, not a pollutant (that's what the 3630 is). Maybe you should
> talk to Mark and clarify with him your point of application for the
> unit, etc. One thing for sure is that the 3630 is shit in the box. The
> rnc sounds nice.
>
> George
>
George,
Unless I'm mistaken, Kate's application is not actually peak-limiting, but
washing her hog. I'm assuming she means one of the porcine variety (otherwise
talk to Fletcher), and in this case yes, the 3630 would be quite a bit more
suitable than the RNC.
While the RNC does have quite a variety of uses, as Mark has recently pointed
out, it doesn't have the built-in rack ears which are so useful in scraping
the crust and old bristles from the average pig.
Best regards,
Miklin
--
__________________________________________________________________
Miklin Halstead mm.ha...@auckland.ac.nz
Acoustics Research Centre +64 (9) 3737 599 xt 8542
The University of Auckland +64 (9) 3737 410 fax
__________________________________________________________________
Fletcher
lxh2 wrote:
>
> Over the last few days I have recieved alot of email referring to the
> rnc. It seems as if the majority thinks that the rnc sounds great while
> the 3630 is a piece of crap. However, there were no less than 20 emails
> that agreed with my findings, yet they were afraid to post their
> findings to this newsgroup possibly because of the evangelistic attitude
> of the rnc supporters.
>
> I will stick by my findings. If there are any of you out there that also
> found the rnc not to your liking, let your voice be heard!
>
> Also.....I am still interested in a few more 3630's......anyone wish to
> sell me theirs.........I didn't think so.
>
> Last time I offered to buy some 3630's here, there were no sellers. I
> wonder why!
>
> Possibly because you use them while your new rnc collects dust, like a
> Christmas toy a few weeks later. Hmmmmmm
>
You wouldn't happen to have a Hyundai with Mag wheels and air shocks
would you? Maybe curb feelers and undercaridge neon? Give it a portion
would ya...I've never seen any post in particular generate 20
e-mails...I get about 60+ a day, mostly on different topics...and with
the possible exception of information about golf balls, have never
received 20 e-mails in a month on the same subject, definately have
never received 20 in response to any particular post...
If you like your 3630 better than the RNC, godspeed, enjoy the fuck out
of it, make the best recordings you can and enjoy. I like Heroin, but I
don't try to ram it down your throat. Stop trying to ram your 3630 down
mine. This isn't a race, this is art, different strokes for different
folks...
Perhaps I haven't been paying close enough attention, but isn't there
room in most studios for more than one compressor? You seem to be into
this 3630 thing like some kind of religion...personally, I'm glad you
like it, I'm doing back flips with glee that it brings joy and pleasure
to your life...it's just audio, don't take it so personally, you'll give
yourself a stroke, and we'd miss you.
--
Fletcher
Mercenary Audio
http://www.mercenary.com
Jim Funk
To follow up the discussion about why we compress, I have been following
this thread and just had to find someone with one of these RNC's. It was
an hour away, biut I finally was able to listen to the RNC. I know I am
going to get a barrage of comments, but this compressor is really not
very good. We compared it to the 3630 just as that jerk r2d2 or whatever
did. We also found the 3630 much better in all situations. We also found
the RNC to have a strange release time constant that made it audible no
matter how it was used. To sum it up, we spent 4 hours in the studio
with this thing, and tried all types of music, in many applications, and
none sounded as good to our ears as the 3630.
Since I mainly do mastering, I have a keen ear for the artifacts that
cheap compressors leave behind. I would not use the 3630 on final 2
track masters, and certainly not the RNC.
hank alrich & lanis lebaron
lxh2 <lx...@netaxs.com> wrote:
> Last time I offered to buy some 3630's here, there were no sellers. I
> wonder why!
>
> Possibly because you use them while your new rnc collects dust, like a
> Christmas toy a few weeks later. Hmmmmmm
Doesn't your hand get tired of all the jacking off?
DPL
On 14 Apr 1998 18:57:51 GMT, rkri...@aol.com (R Krizman) wrote:
>That is a great compressor, but I couldn't figure out exactly what the crest
>factor control was supposed to do. Can you explain what's happening there?
I've not had any hands on a compressor with a "crest factor"
control, but from what I've read crest factor is an actual value
derived from a song (or any recording) that discribes its apparent
loudness. So, I presume to think that the control has something to do
with adjusting a songs apparent loudness. This is valuable if it
works well since everyone wants thier CDs to sound louder than the
next guys.
DPL
lxh2
Over the last few days I have recieved alot of email referring to the
rnc. It seems as if the majority thinks that the rnc sounds great while
the 3630 is a piece of crap. However, there were no less than 20 emails
that agreed with my findings, yet they were afraid to post their
findings to this newsgroup possibly because of the evangelistic attitude
of the rnc supporters.
I will stick by my findings. If there are any of you out there that also
found the rnc not to your liking, let your voice be heard!
Also.....I am still interested in a few more 3630's......anyone wish to
sell me theirs.........I didn't think so.
Last time I offered to buy some 3630's here, there were no sellers. I
wonder why!
Possibly because you use them while your new rnc collects dust, like a
Christmas toy a few weeks later. Hmmmmmm
> Not necessarily, but it would be neat if he could make a $200 compressor
> with a crest factor control like the GML has. Ever play with one of
> those? I'll bet you could find the sound you're seeking just by turning
> that one knob.
>
Stephen Paul
lxh2 <lx...@netaxs.com> wrote:
I have 2 Alesis 3630's.. I think they are junk and would love to sell
them.. Anything reasonable and they are yours,
Steve
Mike Rivers
In article <199804141857...@ladder01.news.aol.com> rkri...@aol.com writes:
> That is a great compressor, but I couldn't figure out exactly what the crest
> factor control was supposed to do. Can you explain what's happening there?
I started out to write one of my monthly Recording articles on what it
means (technically) and what it means in practice, but I decided I
needed to fool around more with a couple of different compressors and
limiters so I could give some examples and things people could try at
home without buying a GML (though I expect some Recording readers would
buy one if it got raved about enough). Haven't had time to do that yet.
Basically, 'crest factor' is the ratio of peak level to average level.
One of the things that makes a modern style mix sound good on a wide
variety of speakers is to keep the peaks high enough above the average
level so that you can hear transients, but don't let them soak up so
much energy that the system can't reproduce what follows the transients.
You can combine a peak limiter and an averaging compressor and by
adjusting the level of the peaks that you let through as well as the
average level, you can get the punch without letting the "loud" average
signal turn to mud. It's not magic, just common sense.
I intend to pursue the article thing when the day job settles and I get
some time at home to sit and play with some of my (and someone else's)
toys. Unless we get all the answeres sorted out here.
stephen
Li G Tsai wrote:
> One thing for sure is that the 3630 is shit in the box.
unpack it man - helps sometimes!
Eleven Shadows
there were no less than 20 emails
> that agreed with my findings, yet they were afraid to post their
> findings to this newsgroup possibly because of the evangelistic attitude
> of the rnc supporters.
> found the rnc not to your liking, let your voice be heard!
Apparently, this is exactly what they are *not* doing! <g>
> Also.....I am still interested in a few more 3630's......anyone wish to
> sell me theirs.........I didn't think so.
$175 and it's yours. Or better yet, I'll trade even up for your RNC, if
you haven't ripped it apart and placed an Alesis chip in there
instead...
--
Ken/Eleven Shadows
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* Eleven Shadows * ES songs on Real Audio * Music Reviews
* Travels-India * Tibet * Real Audio Radio Shows * More...
http://www.theeleventhhour.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chris Gieseke
Well, from what I understand ol' Mark has a money back guarantee if
you're not satisfied with his RNCs so it must not be that bad. But I
guess its not for everyone's taste. Say, has anybody used the Puncher
effect on Wavelab 2.0? A friend of mine just got it and DAMN! It
totally kicks ass. That new puncher effect seems like some kind of
compressor/limiter and it sounded incredible on some weak drumkit
tracks he ran through it. It beefed the hell out of them and was
extremely transparent with no noticable pumping and breathing. What was
very cool is that this effect held the previously inconsistent levels
rock steady. Simply amazing. Has anybody compared this to the RNC? I
know the RNC is mainly made for compression but does it have a similar
effect on 2-track mixes? I'm debating whether to fork over the big
bucks for Wavelab 2.0 or just get an RNC.
Any suggestions or opinions?
Chris G.
david
For youz guys looking to add to your cheap (& in this case used)
compressor collection, I'd recommend the Ashly SC-50. They often go for a
hundred bucks or less. I sure do like em.
david correia
celebration sounds pawtucket, rhode island
<cass...@macconnect.com>
lxh2
I remember the Ashly SC-50 very well. I only had the chance to use it on
a session back in 1980. Of course I couldn't afford it back then.
However, now that you have refreshed my memory, I would love to get one
now. I f you hear of any for sale, contact me.
lxh2
Dj George
huh...
lxh2...do you have rocks and pebbles instead of guns in your compressor
rack? Tell me about buying skank! I bet that if the RNC would go down
to $50, you would like them.
George,
note: not to be taken seriously or flamously
> lxh2