Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[,,deda,, Tim Porter]

 Pretty simple I have been "needing" a minimum 32 channel analog mixer for awhile to use with my 24 track Radar and my very adequate outboard and the following links to the description of 2  consoles that are basically the same price.

My studio's private so the music is rock from "Puck Tinged Common Sense" to Texas Roadhouse to acoustic finger picking my take on  pure Delta Blues with about a 50/50 mix of stereo recording my vintage guitars and recording the Culls meaning rock.

Meaning which console is going to translate best the styles of music on my plate.

The D & R Cineamax is I guess best described post console for film and with the 5 to 1 surround a given,

BUT it is an analog console and though not every function has the digital recall ability but enough do.

I have 30 outboard dandy pres, comps, effects and enough eqs I feel it should handle the rest, routing and a great patchbay.

Here's the link to the D&R console:

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gearslutz-secondhand-gear-cla ssifieds/484056-d-r-cinemix-console-fs.html


The other console is a Toft ATB 32 newest version with balanced outs with meter bridge a custom desk for the console that's very elaborate AND,

AND a great patch bay that has every and I mean every in and out of the Toft ATB 32 tied to the patchbay and 232 tie lines for my outboard gear.

The Toft ATB 32 link:
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gearslutz-secondhand-gear-cla ssifieds/442697-toft-atb-32-euphonix-artist-series-patchbay- hybrid-desk.html


Any feedback on the choices I am pondering would be very much appreciated.

Regards, ,,deda,,

[Tim Halligan]

A friend has the Toft and radar rig.

It rocks.

That said, don't be expecting all of the niceties of a LFAC...

HTH


Cheers,
Tim

[Wireline]

yes

[dandigby]

For what its worth, I've got a Toft ATB24 and am very happy with it.  Had a recommended 'minor' mod done (replace ICs), but have had no issues whatsoever with it, like the sounds coming out (not doing anything on the quiet side of life though admittedly), and really love the flexibility and routing it offers over how I was previously working.  Would love the meter bridge, but too scared to drill holes in the furniture!

[Seb Riou]

I have no experience whatsoever with he Toft, but been using a 14 years old D&R Orion at the studio for over 2 years now.

Quiet, very decent headroom, wide stereo image, ultra -reliable (NO breakdown since I have it), nice mic pre's (great transformerless sound), and most of all : incredible routing capacities.
The cinemix is the big sister of the Orion, so I guess it only gets better on everything.

A reaaly great tool

[seedyunderbelly.com]

If You can sit on both even short plane tickets would be worth it j

[Seb Riou]

seedyunderbelly.com wrote on Tue, 11 May 2010 13:58

If You can sit on both even short plane tickets would be worth it j

Hey john !
Sure thing, I flew from Lyon (france) to Amsterdam (NL) to try the console before buying.
I never regretted the expense.

[Fletcher]

FWIW, when I had a studio [which had a 32 input Yamaha PM-2k with a ton of mods] I always said that if I was ever going to change consoles I would install a Toft.

Just a thought, not necessarily an educated thought as I've not heard or used the "Digimax" but a thought none the less].

Peace

[,,deda,, Tim Porter]

 Thanks to all for your very important opinions that have been a huge help in my decision.

I have thought things through and after reading your opinions along with my other research I firmly believe the Toft would be a better fit for myself and various music genres I work in.

The recall would be sweet that's offered on the D&R but since my studio is private and I'm not working on a bunch of different mixes it's just not feasible to choose the D&R based on that 1 aspect.

Thanks to all again for taking the time to respond and as stated it was a HUGE factor in my decision.

Regards, ,,deda,,

[Podgorny]

That D&R is in an entirely different league from the Toft.
Onboard dynamics, proper automation and routing.

If you can afford it, it seems like a no-brainer to me.

[Fletcher]

All due respect, I've found "on board dynamics" to be more of a negative than a positive.  The closest I've found them to being a positive is on the 9098i, but even then it was a toss up [with the exception of the "on board auto-pannner" which is an AWESOME effect].

I liked being able to key the onboard gates on SSL's [which you can do in a bit more cumbersome manner on the 9098i] but with the exception of the "02" version of the SSL dynamic card [VERY early "E series"] the compressors were bad copies of DBX-160X's [in this reporter's opinion] and even the "02" dynamics card was really only great in parallel for snare tracks [see "Let's Dance" &/or Bryan Adams "Reckless" for details].

Again, I've not heard or used the D&R... so I'm only going by "racial bias" on the "not being wild about onboard dynamics" statement... but at the same time, every SSL "E" and "G" series desk I've ever used was heads and tails above [sonically] every D&R I've ever used... and there is no SSL or D&R I've ever used that was fit to lick the sweat off the balls of a 9098i [in this reporter's opinion, as always, YMMV]

Peace.

[Podgorny]

Like onboard dynamics or not, you're comparing a proper large format console to a glorified mackie. So even if you only use the gates from time to time, or compress some synth tracks, it's still worth having the automation, the recall, and the routing.

Speaking of licking ball sweat, unmodified, the toft is just "okay". I like the EQ, just as I like the 80b eq. But the pres are nothing special, and the mix bus is lacking in headroom. The meter bridge is a total afterthought. I'm a little surprised you'd recommend this console at all.  

[resolectric]

Podgorny wrote on Wed, 12 May 2010 01:22

... a glorified mackie. ...

Having tried the Toft ATB myself, i couldn't agree more.

[Fletcher]

Having tried the ATB, I couldn't disagree more about the "glorified Mackie" statement except for the footprint of the thing.  Different strokes I suppose.

[Kris]

If by 'glorified' you mean sounds a hell of alot better in every regard, then I suppose I could agree...  In that case you could probably say the same about the D&R I suppose.

[mixwell]

Wait......

Which Mackie Mixer has two paths per channel?

[Podgorny]

The Mackie 8-Bus (the one everyone refers to when they say "mackie") was inline.

[Fletcher]

Are you sure its "inline", I thought it was Mic or Line but not both at the same time [which would be "inline"]

[tom eaton]

It was inline, a 32 in has 64 inputs plus aux returns (and bus inserts if you really need them) available at the mix.

It's been a long time since I had one, but I know I used all 64 inputs on my 32.

t

[Halfway Competent]

Fletcher wrote on Fri, 14 May 2010 05:47

Are you sure its "inline", I thought it was Mic or Line but not both at the same time [which would be "inline"]

Each channel had a channel input plus a tape return. The tape return could be routed through the channel by hitting the "Flip Switch", or via a barebones channel-within-a-channel, Mix B. In that way -- via Mix B -- you basically could have simultaneous mic and line inputs going.

[Barkley McKay]

Halfway Competent wrote on Fri, 14 May 2010 15:40

Fletcher wrote on Fri, 14 May 2010 05:47 Are you sure its "inline", I thought it was Mic or Line but not both at the same time [which would be "inline"] Each channel had a channel input plus a tape return. The tape return could be routed through the channel by hitting the "Flip Switch", or via a barebones channel-within-a-channel, Mix B. In that way -- via Mix B -- you basically could have simultaneous mic and line inputs going.

Same as the Toft ATB, except the "input" is called the Channel and the "tape return"  the Monitor. Both inline as an I/O "Module"

Both desks have same topology, which is almost identical to the older Soundcraft Spirit Studio.

barks

[Jim Williams]

A Toft 32 will have a lot of buss noise. That noise you can't get rid of as it's permanently assigned to the stereo mix buss from the monitor inputs. Although the main inputs can be pulled off the mix buss via the mix switch, the monitor input pan buffers are permanently assigned as the monitor mute switch is placed before it.

The other main complaint is the lack of dynamic headroom on the stereo sum amps. There is a sweet spot at 0 VU. Push it into the red and it breaks up. Lower it and the noise floor eats you up.

There are fixes that I posted on that alternative web site, you know, the one that rhymes with "earbutts". It's a complete master module modification including the sum amps, monitoring and solo.
That mod allows you to push the stereo mix hard into pegged red land without break up. THD drops to .003% at +28 dbu outputs. The noise floor also drops but is still dependent on the monitor sends. To fix that, replace IC10 on the input channels with a National LME49720NA opamp. Add a couple of 22 pf caps across the feedback resistors and a pair of .1 uf mono ceramic caps from pin's 4 and 8 to ground. That will lower the console noise several db's. Replace the rest of the 072 opamps and the total console noise is very low.

[rankus]

Here is Jim's Mod for the 2 bus as posted on the earbutts forum:

Thanks for this Jim!

Quote:

TOFT ATB MASTER SECTION MODS: I'm getting a bit tried of reworking these, that gummy RoHS solder is a pain in the a s s. So, go for it yourselves. For the master strip do this: Change C39/42 to a ferrite bead. Change C40/41 to 150 pf NPO or polyprop. Bypass C38, 43, C1, C2, C6, C7, C62, C61, C60, C59, C3, C4, C57, C58 with a wire. Also bypass C50, C49, C18, C17, C36 and C37. Add a 10 pf NPO cap across R88, R101, R13, R3, R2, R113, R122. Change C10, C15 to 22pf NPO ceramic. Change C25 and 26 to Panasonic FM 1000 uf 25V. Add 100 pf NPO ceramic cap across R144, R151, R140, R141. Change R84, R85 to 2k ohms, add a 100 pf cap across them. Change C9, C8, C5, C11, C13, C16, C34, C36 to Panasonic FM or Nichicon HE 220 uf 25 V. Bypass with Wima MKP-2 .01 uf polyprop film caps. Add local .1 uf mono cermic caps at each opamp's power inputs to ground, that's pins 4 and 8 to ground. Change IC1 to AD8512A. Change IC2, IC3, IC4, IC5 to LM6172IN. Change IC12, 12, 14, 16 and 11 to LME49720NA. That will drop that THD+noise spec to .003% at +27 dbu. CCIF IMD is even lower. It loves the red zone, it won't crap out. Elevated levels help pull the signal further from the noise floor. Stereo crosstalk improved from -58 db stock to -75 to -80 db modified on a 24 channel. The 6172 output drivers easily drive 150 ohms, the stock console with 072's cannot drive a load below 2k ohms without severe THD and level loss. 600 ohm transformer gear is easily driven with the 6172's and the headphones crank too with 100 ma output current available. The low end is flat to below 2 hz so no more phase shift. The top end bandwidth was also increased while noise was lowered. Removing 20 or so electrolytic coupling caps got the fog removed. All mods were tested and confirmed on the Audio Precision System One. It sounds better than it tests too. Enjoy. Jim Williams Audio Upgrades

[ssltech]

Fletcher wrote

I liked being able to key the onboard gates on SSL's [which you can do in a bit more cumbersome manner on the 9098i] but with the exception of the "02" version of the SSL dynamic card [VERY early "E series"] the compressors were bad copies of DBX-160X's [in this reporter's opinion] and even the "02" dynamics card was really only great in parallel for snare tracks [see "Let's Dance" &/or Bryan Adams "Reckless" for details].

There never was an '02' dynamics card, the dynamics board has always been a '10'...

The '02' was the early equaliser, which was superseded by the 142, 242 and 292 IIRC, but the only '02' was always a brown knob EQ.

The Early dynamics was a '10, but was identifiable by the different VCA: instead of a dbx single-in-line VCA, it had an Aphex-sourced B&B 1537A dual-in-line VCA.

Much of the DC sidechains remained unchanged, but the VCA had to be changed when B&B stopped supplying the 1537A.

Other than that, Fletcher may well be right, I can't say I've ever really compared, even though I have both a VERY early E-series and a few later dbx-equipped ones here.

Keith

[ssltech]

Fletcher wrote on Fri, 14 May 2010 08:47

Are you sure its "inline", I thought it was Mic or Line but not both at the same time [which would be "inline"]

Seems like it's my day to quibble and nit-pick... -sorry.

The definition of 'inline' has nothing to do with simultaneous use of the mic and line inputs; it simply defines the tape return ("monitor") path and controls and electronics as being part of the same control strip as the input path... - the track summing amp too, usually.

For what it's worth, you can't use the mic and line simultaneously on an SSL, nor a Neve VR, nor an Amek 9098i...

Inline topology often offers useful stuff like one set of aux controls which switch between input channel and monitor paths for example; EQ also, and in the case of the three examples which I mentioned, onboard dynamics also.

Sorry to be pedantic, but several people to whom I've recently spoken haven't understood the meaning of 'split monitoring' (which I think is pretty important) and it helps to keep the definition of 'inline' clear, by way of contrast.

Keith