|
Sasha redefines his studio environment with SSL equipment (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Ry Thomas |
| I read in CM Sasha has 2 fully kitted out studios and a team of about 5 people between the 2 studios |
|
|
| Eric J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ry Thomas
I read in CM Sasha has 2 fully kitted out studios and a team of about 5 people between the 2 studios |
The article only mentions 3, but I have no doubt that he has had many people working with him over the years. In fact, one of his crew has been one of my favorite producers for some time: The venerable Charlie May, better known to some as Spooky. He doesn't have a huge back catalog of work, but the stuff he has put out under his own name has always been in the top tier of dance tracks. Quality over quantity. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Eric J
The article only mentions 3, but I have no doubt that he has had many people working with him over the years. In fact, one of his crew has been one of my favorite producers for some time: The venerable Charlie May, better known to some as Spooky. He doesn't have a huge back catalog of work, but the stuff he has put out under his own name has always been in the top tier of dance tracks. Quality over quantity. |
Love Charlie May's productions. |
|
|
| farris |
| Small room in the first picture. Wouldn't that introduce some acoustical problems (like standing waves etc.)? |
|
|
| Eric J |
| quote: | Originally posted by farris
Small room in the first picture. Wouldn't that introduce some acoustical problems (like standing waves etc.)? |
It is likely that is a compositional room only, and that mixdowns are done in a more acoustically sound room, such as the one in the other pictures. |
|
|
| kitphillips |
I like sasha but this is really overkill given that he doesn't use that many acoustic instruments in his work...
Eric J, what is the SSL alphalink? Its not a converter is it? I've seen the name tossed around and am curious....
I really like the idea of these little miniracks though, you could stash a whole bunch of different preamps in there and have plenty of variety... |
|
|
| Eric J |
| quote: | Originally posted by kitphillips
Eric J, what is the SSL alphalink? Its not a converter is it? I've seen the name tossed around and am curious....
|
Yes, it is an AD/DA converter. 24 I/O with ADAT and a few other options like MADI depending on which configuration you go with. It can be used either as a standalone converter ot as the audio interface for your workstation.
Here is the link for the product:
http://www.solid-state-logic.com/mu...-Link/index.asp
They are most likely going into the RME Firface via ADAT with it OR they are going directly into the computer using a Mixpander card or MADI.
| quote: | Originally posted by kitphillips
I really like the idea of these little miniracks though, you could stash a whole bunch of different preamps in there and have plenty of variety... |
Yeah, I really love the X-Rack. My audio guy turned my on to one a while back. However, at $10,000 for a fully loaded rack, I fear that the unit will remain forever in the realms of my dreams. I don't ever really see a situation where I'd be able to afford something like that unless I win the lottery or something. :)
Still, its a freaking SSL unit, so its not like you aren't getting top quality for that money. |
|
|
| kitphillips |
Well, we can still fantasise though:)
So whats the advantage of running the SSL into the RME? Does the SSL not have firewire and is just serving as a frontend for the RME? In which case why not just use a motu or even M audio wth digital ins? Or would that degrade the quality?
This is something I've been wondering for a while... |
|
|
| dannib |
| quote: | | I like sasha but this is really overkill given that he doesn't use that many acoustic instruments in his work |
It isn't overkill at all imo. Lots and lots of electronic artists have setups that far exceed that. Have you tried summing out of the box using top quality gear and excellent outboard equipment. i have and can tell you that the sound quality has a more 3 dimentional sound (hard to put into words). Usually a tighter bottom end and things tend to "gel" together better.
Everything is way more hands on also, which imo gives a better workflow thus helping creativity.
If anyone for example has a virus ti. Running the sound through the usb and into the computer will not compare soundwise to using the analog outs through an excellent pre-amp, into good quality converters. The difference is actually huge imo.
Running synths, drums etc through pre-amps, outboard comps, eqs definately does make a difference, sasha has the money to do this so why the hell not? |
|
|
| Eric J |
| quote: | Originally posted by kitphillips
Well, we can still fantasise though:)
So whats the advantage of running the SSL into the RME?
|
It all depends on if they are using the Alpha Link as a stand alone converter or as the primary audio interface for the computer. There are two likely scenarios:
- They are using the Alpha Link as a stand alone coverter, in which case they need to send the output of the Alpha Link to an audio interface that interfaces with the computer via FireWire or some other means (which the Fireface would do)
- They have the Alpha Link connected directly to the computer using MADI or the Mixpander card. Most likely MADI, as the Mixpander card is PCI only, and the newer Mac Pro's only have PCIe slots. IN this case, the Fireface is not needed.
The advantage to using the Alpha Link is superior Analog to Digital conversion. The RME or any other audio interface could certainly handle this, but the point of a unit like the Alpha Link is to get top quality AD conversion. The RME had good AD conversion, but its not even close to the level of an SSL unit. This is especially important if you are using outboard hardware because all those nuances that make the hardware sound good need to be captured as accurately as possible, otherwise there is no point in using the outboard hardware in the first place.
| quote: | Originally posted by kitphillips
Does the SSL not have firewire and is just serving as a frontend for the RME?
|
Correct. The Alpha Link is not a Firewire audio interface. If you decide to connect it directly to the computer, it can use a PCI/PCIe-based interface in the form of either the Mixpander card (PCI) or MADI (PCI/PCIe), both of which are PCI/PCIe cards. There are numerous advantages to going with a PCI/PCIe based interface versus Firewire, especially with high-bandwidth and high track counts. You'll find that most of your high end audio interfaces in this range are PCI/PCIe based in some form or fashion. Only recently did certain high end manufacturers such as Apogee and Prism introduce FireWire interfaces. Firewire is great for mid-level gear, but when you need maximum stability and bandwidth with high track counts, PCI/PCIe is still a tried and true standard.
| quote: | Originally posted by kitphillips
In which case why not just use a motu or even M audio wth digital ins? Or would that degrade the quality?
|
Once the signal is converted to the digital domain, then loss of quality is no longer a problem. The likely answer to your question is that IF they are indeed using the Fireface as the primary audio interface to the computer and front-ending it with the SSL unit, they may have chosen the Fireface because of other factors, such as driver stability, superior clock and digital input count. The Fireface 800 has 2 ADAT inputs for a total of 16 channels of digital input, so that matches up with the Alpha Link's 3 ADAT outs. They are probably only using 2 of the ADAT out's on the Alpha Link in this scenario
| quote: | Originally posted by dannib
It isn't overkill at all imo. Lots and lots of electronic artists have setups that far exceed that. Have you tried summing out of the box using top quality gear and excellent outboard equipment. i have and can tell you that the sound quality has a more 3 dimentional sound (hard to put into words). Usually a tighter bottom end and things tend to "gel" together better.
|
Exactly right. This is exactly why people use these types of setups. Running even a software synth through a good set of preamps and/or compressors will impart character and a fatness to the sound that can be difficult to achieve when using software alone. In some cases you can replicate it with software, but there are many cases where only using the appropriate outboard hardware will do.
For example, the UAD 1176 software emulation sounds great, but it's not even close to the sound of a real 1176. The reason for this is that we haven't yet developed the technology to perfectly model the analog circuitry that is present in most of these vintage units. We come close, but you can still tell the difference.
| quote: | Originally posted by dannib
Everything is way more hands on also, which imo gives a better workflow thus helping creativity.
|
Im not sure I agree with this. If you are a person coming from the outboard world, this may be desirable for you, but some people learned to do this in an all software world. For some, working with outboard hardware can be a royal pain in the ass. There are a lot of inconveniences to working with outboard hardware, however most who do agree that the sonic benefits are worth the extra hassle.
| quote: | Originally posted by dannib
If anyone for example has a virus ti. Running the sound through the usb and into the computer will not compare soundwise to using the analog outs through an excellent pre-amp, into good quality converters. The difference is actually huge imo.
Running synths, drums etc through pre-amps, outboard comps, eqs definately does make a difference, sasha has the money to do this so why the hell not? |
It will definitely make you life easier. If you know how to use your outboard gear properly, you can achieve sounds that sit better in the mix and do not have that digital "coldness" to them like so many software emulations do. I spend a decent amount of time with my plugins getting a "warm" sound, something that you do not have to work as hard at with GOOD outboard gear. However, it is possible.
The thing is that is all depends on where you want to spend your time and money. The advantage to working with GOOD outboard gear makes things easier from a sonic perspective, because you get all the warmth and character of a good vintage piece with very little tweaking on your part. The disadvantage is that you inherit all the long time problems of outboard gear. Messy cabling, lack of inputs, printing things to audio making them unchangable, no total recall, etc. Software removes many of those hassles, but it does so at the expense of sonic quality in many cases, and you then have to do a lot of extra processing on your sounds to get them to sound good. There are some things that hardware simply can't do (like Lookahead on a compressor), so you have no choice but to use a software emulation. So its give and take either way.
Of course, if you have crappy AD/DA conversion or crappy monitors, you might not notice the difference anyway, so if anyone is thinking of picking up some expensive hardware, make sure you have your basics covered first (audio interface and monitors). |
|
|
| kitphillips |
Thanks for that info, it cleared up a few things I was wondering about higher end convererters and digital inputs and things...
I don't agree about all tht hardware being all that important though, personally, looking at the tracks that have made an impact o me recently, I see that most of them were produced on fairly minimal setups. More and more people are going for the software only route. I can't see that they had that much gear, but still came out with really great records.
Also, please remember that he needs 5 engineers to run all that gear:wtf: Not only does that cost, but it also slows you down and you sacrifice creative control. So that hardware isn't at all easier to work with. It may or may not get a better sound, but if it does, I think its definately a tradeoff, not neccesarily one that comes out in hardware's favour either, especially given the evidence of hte number of people not using hardware but still making great records....
Of course, if I had the money, I'd definately grab a whole bunch of outboard gear:p |
|
|
|
|
