Quantcast
New SSL AWS 900 opinions... - Page 2 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
New SSL AWS 900 opinions...
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #31
Lives for gear
 
Dirty Halo's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] ➡️
Solid State Logic | Music

Well I like it obviously, but I have to say I'm excited about the new SE software which adds some cool new things.

Don't forget it is an analogue console as we all know and love and a DAW controller.

And the ability to add new features via software allows it to grow with you over the next 5, 10 ,15 etc years.

All the best,

Sam
Solid State Logic
Sorry if this has been covered, but what will the SE upgrade offer?

Also, I know there are some versions of 900s that can't be upgraded... or do I have bad info? If so, which?

I'm obviously testing the waters and interested in perhaps getting one, so please don't take my questions as negative:

I've had one engineer tell me he thought the onboard buss comp didn't seem to sound as wide and punch as the supposedly exact same one in the X-Logic single rack version. I could have sworn they are THE same build and design. Any truth to that?

Another, how's the headroom and general summing width, depth and imaging comapred to a G or E series (knowing this is more of a J/K design)... and that siad, does it REALLY hold up in the sound department to those?

Thanks for your patience and help.

-andrews
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #32
SSL UK
 
samw@SSL's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Hi,

All AWS can be upgraded to SE status. Non 900+ versions will need an upgrade chip (which is quite simple to fit).

Features include:

MIDI over Ethernet

AWS browser via Logictivity for Session management

AUTO CUE

SOLO Isolate

Simultaneous DAW control for 2 applications

Improved Monitoring options

Soft Boot

So quite a few new features to play with!

Very best wishes,

Sam
Solid State Logic
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #33
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
It sounds really good. Once you get your head around the workflow, it's really intuitive and integrates nicely into the modern studio. The speaker-management covers all the 5.1-options including bass management and calibration, that is a huge plus.

That being said, to utilise its full power, you have to connect everything to a patchbay.
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #34
Lives for gear
 
The MPCist's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] ➡️
Hi,

All AWS can be upgraded to SE status. Non 900+ versions will need an upgrade chip (which is quite simple to fit).
What's the pricing for the upgrade?
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #35
Lives for gear
 
Tube World's Avatar
 
5 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Love everything about it except for one thing....the mic pre's. Their ok, but I would much rather use Tonelux, Manley, Great River, Pendulum, even the Focusrite ISA pre's. However as a DAW controller, mixer, with great EQ on each channel, great faders, inserts, wondeful bus compressor, it's great. There are a lot of mixers I would prefer like the Rupert Neve console, however it does not give DAW support. So to have a large mixer and then to need a controller is a bloody pain, hence the attraction to the SSL. 900. I think the Yamaha DM 2000 would be a cheaper alternative, that is a great DAW controller, and mixer (especially with the improved plug ins they added. Their pre's are certainly on par if not better than the SSL. However there is something very special about the SSL and I personally prefer it. The API console allows you to add automation but it's not a DAW controller and it's limited to 16 tracks.
Old 13th February 2009 | Show parent
  #36
Jam
Lives for gear
 
Jam's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] ➡️
Improved Monitoring options
Sam
Solid State Logic
Hi Sam

What do the improved monitoring options add ?

James
Old 13th February 2009 | Show parent
  #37
Gear Head
 
Clairaudience's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Hi Sam,

I work on a Duality on a daily basis and have heard "rumors" about SSL software development enabling automation of ALL softbuttons. I assume the AWS is being covered too by the same software – are the Duality and the AWS software "compatible"?

Is it possible to join two AWS's to make it a 48-channel, software and hardware-wise?


Cheers

Martin
Old 13th February 2009 | Show parent
  #38
VIP
 
mwagener's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] ➡️
Hi,

All AWS can be upgraded to SE status. Non 900+ versions will need an upgrade chip (which is quite simple to fit).

Features include:

MIDI over Ethernet

AWS browser via Logictivity for Session management

AUTO CUE

SOLO Isolate

Simultaneous DAW control for 2 applications

Improved Monitoring options

Soft Boot

So quite a few new features to play with!

Very best wishes,

Sam
Solid State Logic
When will the SE software be available in the US?
Old 13th February 2009 | Show parent
  #39
Lives for gear
 
Dirty Halo's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
To MW...

Quote:
Originally Posted by mwagener ➡️
When will the SE software be available in the US?
Hey there Michael,

You're got large console experience I very much respect (Hell, just pure respect), knowing that you've recently gone the AWS route and seem to love it... how would you describe how the AWS compares to the SOUND of a large format console in terms of end product, summing, width, depth, imaging, etc?

So, taking functionality and it's dual contorl features out of the equation, just sonic results.

Your thoughts and time would be much appreciated


-Andrews


P.S. To add-- I'm specifically focused on mixing. Thanks!
Old 13th February 2009 | Show parent
  #40
Gear Maniac
 
castle's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tube World ➡️
I think the Yamaha DM 2000 would be a cheaper alternative ..... Their pre's are certainly on par if not better than the SSL.
Having used both, I have to disagree completely. The AWS900 mic inputs are sonically in another league.
Old 13th February 2009 | Show parent
  #41
Gear Maniac
 
Mathijs's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by USOMG ➡️
Hello C. Lambrechts.

In this biz since 1981 actually.

I have owned and managed businesses that have bought and sold SSL's, Neve's, Tridents, Ameks, MCI's, Sphere's and API's. Still doing it.

Seen a slew of consoles and manufacturers come and go in a quarter century.

Heard it all.

All.



For starters... Don't mean to be pedantic but... There are no capacitors to recap in the AWS900 "common signal path".

It's a DC coupled design.

More importantly:

Nobody I know of, can REALLY predict the future of this stuff... It's all conjecture...But the more you know about the past, the better prepared you are for those eventual and dreadful cycles of things.

Harbingers of what can only be described as 'trends' in this game...

And me.... Well...I can easily see an AWS900 commanding $25-30k in good shape in 6 or 8 years. It will STILL be 24 excellent pres, 24 excellent Eq's and 24 excellent motorized faders, with total recall and a full function center section, including the much loved quad compressor... in a compact, efficient, well designed and solidly built package by a proven manufacturer of analog audio equipment.

I, for one, am unimpressed by the current glut of 'junker' SSL's on the market now being used as justification for the "LFAC is dead" chicken-littles. It is comical, and sadly predictable that such a phenomenon would be used as momentary pyrrhic victory, or better yet, jacobs ladder of hope and justification by the brave souls who bought into the gigantic DigiMouse.

I wish you well. I truly do. I wish ANYONE who is crazy enough to buy any one device that costs more than $50k in this business well.

It takes balls to 'pioneer' any type of business strategy that is NOT based on the proven methods of the past. And pure tactile controllers as the centerpiece for working studios certainly qualifies for that distinction.

It may be "all the rage". It may be "working now".

But...

I'll check back with you in FOUR years.... JUST FOUR years... and we'll see who's laughing last.

I suspect, and I'd be happy to be dead wrong about it, that you may be singing a different tune at that time.

USOMG






This might be interesting for people who are considering an AWS in 2009.
Old 14th February 2009 | Show parent
  #42
Moderator
 
Trev@Circle's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
It'd be good to hear from people who have now been using them for the last 4 years actually!
Old 14th February 2009 | Show parent
  #43
Lives for gear
 
Jorg's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I dont think theres anything wrong with spending 50k or more on a console. Its got to be justified tho by the money thats coming in. If you make enough money (producing, mixing, writing or whatever the hell it is you do) then why not spend that money.

However I would never get a loan and pray that paying clients will walk through my door.
Old 14th February 2009 | Show parent
  #44
Lives for gear
 
tomdarude's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
wow....old thread back


now that one just gave me shivers....he surely would´ve deserved one and I think he would´ve LOVED the SSL Matrix and would´ve gotten one immediately

Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco D ➡️
I used one extensively for a month and liked it. Granted I didn't fully mix anything on it but it was very comfortable and productive to work on. Work flow was great.


2 years already...he´s dearly missed still.......

rest in peace david






off...diggin for disco d´s dvd....good night gents
Old 14th February 2009 | Show parent
  #45
VIP
 
mwagener's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Halo ➡️
Hey there Michael,

You're got large console experience I very much respect (Hell, just pure respect), knowing that you've recently gone the AWS route and seem to love it... how would you describe how the AWS compares to the SOUND of a large format console in terms of end product, summing, width, depth, imaging, etc?

So, taking functionality and it's dual contorl features out of the equation, just sonic results.

Your thoughts and time would be much appreciated


-Andrews


P.S. To add-- I'm specifically focused on mixing. Thanks!
Well, you can't take the functionality out of the equation, because then you end up with "just" a 24 channel great sounding console. Without the DAW control and combination of DAW functions and analog functions the console would be too small, in terms of channel count. One has to have the ability to combine tracks to stems for mixing.

Looking at pure sonics: I have done a lot of testing with summing boxes of all kinds before I made my decission to get the AWS. I used the same mix in Nuendo, brought out to 14 stems (7 stereo stems). When listening back to all the different summing boxes the SSL X-rack created the most space "inside" the mix (besides a Creation Audio Labs modified Ghost). In other words I could hear a space around the vocals and other instruments, if that makes any sense. That's why I decided on the AWS, because it also gave me faders to mix with and the opportunity to mix analog, even if only wth 24 channels.

I brought up mixes on the AWS that had been mixed fully digital before (with stems) and just incorporating the AWS analog summing opened them up width and depth wise. It's that last little bit of depth that you are used to from mixing on a large format console, that I could never get with fully digital mixes.

I also seems that my other analog outboard gear is not quite as effective anymore when mixing through the analog channels. It felt like those analog boxes where doing more with less knob turning than they are doing now. I can't quite make sense of it yet.

Just wish they would hurry up and get the SE upgrade over here, the MIDI is a PITA.

That said, since I'm building the new studio I didn't have a lot of time yet to really sit down and get deep into it (will next week though), but the sound difference is obvious to me.
Old 14th February 2009 | Show parent
  #46
Lives for gear
 
PMoshay's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
The SE upgrade was supposed to be here end of Jan. I guess they had some bugs to work out first.

I second Michaels views on it.
My friend has a DM2000 that i have used and it sounds like a Yamaha console, not even close if you ask me.
But some people may prefer / like the Yamaha console sound........
I'll track with my AWS and nothing else anyday.

It's all about headroom.......... when you have it in the bus structure of a console (or anything) it makes you smile more and work less, and it opens up your sound.

Yamaha DM2000: Max out level before clipping +18 / 32bit internal signal processing
Freq response at 96k: 20Hz-40kHz
110db dynamic digital range dosen't mean squat when your analog section craps out first or your 32bit bus gets a flat.

SSL AWS900: Headroom +27dBu / Freq response: 20Hz-195kHz (always) / no digital limitations


" remember, it's always analog......... unless you can send and receive sound to a human without moving air"

Digital is a very good storage device or a transfer medium...... but Analog ain't broke
Old 14th February 2009 | Show parent
  #47
Lives for gear
 
Dirty Halo's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mwagener ➡️
Well, you can't take the functionality out of the equation, because then you end up with "just" a 24 channel great sounding console. Without the DAW control and combination of DAW functions and analog functions the console would be too small, in terms of channel count. One has to have the ability to combine tracks to stems for mixing.

Looking at pure sonics: I have done a lot of testing with summing boxes of all kinds before I made my decission to get the AWS. I used the same mix in Nuendo, brought out to 14 stems (7 stereo stems). When listening back to all the different summing boxes the SSL X-rack created the most space "inside" the mix (besides a Creation Audio Labs modified Ghost). In other words I could hear a space around the vocals and other instruments, if that makes any sense. That's why I decided on the AWS, because it also gave me faders to mix with and the opportunity to mix analog, even if only wth 24 channels.

I brought up mixes on the AWS that had been mixed fully digital before (with stems) and just incorporating the AWS analog summing opened them up width and depth wise. It's that last little bit of depth that you are used to from mixing on a large format console, that I could never get with fully digital mixes.

I also seems that my other analog outboard gear is not quite as effective anymore when mixing through the analog channels. It felt like those analog boxes where doing more with less knob turning than they are doing now. I can't quite make sense of it yet.

Just wish they would hurry up and get the SE upgrade over here, the MIDI is a PITA.

That said, since I'm building the new studio I didn't have a lot of time yet to really sit down and get deep into it (will next week though), but the sound difference is obvious to me.
I very much appreciate your time and attention. Thank you.

Very helpful.

-Andrews
Old 14th February 2009 | Show parent
  #48
VIP
 
mwagener's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by rimskidog ➡️
Newer thread open here New SSL AWS 900 opinions... Easier to keep them together so please ignore my question.
Merged the two threads.
Old 14th February 2009 | Show parent
  #49
Moderator
 
Trev@Circle's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwagener ➡️
Merged the two threads.
Top man!
Old 15th February 2009 | Show parent
  #50
Lives for gear
 
rectifried's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
xrack summing

Quote:
Originally Posted by mwagener ➡️
Looking at pure sonics: I have done a lot of testing with summing boxes of all kinds before I made my decission to get the AWS. I used the same mix in Nuendo, brought out to 14 stems (7 stereo stems). When listening back to all the different summing boxes the SSL X-rack created the most space "inside" the mix (besides a Creation Audio Labs modified Ghost). In other words I could hear a space around the vocals and other instruments, if that makes any sense. That's why I decided on the AWS, because it also gave me faders to mix with and the opportunity to mix analog, even if only wth 24 channels.
To Michael W,
when using the xrack for summing did you do any parallel processing in the xrack analog domain or did you just send [say 2 drum] stems to it and treat them differently etc.
just wondering if theres something im missing with the rec bus/mix bus insert business on the master module..still trying to get a handle on the scenarios as i plan out a patch bay .
thanks
Old 15th February 2009 | Show parent
  #51
VIP
 
mwagener's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by rectifried ➡️
To Michael W,
when using the xrack for summing did you do any parallel processing in the xrack analog domain or did you just send [say 2 drum] stems to it and treat them differently etc.
just wondering if theres something im missing with the rec bus/mix bus insert business on the master module..still trying to get a handle on the scenarios as i plan out a patch bay .
thanks
I set up a simple mix in Nuendo from a multitrack file, no effects, no plug-ins, no eq, then send out 14 stems (or better 7 stereo stems) like drums, bass, guitars, vocals, backings, acoustics etc.. I took those 14 stems and send them through summing boxes one box at a time and recorded the stereo mix out of the summing box back into Nuendo, because that's the way I work in "real life". There was no analog processing either, just plain old summing. All the channels were aligned exacly to the same level, so that later when all the mixes were laid back into Nuendo they had the exact same level and level relationships, meaning I put an oscillator on each output, sending, let's say -12dB and it was aligned so it read -12 dB coming back into Nuendo through the summing box.

I tested the X-rack with both the 4 channel and the 8 channel modules and those two mixes cancelled out 99% when I reversed polarity, same with the two SPL boxes, which confirms that the levels were exact (and that those boxes are built to pretty close specs). When I reversed polarity between different brand boxes you could instantly hear a difference in sound.

When going from digital summing to any analog summing box there was a definite difference in width and depth of the mix. The differences between summing boxes were minimal, but enough for me to be able to make a decision based on my personal taste. None of it sounded bad, including the digital summing.

And no, I don't have those files anymore.

Hope this helps.
Old 15th February 2009 | Show parent
  #52
Lives for gear
 
PMoshay's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
In the AWS Manual - Section 4, page 15 (4-15) explains about the 2 busses and some of the possibilities.

"The Record and Mix busses have balanced pre fade insert points.
Switching
on INS switches the insert point into circuit, with the insert return replacing
the bus signal.
If ∑ is selected then the insert return is summed with the bus
signal.This opens up a number of creative options - for example you can
sum the output of another submixer or of your DAW with the console mix
busses without using channels or you can process some signals via the
Record bus, then sum the Record bus outputs with the Mix bus for further
processing. "



You can treat both buses differently very easily and sum them together, or bus things out and back in.
Old 15th February 2009 | Show parent
  #53
Lives for gear
 
rectifried's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwagener ➡️
I set up a simple mix in Nuendo from a multitrack file, no effects, no plug-ins, no eq, then send out 14 stems (or better 7 stereo stems) like drums, bass, guitars, vocals, backings, acoustics etc.. I took those 14 stems and send them through summing boxes one box at a time and recorded the stereo mix out of the summing box back into Nuendo, because that's the way I work in "real life". There was no analog processing either, just plain old summing. All the channels were aligned exacly to the same level, so that later when all the mixes were laid back into Nuendo they had the exact same level and level relationships, meaning I put an oscillator on each output, sending, let's say -12dB and it was aligned so it read -12 dB coming back into Nuendo through the summing box.

I tested the X-rack with both the 4 channel and the 8 channel modules and those two mixes cancelled out 99% when I reversed polarity, same with the two SPL boxes, which confirms that the levels were exact (and that those boxes are built to pretty close specs). When I reversed polarity between different brand boxes you could instantly hear a difference in sound.

When going from digital summing to any analog summing box there was a definite difference in width and depth of the mix. The differences between summing boxes were minimal, but enough for me to be able to make a decision based on my personal taste. None of it sounded bad, including the digital summing.

And no, I don't have those files anymore.

Hope this helps.
Thanks for the swift reply michael
some great knowledge
i was mostly asking about your daily work method when you were summing with the xrack.
If you did kick,snr,bass vocal, in the 8 module, mono switched or it was all just stereo stems...and did you parallel comp in the xrack somehow..or send identical drum stems and comp one with the inserts?..did you do ad/da inserts in the session as well?
sorry for all the questions.i like the ssl xrack form and have a few of the comps in my xrack there.which Im using in software inserts...<P>thank you again
Old 15th February 2009
  #54
Gear Nut
 
🎧 15 years
I would love to see Euphonix merge with Dangerous Music to combine an incredible console with simple, incredible summing- like SSL. Euphonix has a a few amazing consoles for DAW control, but I crave analogue outboard patching like the SSL consoles.

I think that Euphonix, Dangerous and Focal Professional speaker monitors will become to be the "future" of gear in serendipity.

Oh and probably count on others to join too ([email protected]#$)...

Eventually the stars will align and there will no longer be the gear in the way of making music, just options for color, tone and dynamics in the outboard world. The loudness war will end since you won't be able to get any louder!!

But I do love the SSL and what it can do -- it just needs the other ingredients to really make it forward looking and have a permanent future.
Old 15th February 2009 | Show parent
  #55
VIP
 
mwagener's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMoshay ➡️
In the AWS Manual - Section 4, page 15 (4-15) explains about the 2 busses and some of the possibilities.

"The Record and Mix busses have balanced pre fade insert points.
Switching
on INS switches the insert point into circuit, with the insert return replacing
the bus signal.
If ∑ is selected then the insert return is summed with the bus
signal.This opens up a number of creative options - for example you can
sum the output of another submixer or of your DAW with the console mix
busses without using channels or you can process some signals via the
Record bus, then sum the Record bus outputs with the Mix bus for further
processing.
"



You can treat both buses differently very easily and sum them together, or bus things out and back in.
...and this is an absolute killer feature. With this you can have analog parallel compression with either the SSL bus comp, the two dynamic sections or any outboard comp, or any combination thereof, when you are tracking or mixing. Thanx SSL, one might think they have been at it for a while. heh
Old 15th February 2009 | Show parent
  #56
VIP
 
mwagener's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by rectifried ➡️
Thanks for the swift reply michael
some great knowledge
i was mostly asking about your daily work method when you were summing with the xrack.
If you did kick,snr,bass vocal, in the 8 module, mono switched or it was all just stereo stems...and did you parallel comp in the xrack somehow..or send identical drum stems and comp one with the inserts?..did you do ad/da inserts in the session as well?
sorry for all the questions.i like the ssl xrack form and have a few of the comps in my xrack there.which Im using in software inserts...<P>thank you again
I only used the X rack for a summing test, as described above, not in my daily work. It led me to buying the AWS though. I didn't do ANY processing when I was using the X rack (or any of the other boxes), just straight out of Nuendo via the Euphonix MA703 converters into the summing box of choice and then back into Nuendo via the Euphonix AM713 converters with the stereo mix coming out of the particular summing box, very plain vanilla.
Old 16th February 2009 | Show parent
  #57
Lives for gear
 
The MPCist's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by sloanlogic ➡️
-- it just needs the other ingredients to really make it forward looking and have a permanent future.
Well, for one, nothing in this world is permanent and another thing is that in the meantime, most songs will still be mixed on SSLs... So maybe they're not as concerned in regards to 'small euphonix/dangerous' type setups that much....
Old 16th February 2009 | Show parent
  #58
SSL UK
 
samw@SSL's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jam ➡️
Hi Sam

What do the improved monitoring options add ?

James
SE software allows you to set a predefined or calibrated listening level.

Simply pushing the Monitor volume pot will recall that level (85db for me)

Also I 'm happy to welcome back Auto Cue!

Sam
Solid State Logic
Old 16th February 2009 | Show parent
  #59
SSL UK
 
samw@SSL's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwagener ➡️
When will the SE software be available in the US?
Very much hoping this week

Just dotting some I's and crossing some T's.

Sam
Solid state Logic
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #60
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Just a quick question about the AWS900.

For example setting up a stereo group of drums, a stereo group of drums for parallel compression, a stereo group of guitars and a stereo group of backing vox for example. Being able to control the volume of the stereo group with a couple of faders.

Would you need,

2x Solid State Logic | Music

1x Solid State Logic | Music

1x Solid State Logic | Music

Connect the 8 buss outs to the inputs of the X-Rack 4 Ch modules where you could use the insert points for outboard and set volume and then route the main stereo out back into a stereo in on the AWS900. Or am I way off the mark and this could be done by grouping channels together completley in the AWS900? I just couldn't see any buss inserts in the manual for using outboard.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 2 views: 1948
Avatar for Jim@SSL
[email protected] 16th October 2007
replies: 577 views: 33480
Avatar for kdm
kdm 1st July 2009
replies: 1030 views: 238539
Avatar for ghostwriter
ghostwriter 28th March 2021
replies: 50 views: 5731
Avatar for Animus
Animus 26th April 2010
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump