I have had a TX5c for about 3 years
I thought it was pretty good especially on guitar, plucked sounds and snares, which have all a pretty short attack in common. I did not really like it with synth basses (which was the main reason I purchased it in the first place). I absolutely hated the UX/UI on it and I only recently traded for a Neve 511 (and acquired a API 527 for synth bass compression duties)

3 Likes

Well, one advantage of all-work-no-play living (and not being able to spend money on bars and restaurants for the last 9 months…) is that I’ve got a decent budget for gear, so I took the plunge. Grabbed a Cranborne ADAT chassis, a Karacter and an Nvelope, looking forward to testing them out on a variety of sources :smiley:

I’ll be keeping an eye on reverb for some of those API modules, I know from the plugins versions that I like what they do… but man are they expensive if I’m thinking about getting a set of them.

3 Likes

A neat function on the Nvelop is that it can double as a shelf filter

1 Like

Good to see here lines ppl have such many responses on this topic.
I’d limit myself a 6 slots rack (cannot afford more even I’ll get it one after one), I will get either API 500 6B or Rupert Neve R6, still deciding which. Also tend to aim at major brands like API or SSL, so I can sell it easily when I have to.

I’m thinking of either one of:

  1. same unit of pre x 2, EQ x 2, compressor x 2
    For that I can deal with stereo (drum machine, stereo synths), and process the recorded tracks

  2. one single pre x 1, two different EQ, two different compressor, tape emulator, etc.
    For that it could be more versatile, but no stereo processing for mastering purpose

1 Like

It always hard to spend 2x on stereo but if you record audio in stereo (delays, reverbs, stereo filters) you need similar stereo pair.

2 Likes

i tend to buy in stereo pairs although i track in mono 75% of the time… but having two of a great eq is never bad.

@vinc i have both an api and rupert lunch boxes. besides the difference in interfacing options i notice no discernible differences between them so just get the one you like the look of better.

i got the neve because i wanted one in a rack. the classic api lunchbox won’t rack mount although they do have rack variations.

if you often mic in stereo i’d go for your 2x2x2 option as stereo preamps would be necessary but if you only use one mic save the other slot for something extra, like you said.

3 Likes

I can echo this. Recently added a 500 rack to my live rig and I tried out the TX5C and was supremely impressed by its build quality, etc. But I didn’t care for it on synth.

Also Nvelope is easily the best thing I’ve tried in 500. There’s nothing like it in eurorack and it’s an uncommon-ish thing in 19". But the quality of this module is so sweet.

1 Like

Don’t overlook the Lindell stuff. It’s on the low end but honestly the quality is well above its cost.

4 Likes

suggestions like this are super helpful… the process of trying to put together a “complete” lunchbox with name-brand stuff is just so $$$$$ expensive that having some well-reviewed cheaper options to start auditioning is a big deal.

2 Likes

It’s definitely daunting. I can’t believe how much I had to spend to get what I was looking for. As someone who flips a lot of gear, I’m really satisfied with realizing this goal. I think the enhancements to my sound are worth it completely.

Most 500 modules that I’ve used are packed with cool op amps and transformers that make the actually exposed module look like “the opposite of a plugin.” Like you’re really about to add some kind of vibe to your sound. Whether this is all placebo or not, seeing that stuff on a heavy-ass module is meaningful.

1 Like

There are a several great value makers in 500. Lindell is probably among the best in terms of good gear for not much money. I had their 1176 compressor and it was excellent. I flip stuff all the time and if I had it back I would use it without hesitation.

One of the techniques that’s worked well for me is to buy stuff used in the first place when I’m not 100% certain it’s a “keep forever” piece. The most depreciation happens between buying new and the first used sale. If you buy a Lindell used it will likely work as advertised and you’ll be able to sell it for the same price you paid for it.

Lindell is good stuff. The new Cranborne preamps are fantastic and low cost (and their ADAT or interface boxes can save you real money on cabling if you want). And though I haven’t tried them I wouldn’t be afraid of the DBX or Fredenstein stuff either. I’m a sucker for Sound on Sound reviews and if they review something chances are it’s a decent piece (and being able to link to the review is handy if/when you decide to sell it).

Like eurorack, it’s easier if you start by identifying why you want the hardware, what your workflow is, and how you want to build it up. It’s totally reasonable to start with used/low cost and figure out your workflow and then start upgrading in a way that makes sense for your own working style and your own taste—which trafos you like, if any; what kind of saturation you like, if any, which “desk style” do you prefer Neve1073/modern Neve/API/Electrodyne/SSL, what kinds of interfaces you like for eq and compression and so on.

2 Likes

For general Pre / DI duties (great results on synths and electronic drums),the API 505 is great: I often see these going for less than $400 on the used market (I scooped my pair for $350 each)

2 Likes

500 series is very intriguing to me. I have had great success at adding depth to my mixes by running tracks through Chase Bliss and Fairfield Circuitry pedals, re-amping thru a Supro tube amp, and using my old Marantz tape deck (sometimes for its warbley cassette sound, sometimes for its limiter, and sometimes for its slightly saturated pre).

All of this analog fun has made me believe that 500 series may be the next logical step, but I am on the fence between going 500 or going with an old mixer (like a Tascam M or Midas Venice).

Either way, my goals are the same. I know I want at least two channels of analog parametric EQ, two channels of analog compression and some transformer/color options thrown in. I know I want to add a bit more depth and make my mixes sound a touch less modern and less aggressive (for reference, I like the thick, rounded sound of Neve-like gear as opposed to the precise, modern sound of SSL-like gear).

The two workflows would be very different though –

With 500 series, I would record individual tracks into Logic and then send these tracks through 500 series modules in place of compression, EQ and colorizing plugins. I would also use the 500 series modules for light mastering at the very end.

With a mixer, I would record individual tracks into Logic and then after the ITB mix is in a good place, I would send several stems through the mixer and an end-of-line leveling-amp and do a final “performance” of the track on the mixer (although I do not have a ton of experience with this type of mixing). I am attracted to the hands-on potential of a mixer but this is certainly an old-school approach and a vintage mixer may turn into an absolute headache maintenance wise.

If anyone has been down both paths and can share some advice, I would greatly appreciate it.

1 Like

@BPCook I have both options available: the way that I look at my 500 racks is like a channel strip in a mixer.
I occasionally do route tracks from my DAW into 500 rack, then back to the DAW, but 90% user case for me is INST —> 500 Rack. —> Soundcard / DAW.

500 Rack chain usually consisting of a DI/Pre—> EQ. —> Distortion / Filter / Compression

I usually tend to use ITB compression when mixing, relying on hardware compression only when tracking.

For Master bus duties, I did not encounter many 5000 rack that do a great job, Elysia Nvelop + Xcompressor and Shadow Hills Vandergraph (which I do not own, but had the chance to work with) being an exception.
I.e. the Neve 517 or API 527, which sounds great tracking synths, are not so great at handling audio from a mix bus.

3 Likes

I was really intrigued by the Aphex 500 interface/lunchbox when that came out, but it seemed to get dropped/discontinued really fast. I’m sure things like the converters and cleanliness of the power and everything are significant upgrades on something like the Cranborne, but I can’t justify it. I tend to record using mixer interfaces in a sort of performative way, even using a very cheap one these days. That said I’m super meticulous about coloring/EQ type details so the Aphex seemed like a nice way to get some simple stereo recording while also being able to fine tune things in a way that wasn’t disruptive to how I like to work at a good price. Anyone ever use one? I still look for them occasionally, might try picking one up used some time, though I don’t know about driver issues or possibilities like that. Anyone making anything with an interface like that at reasonable price these days?

Either way works fine and has benefits.

Desk:
Using a desk will help all of your channels get the sound of the desk. These things are always cumulative per track so that is a fun way to get there. Also, depending on your channel count and/or patience for bouncing stems through the mixer, you get some analog summing which is nice. You don’t have to do all of the performance on the faders either if you don’t want to. Just animate the sends in your DAW.

If you’re working with a lot of headroom then it won’t make too much difference vs riding faders, or you can work with less headroom and use the DAW to animate driving into saturation. I use an SSL SiX for this sometimes and sometimes an old Tascam 688 if I want some gunk.

If your desc has an insert/send I would probably set up the patchbay so that I could track through the desk as well. That way the signal goes through the desk on the way in and also in mixdown. This assumes I really like the desk though haha!

If you’re going with a vintage mixer it’s good to be familiar with a soldering iron and how to read the schematics. They can be a nightmare but also they are usually pretty simple and straightforward, point to point or big fat traces on gigantic pcbs. If you get one that works and hasn’t been too abused you may never need to get under the hood except possibly to re-cap it.

500:
For processing individual instruments via outboard of any kind in Logic I have a template with sends etc set up and will often put a channel eq on the send so that any surgical or overall EQ is handled before it hits the analog stuff. There are surgical EQs in 500 that are great, but for me I work better if the “problems” are fixed before I send it to analog and then I let the analog stuff focus on the color/saturation/knob-fiddling that I like. You can have a lot of fun doing this, at least I know I do.

For mastering there are a lot of great 500 series items though they are often pricey–two channels. Things I use: IGS Rubber Bands mastering edition, Zähl EQ, any clean Preamp (I am partial to the AEA ribbon mic preamps for clean but the Cranborne’s could do this too if one would rather have a mojo knob than a one-way tilt-ish EQ) for makeup gain, any colored preamp for makeup gain, Serpent for bus compressor ala SSL, Bettermaker Compressor for DAW-controlled VCA compression (mid/side capable as well), I like using a pair of the Electrodyne channel eq remakes–super gentle curves and and the EQ freqs work well for me. I haven’t run any of the 500 optical compressors but they exist. I also tend to shy away from tubes in 500 series (on the mastering bus anyway). Colour Palette/DIYRE offers some subtle and not-subtle saturation options as well.

A person could build a very functional mastering lunchbox in 500 but probably not on the cheap; or maybe it’d be awesome on the cheap because it all depends on the kind of music anyway. Some things I think of as being better in 19" or only available in 19" – nearly everything I master goes through a Tubetech CL2A. But many elements are great in 500 – nearly everything I master also goes through 500 IGS Rubber Bands Mastering Edition.

It’s a great time to be alive and processing audio because all of these things are flexible and sound really good–digital plugins, 500 series, desks, 19", hell even pedals. Use the formats for the parts that make you happy. If you like the feel of faders start with a desk and augment from there. If you like the dials and switches and portability of a lunchbox then start with 500. Let whatever makes your hands happy be the start point and then you’ll use it and figure out where to go from there.

2 Likes

Great subject for a conversation - Thanks for starting it.

I see my next move over the next few years to getting a 500 box, specifically for compression and mastering. Anyone here work with much Neve gear? I’m thinking of getting a lunchbox followed by a Neve module every few months.

Though the Neve Portico channel strip might be all I need, too. (Other than the 500 series tape emulator which delights me every time I consider it) - but is there much “other” Neve to be found for preamp, deessing, and mastering for a vocal beyond the Portico II Channel (non-500 but all the stuff I’m liking) ?

Certainly wouldn’t mind jumping into picking up Pultec 500s! Regret missing out on the Moog ones.

2 Likes

taylor (or anyone else who has heard them), how do you like the 500 series EQP pultecs? i use the uad plugins and the warm audio rack clone all the time… tempted to get a pair of the real thing while it’s on sale but have never heard the solid state hardware.

The Cranbourne 8 slot ADAT box is the best thing I’ve bought in years. I love it. Now I want an audio interface to I can got out to it as well as in from it… My Apogee Quartet only allows the former.
While I’m here… I bought my first lunch box in 1995 or thereabouts and it’s still working. I just split my API pre/EQ pair after all this time sending 1/2 to my son in Glasgow and replacing my 550b with the API graphic (in my old age I’m finding graphic Eqs much faster and simpler). I bought a Heritage Audio 4 space box to house my now mono API channel. I’m very happy with it.
I’m also in the Lindell Audio camp. I really like there passive Pultec style EQ and it sells for about 25% of Pultec…
Here’s my current set up. My modular runs through the TK Audio bus compressor most of the time.

5 Likes

I run my Cranborne ADAT into an RME Babyface Pro. Gives me (even more) headphones, a couple Instrument input channels, a couple XLR with clean pre, MIDI in/out, and monitor speaker/line out in a very small footprint.

Also, the entire thing can serve as a very luggable location recording unit (I flip the handles/rack ears on the Cranborne into lugging mode). Backpack for mics, RME, laptop, cables and one hand for the Cranborne (other hand for a Nagra which gets fed the sum from the Cranborne if I am feeling strong).

I love seeing all those graphic EQs! Do you self-patch the system into the TK on the end? Could probably parallel compress using the Aux blend.

1 Like