A&H ZED question

superk · Post by **superk** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:57 am

Brankis wrote:you don't need an expensive mixer, this quote from Juan Maclean on resident advisor gets to the point. I personally have the cheapest Zed (Zed14) mixer and i love it for getting that extra separation in the mix, mainly just with groups

How do you mean groups?

livecollective · Post by **livecollective** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 4:41 am

Ok, ill share this info:

I was at a recording session with a fairly big name at Fantasy SF, ...we were tracking/mixing on a 8000g ssl console. Look it up, its the same studio all the quintet miles davis records were recorded at (check charles mingus, herbie hancock etc. etc.).

When we tracked through the board, we used nothing more than the sends and the faders. Everything ended up untouched (unless by a micpre) into protools.

SO my point is, even at big studios you are seeing people not using half a million dollar desks as they should be. Its become obsolete.

Get a good mic pre(s) instead of analog mixer unless you are pushing to tape.

My opinion only.

coldfuture · Post by **coldfuture** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:18 am

This is only one man's opinion, but I have to say, mixing thru the zed r-16 is unreal.

And yes, it does sound different, much different, and to my ears much better.

After years of swearing by apogee stuff I dumped my converters on ebay and now only use the zed.

@livecollective: SSL has always been notoriously colorless, so its not really a fair assesment as you won't get much beef from that board anyway.

Run something thru a Neve, Soundworkshop, TLAudio, and as I stated my happy little R-16 and its a totally different experience.

The EQ section alone on the zed is enough to make a grown man cry tears of joy and gratitude.

Don't sleep peoples! This thing is the future that was the past.

edit: forgot to mention almighty API consoles/channels as possessing the ever loved "mojo"... those things get their swerve on! A deaf lemming could hear a track treated by API from 5 miles away!

hydrogen · Post by **hydrogen** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:31 pm

victorjohn wrote:This is only one man's opinion, but I have to say, mixing thru the zed r-16 is unreal.

I'm sure. Ive heard good things about the r16... but The Zed R-16 is not the same as the Zed-14. These have a very different feature set as far as i know, different eq's, more buss's, etc... anyways... it may be cheaper than a TOFT or soundcraft, but its still 4 times as much as the zed r14.

Brankis · Post by **Brankis** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 4:02 pm

superk wrote:
Brankis wrote:you don't need an expensive mixer, this quote from Juan Maclean on resident advisor gets to the point. I personally have the cheapest Zed (Zed14) mixer and i love it for getting that extra separation in the mix, mainly just with groups
How do you mean groups?

i just meant not doing a full-on mixdown on the desk. basically sending groups like (kick,bass,low perc, synth, hats, snare). This way i can still do group/bus processing in the computer and just send it out to the mixer for some gentle eq/outboard compression. The hi-pass filter stages on the Zed are very useful for clearing low end out of various channels without running a bunch of plugin eq's and such that can cause all sorts of issues to the audio.

Anyways, I find that I prefer the end result of a track that's actually been recorded out of the mixer rather than rendered inside ableton or whatever.

Brankis · Post by **Brankis** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 4:09 pm

hydrogen wrote:
victorjohn wrote:This is only one man's opinion, but I have to say, mixing thru the zed r-16 is unreal.
I'm sure. Ive heard good things about the r16... but The Zed R-16 is not the same as the Zed-14. These have a very different feature set as far as i know, different eq's, more buss's, etc... anyways... it may be cheaper than a TOFT or soundcraft, but its still 4 times as much as the zed r14.

they arent that different actually if you read on the A&H site, the zed14 is made on the same line as the others and uses the same internal parts as the more expensive boards. With the R16 you are getting a full audio interface + 16 mono channels for 2 grand. That's actually a really good deal if you think about it. Your RME fireface retails for $1299 so assuming they're the same quality, you are getting a 16 channel mixer for $700. My zed 14 only has 6 mono channels and cost $400. I think the price ratio is about right, so with the Zed14 you pay $300 less for 10 less channels

hydrogen · Post by **hydrogen** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:12 pm

Brankis wrote:
hydrogen wrote:
victorjohn wrote:This is only one man's opinion, but I have to say, mixing thru the zed r-16 is unreal.
I'm sure. Ive heard good things about the r16... but The Zed R-16 is not the same as the Zed-14. These have a very different feature set as far as i know, different eq's, more buss's, etc... anyways... it may be cheaper than a TOFT or soundcraft, but its still 4 times as much as the zed r14.
they arent that different actually if you read on the A&H site, the zed14 is made on the same line as the others and uses the same internal parts as the more expensive boards. With the R16 you are getting a full audio interface + 16 mono channels for 2 grand. That's actually a really good deal if you think about it. Your RME fireface retails for $1299 so assuming they're the same quality, you are getting a 16 channel mixer for $700. My zed 14 only has 6 mono channels and cost $400. I think the price ratio is about right, so with the Zed14 you pay $300 less for 10 less channels

yes... i understand... and i can see for your application the 14 does what you want it to... here was those differences that I wanted to point out.

EQ
ZED-14 features a responsive 3-band, swept mid frequency design with MusiQ - optimised slope (or Q factor) for equalising individual instruments. HF and LF also boast Xtra Boost, to make these frequencies more responsive.

R16 - Complete with two swept, fully parametric mids, and high and low shelving EQ, the ZED-R16 has a sophisticated equalisation section without rival in this section of the market. It has much in common with our class-leading pro touring mixers. Forty years of analogue mixer design has given us an unparalleled knowledge of filtering.

Preamps
Zed-14 Based on the proven pre-amps from the hugely successful PA series, the ZED series has new DuoPreTM pre-amps, which use a two stage design, with carefully controlled amounts of gain in each stage. When amplifying the signal from the XLR input, the gain range is huge - 69dB of range to be exact - and is very evenly distributed around the gain control, meaning better control of signal level. Most of the gain comes from the first stage, so unwanted noise is kept to a minimum. Line level signals are simply plugged into the second stage of the pre-amp by using the line input jack socket, which has the great advantage of less noise when using the line input.

The ZED-R16’s pre-amp, which has been specially designed for this application, has a symmetrical ultra linear circuit. The best epitaxial low noise transistors are used in the front end, and active feedback is employed in both phases before the differential amplifier. This results in super-low distortion, while maintaining low noise (-128.5dBu EIN), high CMRR, and a transparent and beautiful sounding pre-amp.

Still have to get hands on experience with them though. It would be interesting to test the different pre-amps have between the two and compare.

topperanza · Post by **topperanza** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:14 pm

thanks for the answers guys!
i guess i´ll have to wait a bit...