Видео

@Sunmoonstars1 You know, I tried the MBT and had really high hopes for it but I ended up sending it back. I was going to do a video on it but decided against it. It was one of those situations like our Mom's would always say "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all." I just couldn't get it to improve any of my mixes. It's definitely an excellent piece of gear and you know who I think it's really good for? People who work 100% ITB and don't use any plugins on their mix or master bus. It will 100% make their stuff sound better, and by a lot. But I already use plugins on my master bus and I couldn't get it to improve what I already had. It just made everything sound worse no matter what I tried. And I tried a few times with proper gain staging the whole way through. When I took all the plugins off my master bus and re-mixed the tunes mixing into the MBT, I could get a great sounding final mix. However, when comparing the mixes I did with the MBT to the mixes I did with plugins on the master bus, I preferred the mixes using plugins a lot more. There wasn't even a question which I preferred. The results were very clear. So I'd say if you haven't landed on master bus chain you like yet, then give the MBT a try. You'll probably be floored by how it improves your sound. But if you already like the sound you're getting but think this may bring it up a notch, I don't know. I'm not sure it will be the answer you're looking for.

@@LesVegasMusic wow really this is a bit shocking to hear cause everybody else on RUclips like Dom, a professional mixer, mastering guy and several others swear by the MBT even when you own the MBP they all feel adding the MBT works really well with the MBP EXCEPT FOR THAT ONE GUY WHO HAD THE MBP FOR YEARS IS THINKING ABOUT SELLING THE MBP BECAUSE HE SAYS ALL YOU NEED IS THE MBT - I wish I could hear the MBT in person linked up to the MBP so I could really see if it’s worth it or not. Yes there’s times I get great results using mastering plug-ins too for me personally and I know this is an argument that will go onto the end of time lol I always feel Hardware sounds at least 10% better when it comes to hardware versus plug-ins, thank you for your reply

@@LesVegasMusic just to share with you and of course we’re all entitled to agree to disagree and I respect your decision that you made for your own reasons but I spoke to someone who not named for reals is one of the probably top five or six literally legendary mastering people in the world and I asked him if he you know got the MBT and he said he did and he actually likes it for certain things he said the MBP has other advantages over the MBT which I agree but the fact that he likes it I know the gear that he has and he’s created his own original gear as well and he’s got plug-ins for giving his presets to the major companies. I just know I really trust his opinion and advice so Hearing you’re the opposite of what he thinks is really surprising, but I wish you all the best

@@Sunmoonstars1 I take no offense to what you're sharing here and to answer your question more directly, the answer is yes the MBT is worth adding to your MBP as it compliments it very well. That's what it was essentially designed to do and why they look and are named so similarly. They're part of the same family and go together perfectly. Like I said, the MBT is very good, it just wasn't improving my own stuff. I'm certain if I was working on other peoples stuff all the time, I could find some great uses for it. Keep in mind, mixing and mastering engineers are handed work of all sort that may need one thing, but not the other. When you primarily work on your own stuff like me, you end up developing a style and having a process. After trying it on my own stuff, I realized my process already got me everything the MPT was giving me and wasn't enhancing it any further. Again, I'm not saying it's a bad piece of gear. Have you seen these two videos where the guys talk about and demo how they work and sound in conjunction with one another? ruclips.net/video/3lW7e9DJ2x8/видео.htmlsi=PKKmd9c248tP8KXn&t=236 and ruclips.net/video/sLuKlSpUZe8/видео.htmlsi=L7KNa72cyqkxwIQk&t=667. Hope that helps. You should just get it and try it out with your MBP. If you don't think it's worth it, send it back. If you end up giving it a try, come back to this comment thread and let me know how it went!

@@LesVegasMusic I just got a great deal on MBT so yeah, I’m gonna try it out and hope everyone’s right that it compliments to MBP because if it doesn’t, I’ll be definitely returning it and I totally feel for where you’re coming from. Everybody’s got their ways, they taste their approach, so it’s all good thank you

@gerdmilano8137 Wow. That's the first time I've heard that. Thanks for your feedback. You must be a total pro.

​@@LesVegasMusic I thought this was about technology, which are originally intended to be tools.So I was not personally attacking you, neither do I require (sarcastic) validation of what I am.or not. These tools have pretty clear use for specific material. If the original material is already very compressed, what is the point? When I have a simple library string sound that is already legato, where in terms of freq and when in terms of time would you require Bricasti's reverberation and diffusion of the device? If you have a piano or a Jazz drum set recorded in a medium sized room, the effectiveness of a Bricasti or Quantec becomes obvious.Not to just a studio "Pro", but to ANY listener. Which is who we make music for, right? How we can hear and identify room informaton and space is not fully explained by science, Yet we all are able to do it. We all know when something sits "right". Adding reverbs to a recording and placing instruments on a soundstage is an art form, and somewhat science, just throwing reverbs on track is totally misleading and see how they sound in solo.... sorry.. it seems to be so besides the point and all about gear acquisition and zero about music.

@gerdmilano8137 where you're right is this video has nothing to do with music. It never claimed to have anything to do with music. It's simply a comparison of a very expensive piece of hardware, to digital plugins that directly emulate the hardware. I make these videos to give people who don't have the hardware, are interested in buying the hardware or who may never have the chance to get their hands on the hardware a chance to hear how it sounds. Then I compare them to more affordable and accessible plugins, so people know what they're gaining or missing by having or not having the expensive hardware. I give people the opportunity to experience both and make their own decisions on which to buy without giving my opinions in the video and instead, engaging in that type of conversation in the comments. I have bone dry examples of the reverb on vocals, acoustic guitar and electric guitar that were all recorded properly. I applied a tasteful amount of reverb to each so we could compare the sound of the reverb produced by the hardware and plugins. I think this video demonstrates that well and allows people to hear what the Bricasti M7 hardware sounds like. That's my goal with this video. If this was a fine art channel, this video is the equivalent of me comparing five red oil paints from five different brands to see which we wanted to buy. I paint five different strokes right next to each other so we can see the difference in the paint. Then you come along and say that the strokes were so badly painted that we can't even see the difference in reds. First of all, I don't care how bad of a painter the guy was, you would still be able to see the difference in reds. And no, the video would have nothing to do about painting, art, or how red paint should be applied in context to a specific element in a completed painting, but it would be very helpful to someone trying to decide which paint they'd like to buy for their own paintings. You just came on here saying that the instruments were so badly recorded, used the word tasteless, and said that I did exactly the opposite of what I should. I don't take that as a personal attack, but it does sound like you're trying to discredit me and this video. Perhaps that wasn't your intention, but that's how you're coming off to me and most likely others.

@@LesVegasMusic I like the example with paint.- but since it is not real instruments going analog to tape, lets use this analogy: You drew smith with Illustrator on a computer screen, then took a picture of that with a Hasselblad. Then you bring up a magic tool for 50$ only that turns the screen contents into a raw image file and let people vote what they prefer. I would laugh it wasn't so many musician souls who already don't make a ton of money are led to spend their dollars on these easy bake oven fake remedies. lmfao Reverbs are tools. For music

@gerdmilano8137 I don't understand what you mean by it is not real instruments going to tape? We have examples of real instruments being recorded straight into Pro Tools here. Your analogy is very bad as it doesn't relate to anything we're talking about. I drew Mr. Smith with Illustrator. Does that equal my friend John singing vocals into the microphone and capturing it in Pro Tools? Does the Hassleblad represent the Bricasti? If so, it shouldn't because we didn't capture anything with the Bricasti and the Hassleblad wouldn't process or add an effect to the picture of the digital illustration. And does the magic $50 tool represent the plugins? Well that doesn't work either because the plugins don't change the file type, in this example, they would be emulating the picture taken by the Hassleblad. It's just a very bad analogy that doesn't work. Any experienced engineer can tell by your comments that you have limited experience using analog hardware or just a poor understanding of how things work at this time. Also, you now sound like you're saying I'm misleading people and encouraging them to spend their money unwisely. What's the easy bake fake remedies in this example? The expensive Bricasti hardware or the low cost plugins?

@markhaliday Yes. Dimension and decay/tails as heard best in the synth examples at 8:22 is where I find the plugins seem to have a hard time matching the hardware.

It's especially a great deal at $47 this week!

@@LesVegasMusic Yeeees! And i picked it up!:) Am really happy with it !

@dimocka79 Alright! Good get! 🙌🏼

@thePunkRockMix same here. It was my first piece of outboard gear. I got mine in 2005. I was 25 years old. I had to sell it because as an aspiring musician and producer, I didn't have any money to pay rent. I also didn't really know what I had at the time or how to use it properly. I actually did just fine with it just by using my ears, but technically, I didn't know much about it and hadn't yet developed an ear for compression. Ever since then, I always wanted another one. When I made this video is when I was finally able to get one again. Thanks to zZounds. I find myself using the 6176 and LA-610 MKII more often than my Neve 1073's, API's and SSL preamps purely based on its versatility and the large, "inflated" sound I can get from it. You know lately, I've actually been using it with a vintage Shure 588SA Hi-Z dynamic mic from the 70's! I bought it for $35 on reverb.com. I'm finding the combination to be great for vintage sounding rock vocals. I just have a lot of fun with it.

@@LesVegasMusic wonderfull :) Ha thats a wonderfull story! thanks for letting me be part of it. I use it exclusivley with a neumann tlm 49 which i also used for electic guitars and the 6176. it really sounds good, everytime I use the box.

@thePunkRockMix I have a pair of the 611's too. They're similar in the way they provide good, clean, solid state EQ. The UV EQ has different color (or lack thereof) that's intended for broad strokes on a stereo bus. The 611's are better on individual channels. I definitely wouldn't use my stereo pair of 611's on a bus. I've tried it. It of course totally works, but it's not the color or character I'd be looking for on a stereo bus.

@@LesVegasMusicgood to know since I was really wondering which one of those two to get for bus processing. thanks!

No, really?!

@@NikolausBrocke yes, Sir. That's why no room size there

@darotm7628 I haven't tried it. Does Altiverb come with Bricasti M7 presets or do you have to load IR's?

@gabrielthesingingpilot Aha! There you are. I was hoping you'd see this one. I thought you'd find it interesting. Yes, you definitely have to listen with good set of headphones to really hear the differences. They all seem to be able to match the overall sound fairly easily on most presets. Listen for dimension and the length and quality of the tails. That's where I find the plugins have a hard time keeping up.

@kevinlentz7604 Yeah man. It's a real treat. Dave Pensado turned me on to it back in 2010. I've been wanting one ever since. Never thought I'd be able to get one. Only took me 14 years. 🙂

They're nice for tracking and a talk piece for Instagram photos though

I disagree. Hardware reverbs are just way more fun to use and there’s a certain weight that they have the plug-ins don’t it’s not a huge difference but it is a difference

@spane5mixline I think at some point, after many years of experimentation and experience, every engineer ends up wanting the best tools available at their disposal. We can all certainly mix without it, but after running comparisons like this one and making decisions on which you prefer on specific instruments and for what reasons, you end up not wanting to mix without it for as long as possible.

If you have Beyonce or Bruno Mars or Taylor Swift's kind of money then you just buy it because it's the most expensive one so it must be good right?

@@RealHomeRecording no. You buy 8 of them.

@@zenlandzipline hehehe

I don't think you are correct about that. Bricasti claims the M7 achieves convolution like realism but DOES NOT say it's a convolution reverb, obviously the other are which is how they can at all get in some kind of ballpark with the hardware. I own a real Bricasti M7, and I have Seventh Heaven which does a good job.

@@therealmusiclab Regardless of whether the algorithm is based on impulse responses, or a mixture of the two, scientifically speaking, the effects of CPU and DSP operations are exactly the same. It is not because the hardware DSP operation is superior to the CPU, and it is not difficult to extract the impulse response (IR) from the Bricasti M7 hardware reverb. )

@djGreenALERT yeah man. You know then. I appreciate that. I just want to share this with other people so they know. If they're fine with the plugins, then that's what I want for them. If they aspire to the hardware, then that's what I want for them. In any case, I just want them to know the difference since many may not be able to get their hand on a piece of gear this pricey. If they want it, I hope they focus and get it one way or the other. In order to have it, you have to make it a priority.

@@LesVegasMusic You did a fine job, and your passion for what you do really shines through.

@djGreenALERT Regardless of the reverb, how did the live drums vs the Addictive Drums 2 with Retroplex expansion compare?

@@LesVegasMusic We went through his 1176 and SSL desk, and AD2 sounded great initially. Then he played live after each pattern I chose. and the difference in quality wasn't really a surprise. As well as the clarity in the 12 to 16k range being more defined, the kick just couldn't be varied enough to sound real. It wasnt just the comparison of sound, but feel a real drummer gives you. Just the human element was .. The word I choose to describe the difference is .. The real drum kit was 'ALIVE'

@djGreenALERT Yes. Of course. I think that's the biggest difference. The drum samples today sound great, but it's hard to duplicate the performance. It takes a lot of programming or a really good e-kit drummer to compare.

Prove it.

@@Clarity-808 This is basic scientific knowledge. Don’t turn professional audio into religious metaphysics. Scientifically, CPU and external hardware are used for calculations. There will be no difference in sound quality. It is only the use of external hardware that produces differences in input and output.

​@@ricecookercat7444 Similar here; the plugin version sounds safer, not creating problem for next-step, while the hardware version feels unnatural in a consumer Bluetooth speaker due to its weakness in mono sound. For me the hardware is like a monster for convincing record investors invest more. I have invested in more than 40 pieces of super high-end hardware in the past 15 years, but I rarely use them anymore, except for the Neve preamp for vocals and a super high-end ADDA converter and some best selling bluetooth speakers(focal consumes my ear power very fast). A great workflow should bridge the gap between production and consumer speakers in typical acoustic scenarios without complicating the workflow further.Just my narrow opinion after owning all the stuff, the Brain+Ear+Taste+Conquer Greed are the best sounding ware.

The M7 also has digital I/O. There is not difference in sound with my M7's when using either the digital or analog I/O. The analog I/O is a little more flexible if integrating through other analog gear. Your comment holds pretty true for older 1980s era gear with inferior convertors.

@@billsimpkins6214 This proves that some reverb presets in the hardware unit and in IR software must sound exactly the same. The rest is the psychological effect of confirmation bias: sth. that costs 100 times must sound better. Technically this is not valid for all presets. If modulation is involved, IR falls short. End of the whole discussion.

Spreading stupidity, the hardware just makes the sound a little rounder during the ADDA process. In fact, you actually output the sound of the plug-in into ADDA once, and that's the effect, not any magic of the M7 hardware.

@@ricecookercat7444 This is possible, I am about to put a laptop with rme dedicated for reverbs on my analog board. The conversion quality may be less interesting than the fact that the reverb's conversion will not be converted in the same synchronized sampling rate. I know some Techno producers who SWEAR by using separate computers with VSTs and interfaces and mix them in analog for that same reason. Lets see, but lets keep in mind - dedicated processing of the m7 is pretty heavy, certainly more than a core of an m3 has to offer. But

@@gerdmilano8137 RME's adda is not good at all, it's expensive and poor... and has a reputation for being ugly.

@@gerdmilano8137 Friends who know how to play with hardware use apogee symphony and other addas. Who knows how to use RME, which is expensive and inferior? A person who understands hardware will use RME?

how do you send multiple instruments to it at the same time? you put it on bus and send all the instruments to that bus and then print that bus.... or print the entire mix with the bracasti on the bus.

@@barneyrubble8255 just using it as a send, and adjusting the levels of each track that I’m sending to it.

Spreading stupidity, the hardware just makes the sound a little rounder during the ADDA process. In fact, you actually output the sound of the plug-in into ADDA once, and that's the effect, not any magic of the M7 hardware.

@@ricecookercat7444 How many M7s do you own? Also I run AES digital in and out of my unit, so the AD/DA round trip isn’t even a factor. I’m speaking from experience.

@@OwensDrumming Many M7s have been compared by different engineers. After blind listening, there are many records of M7 being defeated.

The differences between the hardware and the Liquid Sonics shows up more with fast transient content, like finger snaps and hi-hats. The M7 can handle them without recycling artifacts.

Yes 30 years ago. Now, not so much. How do I know? I had two 480. Now I would never buy or use one.

@@thematsc sound to dated like the 80s or what?

Yea

Spreading stupidity, the hardware just makes the sound a little rounder during the ADDA process. In fact, you actually output the sound of the plug-in into ADDA once, and that's the effect, not any magic of the M7 hardware.

@@ricecookercat7444 You are arrogant, lacking knowledge and communication skills. Your point doesn't prove anything. And I won't waste more time explaining myself, I only debate with inteligible people.

Far better....? That's a bold statement. Let me be as bold as you, you would never hear a difference in a blind test mix between almost any of these plugins........ No that not a bold statement its a fact 🙂 The only thing a hardware Bricasti may do is make you feel happy, when you look at it :-)

@@thematsc its true i feel far happier looking at bracasti and using it on drums then i ever did valahalla lol

@BukaIbuMu Yes Sir! It's a good one! Thanks for watching and taking the time to leave a comment. I really appreciate it.

Thanks Mom! 🙂

@robshrock-shirakbari1862 Yes Sir! I know VerbSuite Classics is good for all the best reverbs of all time but you definitely don't want to sleep on the Bricasti expansion! Thanks for watching and taking the time to leave a comment. I really appreciate it.

@AirArtStudiosOfficial Agree on all points. However, I like I knowing I've got the best reverb possible on the vocal that adds the extra dimension I'm looking for in my mixes so I use it for that for sure. Everything else that's not so up front in the mix, I'd use Seventh Heaven all day long. Thanks for watching and leaving a comment. I really appreciate it. ✌🏼❤️

Well then you can expect the best result possible just as long as the engineer has a good set of ears and a good amount of years experience as a mixing engineer. Thanks for watching and joining in on the conversation. ✌🏼❤️

But with less stereo and less information in highs, very blurry after 12k

@danielkisel5661 You're welcome! Thank you for watching. You're taking about the UAD Avalon 737 though right? Not the 747 compared in this video. UAD hasn't made a version of the 747.

@LesVegasMusic yup you're right. I didn't notice that it was 737.

@danielkisel5661 ​​⁠Oh yeah. That's a good one too. I got it the day it came out when I was still using Unison preamps and UAD plugins.

@thePunkRockMix same here.

@Wishlake I feel you! That's why I did just that. And after making this video, I definitely won't be selling it. 🙂

As with most cases with audio gear, to obtain the 10 to 20 percent better sound quality you have to spend so much more. to get that. So as in this instance, the question is, if a studio can justify the cost of a Bricasti supplementing it with professional projects and studio fees, then yes by all means buy one! However, most studios are scraping by so not very realistic nor financially wise. I'll stick with my FabFilter Reverb and will probably use my Slate Bricasti samples more often now that I've heard a side by side. Thanks for the comparison vid BTW.

@seekhisface866 Well said! And you're welcome. Thank you for watching and sharing your thoughts. I'm glad it helped you make the most informed decision possible. The Fab Filter reverb is excellent! Last I knew, that's the reverb Tony Maserati was using on all his mixes.

@@seekhisface866 Yeah everyone talks about this extra % hardware will give you. But is it true? If buying hardware things make you happy it's probably worth it. Otherwise....probably not. This test proves that almost all of the pluggs sound great and the Bricasti ....it also sound great.

@bigtrecordingstudio463 Yes! Thank you. That's exactly the reason I make these videos. They're the videos I always wanted to see because I could never afford to get my hands on gear like this. Now that I can, I'm hoping it helps people make good, informed decisions and maybe save them some money.

@arturovidal5536 Thanks so much for watching and sharing your thoughts!

I thought the same

Awesome! Thank you @nicholasbalette6354!

@b.hornetiii.6771 I like how you put that. Yes. I think dimension is where the plugins are having a hard time keeping up. Thank you for watching and sharing your thoughts. ✌🏼❤️

Haha. What's your favorite?