PreSonus Quantum 4848 v.s. Burl Audio B2 Bomber | Part 2
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 окт 2024
- In this video, we compare the sound of the PreSouns Quantum 4848 to the Burl Audio B2 Bomber. This is Part 2.
Watch Part 1 here
• PreSonus Quantum 4848 ...
Download the audio files here:
ln5.sync.com/d...
Purchase the Burl B2 Bomber at Sweetwater
sweetwater.sjv...
The music in the video is by the artist Barry Dridger. Check out his music here:
Spotify - open.spotify.c...
Instagram - www.instagram....
RUclips - / @barrydriedger2905
** Hybrid / Analog Mixing Courses **
1. Mixing Hybrid Pop - www.homerecord...
2. Mixing Hybrid Acoustic Rock -www.homerecord...
For more mixing, mastering, and recording training visit
www.homerecord...
My Analog Mixing Services - www.mixingmusi...
If you are interested in learning how to mix music using a DAW and plugins only then check out my mixing membership "Mixing Made Easy".net.
www.mixingmade...
Where I get all of my gear, Sweetwater of course! They have the very best customer service in the business! The next time you need anything for your studio, please consider using my affiliate link below. You don't pay a penny more and you are helping support what I do here. Thank you in advance!
imp.i114863.ne...
Unfortunately the Quantum 4848 is not to be found anywhere now, even second hand. I wonder If the Ferrorfish 32 Pro is a good alternative. I've picked the wrong one and picked Print 2 as the Burl. Thanks for doing this Dave! 👍
That is the one I would get if my Presonus Quantums died on me. Its $3,000 for 32 I/O but anything else with that many I/O would be a lot more expensive
In the last video I had commented that the 4848 was the blue track and the burl was the green track because I thought the color of the transformers of the burl track had a more pronounced snare causing it to be more opened but I was wrong. To me the green track sounded way better than the blue track more open more 3d and the blue sounded like an ITB mix. In this case I would get rid of the burl converters and stick with the 4848 great video please do the high resolution videos I will stay tuned thanks 👍
Thanks for watching!
I compared them with my HD 600 targeted to Harman and I was right with my guess at the first part. Burl sounds wider and more dynamic. I think the difference is quite noticable and worth the price.
Then you should own the Burl.
I like the burl sound and always have, that said I understand why you would keep the presonus due to having the other gear you mentioned.
Thanks for watching!
Burl Audio makes amazing gear and the sound they produce is superior, in my opinion. Toward the end, you mentioned higher resolution, and must concur that there is a difference in sound. There is a depth and width that you don't get from the lower resolution. Not to derail the topic in any way, but in regards to higher resolution; I've recorded and played back in DSD at 5.6Mhz and that sound, to me, was noticeably better. My point of bringing that up is to address the higher resolution only, not to get into an 'audiophile' thing whatsoever. I look forward to the next video. Thanks, Dave.
The higher resolution thing only matter at the recording stage. if the song was recorded at 48K then mixing it in 96K does not do a single thing to the resolution or quality of that file. We have a video coming to explain all of that soon. don't believe that simply mixing at a higher resolution matter, because it does not. Its all about recording at a higher resolution.
I own those burls. And I print thru them.
I only have mix buss outboard gear and it def makes a difference vs pure ITB.
It’s not gonna make anyone a better mixer.
It is a sound I like. But the mix and sound of your mix on the 4848 is still really good.
I think your converters are a luxury to give it signature but it won’t make or break anything.
Thanks for watching!
To my tired 50 year old ears the Burl had a tiny bit extra in the low end, especially the kick. Very subtle though and certainly not cost justifiable to me if I was making a choice between the two units. Appreciate your efforts putting this together, I know it's a lot of work. Super interesting and really useful
Thanks for watching!
My take on those kinds of subtle differences is that if the burl is slightly bigger on the low-end or something like that, it's most likely nothing got a 1db boost or a saturation plugin couldn't fix.
There have definitely been some good converters and bad converters over the past 20 years, but I also think there has been a lot of snake oil that has been hyped up online causing many of us to question whether or not our converters are "good enough."
@@SaySomethingWorthHearing it’s a good point yes. I often wonder how some of the lower/mid priced kit would stand up here too. Throw me a sub £100 interface and it’s clear as day, but to my ear it starts to get foggy very quickly as you move up the price range to say £500+. I’m not sure I like colouration in the conversion process, but that might just be me.
Bro THANKS, I been in the market for a new converter. Wanting to move away from the Antelope Pure 2. After watching all your videos, I think I'll get 2 Neve 542's first. Nuff respect !
Thanks for watching! Glad the video was helpful
If you are running the Burl B2 at -18db post transformer, I would expect there to be very subtle difference between it and any other quality converter. The magic in the Burl is driving signal hard into it (thus saturating the transformer) and then using the B2 to attenuate the post-transformer signal before it hits the converter. In other words, there is way more color to be had in the B2 than what was shown in this video. Whether or not you want that on your mix is another question.
Correct, and I said that exactly during this Burl series. The B2 has a special sound when you hit it hard. If you want that, then you should buy that box and hit it hard. That's the point of that particular piece of gear. For me, I am not looking for another "color" type box. I have racks of that in my signal chain already, so the Burl is not for me.
Thanks for the review.
I had an avid HD system about thirteen years ago and bought a burl b-2 bomber which everybody was raving about.
I was mainly interested in how it sounded tracking my guitars in my home studio. I didn't think the converters in my avid IO sounded that great so was trying to upgrade my tracking setup. If there was a difference between the Burl and the avid, I really couldn't hear it and certainly couldn't justify the extra money.
I use rme now because they are just rock-solid with reliability.
I think we're at the point now that unless you just buy the cheapest thing on the market, you're going to have converters easily good enough to make a great-sounding album if your tracks and songs are great.
Think about when CDs first came out in the 80s there are a lot of great sounding CDs from those days and I bet the average converters these days are as good or better then the top-of-the-line ones that were being used in big studios back then to create those great-sounding CDs. It's a great time for home studio people.
I agree....anything over $1000 is going to be a good interface with good converters.
I always felt the burls were better sounding when used as an ecosystem. Same with the radar converters. Never liked the sound of either when listening to the playback from the daw two track but when spread out on a console they really come alive. With both i would print back on two channels. The old digi 192 always sounded harsh no matter what. The burls only had transformers on the outs so when printing a mix the two track mix was clean. The only way id use the burls is full io with a console, just magic. Strait to daw mixing I prefer a clean conversion.
Anyways there’s aspects of both mixes I like. The burl had more compressed transients and thicker lows. The quantum had more top to bottom extension. Both work.
Have you messed with hitting the burl at different levels? I thought they sounded good when hit a little softer.
Yes, I hit the Burl harder as well as conservative.
Burl sounds loads better to my ears - listening in a mix room on barefoot micro main 27s through d-box D/A
Ok, great! Thanks for watching!
I easily picked out the Burl as blue in the first video. It's smoother overall. The question is, is that extra 5% worth the difference in price? That would depend...
Ok, great. You guessed correct!
The burps are fantastic but yea, knowing you have the neves and ran through those, the differences were super subtle. The burl seemed to round stuff out just a hair more but small enough differences where even though pleasing, wouldn’t really make sense for your rig as you have it setup.
Thanks for checking out the video!
The Burl just seems a little easier to listen to for me -- a little less harsh. The personus is close but the Burl seems both a little more saturated and relaxed at the same time.
Great. Thanks for watching!
I agree they are close. I did a comparison between my Presonus Quantum and external high end A/D and D/A converters some time ago and came to the same conclusion. If I hadn't done it for myself, I wouldn't have believed it. Price wise, you're comparing a 32 channel Presonus box with a 2 channel Burl box. Price per channel for the Presonus box is ridiculously low, and the converters are really good.
Thanks for watching!
That's true for the price you'd think there would be a huge difference, really when you close your eyes on any of these burl dangerous neve, you get lost fast. i was thinking i needed the aurora n for my new summing set up, which i cant afford right now, so looks like if i just close my eyes i can buy a pulse 16 and pretend is an aurora n 16
The Burl has been around a very long time, when it came out it was a class above other converters if you was chasing a coloured type converter. These days lower priced converters have caught up in quality as tech gets better and in most cases the colouring effect is done in the mixing process using plugins. Converters in my opinion should be clean as possible with the best signal to noise ratio. Top of the line Prism's and the Lavry Gold is when you will hear a difference but they are nearly 10k.
Thanks for watching!
The snare jumps out to me the most between the two. Closing my eyes and focusing on it I could tell when you switched. I hear the snare in the 4848 thinner and brighter, with the Burl tighter, punchier, thicker, and sits much better in the mix. Knowing did not change my opinion, I liked the "blue" in the first video and still like it better.
Thanks for watching!
@@MixingMusicAnalog as you noted, the Burl sound, especially in this case, seems to be that it's adding compression to the track, so isn't that the real preference here? I'm sure I would love that presonus as much if you were compressing the snare a bit more, know what I mean?
I could hear the difference in your Part 1 vid. I'm just gonna say, IMO, it's not a huge. It's subtle but noticeable if you have a good monitoring environment (room, speakers and/or good headphones). A bit more depth in the lowend and something a bit more chewy (I don't know what that means exactly) in the lowmids/mids. Again, subtle. Most consumers listening on their ear buds or bluetooth speaker would enjoy either print and be able to tell one bit of difference or really care. All that said - I think I want a B2 -- lol!
The B2 does have a cool sound
I'm doing some serious looking into getting another converter/interface. I went from a Focusrite Scarlett to a Clarett+, and it was quite a noticable difference that I wont go back to any Scarlett. I figured higher end sounded even better. By other videos out there, I've heard the differences. Listening to Mixing music analog, it's so hard to hear differences that I have come to wonder if you are bottlenecked somewhere. Everything sounds so much the same. These comparisons don't mention how much you can push the converters - aka give a hot signal (that's very important). Once you go through a bunch of gear, I'm guessing you have to look into the specs of EACH peice of gear. If a converter can take 122db max input but your compressor caps at 118, then you can't push to the converters max. Am I wrong? If your chain is 120db > 118db > 121db > 129db = 118db max. That's on one level. I'm not sure what could cap stereo field. Maybe an m/s processor in the way like your SPL? Could this be why i dont hear much differences on all on your converter shootouts including the 4848 vs the x16? Could it just be the amps? The emphasis knob on the AD+ was heard well, THAT makes sense because of what it is meant to do. It's kind of an eq thing. I don't mean to insult your intelligence, but could I be right?
I think you are waaaay over thinking this. I am not trying to push the converters very hard because I dont see the need to do that as I have said in many videos and live streams on this channel. There is so little difference in sound when it comes to the converters, assuming you have a good quality piece of gear to start with. I simply dont buy all the hype around this topic and I have listened to enough of these boxes to be sure of that. however, some folks think differently and that's fine. I say, work on your mixing skills and forget about the ever so slight difference between one converter or another.
@@MixingMusicAnalog I'll go with that IF you tested the converters without anything in the way. No other gear. Otherwise I disagree. I think regardless if we agree or not, you are teaching all of us other things through this, and thank you for that. I'll maintain that pushing the converters is a very necessary test. If the converters can be pushed to 0-1db and still sound great for example, that would have me buy the AD+. That's what im looking for. It seems to really know for sure. i'd have to buy and take back on a 30 day return if i end up unhappy. Quick question if I may. Does the AD+ connect and send tracking to the daw through its USB connection, or was it put there to just turn off the clip in the daw? I ask because the Burl doesn't seem to have any method to connect straight to a computer. Thanks again.
We ca agree to disagree....thats fine with me. good luck to you! :)
@@MixingMusicAnalog Have you found the closest converter/interface to the 4848 that is available seeing how you can't buy the 4848 anymore. How was the latency differences?
I tried a null test on these 2 files, just to get a sense of the difference between them. The difference is quite noticeable, until I put a 12 dB/octave low pass filter at 20 kHz on the first file (Burl Audio). Then the difference signal drops to around -40 dbFS (range -42 to -37). Interestingly, the difference is not constant, during the first seconds the difference is way more important than the remaining of the song, but there are some smaller variations throughout the song. If the main difference lies above 20 kHz, I'd say it's caused either by the extra high frequency harmonics produced by the Burl transformator or by a difference in some LP filters implemented in the converters.
A null test in the analog domain really does not mean much. We did an entire video on this subject. ruclips.net/video/6ANUi_LplKI/видео.html
@@MixingMusicAnalog I watched that video, but I don't agree with the bold statement that null tests in "analog domain" are totally useless. For example, the level of the difference signal I got (around -40 dBFS) is quite comparable to the one your friend abtained by comparing 2 files in the digital domain but with just 1 dB of gain difference on the master bus (ruclips.net/video/6ANUi_LplKI/видео.html). I guess I should have called my test a "difference test" instead of "null test", because of course I didn't expect a complete NULL (I know about non linearities caused by analog devices). Still, when the difference between both audio files drops to 40 dB below full scale by just adding a low pass filter, I think there's something to be learned about what is actually the difference wetween the two files, wheteher audible or not. The "difference test" helps objectify where these differences lie. For example, what I didn't say in my first post, is that one thing I could hear in the difference signal was reverb, which means that one of the difference between both convertes is also in the reverb/ambiance (whether it can be heard in a real blind test remains to be seen, though).
-40 is nowhere close to a null. With digital there’s still another 80 that didn’t null. To be fair since he’s a hardware guy the noise floor is a bit higher. Even if it’s at -80dbfs that still leaves -40 that is different. That’s alot.
One thing I wish you did with all of these converters is to clip them. I own the dangerous AD+ and clipping it is really where the magic happens for me. Clipping my Apollo converters is of course terrible so it doesn’t compare to an external converter in that regard.
I have no reason to clip coverters as I explain in the videos.
Ok, I got it right, I haven't done the other two comparisons. I think it might be because all the Interfaces I've ever used are Presonus, so maybe in a way I recognized the sound of it. Having said that, the Burl did also seem like it was making everything more "present", specially the vocals. They sounded a little more "in your face", even like "higher" in front of me in a 3D imaging kind of way. Nice.
PS: Listening on Yamaha H5 and I only listened once.
Thanks for watching!
For me, burl have more low end and a wider and more relax soundstage, but that's subtle. I think a saturation device can compensate that defference with more control to the saturation color.
Thanks for watching!
would you be interested in doing a null test between the tracks?
it's literally the only way to hear the differences between the two signals (if there are any)
We did an entire video on the benefit of a null test......there isnt one in the analog domain. ruclips.net/video/6ANUi_LplKI/видео.html
I closed my eyes and I could hear when you switched because of the kick drum but it's barely a difference. 4848 sounded a little cleaner.
Great, Thanks for watching!
Tracking with burls ,might make the biggest difference,sometimes in my studio I track with a avid carbon,which sounds great, but I prefer the radar convertors for tracking every time .And for my final print track ,back to the radar, track on the board, mix in the box
Tracking through the Burl makes sense if you want the transformer sound
Great I guessed wrong 😊
Would be great if you can do a review about the Ferrofish A32 Pro. There are no decent reviews on RUclips at all and it’s a pretty premium converter with lots of connectivity.
I dont have access to that gear, so that wont be happening here, sorry
@@MixingMusicAnalog Thanks for the reply, I’m always looking for a good converter with lots of i/o for a good price. Lots of i/o means at least 32 channels with upgrade options to 64. The Antelope is interesting and definitely the RME converters are. I heard the Ferrofish converters are built in the same factory as RME so I’m really interested in these.
Have a wonderful day 👍🏼
@@Studio22mix ferrofish is rme under a different manufactuer
It’s not “convincing myself there’s a difference”. You conducted a blind test and a lot of us could tell the difference and guessed correctly. I heard a clear difference and I was right about which one was the Burl. Not everyone’s ears are the same and some people really can hear very subtle differences. Doesn’t mean there’s no difference just because you can’t hear it.
Correct. and I have said those same things dozens of times on this channel. if you think there is a difference then that is great. Go buy the gear you like and think it's going to make a difference.
My opinion hasn't changed, I'd go with either still. That said, I already have a Quantum4848 and I would buy a second one should they still be in production lol
Yea, maybe they will make a new one soon
We can only hope that they make another interface like the 4848. Being that you can't get it anymore kind of sucks for those who actually might want to try to use it, But with what we all get with our 4848's do we really need more? Anything I do with mine sounds awesome already. I can only see getting something different if my 4848 stopped working.
Plus I have been adding several additional pieces of rack gear to include things like the 542s + tascam 32 half-track 1/4 master tape machine. 500x pultecs, dione, Prometheus. As far as analog conversion the 4848 holds it's own. And if you actually have the other bells and whistles to go with it... Well you should be pretty good.... I too wouldn't see a need for the Burl. To add my additional thoughts keep what you have stop looking for more and make music. The rabbit hole of gear will ruin your life and potentially your credit score.... 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
I'm over 90k + vested in myself over the last 10 years. I've reached a point where I don't think I need anything else for a decade at least.
One thing that doesn't convince me about these tests is that we're listening to sounds presumably recorded through the presonus at first, then converted out by the presonus and only then reconverted by two different ADCs.
A better test IMO would be to listen to how they sound different recording an analog source, so splitting a live acoustic guitar recording to two different ADCs for example.
You know what they say about people that "assume" don't you? LOL.....this session was NOT recorded through the presonus units. they were recorded in an studio in Nashville several years ago.
@@MixingMusicAnalog That's beside my point, it is a signal that's gone through multiple stages of conversion before the final one (which is the one we compare), rather than just doing a 1 step comparison.
Ok, well I cant do what you are asking so maybe you'll find another channel that has if you really think it's making that much of a difference.
@@MixingMusicAnalog don't get why you're taking it personal, of course you could do it, it's a quite simple test.
Didn't mean to sound cocky or anything, the reason I say this is that from persnal experience I cannot tell the difference if a signal for example is gone through my converters once, twice or 10 times, but I can defenately tell the difference when I digitize something that was recorded to analog tape. Right away at the first "digital" listen I can tell is not what it was before.
Hope you see my point, keep up the good work and don't lose the spirit :)
not taking anything personally my friend. :) I just can't do what you are asking and I simply disagree with your assessment. If it's a simple test, then go ahead and do it for us and post the video, I see you have a channel with some good content already. Be part of the solution. :)
All burls add it color to the mix. My converters are the last device I want to impart color. I have tons of outboard hardware to add various color. You can always add color, but you can't add "clean" to your recording.
Thanks for the info!
The Burl is bit more fluff on the transients... not worth coins... you can achieve a good end goal with the Presonus
Thanks for watching
A good test. I guessed correct. The Burl has slightly more weight and its very subtle indeed. Is it better, that's subjective too. Is it worth the change......NO
Yep, you simply guessed and had a 50/50 chance to guess right. LOL
The Burl has more meat to it. You can hear on the first solo switch.
Ok, thanks
Try the Lavry savitr
not going to happen here, sorry. We are done with converter tests. They are pretty much all the same
Great video thanks, im sure youve answered this question so many times but why have they stoped making the quantum 4848 i would get one in a heat beat if i could. Such a great product for an amazing price. Thanks for your work uncle Dave!!
I dont l know....LOL. i dont work for Presonus so I really have no idea.
Where are the "super ear guys" saying they hear clearly the diference in the first video?
Good point :)
Crazy, the green track has way more depth and sound fuller to me. Could it be that you mixed into the presonus and when it sounded good switch to the burl. Did that to with summing, ans always like the clean better but if i mixed from the start through summing, then i made a much better mix than thee cleans
You're waaaaay over thinking it. :)
@@MixingMusicAnalog Mabey, mixing into things do play a big role. But i also think the presonus card is great my friend has there old too speakers also very good
I have now seen all your converter videos. I failed to pick any differences between all of these converters from a purely audio viewpoint. I would be focusing on features, expandability, reliability or other factors when choosing converters. You can get much better bang for your buck in investing in other areas for your studio (room treatment, mics, instruments) than in buying high end converters.
The other thing to note is that the converters you use will be there from the start, you are mixing through them. So the end mix will end up as you want it.
Maybe my ears are just shot.
No, your ears are not shot. There is so little difference between the converters today that you simply dont need to worry about it
I was genuinely thinking the green track was the Burl, because i thought, better low end, transformers and more definition = more expensive.. i was dead wrong, presonus really hit it right on the spot with this one ! Take that failed engineers "experts" with no real background on Gearsnobs !
Thanks for watching!
I agree with you
I can only on the kick
Thanks for watching!
For me the presonus trashes the burl its just transparent and 3d the burl sounds a little muddy i dont know if its those transformers coloring the mix
Thanks for watching!
WOW I can Hear a HUGE differance
on my I PHONE 13 PRO MAX
THE Saturation and Harmonics come alive on the TOP end with rhe BURL
MAKES THD Guitars & HAMMOND B3 SING🔥
LOL....ok, sure, even on an iphone speaker.....then you should go get the Burl
I had the Burl Mothership and the full kit. The converters alone were less transparent than other stuff so it's not worth the price tag by a long shot. In fact stuff way cheaper is more accurate conversion, which is what I want for my final prints. I already have top tier preamps and other outboard so I don't care for the colored converters of the Burl. I'm not convinced in their ecosystem at all.
Thanks for watching!
hahaha i was correct
Cool, good guess
Apollo X should be cheaper in price because the conversion isn’t that great.
The conversion is just fine in the Apollo. Its the DSP technology is why that box is so expensive
Converters don't matter. Neither flavor give's to or take's away from the value of the song. ADC's arent worth worrying about as long as its been made in the last decade.
I agree