Does this unit also have the automatic delay compensation for analog hardware inserts like the Galaxy 32 Synergy Core has?

I have gen 3 and I route 49/50(33-48 is my adat outs) from DAW(playback) to monitor outs just fine and I dont lose any of my 32 analog outs. I don't use pro tools though. Also are the converters the same in both gen 3 and 4?

Hello what is the highest buffer setting

So it's a kind of a chorus effect? Use cases for keys, guitars and whatelse ?

Another hype, hope it fix bad performances to awesome sounding records because we have unsolvable problems for decades 😂

Just to say thanks - I had a couple of faders fail - and your video was really helpful. Now back and working. BTW in my S3 - the top row of screws (where the s3 is deeper) - were all long - and the sides and lower row were the short ones.

I own a Dangerous 2 Bus plus and don't use it. There is really no difference. I know some will say there is but I had this box for a year and ran so many mixes through it. It's really not worth the price. I wanted it to be a huge difference to justify spending that kind of money. For anyone reading this and you want a summing mixer, put that money on something else. Mine will be going back on Reverb, where I got it from.

that saturn trick.. hmm. destroys the life of the tom sound to my ears. Makes them muddy. But that as always subjective

Whats the name of the band?

Are you using it as a send or insert? I cant get mine to be anywhere near as pronounced as this

The whole point of this video should have been to test wether or not the “tom mic” has the same off axis rejection as the “Ls 308”s which are second order cardioid patterns. This would more accurately illustrate to people where their money is going when they pay for the LS308.

Super important would be to show distortion level graphs, it is just as much important than frequency graphs. I highly doubt that this speaker can manage low distortion on both end of the frequency range. While this would be super important in a studio.

Yes! finally someone is doing some comparisons. Looking forward to seeing the A/B tests 😍

NO !

What’s the song if u don’t mind me asking? Also, the plug in does the trick imo. Would love the hardware, but it’s sounds good enough & no1 cares what u use as long as it all meshes. Good vid

You can’t null test analog gear lol cool dry though. The Behringer definitely sounds good!

Curious to hear your opinion on the A/B test with the Avantones but I really have no idea if they’re gonna be useful 😊

I came to this same conclusion - the attack profile is slightly different, and thus a NULL via phase reverse shows a "choppy" effect. Once the attack part passes by the two tend to mostly NULL, but right at attack there is enough difference to be apparent. The two seem quite similar, but not 100% identical.

Thanks for video.. For me Bus+ Awesome😍

On drums they sound about the same. On the mix bus, the neve feels more pleasant to my ears (but it better for the price tag). Looks like I just found my new drum bus compressor. :)

Thanks for doing this!! I felt that the hardware had slightly less crystal clear highs than the plug-in, and that the HW seems to have a tighter and more solid low end, it's extremely subtle but it sounds deep and solid. I don't have a horse in the race since I can only afford the plugin currently!!

its the depth in the hardware that separates it

It would also be helpful to see how they compare in terms of cymbal bleed

save the 6k Id say?

yea there's no comparison here .. I didn't have to even turn on my monitors to hear the difference ... analog forever

Can we get a video on the V3A's please?

First off, thanks so much for making this video! If you ever want to compare the frequency response of two units, whether HW or SW, I highly recommend the free Bertrom Curve analyzer. Give it a shot and you wont go back; the FFT from Pro3 in this circumstance doesnt seem to me to be useful at all

Please, use Bertom EQ Analyzer. It's free and will be much better than Pro-Q for matching frequencies. I enjoyed and preferred the hardware. Thank you for sharing.

I prefer the hardware, could there be more harmonics in the hardware can you a person even measure that ?

Love my Curve Bender but the caveat is that I am mastering full time so those added few percent are actually worth the investment. For anyone tracking and mixing I would stick with the plugin. Personally, I find compression is where hardware really outshines the software. Great video as always Oliver!

Is it playing wrong file? It's not changing the sounds at all.

in blind test especially on the phone, I could always hear instantly when that high frequency percussion hits , that high end harsh sparkle of plugin, vs the hardware rounded pleasant sound, vsts always seem to have something predictable over 7k

What is interesting for me is that commenters hear the difference… despite that Pro-Q sees difference only in roll-offs and only about 0,1dB per octave or so. :) If you can’t see it in the analyzer, and you feel punch, it is likely psycho. I intentionally played it via my phone. There wasn’t any difference while casually listening to it. Yes, I like to turn knobs, but for 5500 USD more? Hell no. If you feel less 3D and depth, or harshness, drop a resonant filter and space imager plugin on it. But more likely if you let it alone, plugin result will sit in the mix better. As for utilitarian tasks: The first area where I feel that “imperfect” hardware use has some coloring and “glue” benefits in today’s world is in certain step of mastering (but not entirely). The second area where hardware might feel more comfortable is recording. In case if you didn’t master plugin usage yet, or you have very good preamps that are far better (for the task) than your interface’s preamps. The third scenario is when you stay completely in the analog world, no ones and zeros involved at any stage, only when converted to final file for online platforms. Then of course better, less noisier, more consistent hardware with quality components wins. As soon as you go in the box, or jump in and out with converters, you will use 1 and 0 data with hard ceiling but infinitely more clean(!) depth of dynamics, where everything matters, specially gain staging between plugins. Best if you do not use hardware inserts unless you have some quality ones for specific tasks and you are using pristine converters. Plugins were mediocre even in early 2000s and computers were weak; by today, pro developers and some small ones too came to a stage that professionals can go entirely in the box, absolutely doable to have clean and pro mixes if the recorded material is good (but even cleaning bad material is magical nowadays with right plugins), with todays superpowerful PCs. Plus they do not compare plugins to hardware with 1:1 knob turns, but can achieve same result by ears. If they need more plugins to do that, they will use them. Use quality plugins with well written algorithms!! (Many times price does not reflect quality.) And the only area where hardware still wins to my ears in critical listening environment: mild musical distortion. In analog domain you do not have to deal with a ceiling, it will just naturally distort, while digital distortion will be always harsher due to maths nature (even if sometimes digital distortion is an artistic intentional effect in the take).

If you’re listening to 20 songs, like the average listener, then hardware is less fatiguing even if the listener doesn’t necessarily know. I don’t really agree with industry mixers deciding that ITB is good enough. I guess generally they’re using hardware in mastering. The only guys making ITB work are veterans who previously were all analogue and they can bend it in the box to ‘passable’ results. “I don’t think software will ever sound as good as hardware” - Rupert Neve

Good hard rock! Hard to come by, these days, no?

Behringer's reputation isn't the best either so I hope it's really good so I can get clean sonics

UAD x Softube did an amazing job at emulating this and the Zener Limiter which I am also looking forward to seeing you reviewing it. As usual, the hardware wins; better 3D imaging with a punchy foundation that does feel very natural and organic to my ears

Listening on some good cans and it's immediately apparent the hardware, as expected is not only less harsh sounding, but absolutely imparts a lovely sense of depth/space that is still not accurately replicated by plugins. I usually have a massive passive or stereo pultec sitting on my mix bus - but sure wouldn't mind a curve bender - obviously the price, cost of operation, heat (my studio gets toasty), and maintenance are all barriers to entry. I don't expect to sell any of my favorite analog pieces but plugins have certainly come a long way.

Try IGS Audio S-Type format 500 😊

The hardware sounded better to my ears, not 6 grand difference but still 😊 Very nice eq

This was a very helpful video

iirc, Bob Clearmountain was very fond of their old DN410 dual parametric equalisers, - it's a shame they can't bring back their own original designs, circuit for circuit. I know Behringer own the company/name now, but hey, they brought back the TC SCF chorus pedal, although I don't know how similar it is to the original. I'm currently just running a Boss DC-2w, into the 2 Aux inputs of an old TL Audio 3012, so the signal is at line level and balanced when it hits my desk, and a Radial JCR reamp to drop the level going into the pedal, - but this does look tempting. Wish Roland would just make a professional Multi-Fx rack mount unit, with all their old effects loaded up, using their new digital algorithms, with maybe some stereo analog, switchable, preamp choices. - Their RE-202 is sublime, I have an old RE-301, but haven't used it once since I bought the 202. Many thanks for your input, much appreciated.

I have the Dji Mic 2, you may want to use 32-bit float recording for better dynamic range, swipe down then across to transmitter settings, then across to 32-bit float, tap power button to exit, it will apply to both lavs simultaneously.

How is it a "vs" if you didn't use the C2 in this demo? Just told your opinion? I gave a "like" either way

That is crazy Pro Tools has not worked this out automatically because Cubase calculates this for you and makes the adjustments internally. I am new to Pro Tools and would have thought with them being the industry standard and mainstay would be ahead of the curve.

I would love to have mics like that 👌🏼

Great comparison, Oliver. Thanks for taking the time to do it!

The neve sounds to me like it's compressing more, therefor it's pushing the stereo signal out at the same time so it's reacting more to low end which is why some may percieve it as less muddy. Older units such as Neve compressors or any compressor are not some magical gear that work on everything just because they are old and well known, I think for what it does work on you can crank the Behringer more to achieve the same probably. Whatever the differences are they can be utilised on songs/instruments that benefit from those differences or lack thereof so anyone who tries to point one over the other on that alone is naive. If the only difference is due to lack of adjustment then it doesn't mean much, once they are compressing exactly the same then I want to hear what the different characteristics of compression and effect on each signal are.

Great video. Do you know how the Behringer is compared to Warm Audio Bus-Comp? Planning to get one of them for drums and mixbus.

I GOT THE ROGER MYER! Excited to see this.. IN FACT: I FEEL LIKE ITS THE PREMIER TO A MOVIE