bx-Console Amek 200 vs. 9099 vs. SSL Channel Strip: Console Showdown!

Prepare for an epic battle of the Titans! ⚔️ 3 legendary console emulations against each other: the Plugin Alliance Amek 200, the Amek 9099, and the SSL Channel Strip v2. 🏆 Which one will emerge victorious in the quest for warmth, punch, and analog mojo?

[@sarafung6564]

I love how cinematic this whole experience is

[@MaxDropPro]

Thank you so much! Cinematic is exactly what I was hoping to achieve. Would love to know what aspects of the experience felt particularly cinematic to you?

[@PurpleSpiritArmor]

Immediately subscribed

[@PurpleSpiritArmor]

That 9099 is so freaking amazing

[@MaxDropPro]

Yes, I agree. I use it everyday!

[@Ambolik]

Little mistake: bx_console AMEK 200 EQ is 5 band + LPF & HPF. It's a (very) good one, but a lot more CPU intensive than other bx consoles!

[@MaxDropPro]

Thanks for catching that mistake! You're absolutely right, the bx_console AMEK 200 EQ is a 5-band EQ with LPF & HPF. I appreciate you pointing it out.

[@saj5386]

For me ssl then 9099 then the 200. Amek 200 seems to bit muddy on the low mid and didn’t open the mix compared to ssl. 9099 Has a good balance of warmth and openness. But I like the ssl more because it had more 3d and nice clarity and openness. That’s just my personal opinion. But I still love the 9099.

[@MaxDropPro]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! It's great to hear different perspectives on these consoles. You've made some interesting observations about each one's character. I agree the 9099 strikes a nice balance between warmth and openness. Your point about the SSL's 3D quality and clarity is spot-on - it does have a distinct sound in that regard.

[@osvaldodomingos9041]

What a grest vide Man, i forgot about the consoles and was just enjoying your video. I appreciate the work you put in. Thumbs up!!

[@MaxDropPro]

Thanks for the kind words! I'm glad you enjoyed the video, even if you forgot about the console comparison for a while. Your positive feedback is very motivating.

[@osvaldodomingos9041]

@@MaxDropPro ❤

[@smujohnson]

This would be so much better without the AI readout. (after watching it a few times, I take it back. The video is great and makes up for the voice :)

[@MaxDropPro]

lol. Thanks for the advice. Maybe next time will be different. :)

[@smujohnson]

@@MaxDropPro The video quality is great and the song is a banger. Have you released it yet? 🥺

[@MaxDropPro]

@@smujohnson I want to say yes, but I didn't write this song. The signer she was the one who wrote it. I only programmed and mixed the song.

[@doodoogtube]

The SSL sounds more polished and 3D (depth) to me. I always use it with the SSL Saturator plug-in to give more warmth. I wish you could've added the SSL 4000E in the mix too. Nice comparison, thanks!

[@MaxDropPro]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I appreciate you taking the time to watch and provide feedback. I can definitely see why you prefer the SSL - it has a polished and 3D sound that's popular for achieving a certain type of mix. You're right, the SSL 4000E is a classic console that would have been interesting to include in the comparison. I'll definitely consider adding it to future console shootout videos!

[@uhohcosmo]

1:49 This song is incredible, what song is this!? Great video, I like the format and the vibes. Would love to see more!

[@MaxDropPro]

Thanks for the awesome comment! I'm glad you enjoyed the video and the song. I can't wait to share the song officially with everyone soon!

[@smujohnson]

@@MaxDropProIs it out yet? I would get it for sure.

[@DanielPestanaTranslations]

I own the 9099 and the SSL. I prefer the SSL for almost everything. The 9099 is good if you’re looking for a warmer sound. They all have their applications.

[@MaxDropPro]

Great point about the 9099's warmth! They definitely each have their strengths.

[@KeithFranklinKCC]

I felt the vocals on the SSL sounded more forward & clearer / the 200 & 9099 were much warmer

[@MaxDropPro]

That's a great observation! I find that using the SSL for vocals and the 200 or 9099 for instruments creates a nice balance between clarity and warmth.

[@vigilantestylez]

Good shootout though. I think the SSL plugin sounded harsh, the AMEK 200 sounded best to me. The AMEK 9099 sounded good too, but the low end was weaker than the 200. I might consider getting the 200 after all. Thanks for doing this!

[@MaxDropPro]

I agree that the AMEK 200 has a great overall sound with a strong low-end. While the 9099 might not have the same punch, it offers a different flavor that could be ideal for certain mixes. Ultimately, it's all about what works best for your projects.

[@nwm2003]

The song is very beautiful. I hope I want to hear the full version of this song.

[@MaxDropPro]

Wow, I'm so happy you like the song! That means a lot to me. The full version is actually still in the works, but I'm thrilled you're interested. Stay tuned, it'll be out soon

[@Radianation]

Felt like the ssl sounded better in this shootout.

[@MaxDropPro]

I can see why you prefer the sound of the SSL in this shootout.

[@MrMusicopath]

ameks have almost no difference, how disappointing 🙄 ssl is super bright extremely good quality video, subscribed

[@MaxDropPro]

Thanks for the Sub! Console comparisons can be tricky as subtle differences can be hard to pinpoint. Glad you enjoyed the video quality!

[@ITBProEng]

How much CPU usage by each with same program material? If your running lots of stems, etc impact on computer platform is useful for decision making.

[@MaxDropPro]

You're right, CPU usage is definitely a factor to consider when choosing plugins, especially when working with lots of stems. I'm happy to say that these plugins are generally lightweight and do not use excessive CPU resources. (I will definitely include CPU usage in my next shootout, thanks)

[@flite25]

am I hearing things or does C have more depth? Feels more 3D imo

[@MaxDropPro]

Totally! Although A & B may have more Warmth and Focus, C definitely has a wider stereo image and more depth in the low end, which gives it a more 3D feel. It's interesting to see how different people hear the same thing.

[@doodoogtube]

You are correct sir.

[@flite25]

@@MaxDropPro sheesh choosing a channel strip has been a tough decision. This comparison helped me make up my mind though, so I appreciate you putting in the time to make this! I was in between the PA cyber bundle deal and going all in on the SSL ecosystem and opted for SSL. Their DAW controllers are hard to beat and I think I'm at a point where I need to focus on the essentials. Way too many plugin options. I do wish the SSL EQ had a mid frequency band like the others, but I'm thinking I could use two channel strips on every track. The SSL Channel Strip 2 for corrective EQ and dynamic control followed by the SSL 4K B for EQ and dynamic enhancements and color. Thoughts?

[@MaxDropPro]

@@flite25 I completely understand how choosing a channel strip can be so tough! There are so many great options out there. Going all in on the SSL ecosystem sounds like a solid decision, especially if you're already a fan of their DAW controllers and want to streamline your workflow. While the lack of a mid-band frequency on the SSL Channel Strip 2 might seem limiting, your idea of using two channel strips on each track is a creative way to overcome that. This would give you a lot of flexibility and allow you to sculpt the sound of your tracks in a nuanced way.

[@RyanHarris77]

The 200 also models the 9098? I thought the 9099 was their attempt to model the 9098.

[@MaxDropPro]

You're right, it can be confusing! Both the AMEK 200 and the 9099 draw inspiration from the classic AMEK 9098 console. The AMEK 200 takes a more "vintage inspired" approach, capturing the overall vibe and character of the 9098 with a streamlined interface and modern features. The AMEK 9099 is a deeper dive, aiming to be a more faithful emulation of the 9098's circuitry and sound. It's more complex and feature-rich, trying to recreate the original console's sonic nuances in detail.

[@smujohnson]

The 200 has the 9099 limiter, that’s it.

[@saiben9639]

Subbed thx.

[@smujohnson]

Same.

[@superyellowman20]

Amek 9099

[@Reggi_Sample]

SSL wins

[@MaxDropPro]

I can see where you're coming from. There's certainly something to be said for the SSL's sound.

[@abolit]

same $hit ...all those consoles even if they sound a bit different it's all about EQ curve variation, not a "special tone" as promoted. Nice GUI though...

[@MaxDropPro]

The GUI is indeed visually appealing. As you mentioned, it all comes down to personal preference for EQ curves.

[@doodoogtube]

I totally disagree. Console emulation plug-ins spread across your mix on every channel, buss and master totally changes your sound for the better. That's why a lot of old school cats are slowly moving to more and more in the box (not newer guys, newer guys are always gonna be ITB). My 1st console emulation was a free (or inexpensive) Sonimus plugin which changed the game for me forever. I then moved on to the Console 1 (which is amazing) but now I only use all 3 SSL Channel Strips from Solid State Logic. Bottom line any channel strip across all your channels ITB is better than none at all. They are way more than a simple EQ curve.

[@MaxDropPro]

Thank you for sharing your experience on console emulations. It's quite interesting to know how got into console emulation. As you mentioned, console emulation plugins can be a game-changer, adding depth, character, and that "glue" that makes a mix sound cohesive. It's fascinating to see even old-school engineers embrace the power of in-the-box tools.

[@Mansardian]

I absolutely agree. But we have to explain it for those who didn't dive into this topic yet. Console emulations are - let's be honest - ideal for people who don't know yet what they are doing. Let me elaborate what I mean, and please read to the end. 1.) A standard EQ, as it comes with any DAW, is capable of reproducing almost any curve you like. However, you have to know how, and you have to know WHY. That means, as long as you know what you are doing you are good to go with a standard digital EQ plugin. It is really simple as that. The differences between consoles are freely reproducable, as well as anything in between. That wasn't possible in the analogue days, so each piece of hardware tried to present its own character or flavour. 2.) The harmonic distortion. Also this is something that can be easily reproduced by using simple waveshapers. However, to get this right you have to understand how waveshapers actually work. A configurable waveshaper can produce both tube and transistor distortion. Or OP-Amps. Or FET. Again, you just have to know HOW to achieve that. This one is a bit tricky, especially for beginners. 3. The compressor is the only thing that has a unique soul. there are too many components in play to reproduce a specific behaviour easily. Compression curve, attack curve (not the time!) detection window, release curve (again, not the time!) knee curvature, input or output saturation.... all baked in into one device. THIS is the only device that brings a unique flavour to mixes. That leads to the question: Is a console plugin worth the hype when it is only the compressor that defines a unique, hard to imitate sound? The answer is: YES. It is worth it. And here's why: consistency and speed. Sure, you CAN imitate the saturation, the EQ curve, perhaps even a rather simple channel compressor, but how long does it take you to do that? Even if you have gathered all the knowledge I mentioned above... is this intuitive mixing? I guess no. And that's why console emulations are so popular. You turn ONE knob and you get that Neve high shelf. You turn down ONE threshold knob and you get that smack of a SSL 4K compressor. It is all about speed and ease of use. Some info about myself: I used to work on a Neve VR console. The closest plugin to that Lady is the PluginAlliance Console-N plugin. It is modelled to mimic the VX which was the successor of the VR. Same processing but it introduced the use of more PCBs instead of wiring. It made me laugh when I saw the toothpicks on the GUI to keep the buttons pushed in because that's what we had to deal with on the real one. Was an issue with these consoles. Having said that - to show you I actually know what I'm talking about - I couldn't care less about the TMT. Guys, that's just marketing. You get the same result by setting one EQ to e.g. 1K for the left signal of a stereo source and the other one to 1.1K for the right signal. There is no magic.

[@MaxDropPro]

Thank you for the detailed and insightful comment! You raise some valid points about the capabilities of standard digital EQ and waveshapers compared to console emulations. I agree that skilled individuals can achieve similar results using native plugins, but it requires more knowledge and time. A beginner might not be familiar with the nuances, but with a console emulation, they can quickly access it's unique sonic character, allowing them to focus on the creative aspects of mixing. And thank you for sharing your perspective and experience with the Neve VR console. It's fascinating to hear your story on this legendary piece of gear.

[@carlosp.1846]

0 difference , just different fancy buttons

[@MaxDropPro]

While the buttons design migh only seems to be visually appealing , they provides easy access to frequently used functions, streamlining the workflow and making the interface more user-friendly. This improved efficiency can, in turn, motivate users to work more effectively.

[@thecastermaster1]

Do you have ears???

[@spaceiswater6539]

Amazing video but I cant really hear much of a difference between them all. I have bought lots of Channel Strips but I think with making electronic music Channel Strips don't seem to do much, whats your view on this @MaxDropPro am I just wasting money using these on electronic music?

[@MaxDropPro]

I used to feel the same way, but after A/Bing with and without channel strips, I started appreciating the subtle depth and coherence they add to my electronic mixes. It's definitely worth exploring! I'll be using EDM for my next video. stay tuned.