How Does The New AMS RMX16 500 Series Compare To A Vintage RMX16 And The Plug-In Emulation?

[@37sikora]

you know it kind of seems like the level of the vintage one is a bit higher, which may be part of the reason for everyone's vote. also the age of the components in the original are going to factor. and reliability should always be a thing. hell, i have a lexicon 200 that i like better than any plugin lexicon algorithm, UAD, or the like. i think the 500 series beats the plug in. not by a lot. and the vintage sounds warmer, but i blame older components, ancient A/D/A circuits and chips. old caps. Likely larger through-hole components vs SMD, which all play a factor. I bet through a great console and a little bit of saturation, the 500 series sounds fucking fantastic. Im sold. Fuck fixing vintage digital stuff.

[@MrSNEAKFREAK96]

Sounds like the original has a fuller tail, and maybe a bit warmer/fuller in the midrange. New one is pretty close, just sounds newer and cleaner for lack of better descriptions. Plug-in sounded 50-50. Hall sounded good but not-lin didn’t. Great shootout VK!

[@yozy4996]

This had to the best comparison I have ever seen and heard....This should be the gold standard upon all A/B comparisons.. Their was a noticeable difference when the plug-in came into play...It was almost as if the wet/ Dry mix was altered, but more so in the reverb department....Thank you again for an awesome job, and more importantly using real instrument, and not the usual distorted guitars, or these crazy modular sounds..

[@blindguitarfox]

They all sound a little different, but I would be happy to own any version.

[@davegalens1980]

500 has something weird going on in the mids/upper mids. Really hear it on the snare drum

[@austinpoznoski3083]

I was quite surprised by how different they are, I was expecting the differences to be barely noticeable. The vintage unit sounds the best no doubt, then the 500, then the VST, which is actually quite lacking in my opinion, especially on the nonlinear setting, which is the main reason most people want this reverb unit in the first place!

[@musicgalaxy8832]

The original wins by a lot in my opinion. I find the 500 series sometimes a bit cold. The plugin is not as 3D as the hardware units but warmer then the 500 series. I would say, save the money and get the UAD plugin. Great video Vintage King!

[@jeanpierreisyou2]

Now this is QUALITY content! The Vintage unit smokes the other 2! Sounds more organic and smooth. Actually really disappointed with the 500 Series, basically sounds exactly like the plugin! lol

[@AMSRMX16]

Jean Pierre exactly! The 500 sounds like the plug in.. the original RMX totally killed it!

[@SecessionStudios]

Plugin has a high end harshness to it that is quite unpleasant especially on synths with a lot of top end. Thanks for the demo!

[@bradleyolinger1691]

I honestly felt the 500 series had the best sound, but the UAD version is in between the original and the 500 to my ears. My question is whether, for someone in need of a good 80s reverb unit, whether the extra money is worth it for the 500 series over the plugin. Does it add anything important over the plugin version?

[@cmath8577]

The new 500 unit and plug are not %100 exact but close enough for me. No complaints for not having the expense and hassle of the vintage units. Thank you AMS

[@CLaw-tb5gg]

Dammit, I really wanted to like the plugin best because it's so much cheaper and more convenient, but it sounds much flatter compared to the other two. 500 series was best for me.

[@fawkkyutuu8851]

Original still sounds the best. I don't know what It Is about 70's and 80's music equiptment but almost all of It Is gold , and still sounds superior to any modern efforts.

[@OscarBerglund]

I really wanted to like the new 500 ams box... but the plugin was more spot on in sound! (at least that's what I hear). Love these shoutouts btw, keep them coming!

[@damiensmith371]

Thanks so much for demoing this shootout VK! All examples felt like the vintage original holds more space, depth and richness. But the new version and the plug in are excellent. Was actually surprised how well the plugin holds up to this new reissue version.

[@StereoAnthony]

Vintage version is far and away better than the 500 series and the plugin. The plugin on the nonlinear setting didn't even have the same "levee breaks" slapback!

[@cornerliston]

Would you say the same if this was blind tested? ; ) To my it sounded almost identical apart from some minor differences. But if we didn't know which was which I think we would be fooled. And yes I have proper monitoring. Even the plugin was greatly modeled except for that Non Lin program, also being the reason why I haven't bought it.

[@hauntedbytheliving1175]

My 2 cents: The vintage unit is slightly brighter so the effects sound a touch more apparent and seem to “wrap around” the sources more. The brightness isn’t automatically better, its more of a 4-7k thing that could sound cheap on some sources and need to be eq’d down. The 500 series has the 3D depth and amazing, if slightly darker and clearer tone. In my experience this is how modern equipment sounds... Same with newer Lexicon units. I believe that if the 500 series was turned up a touch to match the APPARENT loudness(LUFS not DB) it might even sound slightly more expensive as it reduces frequencies I often remove anyway on reverb sends. Bricasti is like that, too... sounds transparent, like you’re hearing the effect, not the converters and other circuitry. In an A/B many modern/rich sounding units could sound dark and even overly clean compared to vintage units. If you really want the sound of the vintage unit, I personally think you just need a tiny bit of EQ. It’s a taste thing, not a quality thing. I own and use the UAD and I worked with the actual vintage unit for many years. One afternoon I compared the UAD plugin and the hardware in a studio environment and I recall it was MUCH more similar to my ears... I agree it sounds quite 2 dimensional and devoid of tone in this shootout. The volume of the effect compared to the original source signal seems audibly lower on some of the patches here, too. Bottom line: this is not how it sounds in my system. That said, it still definitely does need a little help to feel closer to the hardware so I put an Acustica pre on the channel to add dimension as well as AMS Neve DFC plugin with a bit of top and bottom and a touch of stereo spread. Sounds really great. You can definitely make great sounding records with any of them. Thanks for the shoot out! I personally think the new unit sounds amazing and it’s a great deal at that price.

[@BlueHouseSoundStudio]

Great Shootout! The original is best but the new 500 is amazing and sounds great! The plugin sounds flat /2D. Thanks so much for the shootout! - Bahrum

[@videomusic1381]

Vintage is warmer but some programs on the 500 are damn close but less wide, plugin as usual behind in terms for warmth but still pretty usable if you like boxy / 2 d sound

[@QuiethouseRecording]

The vintage hardware seems to soften transients a bit on acoustic and drums. The Plugin and new 500 series gear sound almost identical. There was a noticeable difference in the "bloom" of the AMBIANCE patch on the 500 series hardware and plugin. I wonder how much of this has to do with the age of the components in the vintage hardware - and if most people will see that as part of the "magic" of the older unit.

[@photocallmusic4221]

Thanks for doing this shootout, VK. The original has a width that I've not been able to get with the plugin. To my ears, here, on PMCs, the 500 series and plugin sound very similar (although it seems something was just off with the pre-delay time of the plugin on the nonlin/drum example). I don't think the width of the original is due to vintage components. The ease of use of the plugin and 500 series and lack of a fan and maintenance are pluses for those two, but sonically, nothing tops the original in my opinion.

[@colinowenuk]

The original sounded better to me.

[@justincanton]

Vintage wins every time. 👌🏽

[@kmelz]

The vintage and the 500 series units sound a lot better than the UA plugin. The 500 series sounds really good.

[@DynamitaStudiosChannel]

Cool one! Honestly I think that the plugin sounds closer to the original unit than the 500. I would prefer the vintage unit, but I really think that IN THE MIX nobody will hear the difference between vintage and plugin or even the 500. Thanks for the video!!!.

[@mufakkas9731]

Surprisingly large difference. Thanks Is it because the AMS RMX-500 is said to use the Burr-Brown BRC3931 20-bit D/A converter, which gives it a brighter and more transient sound than the original RMX-16, which used TI PCM1704?

[@NikFarr]

It's pretty wild--even on my shitty laptop speakers, the vintage unit sounds more "3D," for lack of a better term. Wider and more spacious, without losing focus, if that makes any sense. The 500 series and the plugin don't sound bad at all, just... less-good.

[@seanvalentine8304]

as always, vintage sounds the best

[@ArtisticAutisticandAiling]

I'm curious about the RMX-16 and RMX-16 500, does the RMX-16 require XLR cables for input and output. What about the 500 series? The back of the 500 series unit puzzled me to what kind of thing it connects to. Do either of the two sample in and out in stereo? :)

[@braincoral9866]

useful..thanks..the plugin did well on the vox and mellotron but couldn't keep up with the rest of the program material imo..I sense a faint "metallic" tang to the 500 series on the longer reverb..probably because it's new...i've got the RMX extended in my UA account..use it a lot...can't afford a real one :)

[@BoAstrup]

UA has some work to do. Not sure why AMS would have signed off on it. Love the vintage unit. Business decision is the 500, so close, but without the maintenance headache, and not that much more than the plug in.

[@ChrisLandis]

Wow. The vintage wins by a mile over the 500, and 3 miles over the plugin. Really interesting shootout, and great comparison video!

[@0phylum0sinter0]

In most of these comparisons the vintage sounded the best to my ears, i need something that can switch up the order while my eyes are closed to know for sure... but i'm also getting the sense that the plugin was either dialed differently (especially on the nonlinear reverb test - such a HUGE difference, much more narrow, shorter, quieter decay, almost 2 dimensional sounding) or the plugin just wasn't matched well to the hw. This being a digital effect i don't think there would be much variation from unit to unit, beyond whatever wear the i/o has, i guess. Overall just doesn't seem like 3 of the same box to me, it feels like two knockoffs of a vintage - the hw one seems like a 80% match, while the plugin sounds about 60% there to me. They perhaps all stand on their own but for the asking price? I'd definitely seek something with more control and variety of algorithms.

[@sigil_theband1953]

The vintage unit definitely has more depth, and sounds more...vintage...than the others. The 500 series is close, and sounds great, with a cleaner, more modern sound, but in the ballpark with the vintage. The UAD, which I own, btw, is good, but a reasonable facsimile.

[@vnzo9904]

I love the original but im super impress with the plugin after hearing them back to back

[@joeblack7841]

I'd love to get my hands on a vintage unit. Just missed one on ebay. Didnt pull the trigger in time because i was wondering about upkeep, etc. But it sure sounds sweet here..

[@andivax]

thank you for the quality comparison. Please add WAV files because KZbin compresses audio too much. On my 4 way speakers I am hearing a difference between the three but it's not "night and day". Only weird UAD Non Lin without pre delay effect :/

[@ReginatorNet]

With the vintage unit as the benchmark... the 500 series sounds 80%... the plugin sounds 60% (the plugin's nonlinear sounds 30%).

[@rectape]

Thanks for this video. I prefered the vintage unit but they seems to be fragile and they’re not many peoples who can repair them.

[@Md2802]

The 500 series reissue sounded the most polite / well balanced. If I was doing something that needed to sound hifi, that would be the clear choice. But the original is the sound that's established - so any deviation from that, no matter how good, is going to sound off. At least when it comes to strict, purist recreations. With more loose interpretations or "inspired by" effects presets, there's often enough difference for the recreation to carve out its own cultural space. Liken it to song covers. If someone completely 100% nails a breath-for-breath recreation of a Sinatra classic, with a spot-on imitation of his voice, it will always come across as not-as-good to the already established recording (with any differences interpreted as flaws). On the other hand, if someone puts their own spin on it, it can become its own thing and earn respect on its own merits (and in some cases be considered better).

[@RichardGroulx]

Great shootout! Thanks!

[@AbsurdTV1]

most of the time the 500 series was the best, but sometimes the authentic original version was the best. The plug in was respectable but I'd pick the 500 series, unless the original version was available. Thanks for the shoot out.

[@vaportrails7943]

“Nonlin” on the plug-in is really lacking... there should be no difference because they’re all digital, except for the A/D-D/A. Maybe gain staging and how they handle input is the variable.

[@adam872]

I honestly think I preferred the plugin on most sounds, especially the nonlinear reverb on the drums.

[@ssepper]

Am I the only one that couldn't hear a difference? They all sounded the same to me. But then I've found KZbin tends to lose detail with their data compression. I'd like to be in the studio for the shootout.

[@adee2569]

vintage for sure! great video!

[@jarekb2043]

Thank you... well done. 500 and plugin are close, yet apart from vintage unit... We have 40 years of progree behind us.

[@DavidxxLB]

on a laptop with a headphone they all sounds exactly the same .. so . .for a home studio i think the plug in is efficient enough . if someone is abble to tell me ' no ' .. what headphone do you have ? my hears are feeling good .

[@MrAmukelani]

the vintage has more depth but I will stick to my UAD PLugin I dig it

[@carlosloor88]

does it have a stereo input or output?

[@MuseFrescoProduction]

I was stunned at how close UAD plugin version was to the hardware units. Well, it's obvious the original unit is the very best and has the better, bigger stereo field and clarity, but well look at the price. I would definitely choose the plugin. But I would hope to get the original unit in the future. I would say if you have right gears in your studio, I feel in most cases you could get away with the plugin version.

[@saminekunis8680]

I want one....is still the best reverb generator for drums

[@MrLawrence0071]

With the same settings, I feel the original old unit sounds absolutely the best. I feel the 500 rack reissue is almost identic to the UAD plug-in. I also think. you can make all 3 sound indistinguishable by tweaking the settings. I think the plugin needs more wet% in the dry/wet balance. So does the reissue to come closer to the original one. But this clearly proves how amazingly good the old bucket was and is! Still one of the best reverbs.

[@mattymel75]

Obv id like to inherit the vintage, but for first time ever I think I’m good with the plugin this time. Honestly thought some of the plugins sounded better. Neither really even came close to the original. So I’ll stick with the plugin til/if I happen to find a fixer-upper.

[@diamondmine9773]

PLUGIIN LOSES EVERYTIME !

[@interray11]

VINTAGE KING !

[@robshrock-shirakbari1862]

I felt the plugin was intentionally made a little dryer and lower in volume. With some compensation, I think the UAD plug-in beats out the 500 by a slight margin. There is something weird in the low mids on the 500 module. The vintage unit wins hands-down in a direct shootout; but no one uses it this way IRL.

[@MiguelNoyola1]

Vintage is the money unit!

[@pascalmerschaudio]

the 500 sounds like plugin, and the original is not so clean like the other 2, Very good Video Vintage king

[@tempesthoughton4441]

ok ok, the vintage unit sounds a little better, but I'm pretty impressed with the 500 series and plugin too and would gladly use either and no one would know in a mix. I just found out the 500 series is mono in though which is kind of icky.

[@cymonalex]

Vintage unit sounds better by far ! I re-ran the test with my eyes shut.. Vintage

[@JulianCamarena]

👍🏼ordered a unit can't wait to try it out!

[@nogoogleplus]

Killer shootout! Vintage unit has the vibe...the others will do the job though

[@Suburbstudio]

Thanks a lot!

[@tempesthoughton4441]

Love these shootouts, BTW. Very well done.

[@nashvillehitmachine-offici7936]

Thick and warm Analog - 500 less low mid silk - plugin flat and harsh highs id add a dicapitator or saturation plugin good to go.

[@pullman1958]

As an owner and long time user of the original, I would say the 500 series is a very good replacement. Sounds almost dead on. The plug in sounds a little uninspiring to me. Mind you I am listening to this very well thought out comparison on an I Pad.

[@CARDS_MUSIC]

the 500 series comes in last place for me. the plugin version def does the job but wow that chorus on the vintage model is something I really wish I had access to.

[@kevinbatchelor9566]

Depending on the algorithm, the UAD plugin stands up but it falls short of the depth that both hardware units bring.

[@sK3LeTvM1]

Always like the comments of the vintage 'believers'. Makes me smile. Check out Andrew Scheps YT video on analog vs digital. In a final production no-one knows what delays, reverbs or whatever gear you have used. And who cares anyway ? It's all about the cook, not the kitchen.

[@3phaseBerlin]

In my i phone vintage wins hans down.. api is mor brute and flatter and plug in weaker and more distant.. however remarkably smooth.. i think i would prefer it over the api version.. but opposite to the original its too weak to really lust for.. but in that high price range i might prefer an emt..

[@kevinschuckvk]

that 500 unit sounds so badass!!!

[@cymonalex]

I have both the original and the plug-in…. I still maintain that the original hardware RMX 16 sound much more organic and smooth, than the plugin.. listening to the 500, I prefer the plugin.. Still do not fully understand why they only made it in 500 series either?

[@SAGABIJO2]

Original is the best, better glue with the source, deeper, makes everything bigger - 3D, and magical... New hardware, also great but - 30% less mojo and wow, Software - just the picture of the sound without the glue and the 3D.

[@jackpat4069]

it's sad to say but the vintage unit stays n°1... the 500 series and the plug in are boosting the high mids significantly. Not really smooth. cool shoot out. Nice job guys !

[@tiekumark]

The vintage unit absolutely destroys the new unit and plugin. The plugin seems to sound thinner on each setting. I actually do love and use the plugin a lot though. I did actually do my own shoot out between the vintage unit and the plugin myself a few years back and that time I preferred the plugin. Level matched them. Identical settings and both brought up in channels on my SSL. The plugin seemed more focused. I guess not all vintage units are equal.

[@KendrickCreates]

Listening on car speakers via Bluetooth, and that new unit sounds much better than the vintage one. Tails are smoother, and the low end doesn't pulsate. So I'm really surprised to check out the comments and that everyone prefers the vintage unit. From what I'm hearing, it's the worst of the three. Now I'm going to have to re-watch this video at the house

[@aastudio2957]

next, pls do the blind test

[@moustafaabdulreda]

the difference is obvious between the old and the new one.the vintage version is more wide and has more depth.the new one is similar to the plugin version

[@sleepstudyrecords]

what about international calling... that phone style keypad is what’s up lol. the nonlinear program sounded 1:1 IMO

[@Jordannofun]

maaaad decent!

[@sunahura]

The original is beutiful The 500 series is slighty off of the original sound , and is cleaner but not better. The plugin is closer to the original, but of course thinner sounding and has a slightly different eq curve. But hey thats life.

[@jimmmosher]

I was Really hoping this would sound like the original, but the 500 series doesn't sound much better then the plug in. Oddly enough the 500 sounded better on the chorus than the original lol, As far as the plugin is concerned? Thin, no bloom etc

[@NickCent]

I'm 37 years old. @ 5:45 The only one I recognize...

[@themattybags]

500 Series sounds spot on to the original. The plugin.... not so much. UAD get's so close with their Analog emulations, I'm surprised a digital emulation is so far off. Tho it could be due to the difference in predelay. It seems like the 500 series and vintage unit have a certain amount of predelay even when set to "0" while the UAD plugin seems to actually eliminate all pre-delay at the 0 setting.

[@gregorycurry1827]

So the vintage unit seems a bit darker than the 500, but I think the 500 has pretty much nailed the sound, and a bit cleaner and more detailed. The UAD plug sounds good, if 'thinner' than the hardware. Thanks for the shootout, VK. You guys just saved me some money. My UAD plug is good enough for my purposes. Cheers!

[@pascalmerschaudio]

when it comes to drums, the original is unbeatable

[@AMSRMX16]

The plug in sucked since it didn't model the electronics. But I'm surprised at how bad the 500 unit is compared to original!

[@wewantmoreparty]

Woow

[@ankurbaghel2441]

Vintage unit is ... More sounding batter than the 500 nd plugin version

[@kazunorikawasaki7081]

👍👍👍

[@Jurrockin]

Vintage model sounds the best to me but the 500 is super close!

[@The_Penny_Seventeens]

I can’t tell the difference I think I’m getting too old lol

[@JamesCorbettMusic5000]

The vintage is so noisy compared to the 500! Loads of hiss from older components I suppose. That’s the only difference really. Plug-in was ok

[@LesVegasMusic]

Ok. Really weird but did anyone else think the original unit and plugin sound brighter and match more closely than the 500 series?

[@monkeyxx]

that poor plugin didn't stand a chance

[@tappy72]

def orig best, 500 2nd, plugin last

[@skythemusic]

Ahh well...not even close to the vintage for non lin but better than the plugin.

[@bigxrecords7375]

Vintage sounds wayyy better the plugin sounds harsh on the top end

[@MustafaAlbazy]

I liked the 500 more, mainly on the drums .. the plugin sounded meh!