วีดีโอ

busoaudio.com/products/producer-2

quality comes at a price, just because you can't afford it, doesn't mean its overpriced. its like any other tool for pros, if you find the value in owning it and it saves you money, its worth the investment. I started with 1 and now own 3 of them. worth every penny imo.

Knowing a little about the technology it takes to actually achieve what Flock have done here, i'm not entirely sure it CAN be done much cheaper, if at all - otherwise Flock would probably have done so already. They aren't charging this money because they want to - the cost of the components, plus the development involved here, is not insignificant and the Pro Audio market is extremely competitive. In the PATCH, you're looking at every single connector point being able to route and connect to every other point, which means at least 1024 internal connections, all of which must be remotely digitally switchable and controllable from the software, which is managed in the UI by simply dragging an icon. It's a true feat of engineering and not as simple as it outwardly seems which itself is testament to just how well Flock have done in it's implementation. Having worked with Flock since they launch the first PATCH product, we are well aware just how hard Flock have worked to develop this product. For the record, in the PATCH XT there are at least 9216 internal connections!

@@studioneo986 thank you 🙏 really glad you liked it.

@@RafaelKrux This will be life changing for you!

You could choose to look at this from another angle... The PATCH is not an expensive product if you are a professional where time = money. The PATCH will save you many, many hours of recall time each week and as such will pay for itself extremely quickly. Also, you don't REQUIRE the premium version of the app to use the PATCH. It comes with a free version that is by no means limited; everything that is important is covered by that and I demonstrate this in the video. You would only choose the premium app (which is not expensive!) if you want or need the extra features it offers. You are not obliged to pay anything extra. You CAN, if you want the extra features, which cost Flock a not-insignificant amount of extra expense in development. There are a few features that I didn't mention in the video for the sake of keeping it relatively clear and not too confusing; firstly the DX Bridge Plugin which auto-recalls the mix from your DAW session when you open it, and also an iOS app that you can use to control the PATCH from your iPhone or Ipad. These things unfortunately have ongoing costs to maintain because of constant updates to software, both DAW and OS. If you feel the PATCH is expensive, it's probably because you wouldn't benefit from it in your situation and that's totally cool - like many products out there it's not designed to be the perfect solution for everyone, but there are certainly many people who could benefit from it and thousands who already do.

whats the difference of buying an Apollo or antelope interface and having to purchase the plugins separately? lol

@@zisuiwang4060 really nice of you to say so, we are working on that! 🙏

The Red 16Line is a very nice sounding interface with a brilliant array connectivity (which is why we chose it for our video suite). Using it via Dante with the Nova is effortless and sounds great!

@@sxproaudio Thank you for detailed replying! Really great and helpful video content :)

@@sxproaudio Do you prefer use the DAC of trinnov directly or digitally back to focusrite red’s DAC? Thank you

@@zisuiwang4060 Thank you! We will keep it coming!

@@zisuiwang4060 The Trinnov DAC is very good, don't let anyone tell you otherwise. We've had the Trinnov in front of some world-class engineers and none have suggested anything is wrong with the DAC. Currently in our studio we are coming directly out of the Trinnov DAC to our monitors. If we were seeking perfection (if there is such a thing) then I would be inclined to use a Lynx Hilo 2 or a Prism Sound ADA-128 for it's DAC.

@@Luancwav No problem, this is in the pipeline! Subscribe to the channel if you haven’t already and you’ll be notified!

While you are absolutely entitled to your opinion about value for money, you seem to have mistakenly stated some wrong information. Firstly the Trinnov Nova with a 6-channel license and mic included is £5795 (at time of writing) including tax (UK): sxpro.co.uk/product/trinnov-nova-6-channel/. If you're US based this is not much different, especially if you contact your dealer and ask for a deal. You know what you're getting when you buy the product. If you don't happen to know you're going to need more than 6 channels at the time of purchase, there is nothing stopping you selling off the Nova when you exceed it's specifications and purchasing an alternative, higher channel count Trinnov product. Alternatively, if you know you will need more than 6 channels when in the market for such a product, you'd never consider the Nova rendering the value for money you mentioned irrelevant. Then you mention off-the-shelf chips in the Trinnov. Almost all converter products on the market use "off-the-shelf" chips (eg AKM, Cirrus, ESS etc) and Lynx Aurora has no discrete resistor network instead of a converter chip, despite the language you may have seen used in some of their online product descriptions. See here for pictures inside the Lynx Aurora, no discrete components in the converter path at all here at all with the exception of possibly a single capacitor, it's all IC and surface mount components otherwise: support.lynxstudio.com/hc/article_attachments/360025691271/TopCover.Open.SMALL.png prosound.ixbt.com/interfaces/lynxstudio/pre1608/image04s.jpg Both Trinnov and Lynx are using converter chips made by external companies, ergo "off-the-shelf" and there is nothing wrong with that. The fact is the vast majority of companies that produce converter-based product do this. It's almost always far more cost effective than developing and producing your own solution. Notwithstanding, the converter chips used by themselves aren't the whole picture. The supporting circuitry, the clock, the PSU all factor into the end result. We have countless experiences of comparing various products using the same converter chips, but with wildly different sounding results due to the other components used. In truth, the Trinnov Nova may not feature the best sounding converters on the market, at this price no one would reasonably expect it to, but the correction it can provide to otherwise unfixable or unpractical room issues can massively outweigh the perceived "loss" in quality you'd get against just using a regular converter output to your speakers, certainly for the vast, vast majority of end users. I would even go as far as to say probably only some mastering engineers and total purists would avoid the Trinnov, opting to put money into fixing their room with acoustic panelling; a FAR more costly affair and therefore, arguably much worse value for money as far as bang for buck is concerned.

@@PagalheoQuartoRecords its definitely a go-to unit and every studio can benefit from having one. Nothing else comes close at this price point!

It's why we take the time to actually bring quality monitors like Amphion to our customers room. Not only do we get to shake hands and say hello, but we can ensure the monitor is set up correctly in the room to ensure the best possible experience. Then our customer can be absolutely sure they are making a good choice without any doubt.

@@CurtisGabrielMusic The thing with these is that while the conversion on the Trinnov is obviously excellent, any perceived or possible loss from the conversion should be massively outweighed by the performance benefits you get from the correction.

@@sxproaudio This is a good point! I fear the same may not be true of the Arc though, It really depends how good that is. If it starts becoming grainy or lacks detail then I would lean more towards learning the current curve of my room after lots of treatment

@@CurtisGabrielMusic It’s always best, where possible, to make the room as good as you can without room correction. Room correction is best used either when no other option is available or you have already done as much as you can. It is really good and works well in rooms that are already good. The Trinnov is far better than the arc in several important ways and also, critically, a more reliable device.

@@sxproaudio Absolutely, I couldn't agree more, this kind of software is not a substitute for acoustic treatment. It can't fix reverberation times. I have a major decay time issue with a resonance at 51hz. I have TONS of expensive absorption in my studio and it's still there 😩

The Tubecore is super-colourful and vibey. The Grandchild is much cleaner and more transparent with a touch of transformer goodness!

@@n.shafarich That’s cool, everyone has their taste. This was EQ’d as described to bring way more “forward” and sweet. You can equally soften and darken tones with this EQ if that’s more your vibe. This was recorded with a U47 though, so it was really nice to start with 🔥

@@Apemedia888 Lots; we are the main UK dealer for Thermionic Culture. The Phoenix is a cleaner, smoother sound than the Tubecore, which is much thicker, punchier and more colourful sounding. As such the Phoenix is more versatile, but not as aggressive or bold.

Absolutely spot on - I think the 12dB version is better in almost all cases to be completely honest; when you consider the curves it's capable of and the bandwidth of each band, the 12dB version capable of extremely subtle changes and even in extreme use rarely seems to do too much. The 6dB version in some cases may not quite do as much as you might need!