AD Converter Shootout - Burl B2 vs RND MBC vs. UAD Apollo X
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ม.ค. 2021
- Analog to Digital converter shootout between the Burl B2 Bomber ADC, the Rupert Neve Designs Master Bus Converter and the Universal Audio Apollo X.
Audio Examples available at www.rhcmusic.com/shootout - เพลง
![[ไฮไลต์] แบดมินตันชาย SHI Yu Qi (จีน) vs วิว กุลวุฒิ (ไทย) รอบ 8 คน | โอลิมปิก 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/f7z7taforOM/mqdefault.jpg)
Burl owner here. Such an undeniable sound. Use it on every song. Cuts through like butter
No lies told.
recently looking into the Burl b2, but I want to know if there would be difference in playback for mixing if I get the Burl b2 DA converter?? I currently have a Uad apollo firewire.
Thank you
Thank God for your video, it helped me to choose RND, the lows sound so nice & controlled both the times (with transformer & without)
Love the vid thank you for doing this shootout!!!
I am also printing all of my mixes through the Burl B2 and I love it. I was also pretty intrigued by the new RND master converter but after hearing it I am more than happy to just stick with my Burl. Just gotta find a boatload of money to get a mothership now lol
Really informative Ross. Thanks for this. Wicked mixes as usual man.
That Burl grips my ear with the bass and makes me pay attention to the dynamics much more
Thanks a lot for the shootout! I didn't like the Burl with my own mixes (and instead use a Forssell) but it's easily my favorite out of this bunch -- sounds great on your work.
Thanks for this. I just ordered a burl b16 and b4. The b4 is a preamps but also lime in bypasses and is straight conversion. I’m going to shootout it vs my other converters in a couple weeks. Stoked to hear all these. I was considering the neve but after this video I’m glad I got the burl.
So crazy how I have both of these written down and just wanted to hear both, too perfect.
Thanks for doing this, def liked the burl best. One day!
The Burl brings the Magic. I'm listing on desktop computer speakers and the Burl sounds the Best. Thanks for this, I'm now willing to spend a little more for the BURL.
Thanks for the video Ross, super helpful. It's the 'Limiter/SC/HPF' that really swings it for me. The B2 is 2.5k so for only 1k more you get that limiter and more control on the transformers.
Thanks for this. I have the Burl B2 and the UAD2192 as well as the Apollo. Was thinking about adding the Neve unit. No need, after this. Thanks!
They all sound great but you are right the BURL has a thicker warmer sound for sure.
I liked the BURL. It added dimension. It's cool how the difference sonically is subtle, but the difference in how it makes the mix feel is huge. Those BURL transformers really create a vibe.
Totally agree with you, Burl... 100%.
When I first listened to this about four months ago, they all sounded the same. But now that my skill level has improved, the Burl B2 without question.
The best balance is the Neve Mbc without transformer. You can feel the bass groove clearly, hearing the bass sliding. It's nice. Also making the song more presence against Apollo X. B2 added much more low end, but the snare drum sounds nice and the high end is open. Thx for sharing!
Apollo 1:57
MBC no transformer 2:39
MBC with transformer 3:21
Burl 4:03
I was looking at comments and surprised for the little love the Neve got. Probably because it’s new. I thought [transformer in], it was punching through the mix bus, even on the fade out. Clarity and loudness really shone through.
Burl is gorgeous! Woah!
Thanks for the comparison video. I made some comments over at Gearslutz. Both the MBC and Burl are a nice improvement over the Apollo. The Burl has a nice colour and mid range push and the MBC has a nice top and bottom with maybe a tad more clarity. I need to download the high res files and have a listen in my DAW.
I'm trying to chose a new converter at them moment and currently use an Apollo X6, so this has been very useful.
Same here using an x8p,
Me tooo!!! I also have an 8pre
Burl hands down!
Great comparison :)
I agree, they all sound amazing,.. BURL did it for me too, but any of them would be fine. Sounds like a Great song by the way too. Thanks for sharing.
Thank you so much for this review. I was going nuts trying to figure out if I wanted to change my apollo x converters
What did you end up doing? Im going nuts also lmao
Go all Burl. It's worth it.
@@Redigulas Im sticking with My Apollo converters for now but I have the Burl's in my cart, ready to pull the trigger when I land my next gig lol
The Burl was like an extra serving of gravy compared to the RND. Thanks for the demo.
(for myself)
1:58 Apollo X 2:14
2:39 RND MBC w/o transformer 2:56
3:22 RND MBC w transformer 3:38
4:04 Burl B2 4:20
world should have more ppl kike u sir.
I was about to do the same thing, thanks for doing it for me.
Thank you
I actually like the way the RND sounds on this print. Lots more punch. Might not have the same puffy thing as the burl, but the burl feels a bit smeary. The RND seems to just have more force.
Apollo - 1:59
Neve no tranformer - 2:41
Neve with transformer - 3:23
Burl - 4:06
It's also worth noting he's hitting the burl harder. Look at the printed waveform. However, the burl does sound like it's very forward, and the neve does sound like it has more separation. So, tomato tomato. If I had to choose "yould you rather have the burl or neve?" I'd say "yes". :)
Rupert Neve without transformer engaged sounded the best for me
Also thought so at first. But after going back and forth between the two, the Burl was my favorite.
Toronto studio owner, too.
You're almost there, brother - swap those Apollos for a Mothership and don't look back. I did exactly that a few years ago. The difference wasn't subtle.
Do you have audio examples that we can download? I'd like to see if they cancel eachother out when phase flipped.
I’m interested if you could get the same low end punch out of the MBC with the blue silk engaged? Great shootout, any studio should be happy to have any of these.
awesome, thanks a lot
Hi Ross, great shootout, thank you. I'm very impressed with the Burl (agree that it's the best sounding of the three). Would you say it's the same thing with Burl vs Neve preamps (for home recording)?
The Burl level is a tad off, but if you knows these converters, THAT is what they sound like. Probably my favorite overall, but the MBC with transformer is less congested and more clear. The apparently discontinued Mytek Brooklyn ADC was similar with its transformer sound.
The Burl sounds amazing! Your video and the difference with how the Burl sounds is the reason I’m getting one to try personally in my spot with my X6, I’ve heard other tests and it’s not as noticeable as your video, plus all the praise the ADC gets it’s time to run it with my chain and see how I like it. Maybe you could shed some light on a couple questions?
Are you running the Burl into the Apollo X via toslink/Adat? If so is the Burl B2 bomber clock set to EXT and are you clocking it off the Apollo? If it is being sent over toslink/ADAT to the Apollo does it need to be connected with a WORD clock as well? I’ve been looking into it and the way console has options for both(but can only choose one) makes it unclear if both(toslink/ADAT and WORD clock) would be needed, or all the clocking info handled over Toslink/ADAT?
I know there’s tons of ways to go about this, but just wanted to get an understanding of what you did in the video, as it’s not even close with the way that particular mix sounds through the Burl.
thanks and cool video!
Nice shootout. The Apollo does seem to have a bit more coloration in the highs, the Neve has a certain neutral softness to it, while the burl definitely adds some thickness and depth.
They all sound pretty good. That burl is nice though, neve with the transformer is real nice too.
Did you happen to compare the clocks of each?
I have Apollos and Burls as well that everyone just loves the sound of. Just ordered the Neve to to use in conjunction.
Was the mix completed on the Burl? On this system it seems to be a hyped low end, not like the mix at all. Also, were the MBC transformer and blue silk functions fully engaged? Burl is pleasing, but hyped. Barefoot Microstack45 is the playback system here.
Good info I like the Burl B2. Did you use the Apollo x converters to record/Track with? Thanks
How do you feel about Dangerous AD+,and RME ADI-2 FS?
It should be noted that UAD no longer use the AKM DAC chips since AKM production facility was destroyed by a fire, same for other companies like RME and many others who now use ESS chips
Burl is the one for me. Not just saying that because I have one either. ;)... The MBC without the Transformer engaged sounded good. I didn't really like it with the Silk engaged. Just a preference thing. But the Burl definitely suits my style of music (Hip Hop/Rap) better imo. Thanks for this video!
Hello Ross.. great video.. i loved the burl sound the most in the video... i have a question..my A/D converter is also the burl B2... in my analog chain, the last unit before i hit my Burl B2 is the Maselec MPL-2 Limiter.. Do you think its a good idea that i sell the burl and maselec limiter and get the RND MBC? i am just thinking that maybe with this unit i would have more versatility with the tone shaping options (transformer, tranformerless, silk red, silk blue), the side chain option in the limiter thats not in the maselec which i think is a great addition...etc..
Hi from Calgary! For mixing and mastering ITB exclusively on headphones ( Audeze LCDX & Focal Clear Pro MG) which One if the following do you recommend me:
- Lynx Hilo TB
- SPL Phonitor XE + DAC 768
Thank you
Great comparison, it's also great to know that the Apollo X converters can hold their own when and if chosen to deliver a final mix. Thanks for doing this!
What's a good interface to use for Burl? I don't want to buy some really expensive interface since the Burl will be doing the converting? So where does that leave you? And if i understand correctly to buy and use a burl interface i/o you first have to spend a 2000 usd on just a metal chasis "mother ship" Is there cheaper options for interfaces with quality inputs and ouputs?
Cool Video
THEY'RE ALMOST IDENTICAL ! BURL HIGHLIGHTS THE BASS GROOVE LIKE NONE OTHER
Very interesting comparison thanks. One thing to add perhaps, you're mixing, and in the mastering mindset, it's great to be able to make your converter totally transparent if need be. So the MBC might have an edge there (just like the Dangerous AD+ btw). And did you try the two SILK variants (blue and red) on the Neve? would be nice to compare to the BURL.
Not even a comparison.. The Burl is REAL
Hey man what power conditioner supply are you using ?
The Burl most definitely is incredible. I’ve been using a B2 Bomber as well and it just does this thing to gel everything together that literally nothing else does. Weight, bass tones always sound amazing, and the stereo width makes whatever you panned sit in the “correct” location. I can hard pan left and right in the box and things always sound a tad claustrophobic and narrow but boy does that change once the Bomber is patched in. I use mine in tandem with an SSL Fusion and Warm Audio Bus Comp and the combo is fantastic. Recently I’ve also been experimenting with triggering the comp the kick drum via external sidechain and that just locks the groove in even further (if you get your latency offsets right lol).
Did you have to clock the Apollo off the Burl for this?
for me, burl offers the best rendering without any doubt
great video and feedback on the gear. Would you use the BURL ADC also for tracking besides running your mix through it? 2) do you have the digital outputs of the BURL connected back into the digital inputs of your Apollo system? i find myself stuck choosing between the BURL and the "Silver Bullet" from Louder than liftoff and putting the RND ORBIT in front of it for summing, too many freaking options :-(
Ya I often track vocals or stereo instruments through it cause it’s an incredible sounding converter. I would very much like a mothership to have 32 I/o of this.
thank you
Great tips and info! I've been a long time Apollo twin user and I now own the the 6X I'm not happy with the sound of the converters they seem to have a light hard muddy distortion sound when I tried a few different audio interfaces the muddy distortion went away I love the UAD Apollo plug-ins zero latency etc... I'm thinking of getting a Burl Audio B2 Bomber ADC 2-channel AD Converter and bypassing the Apollo 6X converters. This is my home studio I'm only tracking one or two tracks at a time. Cubase pro, Apollo 6X, LA 610 mic pre, MacBook pro I'm also getting a Apple Mac-book Pro M1 Max 16" Space Gray 10/32C 64GB RAM 2TB SSD and a BAE Mic Pre & EQ w/ PS. Any thoughts or advice would be greatly appreciated Thanks. 🙂
Will a converter set up like this improve my mixes and tones if im just running a RME Fireface 800 into a computer? Or would i not see the benefit in a modest set-up like im running? For monitoring i run 3 sets, with focal trio6 be 8s as my preferred.
Have you already spent the money on the room acoustics? That would be more significant of a change then the converters, but after you have the room dialed in at mix position and you can hear deep into the mix, then the converters will he significant. Thats my 2 cents anyways.
This is newbie question but I’d like to buy a Burl but I’m so used to the Apollo workflow with console. I hate monitoring through plugins because even when the buffers are all the way down, there’s still latency. With the Apollo I can monitor through their plugins with little to no latency. My question is, is it possibly to buy a Burl and use it for what it’s meant for while using the Apollo format or is it only one or the other? Thanks in advance.
I’ve got both and mix into the Burl - works like a charm - the two Apollo X16s handle I/O for the hardware - my DAC is a Dangerous Convert2 at the moment. Hope that helps!
Burl is 0,9 db louder than apollo and 1.4db louder than mbc. That's why it brings "the Magic".
Very good. Please read the comments addressing the loudness and the reason why.
what comments ?
Thanks!
Do you mix into the Burl when mixing, or add it after the fact only when you are printing? I'm curious to hear what others do as well! Thanks for the video!
In this case I added it after the mix in analog. This kept the test purely about the conversion.
@@rosshayescitrullo3319 Good to know. I was going to ask the same question. To me the key takeaway from this as I have an X6, and had a feeling that the Apollo x AD can be improved on, especially when using it to print a mix.
Did you use the Converters of the Apollo x16?? The x16 has the flagship converters not used in the x8. But I use the Dangerous convert ad+ and it uses a pair of Hammond transformers with an emphasis knob to dial in to taste. Great shootout
Yup. Used the conversion of the x16.
I bet if you used a bit of red silk on the neve, it would have been closer to the Burl. It also would have given you a bit more perceived volume.
its all about sep detail focus density the burl keeps the centre solid for sure
apollo was flat safe vanilla, neve dense high end good left to right, burl elements were breathing
loudest sounding always wins. burl was driven the hardest it seems, apparent in the larger waveform too. also could be lower input impedance on the input path of the burl. if you gain match them all they sound damn near identical
+1000, tired of biased youtube comparison
My ears must be getting better, for I heard this a few months ago, and could not tell the difference. Now ... the differences are obvious. My preference is precisely the reverse of the play order, so Burl B2 comes out on top. However, I wonder if this difference would disappear if you ran the it with an EQ to push the mids before inputting into the MBC, or if there is something extra that happens there that EQ can't copy.
Perfectly timed video - I’ve got a pair of Apollo x16s and the Burl ADC (Dangerous Convert for the DAC). I’m a huge Neve fan and was wondering about their MBC. I heard exactly what you described and was so happy I liked the Burl as well. It was not a very subtle difference IMO.
I have the Apollo x and just got the MBC. The MBC is wider and "taller" and clearer up top (without the transformer). As soon as the Apollo is switched in, the mix shortens, and the vocal pushes out in an strangely abrasive way. 3khz-ish. (At least with the song i used to test.) Subtle, but noticeable. I avoided the burl, not because it doesn't sound awesome, but because I didn't want that sound all the time. With the MBC silk, and the transformer in/out, I have options.
I'm looking at getting one of these, but I don't understand how they fit in the chain. I see some people using it to track and bypassing the converters on the 8pre, and I see people using it after a mix then pushing to the adc and then back into the DAW!!!
With the burl, can hook up an external pre ( Audient preamp ) to it to record vocals? If I can…. Would my vocals sound higher quality compared to an Audient id24 audio interface? Or would it be the same quality for recording vocals?
I have an audient. What gave me immediate higher quality vocals was a decen tube mic CAD M9 with a mic capsule swap with a capsule off amazon and a better mic pre. In using the VMS ONE pre and the size and quality of the vox and other recordings is noticeable but still wont get you the quality of going straight into a BURL...but very respecable and much better than every interface pre under $2k that ive tried or listened to
The Burl was printed a touch louder.
The Burl definitely has PUNCH! Didn't expect to be that obvious. Thank for doing this awesome shootout. I was in dilemma between B2, MBC, and HEDD (or upcoming Interstellar). Now I know that B2 win over MBC. Do you have any experience with HEDD?
No sorry I don’t know the HEDD. interested to hear how it compares.
crazy: I can hear the differences on my iMAC 24" in the Studio. I really hear better transients and depths on the burl. Sounds more "like a record" indeed!
Did you experiment with the gain on the MBC to hit the transformer a bit harder? I was reading that its not a make-up gain on the MBC, instead its for pushing the transformer saturation. In the vids you have the gain at zero. Just curious. Thanks
Ya the transformer saturation on input is toggled between -20 to -14 and I matched it to the burl. The gain knob you’re seeing is in relation to the limiter and it’s threshold. The limiter circuit isn’t engaged in this video. It does cool things but not necessarily a fair test cause the other units don’t have one. Thanks for watching!
The Burl has a pleasing color but the low end was so saturated that it erased the dynamics of the bassline and messed up the groove because you can longer feel the distinct attack of individual bass notes, all that's left there is a squishy bass image floating back and forth in space. Damaging a musician's performance and turning it into EDM is something you don't want to do to a musician.
That’s why you can dial back the transformer
@@gregbradshaw7220 If you dial it back by increasing the headroom then you lose A/D clipping which gives transparent gain that's unmatchable by plugins because it's free of aliasing. So you better not be clipping the B2 cause bass gets smeary at that input level. I'd rather saturate upchain in a way I have actual control over and then clip into a transparent converter that clips well.
@@gregbradshaw7220 I have the B2 and the input level knob is actually POST transformer (and pre-converter). This lets you control how much you're clipping the AD converters without altering the sonic characteristics of the transformer output. In other words, the only way to 'dial back' the transformer is to dial back the signal going into the B2. It's worth noting that on the Neve MBC, the ADC Calibration (i.e. input level) is PRE limiter and PRE transformer, so changing the calibration/input level can dramatically change how hard the limiter and/or the transformer is being hit. This is actually one of the reasons I went for the B2 instead of the MBC.
I did not know that. Good to know!
1:56 uad console
2:39 neve
2:41 neve trnsfrm
3:27 neve transfrm
4:10 burl
I agree about the Burhl. And dare I say the Apollo stands up pretty good against the MBC surprisingly.
why are u surprised. its ad conversion in 2022 . its 99.9 the same bro. don't buy the hype.
@@iep4657 good point, but I wouldn’t call it all hype. With all the features of the MBP outside of conversio, I would say it’s in a class of its own. I guess that’s why I was surprised the Apollo sounded as good.
how is showing red on the peaks in the units but not clipping back into the track in protools
I wish I liked the UAD more but that Burl is magic. The RND is also very nice but the Burl is clearly better.
What converters did you track with? I have a pair of UAD 8p’s and I’d like to cross over to Burl but I can’t afford to update all at once so I’m trying to figure out if starting with adding Burl gear for tracking first or if starting with mixing (and tracking with UA) is the way to go for now.
Tracked with a combo of UA converts and the Burl
@@rosshayescitrullo3319 on the way in, how do you think the UA compares?
Did you mix that song while monitoring through the Burl converters? All of the other mixes sounded unbalanced except for the one through the Burl to my ear.
Nope. I actually mixed it on the analog mix bus off the ssl and then sent that mix into each converter respectively.
The ultimate test would be to do a blindfold shootout with the average non engineer music listener and ask them if they can tell a difference.
What were you using as the master clock?
Good question…
At 2:15 you see that an Apollo x8p is in "clock int" mode.
The Burl with the transformer sounds clearer. The MBC with/without the transformer also has a clear sound but the Burl is slightly clearer. The Apollo sounds a bit dark to me.
RND MBC without the xfmr had a great tone IMHO.
Geez.... the casual listener may not hear that much of a difference, but it feels bigger on the Burl. I like how the Neve holds everything together.
What a difference 1db can make.
@@rist98 I agree. It's TRUE. One thing that blew my mind when using saturation was that the nominal level stayed the same, but it sounded louder. So I assumed it was level matched, but there was percieved loudness.
@@badmonkeymusicproductions3569 Yeah. Its probbably just pushing on the limiter more. All examples touched 0db, but the Burl was clearly louder sounding. Took -1db to correct it. This single fact means this is scientifically a very bad comparison. Idk how one would miss a 1db diff when creating this comparison.
Are these files available for download?
Between the first uad and second Neve (tans on) you basically went from cheap cheesy sound to A full blown studio a with a 8068!
The burl is epic but the problem is in this situation you want to glue the tracks together and the burl sounds like you are in the room with the artist before it was even recorded.
The burl has the most separation of probably any audio circuit out there!
You could use it driving the trans and glow the track together and it would be great like the Neve was for this context 👍
I am struggling between choosing the Burl or the Dangerous AD+. From what I have read online people are choosing the AD+ over the Burl. But everyone who has the burl says that it is a game changer and makes things sound like a finished record? Anyone have experience with both?
I had the same problem choosing between the two, but the burl did the trick. Dangerous is tight but the burl is more musical in a sense. It feels bigger and the music surrounds you, it just grabs you if you know what I mean... those things are always hard to explain.
I tried both but when with the AD+ it was more flexible, the Burl will imprint its sound on to everything which wasn't always wanted. if you do get the AD+ make sure to run it on its internal clock, makes big difference
Burl in a landslide. Wonder, though, how the mastering engineer would feel. Predict the ME would prefer no iron, would interfere with the more subtle points. But hey, It ain't his baby!
Burl for the win omg
Hello. I want to buy a Burl B2 ADC I am using 2 convertors now I have an Apollo x8p and an Antelope 2 channel pure 2. The pure 2 is hooked up to via SPIDIF to the appolo x8p. If I buy a Burl how would I hook it up so I can connect it to my Apollo x8p so I can choose between the pure 2 and the burl. All the mic channels are full. I am waiting on a repair to my old Apollo 8 so I can expand my ports soon. I really want this burl. Oh I am on windows. Perhaps I should use my Mac M1 so I can aggregate the interfaces. Any help would be appreciated.
The Burl works best run on the AES input. I have it on x16 not the x8P. In this configuration youd need to have another converter to connect the Burl to as the Pure2 is taking up the only digital input.
@@rosshayescitrullo3319 Why does that work better?
I’d like to hear a null test or a blind test.
Please add timestamps
Can the apollo 6x mic preamps be bypassed? Thanks
They can be switched into line inputs. You can also use the pres in unison to make them sound like a variety of different pres.
@@rosshayescitrullo3319 Awesome!! Do you know how to do this? I'm recording lead vocals using external hardware uad la 610 mic preamp into the Apollo 6x . Do I come out of the la 610 preamp into any of the 6 line inputs 1-6 or 3-6 inputs and what settings do I set in the UAD console? Thank you very much for your time!!!. macbook pro cubase pro 10.5 La 610 mic preamp hardware audio-technica 4033 Recording input level in cubase -18 -12 -9
Burl has the low end punch analog sound. The neve is good though and offers more . It sounds like you mixed into the Burl before doing the comparison. If you mixed into the Neve you would be more drawn to it compared to the Burl because all your mix decisions would be based on the units sound. Just offering a different take on the outcome and why you might think one is better then the other. The Burl sounds the best in this example however. Thanks for your time.
I mixed it in analog on the console, no converters used. Then did this test and picked the result.
@@rosshayescitrullo3319 the sound had to be converted before the console yes? what converters did you use?
@@metalplatedfacejob it was sent out of pro tools via the Apollos. 32 channels to the console and then mixed in analog there. Then the mix bus output was fed through each converter.
Burl ALL DAY
Are you sure that the burl is not louder?
Yeah. Defo smth like 1dB louder. In fact, that nulls out any credibility for this comparison. There are differences between em, null testing clearly shows them. But I would suspect its the rest of the chain that creates quite a lot of variability in each run thru. Analog desks have that analog variability. Run the same thing thru twice, and this kind of difference level is what you will get each time.
Other type of tests might show the ADC performance better. And I suspect that bit is quite negligible. But what do I know.
Yes it is.
its way louder !!