• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

best rackmountable compressor

P

PMC89

May 1, 2006
422
1
New Jersey
#1
i'm getting a 4U gator rack bag and a compressor to go with my swr workingpro 400.

any suggestions on a rackmountable compressor? (100-200 dollars.. im just intermediate and its pure hobby.)

new is good, but used would be even better. so used 100-200 in mint condition.
 
#11
I just directly A/B compared a dbx 160A, 166A, 163X, and a Presonus Bluemax. I used the exact same input signal and listening setup for all four units. I actually liked the sound and action of the 166A best. It is not as "foolproof" as the others, but it is flexible enough that I was able to dial in a much bigger, fatter sound than the other dbx's, and a much brighter sound than the Bluemax. I also was able to set it up to mimic the other dbx's exactly. I think the 166A had just a bit more low end extension than the other dbx's, although the high end was about identical. I certainly was able to make it seem much deeper than the other dbx's by varying the compression settings.

All in all, if you aren't intimidated by the amount of knob-tweaking required, I think the 166A is superior sounding to the 160A (which costs twice as much). Of course, the 160A is easier to set up, so that's worth something.
 
#13
Hey Bongo.

Might I suggest trying the 160X in the same scenerio? While I know the 160A is the direct replacement, I spoke with a lot of studio engineers that said there was a discenrable difference between the 160A and 160X models. Some claim it was due to the ownership change of dBX (being bought by HK) and that they think there are some better quality component s in the X.

I don't know myself, as I've never been able to A/B the two. Just an idea for you to pursue, as I would be interested in the result.

bongomania said:
I just directly A/B compared a dbx 160A, 166A, 163X, and a Presonus Bluemax. I used the exact same input signal and listening setup for all four units. I actually liked the sound and action of the 166A best. It is not as "foolproof" as the others, but it is flexible enough that I was able to dial in a much bigger, fatter sound than the other dbx's, and a much brighter sound than the Bluemax. I also was able to set it up to mimic the other dbx's exactly. I think the 166A had just a bit more low end extension than the other dbx's, although the high end was about identical. I certainly was able to make it seem much deeper than the other dbx's by varying the compression settings.

All in all, if you aren't intimidated by the amount of knob-tweaking required, I think the 166A is superior sounding to the 160A (which costs twice as much). Of course, the 160A is easier to set up, so that's worth something.
Click to expand...
 
#15
I still say the TC Electronics Triple C is my favorite. Although I've not alot of experiments with rack comp's. This one sounds f-ing unbelievable. They can be had for $250-$350 on the Bay. What I like so much is the multi-band option. This unit is excellent for mix down and mastering too.
 
#17
Something to study further... I have spoken with some sound engineers who prefer single-band compression because, in their opinion, there are undesirable audible artifacts from the crossover and mixdown process. So far the only multi-band units I've tried are the EBS and an Aphex Dominator, and the Dominator I had was faulty, so I don't have my own opinion on the subject yet.

Edit: it turns out the "contour" feature of the 166A is in fact a type of multiband compression, and this unit sounds "biggest" when the contour is engaged. If anything, it sounds "less processed" that way. :)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back