5+1 Music Gear Myths You’ve Probably Fallen For

Since the early days of the internet, forum participants have given birth to certain ideas that have been passed down through generations like mantras. Nobody really knows the origin of these gear myths, but they continue to echo—unchanged or slightly adapted—through today’s social media platforms, studios, and stages.

I won’t deny that I believed some of these myths myself, especially when I was starting out. But even now, I find it both entertaining and baffling that these myths seem unstoppable, self-regenerating like a modern-day Lernaean Hydra.

Disclaimer: This post isn’t meant as a rant against internet enthusiast communities—far from it. I’m genuinely glad they exist, as they’ve made sharing knowledge and experiences easier than ever. The issue, however, is that many people pass on "wisdom" they’ve never personally tested.

So, my advice? Curate where you search for guidance. Focus on the basics, avoid falling for the hype, and don’t beat yourself up if you don’t own the latest or most talked-about gear. Instead, make the most of what you already have—it’s likely more than enough to create something great.

With that in mind, let’s dive into a few persistent myths that often pop up in music recording enthusiast circles.

1. Gear Can Be TOO Perfect

I’ve come across arguments claiming that certain guitars, microphones, preamps, converters, digital recordings, WAV files—essentially anything—can be "too perfect", lacking mojo or character. Honestly, this doesn’t make any sense to me.

Sure, some gear inherently adds color or character that might be appealing for specific applications. But the notion that "perfection" is undesirable in general is nonsense.

In fact, starting with a clean, noiseless source gives you the flexibility to shape the sound however you like. You can always add color and character during production, but it’s nearly impossible to remove unwanted color or distortion from a recording that’s already too characterful.

Of course, maybe some of us do need characterful gear to add some life to our 100th soulless take. If the problem isn’t the gear but the player, a bit of extra mojo might be the only thing keeping the session alive.

2. Vintage Gear is ALWAYS Better

There’s a certain mystique to vintage gear, especially the equipment used in historic recordings that has been elevated to legendary status. And let’s be honest - nothing boosts your studio cred like claiming, ‘This was the mic of choice for Francisco Tárrega!’, right? But since most of us can’t get our hands on these rarities, it’s easy to assume today’s gear just doesn’t measure up.

The truth is, old equipment often came with quirks and flaws. Some of it was discontinued for a reason—whether it was temperamental reliability, noise issues, or just plain bad design. Producers back then weren’t looking for "mojo" as much as they were praying their tape machine didn’t eat the master take.

Sure, vintage Fenders, tape machines, and Hauser guitars have their charm, but the gear you buy today solves many of the headaches they lived with. And let’s not forget, the shiny new gear you’re dismissing now might be someone’s prized "vintage treasure" in 20 years. So treat it well—future collectors might thank you!

3. Your Gear SUCKS

Spend a few minutes on any internet forum, and you’ll quickly be convinced that your gear isn’t just "not enough"—it’s the root of all your problems. Even world-class Neumann microphones or RME converters can be dismissed as cheap and harsh, right alongside questionable knock-offs. The only exceptions? Esoteric gear no one’s heard of yet or some Frankenstein contraption built in a genius's basement. What chance does your gear have when you ask for advice in these spaces?

Here’s the harsh reality: if you can’t make a decent recording with the equipment that’s readily available today, the issue probably isn’t the gear. Unless you’re trying something wildly unsuitable—like recording your classical guitar with a Shure SM58—the problem lies elsewhere. Your gear doesn’t suck, and new gear won’t magically solve all your problems.

4. You Need MORE (Usually Expensive) Outboard Gear

It’s not just new microphones that supposedly hold the key to success. Spend enough time online, and you’ll start believing that your recordings will only have the depth and quality you’re chasing if you invest in tube preamps, compressors, or other outboard gear.

I get it—audio quality has fascinated me for over two decades. Back when I didn’t even own a decent pair of condenser microphones, I was convinced I "needed" tube preamps, rack EQs, and reverb processors to sound professional. Over time, I got them all—and guess what? My recordings still sucked. The worst part? I couldn’t even tell why they sucked or admit that they did. Turns out, shiny toys don’t mix the track for you—who knew?

The one piece of gear that made a drastic difference wasn’t some flashy tube preamp but a pair of (cheap) studio monitors—and lots of listening. After that, it was improving room acoustics and, most importantly, learning to trust my ears—a skill no piece of gear can replace.

Now, I can confidently say: a good guitar, a pair of decent microphones, a modern audio interface, and something reliable to monitor through are more than enough to hone your skills and produce recordings that won’t make you cringe.

5. Cables Don’t Make a Difference / Cables Make a HUGE Difference

Of all the internet wars, the one over the impact of cables in music production might just be the silliest. So, what’s the truth? Do cables make a difference? The answer is yes—but with some important caveats.

Between cheap, poor-quality cables and reasonably priced, good-quality cables, there’s a clear difference—not just in sound but in reliability and durability. However, when comparing good-quality cables to ultra-expensive boutique ones, the answer is far murkier. Are we talking instrument cables, microphone cables, or interconnects? Depending on the use, the difference can range from slightly noticeable to impossible to hear—or no difference at all.

But here’s the real question: does it matter? If you haven’t nailed every other aspect of your setup—recording technique, instrument quality, room acoustics, microphones, listening environment, and only then preamps and converters—it makes zero sense to splurge on expensive cables.

For my part, I use high-quality Vovox and Sommer cables, mostly because I don’t want to think about cables at all.

And let’s not even get started on the audiophile crowd, where power cables cost as much as world-class instruments. At that point, the myth stops being silly and becomes full-on absurd.

At the end of the day, cables are just one piece of the puzzle. Good cables matter, but they’re not the magic ingredient to better sound. Focus on the things that do.

Bonus - A Steel String Acoustic is not different than a Classical Guitar

This one definitely hits a nerve. In fact, it’s one of the main reasons I started my recording journey. I’ve been to multiple sessions where the engineer confidently placed a KM184 at the twelfth fret and assured me it was "standard practice". Sure, it might be for a steel-string acoustic—but for a classical guitar? Not so much.

And it’s not just in studios. A simple search into any thread on recording forums about capturing classical guitar, and you’ll inevitably find people discussing techniques and microphones designed for acoustic guitars, not classical ones. Worse, they’ll often post "examples" of their approach—only to showcase a heavily processed recording of a western steel-string acoustic instead of an actual classical guitar.

Equating the two instruments is like saying a sports car and an off-road truck are the same because they both have four wheels. Sure, they share some common features, but their design, purpose, and handling are entirely different.

Conclusion

Some ideas and concepts circulating in internet communities have taken on a form of "common knowledge" that nobody really questions. While these myths can vary from group to group, the pattern remains the same: untested "wisdom" passed down like gospel.

The reality? Most of the time, it’s not about having the perfect gear but knowing how to use what you already have. Skills, experience, and good judgment will always trump hype.

Think professionals are immune to myths? Not quite. In Part II, I’ll dive into gear myths that even seasoned pros aren’t safe from. Stay tuned!

5+1 Gear Pitfalls to Avoid as a New Music Producer, Part II

Welcome back to the second part of our series on common pitfalls to avoid as a new music producer. If you missed the first part, you can check it out here. In this installment, we'll dive into more practical tips and essential advice to help you improve your recording and mixing processes, avoid common mistakes, and stay motivated in your music production journey.

Quality monitors are essential for making informed mixing decisions and improving your overall sound.

1. Don't mix with crappy speakers

The most important element of the recording chain is not your audio interface or microphone, but your ears. Using laptop speakers or consumer-grade headphones for mixing can be compared to driving with a dirty windshield or foggy mirrors. Decent monitors will not only allow you to make much better decisions regarding all aspects of the production, but using your studio monitors for regular casual listening will also sculpt your perception of what is considered good sound, exposing you to more nuanced audio. This practice will help you learn your monitors quicker and enhance your overall mixing skills.

When I first got into recording, more than twenty years ago, I bought a pair of 8" Behringer studio monitors which died rather quickly and then I moved to a pair of 6" Tannoys that I used for quite some time, an M-Audio interface and a Shure SM58 (because everyone was using those) and soon after an Oktava MK 012 as I realised that the dynamic mic would not cut it for classical guitar. In retrospect, all those were terrible choices for various reasons. The Behringer monitors, with all their faults, played a vital role in my infant days of recording. The alternatives I had at that time were 4.1 Creative computer speakers and a Pioneer Hi-Fi, both subpar of course.

Professional results come from careful recording, not just fixing things in the mix.

2. Abolish the "fix it in the mix" mindset

Use your resources and time to make all the right decisions to capture the best possible recording before you are ready to record your first take. Don't skimp on the details and hope that everything will work out in the end, or that you will be able to "fix it in the mix." Everything you didn't pay much attention to will show in your recording, and the chances are that you won't be able to fix it. Strive to get the best sound from the start to save time and achieve higher quality results.

3. Don't waste your time on editing; plan on being competent

Editing a mistake out of an otherwise beautiful take, or enhancing your recording by editing in one stunning note from another take, can add to your recording and is perfectly fine. However, creating what I call a Frankenstein-take by combining a bunch of takes might allow you to have a result without mistakes, but it will lack cohesiveness and overall direction. Recording phrase by phrase, similar to pop or rock production, will take all the life out of your recordings, even if you compile the most perfectly played song. This is classical guitar; be deliberate with your choices and execution. Document it to the best of your ability, and if you're still not happy, practice some more and redo the recording. Don't waste your time on excessive editing.

4. Don't neglect your room acoustics

Until you make meaningful changes to your room, your recordings won't get much better regardless of how much money you spend on gear. You don't need a professionally designed studio, but addressing basic issues with reflections using absorbers, diffusers, and bass traps in key places can drastically improve your recordings. Also, declutter the space; if you have too much stuff around, the sound in your room will never be great. A visually aesthetic room will also be more inviting, perhaps aiding in your inspiration.

5 - Take critique with a grain of salt

Listen to those with more experience than you, seek advice, and learn from the mistakes of others. However, if you have a strong feeling towards a particular idea, don't hesitate to see it through. The worst thing that could happen is you make a subpar recording. On the other hand, if your idea pans out, you'll feel like a genius, even if just for a couple of seconds.

Stay grounded in your passion and don't let the lack of immediate recognition deter you.

Bonus - Don't be discouraged if your music doesn't get the attention it deserves.

Even if your recordings are Grammy-worthy, the world won't necessarily notice them. Expecting your music to be received with grace can kill your appetite to get back in the studio the next time if it doesn't happen. Focus on the journey, the love of playing the guitar, and recording your music to save yourself from getting depressed. If you do get a Grammy (don't forget to thank me in your speech for all the invaluable things I share on the blog), that's a bonus, but it's not the primary purpose.

This is still hard for me, and I suspect it always will be to some extent. I try to remind myself that the joy of creating and sharing my music is what truly matters. I try to do my best, and when everything is done, it is out of my hands.

Conclusion

Remember, the journey of music production is about constant learning and growth. Embrace the process, stay motivated, and keep creating. Every recording session is an opportunity to learn and improve. Good luck, and enjoy the ride!

---

What do you think about the points I'm making? Do you have any experiences or tips you'd like to share? Leave a comment below and let's discuss! And don't forget to check out Part I for more insights into avoiding common gear-related pitfalls.

Bowers & Wilkins Px8 Review

The Quest for the Perfect Portable Headphones

For the longest time, I've been searching for a pair of decent portable headphones that could deliver realistic sound. I often found myself commuting with full-sized wired headphones, as the Bluetooth technology just wasn't mature enough to satisfy my audio desires. However, in recent years, several high-end Bluetooth headphones have emerged, catching my attention and offering a glimmer of hope.

Enter Bowers & Wilkins (B&W)

Bowers & Wilkins, a British company with a rich history dating back to 1966, has long been renowned for its high-quality audio equipment. With a dedication to innovation and a passion for creating the best possible listening experience, B&W has been a leader in the audio industry, catering to audiophiles and casual listeners alike. In fact, high-end B&W speakers can often be found in mastering studios for classical music, a testament to their exceptional sound reproduction capabilities.

A Chic and Elegant Choice

Bowers & Wilkins Px8: A Chic and Elegant Choice

About three months ago, I decided to take the plunge and invest in the B&W Px8 headphones, and I've had ample time to explore their features and performance. I opted for the Tan version, which boasts a sophisticated design with cast aluminium arms and fine Nappa leather trim. While the black version looks a bit more generic, the 007 and McLaren special editions are visually appealing but come with a heftier price tag.

The Px8 is designed with ultra-plush ear cups and a hot spot-free headband, making them incredibly comfortable for extended listening sessions. The headphones gently clamp from the sides instead of resting on the head, ensuring an ideal fit. 

The included carrying case is stylish, and protective, and features thoughtful touches like a magnetic lid for the cable compartment, making it a great travel companion to the headphones.

A stylish protective case for the B&W Px8

A practical cable compartment

Technical Prowess

The Px8 headphones come with an array of technical features, such as hybrid noise cancellation, ambient pass-through, wear-detection sensor, and Bluetooth 5.2 with aptX™ Adaptive. They support multiple Bluetooth codecs, including aptX™ Adaptive, aptX™ HD, aptX™, AAC, and SBC, ensuring compatibility with a wide range of devices.

The Px8's Bluetooth connectivity is seamless, allowing me to waltz, tango, or just wander around my apartment without any interruptions or cut-offs. Plus, they can be connected to a MacBook via USB for an even richer audio experience.

The Px8's controls are responsive, intuitive, and thankfully, free from sluggish touch buttons. This means you can effortlessly adjust volume, pause, or skip tracks without missing a single tone.

Intuitive physical controls

Uninterrupted Classical Music Indulgence

With an impressive battery life of 25-30 hours, the Px8 headphones will keep you immersed in the intricate nuances of your favourite symphonies, concertos, or solo classical guitar performances for days on end. Plus, a quick 15-minute charge provides 7 hours of playback - perfect for when you're on the go.

Impressive Audio Performance with Minor Caveats

The angled Carbon Cone drivers deliver crystal-clear audio with minimal distortion (<0.1% THD at 1 kHz/10mW). While the out-of-the-box tuning is a bit bassy and warm for my taste, a quick adjustment using the companion app gets the sound just right. There is a very slight hint of compression, likely due to the codecs used, but it's not a deal-breaker, and the overall audio quality remains enjoyable and immersive.

Audiophile-level Classical Guitar Experience - Unshackled by Cables

As a classical guitarist, I treasure the authenticity of timbre, and the Px8 headphones rise to the occasion with their remarkable audio reproduction. The nuances of each note, the nails, the strings, the resonance of the wood, and the ambience of the room come together to create a captivating and immersive listening experience - it's like being transported to a private recital. 

Although I wouldn't rely on these headphones for mixing purposes (I have my trusted Focal Clear Pro MG and Beyerdynamic DT 880 headphones for that), the Px8 offers an impressive listening experience for classical guitar music, capturing the intricate details without becoming overly analytical or excessively enthusiastic. The most remarkable aspect?

Finally being able to indulge in such exquisite audio quality without the limitations of cables, providing an even more enjoyable and liberating listening experience. That being said, B&W's unique sound signature is truly a standout feature, and I can't help but wish they were still making wired headphones for professional use.

Ultra-plush ear cups and angled Carbon Cone drivers

A Quiet Place

The Px8's noise cancellation works like magic, effectively blocking out the world without compromising sound performance. The passive noise damping is quite decent for street noise, allowing you to still enjoy your music while maintaining some awareness of your surroundings. The active noise cancellation truly shines in environments like the U-Bahn, where background noise is easily dampened. The pass-through option is a nice bonus, although it could sound a bit more natural. I'm looking forward to testing these headphones on flights this summer, anticipating an even more serene and enjoyable in-flight experience.

B&W Px8 vs B&O H9 Gen 3 - A Clear Winner

Bowers 6 Wilkins Px8: A Symphony of Performance, Design, and Comfort

When comparing the B&W Px8 to the B&O H9 Gen 3, the Px8 emerges as the clear winner in terms of comfort, sound realism, and design. For those who have read my review on the H9 (click to read my review), you'll know that I appreciate the sound quality, but they can be quite painful to wear for extended periods. The Px8 not only outperforms the H9 in terms of comfort, allowing for long listening sessions without discomfort but also delivers a more realistic and refined sound experience.

A Playful Conclusion

After spending three enjoyable months with the B&W Px8 headphones, I can confidently say that their impressive technical features, long battery life, and effective noise cancellation make them a top pick for anyone seeking high-quality headphones.. Initially, I got them as a portable device to use outside of the house, but they've become my go-to headphones for casual listening at home when I'm not working on my music. While they do come with a relatively high price tag, if you can manage the expense, the Px8 headphones are a fantastic choice. 

SPL Crescendo duo Microphone Preamplifier Review

Gorgeously clean gain for your microphones

High-quality preamps that can capture all the nuances and subtleties of classical guitar are not as common as one might think, as most designs introduce too much noise and colour. When I came across the SPL Crescendo duo microphone preamp last year, I was intrigued by its specially designed 120-volt technology, which promises a particularly neutral, dynamic and low-distortion sound. I immediately contacted SPL and they sent me a demo unit to test.

Sound Performance Lab

SPL (Sound Performance Lab) is a German company that has been manufacturing professional audio equipment for about 40 years. SPL is known for its innovative designs and audio solutions of the highest quality. Their preamps, converters and headphone amplifiers are used in recording studios for music and film worldwide. Common features of all SPL products are the impressive build quality and enormous size.

SPL Crescendo duo Microphone Preamp

The Crescendo

The Crescendo 120-volt rail preamp design was introduced with the original 8-channel unit; the duo, as the name implies, is the stereo version, ideal for recording classical guitar in situations where good enough is not enough.

One of the ftings that sets the SPL Crescendo duo apart is its large knobs and tactile switches. Each channel provides from +18 dB to +70 dB of gain, which can be independently increased or decreased by 10 dB with a switchable output control. In this way, the rest of the chain can be supplied with an optimal level. The total output can reach up to 80 dB, which is more than sufficient for even the weakest ribbon microphones.

The physical VU meters for level adjustment leave a remarkable impression and can lower the displayed level by 10 dB if necessary. A high-pass filter of 6 dB per octave at 120 Hz is quite useful, although I would prefer it to be switchable for greater versatility. Nonetheless, every aspect of the Crescendo duo has been carefully thought out.

SPL Crescendo duo - tactile switches and VU meters

Four times more voltage

The 120 V technology operates at +/- 60 V. To handle such a high voltage, SPL has developed special proprietary operational amplifiers (SUPRA) that can operate at a such high voltages, as this would destroy conventional components and operational amplifiers.

How it sounds

After using the Crescendo duo in my recording setup for a couple of months, I am happy to report that it exceeded my expectations. The SPL has a very clean and transparent sound, which is essential when recording classical guitars. Many preamps introduce colouration and distortion that can detract from the subtleties and nuances of the recording. The result can sometimes be pleasant, but it strays far from the original sound and is usually not what we are looking for when trying to capture luthier-grade guitars and world-class guitarists. It's worth noting that unlike other clean preamps, the Crescendo is not a bit shrill, but has an overall smooth and warm sound.

A high-end setup & ‘The Music of the Impressionists’

I used the SPL Crescendo duo to record my latest album, The Music of the Impressionists, which contains a wealth of tonal colours, sustained tones, great dynamic differences, and silences. I used my beloved Essense guitar, handcrafted by Angela Waltner in Berlin, and in conjunction with a pair of Gefell M 950 microphones (review coming soon), another marvel of German engineering, and the RME ADI-2 Pro FS for the analogue-to-digital conversion, the Crescendo captured every detail brilliantly.

Listen to ‘The Music of the Impressionists’ on Spotify:

Comparisons

SPL Crescendo duo vs AEA TRP2

The Crescendo duo is similar in many ways to the AEA TRP2, another highly regarded preamp that I have used for several years. Both units are known for their clean and transparent sound, and both have low self-noise and high maximum gain. However, the Crescendo has a bit more refinement, smoothness and realism in its sound. The sonic benefits, additional features, and fantastic build quality of the preamp are worth the price difference. However, I will also keep the AEA TRP2 for some field recordings, as it is easier to transport.

Some thoughts on microphone preamps

Most audio interfaces have adequate preamps for most applications and users. So unless every other aspect of your recording chain is well thought out, searching for microphone preamps is a futile endeavour. The differences between clean mic preamps are only subtle but can become important when combined with other competent equipment and production skills. If you are confident in your setup and all you are missing is a good mic preamp, I'd suggest forgoing cheap deals and saving up until you can afford a high-end preamp like the Crescendo duo.

The Coda

The SPL Crescendo duo microphone preamp is one of the best options for recording classical guitar. It is a well-designed and sophisticated device that is capable of producing excellent recordings and is made to last a lifetime.

---

SPL Audio - Crescendo duo

Best Reverb Plugin for Classical Guitar

Classical guitar performance is meant to be experienced in a natural space; the player, the guitar, the room, and the audience summon an ensemble and create a unique contract. As recordists, we aspire to capture such magical moments, but we don't always have the luxury to operate in fantastic-sounding spaces. As producers, we sometimes record in our homes or bland-sounding studios, in such occasions, the use of artificial reverb is unavoidable.

For a decade or so, I've been a happy user of 2CAudio's reverb plugins, Breeze at first and then Aether, as you can read in my post for the Three Essential Plugins for Classical Guitar. However, I recently got a MacBook Air M2 (review coming soon), and these plugins are not yet compatible with Apple's processors. Thus, although I'm still pretty satisfied with the results I got from both Aether and Breeze, I have to find their replacement. 

Note: As I learned after starting this test, Logic can run x86-x64 plugins natively and without having to setup Rosetta. Possibly with a hit on the CPU, but this should only become appartent on more heavy projects that solo classical guitar recordings. This fact make the need to find new plugins a but less imminent. 

After an initial market research, I downloaded trial versions of all plugins that caught my eye and are compatible with apple's silicon. Testing software with so many variables can be intensive, therefore I spent enough time with each plugin to understand its interface and try to make it work for my taste and needs.

The reverbs I tested this time:

• Neunaber WET Reverberator

• Strymon BigSky

• Universal Audio Lexicon 224 Digital Reverb (Spark Native)

• Universal Audio Pure Plate Reverb (Spark Native)

• FLUX IRCAM Verb v3

• Apple Chromaverb

• RELAB RX480

• RELAB RX480 Essentials

• FabFilter Pro-R FLUX IRCAM Verb v3 

• LiquidSonics Seventh Heaven

• TC Electronic VSS4 HD Native (Non-compatible with Apple ARM Processors)

• 2CAudio Aether (Non-compatible with Apple ARM Processors)

• 2CAudio Breeze2 (Non-compatible with Apple ARM Processors)

My final assessment of the usefulness of these plugins is asserted not only on sound quality, ιntuitiveness and adjustability play a minor but meaningful role.

My least favourite reverb plugins

Neunaber WET Reverberator

No matter how much I tried, I couldn't make the Neunaber WET Reverberator Plugin sound decent enough for my uses. I wanted to like the sound, as the WET pedal, that the algorithm originates, is quite popular among electric and flamenco guitarists. In all settings, there is always some chorusing on the reverb tail that I couldn't remove, and the space doesn't sound realistic, natural or with a desirable sound signature.

The price of the WET Reverberator Plugin is reasonable, but considering that there are a few plugins at a similar price (especially during sales), besides the decent sounding free plugins included with most major DAWs, I cannot recomended it even for those on a tight budget.

Strymon BigSky

Another plugin ported recently from a pedal with an almost cult-like following is the Strymon BigSky Plugin. I was looking forward to testing it, however the experience was underwhelming. Not only the sound quality of the Room, Plate and Hall algorithms was not on par with the other reverbs of my test, but the tweakability was also pretty limited. Perhaps the other algorithms included could justify the high praise and price, but for classical guitar, the sounds were not convincing enough. Thus, another hard pass unless you are looking for shimmer reverbs for your classical guitar.

Apple ChromaVerb

The last of the three not-good-enough reverb plugins is Apple’s ChromaVerb, which is included in Logic's vast plugin collection. The UI is much more intuitive than the "pedal" plugins, and getting a usable sound was not that hard. As expected, the ambience created by the ChromaVerb pales in comparison to the most sophisticated reverbs of the test; it lacks finesse and sounds more like an effect than a realistic space. But given that this is a free option, the results were better than expected.

The good but not-for-me

LiquidSonics Seventh Heaven

Another plugin that seems to be loved by many producers is the LiquidSonics Seventh Heaven. LiquidSonics claims to reproduce the algorithms of the acclaimed Bricasti M7. I have never used the M7 in person, so I cannot confirm or deny this. What I can back up is that the Seventh Heaven has a rich and refined sound, and I can see why it is so popular. The interface is pretty modern and intuitive, I was able to get a sound I liked right away. After comparing it to some of the other plugins though, I concluded that it sounds a bit too polished and generic for my taste. It is worth noting that the Seventh Heaven is the only convolution-based reverb of the test.

Moving on, a reverb plugin that will satisfy those who want extreme control over how the space sounds is the FLUX IRCAM Verb v3. The Verb v3 creates the most realistic-sounding room recreation of the bunch, and could be perfect for film production or other uses that realism and accuracy are desired. In addition, the control the UI provides is pretty phenomenal. I needed some time to get to know how every parameter affects the sound, but after a while, the somewhat uncommon layout made total sense, and I was pleased by how much control the Flux plugin offers. Soundwise, the IRCAM reverb lucks a bit of musicality and elegance for solo classical instruments.

FLUX IRCAM Verb v3

A utility reverb plugin

One of my favourite plugin developers is FabFilter. I really like how powerful their various plugins are, love the clean and pristine sound quality, and appreciate the modern and intuitive UI. I own their Mastering bundle and use it almost every day. 

I downloaded the trial version of the Pro-R when it was released a few years ago and did enjoy the user interface and sound, but not enough to change the 2CAudio reverbs I have been using almost forever. This time, I got to play more with the Pro-R and even used it in the production of my latest release: 'Will Have Been'. It is a very intuitive and capable reverb plugin, not my favourite sounding of the bunch but very useful and easy to use. So, I'm debating getting it now or waiting for a sale, but FabFilter's Pro-R will definitely find its place in my collection.

FabFilter Pro-R

---

---

Rent or own

Universal Audio Lexicon 224

A reverb plugin I was happy to see released in native format - without requiring the expensive dongle that is called Apollo - is Universal Audio's Lexicon 224 Digital Reverb. Universal Audio has the resources to create some great plugins, but some of the hype comes from the fact that they were only available through their DSP-powered interfaces. That was perhaps necessary a decade ago, but computers today are so powerful that this business model makes little to no sense. With the release of Spark Native, Universal Audio seems to have realised that. 

Universal Audio Pure Plate

The Universal Audio Lexicon 224 Digital Reverb sounds musical and manages not to get in a way. Besides, lots of attention has been given on the UI, which looks beautiful but is a bit limited. The Pure Plate reverb sounded perhaps even more musical, albeit less natural for solo classical guitar. 

I liked both reverbs from Universal Audio, but if there is one thing I hate more than USB dongles is the subscription model for software - an argument against using Adobe apps as well. Now, $149,99 a year for all the Spark Native plugins is not so bad. But, considering that I don't have any use for any of the other plugins, I decided to cancel my subscription at the end of the trial period and reevaluate later.

Early reflection goodness

When I first got into recording, personal computers were not powerful enough, and native plugin offerings were pretty limited. For that, I used to own a TC Electronic Powercore unit and loved the TC VSS4 algorithm. The Powercore was much of a hustle later on for me to keep using it, and native plugins became capable enough, so I parted ways with it. TC Electronic released the VSS4 HD Native plugin, and although it is not compatible with apple silicon yet, including it in the comparisons can only be constructive. 

TC Electronic VSS4 HD

The VSS4 HD sounds pristine and lush, with some of the most realistic early reflections. It makes any recording sound somewhat more three-dimensional. Oher algorithms may sound more pleasing for longer reverbs, but the VSS4 HD is hard to beat for short realistic reverbs. 

Vintage vibes

RELAB RX480 v4

One of the best-sounding reverbs of the bunch is the RELAB RX480 Dual-Engine V4. It is supposed to be sample-accurate dual engine recreation of the legendary Lexicon 480L. I cannot confirm or deny the claim as I never had the pleasure to listen one in person. The RX480 is truly stunning with its plush, thick sound. A more modern UI could make the RX480 more straightfoward, as the LARC-type graphic control would make more sense to those with experience with the original Lexicon units, but I could live with that. It is much more impreesive than the UAD 224 Reverb and sounds more pleasing to my ears. The Random Hall algorithm especially is impeccable. 

Moreover, RELAB has a lighter version, the RX480 Essentials, which packs the same basic 480L sound with a less overwhelming UI and at a burgain price for what you get.

The familiar

2CAudio Aether

I purchased the 2CAudio Breeze several years ago, then moved on to the Aether. I'm using both plugins it tandem sometimes; the Breeze for a more natural space and Aether for a thicker sound. Both plugins are exceptional, with first-rate sound quality and offer plenty of control. I was so pleased with this combination that I stopped looking for other reverbs. I somehow also missed trying the Breeze2 when it got released. 

As it is obvious, I'm used to the sound of these plugins. I downloaded a trial version of Breeze2 to conclude this comparison. Both 2CAudio plugins sound admirable, with the Aether being the most versatile, especially for those who are also into sound design. But I was particularly surprised by the Breeze2. The placement of the solo classical guitar in space is very realistic and offers lots of depth. The Breeze2 sounds lush without sounding as much as an effect or too sterile as some of the other plugins. 

2CAudio Breez2

Although it is not yet compatible with the Apple ARM chips, and perhaps there never will be. Given that I already had the first version, the update to the Breeze2 was inexpensive for me, so I didn't give a second though. Unfortunatelly, due a dispute at 2CAudio, the future of the company is currently uncertain. So, I cannot recommend either one, at least for now.

Some thoughts on convolution reverb

I've tried convolution reverbs in the past and had determined that they don't work for me, but I thought that this time might be different perhaps. In addition to Apple's Space Designer, I downloaded the Inspired Acoustics Inspirata Silver and HOFA IQ Reverb v2. As much as I wanted to like them, I never got them to blend well with the dry tone. Admittingly, impulse respneses sound very natural and realistic, but It always sounds like a cross-fade of room ambience and classical guitar layers than an instrument in a room. Furthermore, the IRs tend to get a bit weird whenever I am pushing them. I understand that the results rely on the specific IRs, but I get satisfying results with algorithmic reverbs to investigate convolution reverbs further at this time.

Conclusions

If who don't have a problem with subscriptions and might have uses for the other UAD plugins, the Spark Native is hard to beat. For a versatile reverb with a clean but superb sound, the FabFilter Pro-R ticks all the boxes. Lastly, for vintagey charachter and thicker reverbs, the RELAB plugins are outstanding. 

For me, the Breeze2 will replace the original Breeze for realistic but musical sounding spaces, and the LX480 will replace the Aether for characterful reverbs. And, I’ll keep an open spot for the FabFilter Pro-R.

Bang & Olufsen Beoplay H9 (3rd Generation) Review

They do sound good, but it's not all fine.

Wireless headphones that don't sound like a bloated mess are hard to come by. Professional audio brands don't seem interested in this market segment, while consumer products are often tuned so weirdly that it gives me nausea even when I think about it; clarity and definition sit very low in the design goals list.

Admittingly, I avoided some of the more expensive ones. I already have high-end wired headphones, and I couldn't justify spending too much on wireless headphones just for casual use. Besides, budget wired headphones that sound excellent are not scarce, while good sounding, comfortable headphones of the wireless sort seem to be an elusive combination.

However, a couple of months ago, I found a great deal on the Bang & Olufsen Beoplay H9 3rd generation and decided to purchase them.

Bang & Olufsen

Bang & Olufsen is a Danish premium headphone and speaker manufacturer with an almost century-old history. With a pretty much consumer-oriented marketing and a glamorous design aesthetic, it gives the impression of a lifestyle brand rather than a high-end audio manufacturer. Although it is undeniable that part of its success is attributed to the market that lusts for premium, higher-status products, reports about the superior sound quality are always favourable.

Bang & Olufsen H9 3rd Generation

First impressions

Unboxing the Beoplay H9 3rd gen. is everything you expect from such a brand. The box has a snug fit and feels much like an Apple product; opening the lid has an ultra-smooth action. The headphones sit comfortably on a soft-feeling moulded cell to keep them safe during transportation. There is also a carrying pouch and a basic assortment of cables. I like the attention to detail, but honestly, I would gladly trade the "high-end" experience for a decent carrying case since the included cloth is a mere dustcover. It is noteworthy that both the anniversary edition H95 and the HX, the succeeder of the H9, come with a hardshell case.

The headphones feel good on the hand and are well made; metal yokes, leather earpads, metal sliders, cushioned fabric headband and quality plastic earcups. A unique feature of the Beoplay is the mechanism that extends the chokes as it moves fluidly instead of having the more usual clicky steps. The action is buttery smooth, and the resistance is ideal as it's not difficult to adjust but holds its place strongly enough.

The pouch is nice, but mainly for the dust or light scratches.

Sound and tweakability

Pairing the H9 3rd gen. with my Google Pixel and MacBook was effortless, and after listening to some classical music, I was pleasantly surprised by the sound quality. The B&O sound is smooth and easy to listen to without sacrificing clarity much. The stock response is a bit recessed on the highs, resulting in a warmer overall presentation, but the drivers are flexible enough, so I could easily fine-tune to my liking with the free Beoplay app.

Low notes are deep and well behaved; they don't overwhelm the overall image. The H9 3rd gen. midrange is pretty competent; well-captured recordings sound fairly realistic. Instruments sound like themselves, with their individual tonal qualities distinguished.

The high-end response matches the overall sound signature of Beoplay. It doesn't demand your attention but is not too restrained either. It supports the natural reproduction of instruments and voices and grants a less analytic and more fun listening experience. The room ambience in solo recordings is more laid-back than on typical studio headphones.

I would not use the H9 3rd gen. for mixing or other critical listening purposes, so they won't replace my Focal Clear MG or even my trusted Beyerdynamic DT880. However, for casual listening and the convenience that the wireless connectivity offers, I am happy finally have a Bluetooth headphone that sounds good enough for the intended uses. With the noise-cancelling turned off, the presentation is more akin to open headphones rather than closed, which is an impressive feat.

Controls and connections.

Active noise-cancelling

Engaging the active noise-cancelling alters the sound to some extent. There is less depth and meat to the sound, and the highs become somewhat more fake-sounding as if filters are applied on both ends of the spectrum. There is also a noticeable increase in self-noise. So, it's not an option I would leave "on" all the time, but, I accept the lessening of the overall sound quality for the times when outside noise could render listening without noise-cancelling unbearable.

The effect of noise cancelling is quite decent, but compared to other headphones, it is not nearly as powerful.

Transparency mode

The implementation of the transparency mode of the Beoplay doesn't make much sense to me. The responsiveness of the touch interface is pretty sluggish, so if someone talks to me when I'm wearing them, it is way faster to remove the headphones and talk to them than to engage in funny gestures with my fingers on the right earcup until I find the correct spot to get to the transparency mode. Besides, the resulting sound is rather repulsive.

I could see the benefits of the transparency mode if it wouldn't pause whatever you were listening to before or even more so if it could work during a call to hear my voice more naturally. But, that's not how it functions.

Touch me if you can

I like the idea of a futuristic world where everything will be effortless and efficient, but the touch interface on the H9 3rd gen. is neither. Au contraire, there is a throughout unresponsiveness that becomes annoying pretty fast. I prefer the more typical set of buttons for controlling the headphones anytime. Saying that, the circular gesture for controlling the volume is works smoothly.

(Dis)comfort

The sound quality and feel of the H9 3rd gen. could make me overlook these minor complaints, which in the grand scheme might appear superficial. Unfortunately, my biggest gripe is about the second most crucial aspect of any headphone. The Beoplay H9 3rd gen. is one of the most uncomfortable headphones I have ever worn. The earcups are somewhat small for an around-ear headphone and press the ears, but the worst part is the headband. I cannot understand how a manufacturer with such a long history in the industry could not get the headband right. I can only wear the B&O for about 45 minutes before they become unbearable. Regrettably, I didn't do any extended listening sessions during the return period, so I had to keep them.

Wireless range and battery

The range is exceptional. I could move from room to room without any issue. Although the Bluetooth protocol is older, I haven't experienced any drop-offs or other ill effects. Battery life is adequate for normal use.

They lay nicely flat.

Getting passive

The B&O H9 3rd generation sports a 3,5 input that bypasses the on-board DAC and offers a passive experience, which was a decisive factor for me when I purchased them as I could still use them when they are out of juice. In addition, this ensures that the headphone won't become an expensive paperweight when, in a few years, the battery will not be able to hold a charge. Unluckily, following the trend of our times, the battery is not user-replaceable.

When the H9 3rd gen. is connected passively to my MacBook the sound is pretty decent. When I plug the B&O into any high-end DAC, like my RME ADI-2 Pro FS, the limitations of the drivers become apparent as a slightly harsher character is being exposed. This perhaps means that part of the balance and elegance of the Beoplay become possible through digital manipulation. This is not a critique but rather just an observation.

Final thoughts

Annual design revisions, upgraded Bluetooth protocol and futuristic touch interfaces are not enough to ignore that the Bang & Olufsen H9 3rd gen. are uncomfortable to wear for a prolonged time. Maybe it's just me, so I could only recommend them if you can find them at a fair price and a vendor with a good return policy. If you don't have any hot spots, the sound is reasonably satisfying for wireless headphones.

Focal Clear MG Professional from the perspective of a Classical musician

Focal is a household name in the audio world, renowned among professionals and amateurs, besides hi-fi and car audio enthusiasts. With over 40 years of history, it is safe to say that they know speakers. Headphones is a relatively recent endeavour for them, but with the introduction of the open-back Utopia some five years ago, Focal shook the industry. Soon after, Elear and Clear follow at more budget-friendly prices.

After four years from the release of the original Clear's, and many developments at their closed-back headphone arsenal, Focal employs all recent innovations and research with a sole objective. The aim is to improve the mid-priced open-back design and assure the purest listening experience at home and the studio.

The Focal Clear MG Professional.

My usual complaint about headphones is that most are made to either sound too analytical (read bright) or too fun. Either way, the result is an unnatural reproduction; instruments tend to sound false. Whilst I understand the uses of the analytical headphone in the recording environment or the fun element for those who prefer a more produced sound. As a classical guitarist, I'm used to hearing real instruments in the wild, and unfortunately, only a few headphones succeed in replicating them in an honest but exciting way.

In addition, a seamless transition between my monitors and headphones is far more productive in my workflow, along with keeping me sane with tonal decisions. Focal, being first a speaker manufacturer, approached headphones from that perspective. A choice that I appreciate and fully endorse.

The original Clear has been warmly received by producers and audiophiles as it strikes a fine balance of clarity, dynamics and realism. The question is what the new MG version can improve on to be worth the extra money.

An elegant protective case.

Presentation

The box might say "professional" on it, but Focal, having one of its feet in the HiFi world, has learned a few tricks about presentation.

The Clear MG Professional come in a minimalistic black box that feels almost as expensive as some headphones from other manufacturers. Upon opening, a hardshell case covered in some kind of reddish fabric emerges. A (too?) tight zipper allows it to open flat; the headphone is sitting comfortably and safely inside the moulded cavity. There is a bit of extra room for the short and relatively stiff but high-quality cable. I love keeping my equipment secure, especially when travelling, and the provided case is one of the best I've seen. Also, everything smells like expensive french cologne.

Extra earpads and coiled calbe.

Furthermore, a rectangular presentation case holds the extra earpads and the additional coiled cable. I tried to use the coiled cable when I first got the Clear MG about three months ago because I wanted a longer reach for my setup, but it is utterly unusable; heavy, bulky, junky. A second straight but longer or a much less weighty coiled cable would have been much prefered.

At 1.2m the straight cable is quite short for most uses.

With the included cables ranging from inoperable to awkward, I wish that Focal (and other headphone manufacturers) would give us the option to purchase just the headphone and case, without any extras, for a couple hundred less. I know they won't, but I hate to own (and pay for) things that I'll never use.

Are you professional enough?

Similarly to the original, there are two versions of the same headphone; the Clear MG and the Clear MG Professional. According to Focal, there should be no real difference between the two versions other than the aesthetics and included accessories. I bought the MG Professional because I have more use for an additional pair of earpads. I also prefer the subdued red on black aesthetics to the more luxury-looking copper version. Either version is gorgeous, no question.

Elegant honeycomb pattern on the earcups.

Looks and feel

As mentioned the headphone looks stunning. The redesigned grille with the honeycomb pattern, soft genuine leather on the headband and plush matching microfiber cushions for the ears and lower part of the headband make the Clear MG one of the best-looking headphones on the market today. 

The headband with perforated microfiber cloth ensures ample wearing comfort.

Apart from the aesthetics, the Clear MG is also extremely well-built. With all metal parts, everything feels solid and premium. The plugs fit snug and with a very satisfying "click". The spring-loaded mechanism on the earcups ensures ample comfort and seal. The perforated earpads also feel very smooth and comfortable, maybe not as luxurious as real leather ones, but they breathe more. There is enough space for medium ears, but people with large ears might find them a bit tight overall.

Although the headphone is quite heavy at around 450g, the weight distribution is such that the Clear MG don't tire me even after hours of listening or mixing.

Listening and comparisons

Build quality, looks and comfort are vital, but what good is a €1500 headphone if it doesn't sound incredible?

While other headphones, like the Sennheiser HD800 or Beyerdynamic T1 series, seduce the listener with a big stage presentation and ample highs, Focal takes the total opposite approach. The Clear MG prioritises realism, tonality, dynamics and intimacy while remaining detailed and transparent. The result is the most realistic listening experience headphones can offer; finely recorded instruments sound as they do in real life. 

The high-end sits where it should be for music listening and production. The Clear MG doesn't emphasise recording artefacts or noise like the Beyerdynamic DT1990/880 but doesn't hide anything either. It delivers highs in a more or less unopinionated way. I find the high-end emphasis of the Beyer's to be welcome during some stages of music production, especially early on, and don't plan on selling them. But, I honestly enjoy the balance and purity of the Focal much more.

The headphone sits comfortably inside the carrying case.

There is a lot of misconception about detail retrieval and the typical high-end boost in headphones and speakers. Many people are used to a V- or U-shaped sound, which can be impressive but inaccurate. With acoustic instruments, most things happen in the middle frequencies. If those are not presented honestly, the timbre of instruments suffers. The original Clear's had a slight bit of pointy mids, which forced me to return them eventually. Focal solved that issue with the Clear MG's as mids are phenomenal here; low-mids sound full and defined, and high-mids offer excess detail. Music sounds real.

Lows are also exceptional. Keep in mind that I don't listen to bass-heavy music, but with solo instruments, orchestral music or even jazz ensembles, the low end is much fuller than what you expect from an open-back headphone. It provides essential support but never overwhelms. Not unless the music is poorly mixed. 

Although I mainly use monitors (Focal and Geithain) for tonal decisions, this is the first time I can be confident to mix with headphones when travelling or setting up microphones on location. Also, switching between monitors and headphones doesn't make me schizophrenic.

Honeycomb grill inside the earcups as well.

Criticism

There is only one somewhat negative thing I can say about the frequency balance of the Clear MG, and this only applies to music listening. They can be slightly forgiving on the high-end, but if mids or lows are not captured or mixed masterfully, the Focal's will shout out the problems. 

The extremely low distortion of the Clear MG reveals compression and muddiness almost to a fault. Incorrectly positioned spot microphones on orchestras were also easy to identify effortlessly. On the other hand, great recordings can sound extraordinary and with such purity that brings tears to the eyes.

Non-fatiguing

With extra-long listening evening sessions during the Covid madness, it became apparent that not only the Clear MG are very comfortable for lengthy sessions but also practically fatigue-free. The even tonality and low distortion don't tire my ears in a way that other more shouty headphones or speakers do.

The earpads fit rather snug.

A clear keeper

The Focal Clear MG is a wonderfully designed headphone with striking resolution and depth; string and wind instruments, guitars, pianos, and singers sound rather spectacular. If I close my eyes, the playback medium disappears, as if I sit next to the performers. That's the greatest compliment I can give to any headphone.

Now, I only need to find a nice aftermarket cable, any suggestions?

Neumann KH 80 DSP Studio Monitors Review - I'm not thrilled!

The iconic Neumann badge.

Neumann is arguably one of the most influential microphone makers, responsible for numerous classic microphones that have captured some of the most historic performances; Neumann has defined our perception of how great recordings sound and represents the highest class of musical production.

During the last decade or so, things have gradually been changing at the Berlin headquarters. At first with the introduction of more affordable microphones, like the TLM 102 that brought the famous Neumann badge to the home studio, and more recently with microphone preamps, studio headphones and monitors. Neumann aims to cover every need of the recording studio.

Active Studio Monitors

Imposing looks; similar to the KH120.

The KH 80 DPS Studio monitor borrows from the design of its bigger sibling, the KH 120, which itself is based on the Klein + Hummel O 110. Apart from the size difference, the KH 80 is made of plastic instead of aluminium to be more portable, but also cheaper to make. Furthermore, DPS is utilised to achieve a flatter frequency response, with finer phase response, and a sophisticated room correction algorithm.

The small Neumann monitor has been warmly received by home and professional engineers alike, many also claim that it is even better than the KH 120 for midrange detail retrieval. Most reviews I could find were very positive, similarly to my experience with the KH 120 and KH 310. Therefore, I was looking forward to trying a pair of KH 80's in my room. Is time for me to buy a new pair of small monitors?

Handling

The KH 80 DSP arrived tightly packed. They are smaller and much lighter than you might expect. Unfortunately, their plasticky build, the thin mains cable with the flimsy plug and the ultra-tight space on the back for the XLR cable don't give the best first impressions. It seems that Neumanneiser cut some corners here, but hopefully, the sound will make me forget these weaknesses.

The space for the connectors is limited; I guess it is a plus for very tight spaces.

As soon as you power on the Monitors, the Neumann badge in the front illuminates in red for a few seconds and then turns to white when they are ready for use. The curvy housing is finished in matt sparkly grey; the black woofer, and the tweeter with its substantial waveguides look pretty cool, I have to admit.

Apart from these nice touches, the KH 80 feel more like an oversized computer speaker than a serious studio monitor. I can see the appeal of compactness and lightness for those who seek a good sounding but portable monitor for location recordings, but for the price, I am a bit underwhelmed.

So, how do the KH 80 Studio Monitors sound?

I had the monitors for almost two months, I used them in different productions, as well as regular listening sessions of a variety of (mainly classical) music. I got familiar enough with the KH 80 to be confident with they sound, but I'm a bit baffled with them.

Don't get me wrong, it is a decent sounding monitor. The greatest feat of Neumann is how tight and defined they managed to get the low end for such a tiny monitor. Bass and low mids provide enough depth, greater than what the size suggests, and good enough accuracy.

The rest of the range is less inspiring though. The midrange has a somewhat boxy quality to it; guitars, in particular, tend to sound harsher than with other systems. It is revealing enough, but If you get the mid frequencies to sound right on the KH 80, they will end up sounding too polite in general.

I was expecting a more revealing presentation on the top end, but higher-mids and highs here sound slightly more laid back than I wished. I like that the KH 80 is a non-fatiguing and relaxed monitor, but it won't display otherwise obvious problematic audio artefacts.

The imaging of the KH 80 is very good for the price and offers plenty of localization from left to right, as well as useful front to back information. Reverbs sound realistic and are it is easy to hear what the different settings affect.

All in all, I could make the KH 80's work for me, but I was not sad when I returned them.

Auto stand-why?

Controls.

One of the seemingly trivial things that annoyed me with the KH 80's is the auto-standby feature, or rather, the performance of it. The monitors would automatically go on standby after about 90 minutes of inactivity. Then, by running through a relatively loud signal, the monitors would wake up, and after a few seconds, they would be ready for use.

On paper, this is fantastic as it would mean that I have one less thing to worry about when I leave my desk. The issue is that each monitor has a mind of its own. Sometimes, one monitor would go on standby first, or one monitor would need a louder signal to wake up. The result is that I had to tolerate several times loud music for a few seconds until both monitors were awake.

Besides turning this "feature" off, it is possible to change the time before standby mode but as with the other DSP capabilities of the monitors, their implementation is rather quirky and off-putting that I didn't bother. I cannot understand why in this day of age, Neumann couldn't implement a more intuitive solution. I live in Berlin and every second person here is either an artist or a software developer, it wouldn't have been too hard to find the right people for this. Neumann is a hardware company, and software is an afterthought, but they need to take it more seriously.

Conclusion

Overall, the KH 80 is a decent monitor with some desirable attributes, but I think that Neumann hit slightly off-target with a monitor that is neither analytic nor the most fun. It is rather, dare I say, a bit boring sounding. It is an ultra-compact and light monitor, that sounds as big as it looks. Perhaps that is its strongest achievement, or maybe I was expecting a bit too much from Neumann. For a little more money, the KH 120 is a better and bigger sounding monitor; for considerably less, the Focal Shape 40 is hard to beat for the price.

Ollo Audio S4X Reference Headphone Review

Ollo Audio is a relatively new headphone company, based in beautiful Slovenia. They are not famous, at least not yet; but, they already managed to create some buzz around their two headphones, a closed and an open back. Both designs promise a natural response, while the open headphone, the S4X, is marketed as reference headphone. 

My main complaints about most headphones are that they are either too bass-heavy, too harsh in the highs, or too expensive. Therefore, as soon as I heard about Ollo's ambitions to produce a high-quality, reasonably priced open-back headphone with flat frequency response, I knew I had to try it.

From the edge of the Alps

The S4X comes in a rather minimal box, both in size and appearance. Upon opening, one is treated with a canny slogan: "Save the planet, you can't listen to music in space". Along with the headphone, here is a small black paper pouch that protects the removable cable, and a pleather carrying bag. The presentation is simple and imparts a handcrafted feeling.

There is also a black envelope that encompasses various documents. Besides a manual, there is a printed frequency response measurement and a hand-signed certificate of authenticity. Neat touches. Lastly, a caution notice alerts us not to press hard the headphones on flat surfaces, to avoid distorting the membrane of the speakers.

Manufacturing and comfort

The headphone itself looks quite handsome and feels very well made. Quality materials have been used throughout; wooden earcups, stainless steel grills and headband, along with memory foam earcups. The weight of the S4X is substantial, but the self-adjusting strap in combination with the plush feeling of the earpads, made of a hybrid of velvet and pleather, make them very comfortable to wear for hours.

Although these are over-ear headphones, the earpads are what I consider as medium-sized. They fit my ears snuggly and are deep enough, but there is not much space around. If you have larger ears than average, you will feel them getting squeezed. 

Another nice touch is the removable cable that terminates on a dual 2.5mm TRS for the cups, and 3.5mm TRS that connects to the source. A 3,5mm to 6.3mm adapter is included to accommodate any setup. The cable is 2 meters in length, of good quality and light, so it doesn't weight down the headphone. It has cloth braiding until the Y split for extra protection; then divides into two red rubberized cables that connect into each cup to minimize microphonics.

The cups don't have L/R markings; they become left or right speakers depending on which cable-end you connect to them. This interchangeability makes servicing very easy, but since the lettering on the cable is tiny, it gets a bit annoying to look for it every time. A coloured connector would have been preferable, but that's only a small annoyance and is easy to fix.

Reference(s)

When I received the Ollo's about two months ago, I let them burn-in for about 100 hours and have been using them since almost daily. I've been directly comparing them with the Focal Clear Pro, various Beyerdyanamics, and AKG's, along with PSI and Focal studio monitors.

A fantastic headphone for me doesn't have a sound of its own; it gives me an honest presentation and ensures a seamless transition between it and my monitors, regardless if I use headphones for mixing, mastering, or pure enjoyment.

Reality check

I'm happy to report that Ollo's claim for a flat headphone is not just marketing talk.

The S4X has a full response and shows remarkable depth in its presentation; the instruments feel real. The sound is natural with fast transient response. Also, there seems to be an absence of earcup resonances.

Other than the slightly elevated low-end, no frequency stands out. Bass is solid-sounding and has an excellent extension. Mids are delicate and detailed, and highs are smooth and non-fatiguing. The sound is true to the source. Ollo's have a similar to my monitors' response; much more than my other headphones - other than the Focal Clear Pro. 

The soundstage is average with an intimate presentation; the Ollo's put the listener on the stage with the musicians. I also get the impression that the S4X are a bit like a semi-open headphone instead of a fully open design. Detail retrieval is above average, but not in the realm of the Focal Clear or Beyer T1.2.

Listening to properly captured classical guitar recordings, the sound is immersive with every detail presented accurately. If there are problems in the recording or performance, the headphone will show it without shouting at you. This makes it both an excellent tool in the studio and an enjoyable listening experience at home.

In use

With an impedance of 32 Ohm, the headphone is easily driven even by mobile devices. It does sound considerably better with my RME ADI-2 Pro FS or the RME Babyface Pro FS.

Their small size makes them also, great for location work; although Germany is on lockdown since November and I didn't have the chance to test them in that application.

A modular approach

Aside from the sound, what's cool about Ollo is the philosophy behind the designs. They allow their customers to service the headphones themselves, if the necessity arises, as every part is easily replaceable at home. To sweeten the deal, even more, they offer a five-year warranty, and the ability to upgrade the headphones with new drivers and other parts.

In other words, Ollo promises a customer experience opposite to that of almost every other headphone (and not only) company. 

Complaints

My only gripe with the S4X is the excessive rining of the stainless steel headband. It only occurs when you put them on or touch it for some reason, so in actual use, it is not a problem, It does give a negative impression on an overall very well thought out headphone. 

Honestly, I got used to it and it doesn't bother me anymore, but I wish that Ollo would find a replacement or a way to decouple the headband from the driver.

I would also like to see a hardshell case option, as it would offer better protection when travelling.

Conclusions

Ollo's marketing is quite aggressive and bold, but it is probably necessary at this stage as they need to get noticed. Unlike some of the most popular brands which have flooded the market with numerous models, Ollo seems to listen to their customers and refine their designs.

I don't know if the S4X is a brutally honest headphone, like Ollo claims; but it is an accurate and detailed headphone, without being overly analytic. 

The refined and natural sound, coupled with excellent craftsmanship, and the fact that there is no middle man to inflate the prices, make it one of the best headphones in their price range and well above. 

---

Visit the Ollo Audio Website

Essential Accessories for Classical Guitarists

One of the things that I always loved about the classical guitar is its simple nature. We can practically make music anywhere; all we need is somewhere to sit, good nails, and a decent guitar. Oh boy, was I wrong?

It turns out that a fresh strings and a bunch of scores are not enough. Here are some essential accessories for the classical guitarist.

Take your guitar and play anywhere you want.

Humidity Control

Fine guitars are very delicate instruments, drastic changes in the temperature and humidity can damage them, and even subtle non-ideal climate conditions in prolonged exposure can negatively affect your guitar.

You don’t have to live in a desert for your guitar to get dried out.

I guess that you already have a nice hardshell case to keep your guitar inside when you are not practising, this would keep it safe to some extent but is not enough. Unless you live in a perfectly stable environment, average in every possible way, you need to make sure that your guitar feels comfortable. That means around 45%-50% relative humidity level in room temperature.

If you have a humidifier/dehumidifier in your room, and never travel with your guitar, then you are fine. With no small kids or pets, you can also keep your guitar on a stand. For the rest of us who travel for concerts, lessons, or holidays, the constant and sometimes harsh humidity changes can harm the instruments.

The D'Addario Humidipak keeps my guitars in a perfect condition.

After trying a few different options, I've been using the D'Addario Humidipak Maintain System for a couple of years; it gives me peace of mind even when I travel to Greece. It comes with two cloth pouches for the case and inside the instrument, and three humidifying packs; one for the headstock and two for the soundhole.

They should last around four months, but depending on where you live, it can take up to a year for them to dry out. If you live in a dry environment, the first pack will get stiff quicker than that.

Tip - When you play keep them in your case, and remember to close it tightly. This habit will make sure of maintaining the ideal conditions inside your case and will keep the humidifying packs healthier for longer.

You can also combine it with the D’Addario Humiditrack to monitor any humidity and temperature changes of your instruments for additional mental calmness.

Tip - This summer, I brought a few dried out humidifying packs to Greece, and after being exposed for a couple of weeks in the high humidity levels of a seashore town, they recharged and became as good as new.

Keep it clean.

Keeping it Clean

The D’Addario Micro-Fiber cloth takes care of polishing my guitars.

Dust, sweat, and finger oils are some of the worst enemies of a beautifully applied finish on a guitar. I prefer not to apply chemicals to my guitars myself; I leave it to my luthier to take care of things like that. But for regular cleaning, I use two D’Addario Micro-Fiber polishing cloths; one for wiping down the strings and neck after playing and one for cleaning the top, back and sides every few days.

Be gentle, and always apply circular wiping motion. If you live in a hot environment and sweat a lot or wear short sleeve t-shirts, you should wipe down the guitar every day.

My Lens Dust Blower takes care of everything.

Tip - Before wiping down your guitar with the micro-fiber cloth, you may want to remove some larger dust particles first that may scratch the top, I use a camera lens dust blower for that. Actually, I use it to blow dust out of almost every piece of equipment.

In case there is a dirty spot that doesn't go away with a simple wiping, wet the cloth slightly with water, apply the wet cloth on the area that needs to be cleaned, then buff away moisture with the dry part of the cloth (or another cloth).

Tip - These cloths are very sturdy and should last many years. If dirt accumulates, you can wash them in warm water, just don't use any detergent or softener.

Changing Strings

A fresh set of strings can bring life and joy to our faces. But, changing strings is the necessary evil; nobody likes to do it.

Tuning machines heads.

Depending on the string type, I usually change strings on my guitar(s) every three to four weeks. Sometimes a little more than that if I don't have any serious session coming up, sometimes less than that If I have concerts and recordings. So, if you have a few guitars, changing strings can take up a lot of time, mostly winding and unwinding tuning pegs.

Tip - When you change strings, replace them one by one to keep the tension on the fretboard.

I still remember the revelation of using a string winder for the first time, some fifteen years ago. This invention matches that of the wheel, so simple, yet it transforms the life of a guitarist. Hyperboles aside, changing string with one can make the process a breeze.

D'Addario String Winder is a godsend tool.

Tip - Unwind the string, then cut it in the middle when it is somewhat loose. This habit will speed up things even more.

I use the D'Addario String Winder because as on top of the winding abilities, it is also a string cutter, and a bridge pin puller for all you that double as steel stringers.

Tip - Cut that excess stings that fly all over the headstock, not only they look ugly, but they can produce buzzing and other unwanted vibrations.

Small things can make a difference in keeping our instruments as healthy as possible. And although at first, some might seem inconvenient, they can easily become habits and you won't have to think about them ever again.

I hope that this article is helpful for you, let me know in the comments if there is something I forgot to mention.

---

Disclaimer - This article might seem to be sponsored by D'addario, but I assure you it is not. I purchased these products myself with my own money, and have been using them for many years.

Beyerdynamic DT 880 Premium Edition 250 Ohm Review

Natural-sounding headphone for professional mixing, mastering, and home listening. Or is it?

I love listening to music on headphones, I think it is the second-best way to immerse oneself into the music, to get isolated from the "world" around. For engineers, producers and home recordists, headphones can also be invaluable tools for analytical listening and be used as a reference for mixing. 

This is my first headphone review on the site. Headphone reviews are usually audiophile-centric (whatever that means), but I don't care much about magic dust.

For casual listening and mixing purposes, I would love my headphones to sound as close as possible to my Focal monitors, for a seamless transition. For analytical listening, I want to hear the air around the fingers as they reach for the strings. If you think this a hyperbole, the answer is yes, but you know what I mean. 

The question is if the Beyerdynamic DT 880 250 Ohm can fulfil any or both of these roles. Is it analytical, relaxed or neutral?

Incarnations

Beyerdynamic needs no introduction, they are around since the early 1930s and there is some type of DT headphones in every studio around the world. Noteworthy is that all their professional products are still made in Germany.

The cable is non-removable

Introduced in 1980, the DT 880 is a semi-open design, ideal for mixing and mastering according to Beyerdynamic. There are two distinct versions, the Pro for professional use and Premium Edition for home listening. Both sound the same though, with only some minor visual differences. I bought the Premium Edition because I prefer the straight cable (they are also slightly cheaper), but I would like the headband to be removable like on the Pro version.

The Premium Edition comes with a pleather foamed case for transporting, which is extremely bulky so it gets seldom used. The DT 880 rarely leaves my desk anyway. A slightly smaller and more convenient hard-shell nylon case is also available by Beyerdynamic at a reasonable cost.

Manufacturing and comfort

Industrial design with a mix of metal and plastic

The headphone follows the industrial design aesthetic of most Beyerdynamic products. I find the understated blend of black and grey shades very pleasing, and the mix of metal and top-quality plastic makes it very robust. The manufacturing of the DT 880 is impeccable; I have them since the beginning of 2018 and although it has slid from my desk quite a few times, it looks and functions just like the first day. 

The cable could be shorter

The DT 880 sits on my head very comfortable; the large velour ear pads and that thick padding on the headband allow for extended listening sessions without ever getting tired. The cable on the other hand is an aberration; it is thick, permanently fitted on one side, and way too long. The quality is decent, but I wish I could swap it with a smaller one as the RME ADI-2 Pro FS is at hands reach from my sitting position.

Listening

Although I believe that the DT 880 are some of the best headphones in their price range and even well above, I have mixed feelings about their performance. I know, that's not what you wanted to read, but let me explain.

The sound is generally neutral, especially the low-end and mids. They reach deep, but the bass is never exaggerated; if anything it can be quite lean for some tastes. The mids are pure and open, every detail is utmostly portrayed. There is a slight emphasis on the low-mids, but it is negligible.

Beyerdynamic DT 880 Premium Edition

My difficulty in loving the DT 880 is the high-end, which tends to be unnaturally piercing and sharp. Even some luscious and generally dark David Russel recordings can sound dazzling. The enlarged trebles are useful only when I search for undesired sound in my recordings; for any other listening purpose, it only takes out from the beautiful balance of the rest of the range.

The presentation is transparent and wide, the drivers are fast and the delivery dynamic. The biggest strength of the DT 880 comes from its ability to represent the individual frequencies in a disunited manner, detached from each other. This aspect is invaluable for analytical listening, but as a result, the headphones don't let me forget that I'm listening to a recording; the medium never disappears entirely.

Correction required

Beyerdynamic DT 880 and RME ADI-2 Pro FS

The DT 880 can improve dramatically if you are willing to bother with an equalizer. I had to create a custom EQ preset on the RME ADI-2 Pro FS to be able to appreciate them more. Taming the high-end makes the Beyerdynamics more comparable to my monitors. Still, the headphone remains utterly detailed but much more enjoyable than without any equalization applied. 

I wonder if Beyerdynamic could fix the treble response on the production model. Maybe they don't want to tweak such a classic design, or possibly they want you to buy the new T1.3, which seems to be the ideal headphone for people without hearing loss.

Ohmage

My version of the DT 880 is the 250 Ohm. Even if there is a reasonable level for my ears (I usually listen to music at relatively low levels) when I use it even though my MacBook's output, the sound improves significantly when I drive it with the ADI-2 Pro FS. A more power-hungry 600 Ohm version is also available, as well as a 32 Ohm version for mobile use. In any case, you won't hear what this headphone is possible to deliver if you don't pair it with a high-quality amplifier and DAC.

Beyerdynamic’s DT 880 vs DT 770 and DT 990

Mini jack and 6.3 mm screw adapter

Beyerdynamic offers three main alternatives at a similar price range, all with unique strengths. From the three, the DT 880 is the most balanced and natural-sounding, admittingly apart from the treble spike. The DT 990 is a fully open design and exceedingly analytic. To be honest, every time I listen to anything with it, I get dizzy with its excessive high-end. Finally, the DT 770 is closed-back and its main use is in the studio during tracking. It blocks external sounds to creep in and vice versa, but it doesn't sound nearly as nice as the DT880.

Conclusion

The Beyerdynamic DT 880 is clean and balanced for the most part, adequate for any professional use. It responds well to EQ, which can make it much more useful; the analytic Beyerdynamic nature is always present though, so it is impossible to get absorbed in the music. Considering its engineering and performance, the DT 880 is pretty affordable and is probably the best headphone at that price range, especially if you are willing to use some form of correction.

By the way, if you are still wondering; the best way for someone to fully appreciate the music is, of course, attending a concert.

Three Most Essential Plugins for the Classical Guitar

With the seemingly unlimited processing power of modern computers and affordability of recording equipment, it is not hard to make amazing recordings on location or even at our living rooms; and there is no need to wear a white coat to be able to use a microphone anymore. 

Abbey Road recording engineers in white coats

This democratisation of music production brought an abundance of plugins; plugins that we can use to shape our music in any shape or form we can imagine. We don't need to buy expensive and bulky hardware equalizers and reverb units anymore.

Albeit the plethora of plugins, I adopt a minimal approach. There are just a few of them that I use every day and consider to be crucial for my workflow. Here are the three most essential plugins for the classical guitar:

Phase Metering with the 2CAudio Vector

The classical guitar is a rich and complex-sounding instrument, and as one, it can only be fully appreciated when recorded in stereo. Most of the stereo microphone techniques require the microphones to be placed at some distance with each other, and the more microphones you use, the easier it gets to face phasing problems.

Phasing occurs when the wave shapes of two or more microphones are not perfectly aligned in the time domain. This attribute is not entirely undesirable; as the sound begins its journey from the plucked strings and the vibrations of the top of the guitar, our notes travel as sound waves towards the microphones and reach them at slightly different times. Combined with additional waves that reflect on the walls and other objects around us, all with small but not insignificant delays, these slight differences help to create the stereo effect that we experience. Not dissimilar to how our ears and brains perceive and interpret the world around us.

When these differences are augmented to a greater degree, phasing occurs and has a noticeable influence on the sound quality of our recordings. Cancellations and comb filtering can potentially strip fundamental frequencies from our recording, leaving the recorded guitar sound thin and weak. Phase problems can be fixed during mixing by aligning the offending tracks, but it's always preferable to take the extra time and correct this when setting up the microphones.

2CAudio Vector

Here is my process. After finding the desired positions of the guitar(ist) and microphones, I make the first test recordings, then I immediately load the 2CAudio Vector plugin to check for any phase issues. If needed, I move one of the microphones a centimetre or two, closer or further away. Possibly, I need to adjust the angle of the microphone(s). I make small changes and repeat as many times as necessary.

Any result higher with than +70 is acceptable, I strive though for an average of +80 or higher.

Additionally to the phase-meter, the 2CAudio Vector displays a visual spatial meter, a long-term average level, and panning meters. It is a very important tool, and, it is free.

Alternatives - for those who are on a Mac and use Logic Pro X, Apple provides a bare essential but usable alternative; the Correlation Meter, found under the Metering group. If free options are not for you, iZotope offers the Insight 2 metering plugin at a substantial price, which offers a lot of additional metering tools that can be handy.

Filtering, Tone Shaping and Surgical Corrections with the FabFilter Pro-Q 3

Learning how to use an equalizer correctly can transform a good recording to a world-class one. Not to say that it can save your wallet from the need of better guitars, microphones and other gear.

A gentle roll-off of the low (below 50Hz) and high frequencies (above 18000Hz) is my starting point. There is not much if any classical guitar information at these ranges and most speakers (for home, or even pro-audio) will attenuate these frequencies. I don't want my recordings to have much information that I cannot hear, anyway. 

FabFilter Pro-Q 3 in Action

Tip: I've created a preset with these filters so that I don't have to set them up every time. Better yet, I have created a logic template with my plugins and panning presets that I load any time I start a new session. Small things can make our lives easier and save a lot of time.

Next, I'll try to see if there is any unwanted frequency or resonance that needs to be tamed or even eliminated. I use a wide Q band when boosting frequencies for the smoothest response, and a narrow Q band when cutting to eliminate the offending frequency without affecting nearby elements.

And finally, I might apply a mild high shelf, boost or cut of a couple of dBs, if I find the need to get a crisper or darker sound. If there is too much body or not enough fullness, I apply a mild low shelf cut or boost. A little goes a long way.

To be honest, most of my solo recordings nowadays have a very limited amount of EQ (needless to point out that all the microphone comparisons on this site have no EQ or other processing). I try to get it right before the signal converts to digital, taking a great deal of consideration on the room and microphone technique, and my fingers on the guitar. Yet sometimes this is not possible for various reasons, and learning how to sculpt your sound with an equalizer can be invaluable.

For example, last year I decided to record my classical guitar at a historic monument in Greece, Zalongo. I took my trusty Sony PCM D100 portable recorder with me... on top of the mountain. The high altitude proved to be very challenging, the wind didn't allow for any normal position of the recorder, so it ended up being too low and on the side. When I returned home, I thought that the recording was ruined, but careful equalization saved the day.

My recent series of articles exclusively focuses on how I utilize EQ. If you are interested in gaining more knowledge about it, these articles are a great resource to refer to: Crafting Your Sound: How to shape your classical guitar recordings with EQ

The FabFilter Pro-Q 3 is one of the finest equalizers on the market. The sound is clean and precise, yet with some extra dimensionality and sweetness. The GUI is as intuitive as is breathing, the possibilities offered are virtually endless. Besides, a convenient real-time spectrum analyser to better judge what your EQ choices are affecting is available, as well as other useful tools. It is not cheap, but it is the best!

Alternatives - any modern DAW would have a decent equalizer built-in, basic filtering will be effortless, but more complicated sculpturing will be somewhat limited. Waves Q10 is an affordable equalizer with somewhat similar functionality and interface.

Telling sweet lies with the 2CAudio Aether

Considering that the performance is excellent, the general tone and attributes of the guitar well captured; anything we add at this point is a lie. Adding reverb to a recording is a necessary lie, as nothing will affect the listener more than the physical space that the music takes place.

Contrarily, nothing is more repulsive than a terrible recording trying to hide behind a wash of cheap "church" ambience. 

Tip: As reverb tends to smear the sound to a considerable degree, I make most judgments regarding EQ, microphone positioning, etc. without the plugin engaged. I want to have the best possible result, before applying any enhancing effects. I fine-tune my levels, panning and equalizer choices with the reverb later.

2CAudio Aether Algorithmic Reverb

Applying reverb needs to be a mindful process. To some extend it is a stylistic choice; what is appropriate for the music, what expressive and dramatic elements we want to convey. According to these questions, I choose an algorithm or preset, a starting point, but the settings need tweaking to fit the overall character of the music. 

Room reverb has the power to make a recording feel real and accessible, friendly, like having a guitarist play for you in the same room. A medium or larger hall sound will present the audience with a feeling that they have attended a professional recital; a formal setting. Lastly, larger halls and churches can distance the musician from the audience, maybe even from the instrument itself, granting an elusive and ethereal mystique.

Some audiences might prefer the intimate warmth of the Segovia's recordings, while others find pleasure in the spaciousness of Julian Bream's recordings, yet others might seek a middle ground; not too dry, not too wet. For me, it primarily depends on the actual music.

When fine-tuning the settings, the tempo and rhythms of the piece must be considered; how much space exists between notes, how quick do they change, how dense is the harmony, etc. Faster pieces need shorter reverb tails or they will sound blurry, slower pieces might benefit by longer ambience tails. I fine-tune these parameters on a song to song basis, a few times I might even add automation to the adjustments.

All rooms have a sound, they accentuate and attenuate different frequencies, like employing a catholic EQ. Any decent reverb plugin will offer some adjustability for regulating the response of its algorithms. Most of the time, I tend to tune my reverbs a little darker so that they are not as obvious. Taming the low end can also be desirable to help the recording be a little clearer. At rare cases, I will use two instances of the plugin with different settings on high and low responses.

Tip: The place of the reverb on the signal chain matters, I sometimes like to put the Reverb before the EQ. Hence the general equalization applies to the recorded sound as a whole, almost like shaping a classical guitar tone recorded in a larger room. I avoid any drastic boosts or cuts in that case though.

2CAudio Aether’s intensive list of presets

The 2CAudio Aether is the most expressive and expensive-sounding reverb plugin I have ever witnessed. It is an algorithmic reverb and can sound quite realistic but always musical and impressive. It has excellent room and hall emulations, suitable for classical and acoustic music, still, it can create any ambience sound you can imagine. 2CAudio provides an enormous preset library for the Aether to get you started, and the adjustability is intense. Right now it is on sale.

Alternatives - I started with the 2CAudio Breeze, before migrating to its bigger brother. Breeze offers a similarly excellent sound, at a bare essential and affordable package. It offers less tweakability, but that might be a good thing as the Aether can sometimes overwhelm the inexperienced. Breeze 2 should be even better than the first version I was using. I have also heard good things about the Exponential Audio PhoenixVerb, but have yet to try it.

I’ve recently tested about a dozen different reverb plugins, to find the Best Reverb Plugin for Classical Guitar.

Closing thoughts

I have and sometimes use other plugins as well, but I try to keep an as-small-as-possible armoury. By limiting my plugin choices, I can concentrate on the music. I want to have to take as few unimportant decisions as I need.

If you are on the market for a new EQ or reverb plugin, this article can give you some fine options. But I also hope that this text might inspire you to learn and use what you already have, use your ears to make mindful adjustments, and finally present your music as you intend.

---

2020 MacBook Air i7 and 4K Video Editing, how well does it handle it?

The omission of a (for some) proper heatsink on the 2020 MacBook Air has created a lot of "heat" on the internet, as many claim that the new Air is crippled down on purpose not to compete with Apple's Pro line of MacBooks. 4K video editing is more than an average workload, the question is if the low powered Intel's 10th generation CPU delivers.

I'm an owner of the new space grey MacBook Air with an i7 and 16GB of RAM since late April, in my initial review I write why I choose the Air over the Pro 13" and share my experiences with it in music production and common everyday tasks. This follow-up article is focused on the 4K editing performance of the new MacBook, as well as shedding some light on the so-called heat issues.

Slim, light and safe.

Let me start by stating the obvious; the 2020 MacBook is not a video editing powerhouse. If your work involves creating hour-long 12-bit 4K video documentaries, with multiple layers, advanced colour grading and other visual effects, you should look at the 16" MacBook Pro or even better a top-of-the-line iMac or Mac Pro. If on the other hand, you value portability, need snappy performance for everyday tasks and enough power for non-extreme loads (like acoustic music production, light photo editing etc.) but want to occasionally edit a 4K video and not to spend a fortune, then continue reading.

A major setback! 

I'll be honest, in my first attempt to edit a 4K video with the 2020 Air, I got disappointed. I followed my usual routine of importing my video files in Final Cut, roughly cut the parts that I needed, syncing audio and then applying colour grading and a film-simulation plugin. I would then wait for Final Cut to render the files and then try to fine-tune my edits, add transition effects, text, etc. After doing all that, the problem was that every time I would make a change, Final Cut would take several minutes to render the video again. I had to wait to be able to playback my video; if the edit was not timed perfectly and had to adjust something, I had to wait some more.

At first, I thought that I have too many things run in the background. As I wrote in my review, I like to keep all apps open as I usually go back and forth between them; exporting files on Logic Pro while rendering the video on Final Cut, at the same time editing photos on Fuji X Raw Studio or Affinity Photo. I decided to close all apps, restart my MacBook and try again to work on my video, only with Final Cut running at this time. Nothing changed, rendering takes several minutes and working on the edits is a nightmare as playback is sluggish.

4K projects can be huge; I keep them on an external SSD.

It was not a fun experience but I managed to finish the video, after a lot of frustration frankly. Exporting took an average amount of time, but I don't care much about export times - unless it is abnormal - as I can always use a break for a coffee. I just don't like to waste my time in front of the computer. 

Not an easy fix

I was contemplating buying a used Mac Mini dedicated to video editing as it was the only solution I could think but switching between different machines to finish a project doesn't sound appealing. My other thought was to shoot my videos in 1080p instead. After all, my Fuji X-E3 is not a dedicated video camera and has heat issues when capturing 4K videos in summer, it is a fine stills camera nevertheless.

A couple of weeks have passed while I was busy composing my new classical guitar suite "A Quiet Place pt II" and didn't think much about my 4K video troubles. My MacBook was working flawlessly otherwise; score writing, recording, skype lessons, photo editing, and casual internet. 

The unexpected

Space Grey vMacBook Air and white Magic Mouse 2

When most parts of my new suite were finalised, I shoot the first video to audit my performance. My Fuji was still left to 2160/23.98p from my early trials, so, I was a little nervous when I imported the files to Final Cut.

Since there was no plan to share this first "draft" video, I didn't bother with colour grading and film-simulations. To my surprise, the Final Cut could handle editing and playback like a champ. I didn't even wait for it to finish background rendering this time. Whilst, I would switch back and forth to Logic Pro to edit, mix and export my audio; my usual High- and Lo-Pass filters, as well as reverb from 2CAudio Aether, were applied. The new Air remained responsive throughout this process, much snappier than my 2013 Air was when working on ordinary 1080p files. The fan would spin relatively hard but that was anticipated.

Further examinations

Although polishing this video was never my intention, I wanted to see how far my MacBook could go. I first applied some colour correction and cross-dissolve transitioning effects on the various clips. The playback was perfect, admittingly it was on the "Better Performance" option. I switched to "Better Quality" to see what would happen. No difference in performance at all, even in full-screen playback, despite the background rendering was not done.

My trusty Fuji X-E3 camera and 35mm F2 prime lens.

I couldn't stop there, so I added a second layer of videos in normal blend mode at around 50% opacity, some text animations and a few pictures overlays. Keep in mind that the original clips I used where several 10min videos shot in 8-bit 4K with my Fuji, and overall the final video after the cuts was about 7 minutes. Playback was excellent, with no hit to the performance of the MacBook at all. The fan was moderately loud during the notably quick rendering, after that the fan was not spinning or barely audible during playback.

(Un)usual Suspects

I didn't know what to think, my experience this time was in total conflict with my first attempt. Editing a 4K video with the 2020 i7 MacBook Air was a joy! I then remembered that I also used a film simulation plugin (which shall remain nameless because it was sent to me from the creator for free as I understand it is no longer supported) in my other trial. I quickly applied the plugin to a couple of clips and pressed play. The video was lagging a second or more behind the audio, with dropped frames here and there, and the transition effect... let's say it never happened. 

I let Final Cut render the video, it took several minutes, and then hit the play button again, the playback was smooth this time, the fan was inaudible. I changed the length of a clip, needed a few more minutes to render the video. I begin to understand the source of all my frustration the first time; software that is not optimised.

Export time(s)

I can always use the time for a coffee.

I removed that film simulation and clicked on the export. I didn't time it as it doesn't make a lot of difference to me if it is five or ten minutes, there is always something else to do. I went to make an espresso instead, when I returned the file was sitting in my Movies folder.  

A lesson to (re)learn

We all want a faster, lighter, cheaper laptop, and it would be great to see Apple pushing the boundaries with the upcoming ARM-based MacBooks. Though sometimes the answer lies on the software, developers get lazy with faster CPUs and don't optimise their code to attain the most of what is possible. 

We need faster computers, but we also need more efficient and intelligent software; that's what Apple is doing best.

Europe’s heatwave

As I'm writing this article, I have my MacBook on my lap as I sit comfortably at a sofa and type while I'm listening to music on Spotify and have several open apps and tabs on Safari and Chrome. The Air is only moderately warm and the fan is barely spinning. It's summer and the temperature hit 34 degrees celsius.

Recording at close proximity.

Earlier today I finished mixing the final version of my new guitar suite and edited the accompanying video in 4K, a few more touch-ups and it will be ready for publishing. The MacBook was silent most of the time, except for Logic exports, especially when oversampling was applied, and heavy Final Cut rendering. Not bad at all!

You indeed hear the fan spin with heavy loads, but that is its purpose; to keep the temperatures under control. The MacBook remains snappy and responsive even when the maximum temperatures are being reached and returns to silent operation soon after the processing is done. Arguably the chassis will get hot in such situations; many electronic devices get hot though, sometimes uncomfortably so, and don' melt after years of operation. So, I don't worry!

Expectations

I believe that most complaints about the 2020 Air come from either of these two camps.

First are the people who have unrealistic expectations; they want an ultra-thin and light laptop, at a bargain price and with the power of a dedicated desktop computer. 

On the other camp are the spoiled and easily irked people, who would complain if a laptop takes an extra minute to export a video as if the world depends on it. 

I guess it is personal and depends a lot on each use case. But, for many of us who use our gear for what they offer to our workflow and and understand the limitations of a highly portable computer, the processing power which is available at our hands and backpacks with the newest laptops is unbelievable.

I’m still not content with this mess; why Apple?

My main gripes with it persist though. I don't understand why Apple removed the MagSafe plug from the MacBooks, I always felt so much safer plugin in my Air 2013 while sitting on a sofa and have my 6-year-old son running around. The removal of the SD card-reader also makes no sense to me, period. Lastly, two USB ports are not enough; as I wrote I value portability, but now I have to bring a couple of extra dongles with me just to do basic stuff.

Conclusions

The new MacBook Air is a beautiful ultrabook, with exemplary processing, a fair price, and more than enough power for everyday tasks and professional work if its not too particular and demand continuous high CPU loads. 4K video editing is a breeze, at least with the i7 and 16 GB of Ram, as is my overall user experience with it. So, if you are considering getting one, I hope that my experience will make that decision easier for you.

Apple MacBook Air i7 2020 from the perspective of a Music Producer

The recent introduction of quad-core processors in Apple’s MacBook Air promises greater performance in the familiar form, but is it capable for any professional work?

The new MacBook Air in Space Gray

I have been using my trusty mid-2013 MacBook Air 13 with an i7, 8GB Ram and 256GB SSD since its introduction. Having produced several albums and videos of my music, as well as of colleagues and friends of different complexities in my home studio and on location, this machine has never let me down.

My silver 2013 MacBook Air; no signs of wear after seven years of abuse

After almost seven years of intense use, it has slowly started to show its age. A progressively unreliable battery, the older screen and the greater CPU demands of modern plugins were making the experience less fun.

I was holding on it regardless, mainly because I was not satisfied with some of Apple's decisions in the latest years. Namely, the removal of the MagSafe and the SD card reader, as well as the limited number of USB ports.

Unfortunately, the 2020 MacBook doesn't deal with any of these issues, but Intel’s 10th generation i5 and i7 Quad-Core processors, the possibility to expand the RAM to 16GB, and the impressive Retina display allowed me to let my old computer finally retire.

Windows Alternatives

First of all, let me state that I'm not an Apple fanboy, I'm perfectly happy with my Pixel 3a and several other Android phones before that. But the truth is that no-one else is doing the trackpad as well as Apple. The integration of the touchpad and magic mouse gestures into Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro are an essential part of my workflow, anything else will be a compromise. I also love how stable and efficient MacOS is besides being a low-maintenance operating system. Having dealt with Windows in the past, I can see their advantages, but Apple provides a seamless experience.

The MacBook Pro

The teardrop shape of the Air is ingenious

I have been flirting with the idea of getting the Pro instead, but the form factor of the Air is superior to me. The teardrop shape is more comfortable to type on and for the work that I typically do, and the slightly less weight can be an important factor for travelling and location work. Furthermore, my work primarily involves recording and producing classical guitar or chamber music, writing articles, making scores and editing simple videos. Except for video editing, none of my other activities requires a lot of CPU power. A light, reliable and snappy computer with good battery life and silent operation is all I'm looking for.

2020 Updates

The new Air comes standard with 256GB of fast SSD storage which is enough for me, since I prefer to keep the system drive relatively clean and work off an external SSD, especially with the large video files. Cloud storage for other types of documents allows me to continue working on different machines, and gives me a peace of mind if anything goes wrong. I opted the i7 version for the extra processing power and future-proofing, Intel's 10th generation quad-core processor should be about four times faster than my old computer.

Another welcome addition is the 16GB Ram option which boosts the multitasking capabilities of the MacBook. A typical daily scenario for me is to have a bunch of tabs open at any given time at three different browsers (Safari, Chrome and Brave) as well as having both Logic and Final Cut loaded with my latest project. Sibelius and Affinity Photo may also run in the background, ready for me to use at any moment. I usually leave everything open with loaded projects, and in that case, the more Ram the better.

The old design

My old Air has the classic silver finish, a timeless design choice that doesn't easily show any marks. For a change, I decided to get the Space Gray this time. I hope that it will also take some slight abuse gently. Space Gray is gorgeous while being more subdued, with a more homogenous look in the keys, chassis and display. The less obvious aesthetics let the computer disappear, bringing the work in the foreground. The black and much smaller bezels also help.

Retina display delivers greater resolution and colour gamut

The "new" retina display is a delight to watch, with great colour reproduction and breathtaking resolution. Some people find the slightly wider bezels old-fashioned when compare to competitive ultrabooks, but I think that they might have advantages. They allow for enough space to rest your wrists when writing, a big-enough trackpad, front-facing speakers (for the odd time that I might need to use them) and a full-sized keyboard. Speaking of which, I know that there have been countless complaints about the performance and reliability of butterfly keyboards, I'm happy to report that the new magic keyboard is a joy to type on, and considering the reports from the 16" MacBook Pro, it should be without problems.

I was afraid that I wouldn't enjoy as much the clickless nature of the "new" touchpad, counting on my minimal experience with modern MacBooks, but the smooth glass surface and responsiveness of the touchpad is brilliant and took me only a few minutes to forget the old one. Lastly, TouchID is a godsend, with fast and reliable verification, it saves a lot of time from typing long passwords.

Construction and Connectivity

ONLY two USB-C ports…

Apple's engineering and manufacturing are second to none, everything feels very robust, with smooth surfaces and polished edges. A beauty to look and touch. Plugging in the charging cable produces a very satisfying sound. The removal of the MagSafe with all the safety and convenience it provides is really hard to understand though, and I wish there was at least one more USB-C port... and an SD Card reader. Well, at least there is still a headphone jack.

An innovative mess

I understand that Apple wants to push wireless connectivity, and I appreciate this philosophy. Sending files with AirDrop between my devices is a breeze, as is the integration of Sidecar. But until my mirrorless camera can send large video files with Bluetooth, and my drives, audio interfaces and DACs can work effortlessly via Bluetooth, I’m stuck with a vastly inelegant solution. Just to do be able to use my RME ADI-2 Pro FS for audio I/O, while charging the MacBook, accessing video files on my SD card and working on my external SSD drive - which is what is connected on my MacBook 95% of the time when I'm at my office - I have to rely on a USB hub, which adds to the cost only to create a mess of cables on my desk. On a positive note, if I want to bring my MacBook with me, I need to remove only one cable.

The Wait

At least we still get a headphone output

I have to confess that even though I was confident with my purchase at first, some of the early reviewers that were reporting thermal throttling and other heat issues due to the removal of the heat pipe had me worrying. Recording subtle classical guitar pieces with ultra-sensitive condenser microphones and spinning fans don't go well together. After all, with almost the same money I could buy a 2019 MacBook Pro with 4 USB-C Ports.

I stayed positive the two weeks that took for Apple to send me my MacBook, due to the pandemic and the great demand for the new MacBooks I presume.

When my machine arrived, I set up everything and installed all the necessary software. After a couple of days of making all the preparations, as well as using the MacBook for regular use, I have yet to hear the fan spin hard, if at all. The chassis would sometimes be warm but stay comfortable. A first relief, but I had to wait and see if it would overheat with my regular use.

Performance

An excellent keyboard and a brilliant touchpad

After everything was set, the first thing I did was to record my classical guitar and see if the fan starts spinning, ruining my precious recording. Of course, as expected, it remained silent throughout. I knew that the real test was to see how well it can handle editing and mixing though.

Without quitting any apps, with all three browsers running in the background, with four-five tabs each while five of them being preloaded YouTube videos on Chrome, I started loading plugins on my project. Since, I usually work on my music all day and also use my laptop for other tasks in between, for convenience, I leave everything running.

As I already stated my needs are very specific and not awfully demanding. For music production, I'm usually dealing with only a couple of audio tracks, equipped with FabFilter's Pro-Q3 plugin equalizer and one or more algorithmic reverbs, namely 2CAudio's Aether or Breeze plugins. On the master bus, the usual suspects are the Pro-L2 limiter, along with the 2CAudio Vector spatial image analysis and Youlean loudness meter plugins. If required, I might use a couple of iZotope's noise reduction plugins to remove any unwanted noise.

My seven-year-old MacBook could handle a similar load but the plugins would drain the CPU, sometimes leading to System Overload warnings. Some plugins have also oversampling capabilities, that boost performance with the expense of bigger CPU loads, which would make my MacBook surrender. I would often only run plugins at top quality only for the mixdown.

After loading all the plugins, I started the playback, after a minute or so there was still no sign of fan spun. I started boosting performance on some of the plugins with oversampling, still, the fan was inaudible. Then I decided to push the CPU harder. I went to Safari and loaded a 1080p video on youtube, after a minute of listening to both my guitar track and the random video, the fan was still inaudible. My last test was to reproduce the same experiment with Chrome, and surely after half a minute or so, the fan kicked in, at a low speed. I let the video play for another minute to check if this would make the fan to spin faster, but no luck, the fan was audible but at a very comfortable level. I stopped everything and took an ibuprofen, a headache form all the chaos was started to kick in instead.

System Overload warnings on my 2013 MacBook when pushed hard

I loaded a similar project at my old MacBook and tried to replicate the test. I started the playback on Logic, I tried to push the CPU with moderate oversampling and then I tried to stream a video on Safari, after a couple of seconds, I got a System Overload warning from Logic and the audio stopped so thankfully I didn't have to go through this emetic experience again.

Large projects are not my regular tasks, but I have used the 2013 Air to successfully produce projects with more than thirty audio tracks, with a bunch of plugins on each one, CPU hungry emulations, and virtual instruments. Granted, the fan would sometimes resemble an aeroplane jet, but it was doable and my old MacBook still works like a charm after several years of such abuse. So, I'm positive that the new MacBook Air would not be different in that regard.

Video Editing

Intel’s Iris Plus graphics should make the 2020 Air a charm to work for light video editing. To get an idea on the performance improvements I loaded 1080p footage from my Fuji mirrorless camera. Editing was snappy and with some basic colour grading and a LUT applied, the playback was perfect. The Retina screen is a big improvement over the old display, with much greater colour depth and spectacular resolution. There is much more detail, with better blacks and richer colour reproduction.

On my next video project, I plan to shoot in 4K. This is a demanding job that was absolutely impossible on my old Air, so I'm excited to see how the 2020 Air performs here. Click here to read my experiences with 4K video editing on the 2020 MacBook Air.

A MacBook for the Music Producer on the go

The new MacBook Air offers a perfect balance of performance and portability

Considering the limitations of the form, the MacBook Air is not the most powerful computer, and it was never meant to be. If you like playing games, or your thing is hardcore video editing and music production with 100s of tracks, you have to look elsewhere. The new 2020 Air will appeal to those looking for snappy, reliable performance that will perform moderately heavy tasks with ease and can be everywhere they go.

Apple’s Air line of ultrabooks has totally eliminated for me any need for a conventional desktop computer with a perfect balance of performance and portability

AEA TRP2 Microphone Preamp Review

A black canvas for your acoustic paintings.

---

AEA designed "The Ribbon Preamp" to guarantee the best operation for their ribbon microphones. Equipped with +48 phantom, the TRP2 can power condenser and active ribbon microphones.

Built for the desk and the road

A simple but effective layout.

With retro looks and an elegant grey finish, I think it looks great on a rack or a desktop. Housed in a lightweight half-rack aluminium chassis, the TRP2 is fairly portable though, perfectly fitting on a remote recording session.

The TRP2 has two-channels with 85dB gain for stereo capture. Each one is equipped with a stepped gain stage (+7dB to +63dB) and variable output control (+22dB) for fine-tuning. Push buttons for phase reverse, a low-cut filter (12dB per octave from 100Hz) and +48 phantom, as well as 3 led level indicators per channel, are located in the front panel.

The preamp is powered by an external PSU that is connected to the rear panel where four XLRs are located as well. Two for the microphone inputs and two for the line outputs. No quarter-inch outputs for unbalanced connections, neither a DI input are available. AEA built a high-quality microphone preamp equipped with only the absolute essentials.

Fade to black

Huge amounts of clean gain.

The sound of the preamp is remarkably transparent and natural, with a very fast transient response for excellent dynamics. With ease, the TPR2 manages to pick up unsurpassed detail out of my classical guitar, while allowing a full-bodied portrayal, with a beautiful midrange, pleasing highs and controlled low-end.

One of the most alluring characteristics of the TRP2 is the incredibly quiet operation. The classical guitar, being a soft and subtle instrument, presents a challenge to record properly. The signal path, designed by Fred Forsell, is evident, the TRP2 maintains every detail and lets the notes fade out to total silence.

The operation of the TRP2 is straight forward and a neatly written manual includes plenty of useful information. The level indicator LED are sufficient for discerning that the levels are healthy. I think that the low-cut filters are set a little too high for my uses, but other than I have no complaints.

Can you handle the truth?

Precise control.

AEA's preamps don't try to complement the source. The true strength of the TRP2 lies in allowing the microphones to capture an honest image with exceptional precision. With an impressive 85dB of absolute clean gain, the preamp ensures outstanding performance and can capture even the quietest sounds.

---

Alternatives

Priced a little lower, the DAV BG1 is an acclaimed preamp with a similar feature-set, low noise and high quality. In comparison, its sound is somewhat coloured, but that is neither good or bad. Lake people's MPA RS 01 is a straight-wire preamp in a similar form and function, worthy of consideration.

---

Cons

• Low-cut filters are set a little too high for some uses

Pros

• Beautiful sound, from top to bottom

• Detailed, transparent, and natural sounding

• Impressive amounts of gain

• Very low noise

• Lightweight and portable Sturdy construction

---

Some classical guitar recordings made with the AEA TRP2:

---

AEA Ribbon Microphones

---

Audient iD14 USB Audio Interface Review

Audient's renowned console preamps on your desktop

---

The introduction of the iD22 was a huge success for Audient. It combined preamps ported from their expensive consoles, pristine converters, a monitor controller and enough connections to satisfy even the most demanding users. With the iD14, Audient promises to deliver the same quality, into a small, affordable audio interface and accomplishes that by stripping down the device to the bare essentials.

Minimalist appeal

The iD14 is housed in a slim all-metal body with a minimalist design and classy aluminium knobs. It doesn't only look beautiful on any desktop but is robust enough for travelling and location recordings.

An all-metal no nonsense design.

A big encoder knob controls the speaker or headphone output, an illuminated button is in charge of the switch. By pressing down the encoder, the selected output is muted. There is another button for DIM (lowering of the output level) and a user-defined software controlled function key. The physical controls on the iD14 are very intuitive, and all the knobs and buttons have a satisfying feel to them.

The two excellent discreet Class-A mic-preamps have 56dB of gain, with an extra +10dB boost and polar switches available in the software mixer. A high-pass filter, similarly to the iD22, would have also been welcome. My biggest gripe though is that the gain pots are practically usable only about at the last third of their travel. There is not enough juice until then, then they jump in gain even with the slightest turn of the knob, making it difficult to set the levels perfectly.

DI and Headphones plugs are easily accessible.

There is an ADAT input which can accommodate eight additional inputs for bigger projects, but, due to the limitations of that protocol with only a maximum sample rate of 48KHz. The higher sample rate of 96KHz for the extra channels can be attained when only four additional digital inputs are used.

In the front side, there is a high-quality JFET instrument input as well as one headphone output. I like that these are located there, as I usually like to plug-in various headsets.

---

Capturing Tones

The mic preamps have plenty of clean gain. The sound manages to be transparent, with some added thickness and warmth to the body. The highs are smooth and show a slight boost. The iD14 captures a classy, transparent but not sterile capture that compliments most sources. The DI is excellent as well, designed to emulate the sound of tubes, and I have used it with great success.

The conversion quality in unforeseen for an interface of this price, the speakers output is quite revealing, making precise EQ and reverb adjustments a breeze. The headphone output it looses some of the clarity but is decent enough for the project studio.

For those who like to work on the go, the iD14 can be powered via USB from your laptop, Audient claims that to achieve that, the conversion had to be a step down from their flagship models. That shouldn't be a concern though, as the iD14 sill delivers a joyful, engaging playback. Unfortunately, you need to plug into the mains power to activate the +48 phantom.

I/O connections.

Lastly, the output metering ladder has eight pairs of LEDs, but sadly there is no way to check the preamp input level on the device. You can still see the levels in the software mixer, but considering that the interface is marketed towards project studios, having more visual meters on the box would have been more practical.

Putting that aside, I have used the iD14 numerous times. I have recorded classical and electric guitars, cello, various female and male voices, as well as solo piano and a piano trio on location. It always delivered an excellent sound with stable operation.

---

Life in a digital world

The software mixer has a nice-looking modern UI and follows a similar spartan approach to the physical unit, allowing access to some basic and advanced settings of the iD14. The most important feature is the ability to wire the input directly to the speakers for zero-latency monitoring while mixing it with the playback from the computer. The ability to create different CUE mixes for the headphones and the speakers is also neat.

---

Samples with the iD14 from my residency in Lithuania

---

Bare bones finesse

With the iD14, Audient strips away all the non-essential functions while still retaining the core qualities of its bigger siblings to deliver a high-performance interface to the project studios.

---

Alternatives

If you are happy with the features, nothing can beat the iD14 at this price range. Focusrite Clarett 2pre USB has a similar feature-set, with better conversion, but at a higher cost.

---

Pros

• Excellent sounding preamps

• Impressive converters

• Robust build

• An intuitive, uncluttered UI

• Price

Cons

• Gain knobs too jumpy at the last third of the turn

• No input-metering on the device

• Lack of high-pass filter

---

Audient

---