|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 24, 2018 5:56:06 GMT -6
There is always competition but the edge of this product is the 3 versions in one.
If versatility doesn’t appeal to you: it still has attraction of excellent build and price.
I never have gotten a 500 chassis so direct gear price comparisons are interesting but would be the chassis cost too ?
It seems to get a good one ( strong psu), you need to spend a fair bit too.
With Stam, there is the lead time, but it seems to me most people do really like his gear, once they get it.
I like donr’s buy it, forget about it: nice surprise when it shows up approach ! Personally, will stick with my ADG order, which should ship in October but I do hope not the end of the month as I bet shipping will add another 2 weeks. I will say the long delivery times are anti climatic.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 24, 2018 8:31:48 GMT -6
I can say I don’t have a CAPI endorsement and never have. Paid for everthing I’ve ever had. So you’re saying the same with the Splice? Here’s the real difference though, I didn’t come into a different manufacturer’s product release thread and pump up a different brand. Paid for every Splice (4), every SA3a (4), SB4001 (1). Love all of em. Can't praise em enough. Love em just like you love your CAPI gear. IMO, Mike is the king of compression. You can buy em today, and for those waiting, that may be of interest. Sorry if it came off as scammy. And sorry if I jumped to conclusions...I don't want to fight - really. I agree about Mike's stuff. I'd love to have a chimera...in fact...
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Sept 25, 2018 12:40:10 GMT -6
From Joshua on the Purple Site...
QUOTE: I will try to be very clear on this ADG G revision, transformer-less. 2:1 ratio: Yes Super Slow Attack: No, only from the second batch onward (which is the picture now on the site). The first 150 do not have it on the faceplate print. Stereo Link: No ADF F revision: Cinemag B11148 independent output transformer. O-12 input transformer 2:1 ratio: Yes Super Slow Attack: Yes, all batches Stereo Link: Yes
I really appreciate the clarification but also, as a first batcher, I'm a little disappointed to learn that he's adding the slow attack on the second batch of ADG and beyond. Not that it's necessary (as I've used plenty of 1176's without it) but it is odd to be waiting for something that has been delayed only to learn whenever it is delivered there will already be an 'improved' version so soon afterwards. Maybe I will upgrade to the ADF? Hmmm I posted that exact same opinion over there, though I am in the second batch. As long as the addition of the slow attack doesn't in ANY way negatively impact the rest of the circuit(s) I guess I don't care either way and it might be a nice additional option to have. Still, I was never contacted about it to be asked if it was something I wanted. It just concerns me the way that everything seems to be constantly changing.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Sept 25, 2018 12:48:45 GMT -6
On a related note, a while back in one of these threads talking about the 76ADG, the topic of ABI came up and how it might be affected by the change in button ratios being proposed by Stam at that time. I was just reading the article linked below about the 1176AE and, in the article, UA themselves said that, with the 2/4/8/20 ratios, only the top three buttons should be used for ABI. The Stam has the same ratios as the AE, so I thought it was interesting. Maybe we should only use the top three buttons on the Stam as well? The article also had an interesting comment about using the bottom three buttons, which you can read more about there. www.uaudio.com/webzine/2008/june/index4.html
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Sept 25, 2018 12:55:37 GMT -6
I posted that exact same opinion over there, though I am in the second batch. As long as the addition of the slow attack doesn't in ANY way negatively impact the rest of the circuit(s) I guess I don't care either way and it might be a nice additional option to have. Still, I was never contacted about it to be asked if it was something I wanted. It just concerns me the way that everything seems to be constantly changing. I edited my post while you were quoting. I asked over on GS about the transformers... it's curious as he says the "G" of the ADG is 'transformerless' but that's not actually how a RevG is. A RevG has the same B11148 output transformer as the RevF but doesn't have an input transformer. If it's truly a transformerless version that could be interesting/useful but also isn't really a thing and may NOT be interesting or useful Well, it's just confusion on top of more confusion. I mean, Josh is always talking about all of the emails they have to deal with. If they did a better job of not saying contradictory and ambiguous things, maybe they could cut some of those emails out. People ARE going to email you repeatedly when timelines keep changing and everyone is confused about what it is exactly that they've put a deposit down on.
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Sept 25, 2018 13:03:16 GMT -6
On a related note, a while back in one of these threads talking about the 76ADG, the topic of ABI came up and how it might be affected by the change in button ratios being proposed by Stam at that time. I was just reading the article linked below about the 1176AE and, in the article, UA themselves said that, with the 2/4/8/20 ratios, only the top three buttons should be used for ABI. The Stam has the same ratios as the AE, so I thought it was interesting. Maybe we should only use the top three buttons on the Stam as well? The article also had an interesting comment about using the bottom three buttons, which you can read more about there. www.uaudio.com/webzine/2008/june/index4.htmlI saw once that ABI or multiple buttons gives you something like the average of the ratios. So with original ratios you have like 11:1. With 2/4/8/20 you get like 8.5:1. With 4/8/20 you get 10.5. Ish. Ymmv.
|
|
|
Post by lcr on Sept 25, 2018 17:24:45 GMT -6
I edited my post while you were quoting. I asked over on GS about the transformers... it's curious as he says the "G" of the ADG is 'transformerless' but that's not actually how a RevG is. A RevG has the same B11148 output transformer as the RevF but doesn't have an input transformer. If it's truly a transformerless version that could be interesting/useful but also isn't really a thing and may NOT be interesting or useful Well, it's just confusion on top of more confusion. I mean, Josh is always talking about all of the emails they have to deal with. If they did a better job of not saying contradictory and ambiguous things, maybe they could cut some of those emails out. People ARE going to email you repeatedly when timelines keep changing and everyone is confused about what it is exactly that they've put a deposit down on. Some call this complaining. When one asks about conflicting, confusing, vague updates.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 25, 2018 18:28:51 GMT -6
Ah so its the G circuit but missing the transformer or did the G not have a transformer?
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Sept 25, 2018 18:40:59 GMT -6
I don't know enough about the G versus F to really have an opinion on which one I would prefer. The things that that the ADF has over the ADG, at least in my opinion, is the stereo link capability and the faceplate. That silver with red stripe is really sharp. I just don't know if it's worth the extra $100 and potential extra layer of communication/confusion.
As for the F versus G transformer situation, I don't know how much I would ever use the F OR G, so I may not care about the differences there. It's the A and D that always interested me.
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on Sept 25, 2018 19:46:05 GMT -6
Those IC input 1176s don't suck in my opinion, have used them quite happily on drums. Have never really geeked out A/Bing though.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Sept 25, 2018 21:15:56 GMT -6
I don't know enough about the G versus F to really have an opinion on which one I would prefer. The things that that the ADF has over the ADG, at least in my opinion, is the stereo link capability and the faceplate. That silver with red stripe is really sharp. I just don't know if it's worth the extra $100 and potential extra layer of communication/confusion. As for the F versus G transformer situation, I don't know how much I would ever use the F OR G, so I may not care about the differences there. It's the A and D that always interested me. You see, I don’t really dig the aesthetic of the ADF. But I like transformers, though.
|
|
|
Post by dror520 on Sept 25, 2018 21:39:35 GMT -6
So did anyone switch from the ADG to the ADF?
|
|
|
Post by thirdeye on Sept 26, 2018 5:26:03 GMT -6
So did anyone switch from the ADG to the ADF? I switched. Seemed like a good deal for the updated features and additional transformer.
|
|
|
Post by lcr on Sept 26, 2018 7:26:16 GMT -6
So, its an A, a D, and a G without G transformer?
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 26, 2018 7:53:56 GMT -6
Apparently, so while the original marketing info indicated it was an exact replica of schematic but apparently the G never had the output transformer ?
"The Stam Audio SA-76ADG is an exact replica,, "
"First, each revision had to sound 100% identical to the original by respecting the original signal path and schematic."
"we could use both the 0-12 and 50002 transformers for the A and D sections as used on the original units and bypass the transformers for revision G like the original."
So, apparently, the G originally did not have transformers but the A,D and F did ?
|
|
|
Post by lcr on Sept 26, 2018 7:59:26 GMT -6
Confused.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Sept 26, 2018 7:59:33 GMT -6
Apparently, so while the original marketing info indicated it was an exact replica of schematic but apparently the G never had the output transformer ? "The Stam Audio SA-76ADG is an exact replica,, " "First, each revision had to sound 100% identical to the original by respecting the original signal path and schematic." "we could use both the 0-12 and 50002 transformers for the A and D sections as used on the original units and bypass the transformers for revision G like the original." So, apparently, the G originally did not have transformers but the A,D and F did ? I also find this confusing. It sounds like the original F only had the one transformer, and the Stam version of the F has stayed true to form. As for the G, it sounds like the original G also had the one transformer but Stam has gone with no transformers on their version. Not sure what that's about.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 26, 2018 8:08:56 GMT -6
I understood it the other way, that the G did not have a transformer, but the A,D and F did.
So, in the ADG, in G mode, the A,D output transformer is bypassed but the G schematic is authentic ?
Bottom line if you want that output transfer get the F ?
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Sept 26, 2018 8:24:35 GMT -6
It looks like the original F and G should both have the same output transformer, but G removes the input transformer. Seems like that's not what Stam is doing.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 26, 2018 8:36:15 GMT -6
ah isn't it the opposite ? He is removing the OT from the G or the original G never had one ? Otherwise, why do people pay more for the F ?
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Sept 26, 2018 8:50:43 GMT -6
A and D both have input and output transformers. When F came out, the output transformer changed to a different model. When G came out, they removed the input transformer.
I assume that the Stam G removes the input transformer, but keeps the original output transformer from A/D. The Stam F keeps the input transformer and switches to a different output transformer, so it's more expensive because of the additional transformer.
Grand scheme though, I don't think any of it matters. I don't think the difference between an original G, the Stam G, or the Stam F will have any impact whatsoever on my productions. I'm currently using a pair of Warm 76's and a KT76. I don't expect the Stam to even be that different from those.
|
|
|
Post by mikec on Sept 26, 2018 8:59:39 GMT -6
I guess I am a sucker for Red and Silver so I made the switch for the pair I ordered.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Sept 26, 2018 9:54:05 GMT -6
I understood it the other way, that the G did not have a transformer, but the A,D and F did. So, in the ADG, in G mode, the A,D output transformer is bypassed but the G schematic is authentic ? Bottom line if you want that output transfer get the F ? What you're saying would make sense chronologically, as transformers were typically removed and not added from equipment as technology progressed. I just thought I had read the opposite.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 26, 2018 10:30:51 GMT -6
@superwhack I was referring to the info on the Stam Audio website, as it indicates that the original G did not have the output transformer.
Which is the thing I find contradictory, as the marketing text gives the impression that the G is an authentic recreation of the original circuit when apparently it isn't, the F is ? ?
"The Stam Audio SA-76ADG is an exact replica,, "
"First, each revision had to sound 100% identical to the original by respecting the original signal path and schematic."
"we could use both the 0-12 and 50002 transformers for the A and D sections as used on the original units and bypass the transformers for revision G like the original.""
So the last bullet creates the impression that the G had no transformer as they are bypassed in the SA76-ADG to be "like" the G ?
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Sept 26, 2018 11:31:18 GMT -6
The confusion here and on the other site is getting out of hand. Stam (Miguel/Josh) keep saying contradictory things. They really need to take a breath, stop making any further changes, and issue an official statement that clears everything up. It's kind of ridiculous at this point.
|
|