|
|
Post by soundintheround on Jan 29, 2019 16:13:31 GMT -6
Ok, I am sure there are a bunch of other threads on this topic.... But curious to know any details people have on mid 70's drum recording techniques. Or links to studio pictures showing drum setups, I cant seem to find too many.
How many mics and where? What type of mics? I'd like to know this (not for the super big budget productions), but more your run of the mill mid-level busy studio in the 70's (America/Italy/UK), cutting a lot of groove/soul/disco type tracks. The type of fat breakbeats hiphop guys like to sample. What was the defacto setup for this type of thing?
I kinda get the feeling recording drums back in the 70's on an 8/16/24 track machine was not such a such a big deal as it is now. While the 60's did require special care and attention to place 1 or maybe 2 mics in a good balanced spot, with multitrack and the 70's it was probably much more straightforward and matter of fact. Tape saturation, Consoles, Classic studio Condenser Mics, and everyday dynamic mics into big chunky high-headroom transformer based preamps all probable made life easier for sure.... and I don't think they obsessed quite as much as we do now.
Please share if you know of what went down in that era?
|
|
|
|
Post by jeremygillespie on Jan 29, 2019 22:20:05 GMT -6
Kush has great vids for how to get that sound.
You’re gonna want a super dead room, no front head on the kick with a towel leaning on the batter head on the inside, tuning is everything. The player has SO much to do with the sound in this situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on Jan 29, 2019 22:43:46 GMT -6
Cool thanks, how do I watch those?
I feel like I'm almost there, just questioning the placement of mics a bit.
How close mic-ed, were close mics in the 70's? Like for the snare? About same as we would do it today or would they space things a bit more?
I have a pretty decent small and dead tracking room....which is actually sounding very balanced and even across frequencies. Probably due to half of the walls and ceiling having 2-3 feet of rock wool thickness to really take care of low end buildup.
Yes I totally agree the kit is probably 85% of it. I have a 60's/70's old ludwig that sounds kinda crappy (in a good way) and I spent about 3 months with it taking it apart multiple times and removing washers/nuts/springs whatever buzzed or made a sound. Spent time getting the heads to sound right in the room and with a nice tone. Went through about 4 or 5 different old hi-hats to find a nice pair that was crisp yet not too bright or loud like some of the modern zildjians.
Things are sounding cool and alot times I'm getting the best result with 4 mics or less. But still struggling to get that full kit breakbeat sound, yet also close miced 70's at the same time..... if that makes any sense?
I'll have to try that kick drum technique!
|
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Jan 29, 2019 23:45:52 GMT -6
I mean a lot was done with a mono overhead and a kick mic. Pretty much it.
Later snare mic was added.
The Glenn John's method is cool if you have two vintage u87s and really get the placement right. However the only time I've ever heard this right was when it was the right player. Have to wail on the kit but tastefully. And then slamming it to tape. Without the tape..not the same thing. Too bright.
I know an engineer that used a lot of 414s back then. Mono overhead. One between the Tom's I think. Sounded great but different mics.
Lots of cool ways back then to do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Jan 29, 2019 23:50:02 GMT -6
here's a live recording, but you can see the mic techniques. I'm not sure the year but they say they just finished a recording that was released in 1976.
here's another interesting thing. I have no idea if this is real or faked though, lol:
|
|
|
|
Post by theshea on Jan 30, 2019 3:25:32 GMT -6
that's exactly the drumsound i am going for normally. not to many mics when recording, mainly dynamic mics. dampen your drums, dampen your room. tuning is important as are the heads and the player (all too obvious). when mixing i am mainly using my close mics, not so much the overheads. the overheads are mainly just there to fill the "holes", to liven the kit up a bit. i often use tonebooster reelbus to soften the transients and to give the drums some bass bump. i often use a "wurst" mic, you know the trashy one placed "inside" the mic, over the kick, between the toms and snare. this mic gets overdriven and trashed, than applied a bit to the overall drummix.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeremygillespie on Jan 30, 2019 8:38:51 GMT -6
Cool thanks, how do I watch those? I feel like I'm almost there, just questioning the placement of mics a bit. How close mic-ed, were close mics in the 70's? Like for the snare? About same as we would do it today or would they space things a bit more? I have a pretty decent small and dead tracking room....which is actually sounding very balanced and even across frequencies. Probably due to half of the walls and ceiling having 2-3 feet of rock wool thickness to really take care of low end buildup. Yes I totally agree the kit is probably 85% of it. I have a 60's/70's old ludwig that sounds kinda crappy (in a good way) and I spent about 3 months with it taking it apart multiple times and removing washers/nuts/springs whatever buzzed or made a sound. Spent time getting the heads to sound right in the room and with a nice tone. Went through about 4 or 5 different old hi-hats to find a nice pair that was crisp yet not too bright or loud like some of the modern zildjians. Things are sounding cool and alot times I'm getting the best result with 4 mics or less. But still struggling to get that full kit breakbeat sound, yet also close miced 70's at the same time..... if that makes any sense? I'll have to try that kick drum technique! |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 30, 2019 9:00:42 GMT -6
I'd think the basics are the same. Just use thin shelled drums, thin heads with lots of dampening on them and tune them either loosely or tight depending on the style. Probably lose the bottom heads on the toms, and the front head on the kick.
|
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on Jan 30, 2019 9:37:09 GMT -6
Cool thanks for the vids and info!
Funny I have that 3340 r2r on the UBK video, and I also built my room walls very similar to his.
UBKs 'close' snare mic isn't how we consider a typical close snare today which I was wondering about...good stuff.
The 'wurst' mic is a great idea and I need to experiment more with that!
Favorites for me so far have been D12 or U87 on kick close to front head.....SM57 and 421 on snare and snare side (but I should try more vintage mics too for the side).
Peluso Ribbons for overheads....both above and FOK.
Crappy old dynamics in front of kick between hat and kick and crushed/distorted.
I feel like I have covered a few different types of 70's tones....but still looking for that crisp snare sound. Pretty sure a condenser is needed, just not sure placement for that one.
I'll post a video later of the tone I'm talking about.
|
|
|
|
Post by theshea on Jan 30, 2019 10:18:01 GMT -6
I'd think the basics are the same. Just use thin shelled drums, thin heads with lots of dampening on them and tune them either loosely or tight depending on the style. Probably lose the bottom heads on the toms, and the front head on the kick. i tried to lose the bottom tom skin but it did not sound good. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 30, 2019 10:21:08 GMT -6
I'd think the basics are the same. Just use thin shelled drums, thin heads with lots of dampening on them and tune them either loosely or tight depending on the style. Probably lose the bottom heads on the toms, and the front head on the kick. i tried to lose the bottom tom skin but it did not sound good. Well, I don't think the drums from the 70's sounded good either...  |
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Jan 30, 2019 10:22:13 GMT -6
Bleed can be a big part of the sound too. For example, from a singer’s mic in front of the drums facing away from the kit.
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 30, 2019 10:25:55 GMT -6
but still looking for that crisp snare sound.. Standard old skool : AKG C451E or EB. Often taped to a 57 with capsules aligned for phase coherency. That will get you your bright crispy snare! |
|
|
|
Post by theshea on Jan 30, 2019 12:21:32 GMT -6
i get my crispy snare from my snare bottom mic.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Jan 30, 2019 13:05:12 GMT -6
Ok, I am sure there are a bunch of other threads on this topic.... But curious to know any details people have on mid 70's drum recording techniques. Or links to studio pictures showing drum setups, I cant seem to find too many.
How many mics and where? What type of mics? I'd like to know this (not for the super big budget productions), but more your run of the mill mid-level busy studio in the 70's (America/Italy/UK), cutting a lot of groove/soul/disco type tracks. The type of fat breakbeats hiphop guys like to sample. What was the defacto setup for this type of thing?
I kinda get the feeling recording drums back in the 70's on an 8/16/24 track machine was not such a such a big deal as it is now. While the 60's did require special care and attention to place 1 or maybe 2 mics in a good balanced spot, with multitrack and the 70's it was probably much more straightforward and matter of fact. Tape saturation, Consoles, Classic studio Condenser Mics, and everyday dynamic mics into big chunky high-headroom transformer based preamps all probable made life easier for sure.... and I don't think they obsessed quite as much as we do now.
Please share if you know of what went down in that era?
Ifg you're really talking MID '70s then things were actually a lot simpler on many recordings than most people believe now. Lots of mics and really dead rooms really didn't come into vogue until the late '70s/early '80s. Mid '70s was the period of guys like Glyn and Andy Johns, who used relatively few, very good mics and didn't close mic the hell out of everything. The classic hard rock drum sound of the time was John Bonham - "When the Levee Breaks" which was 2 Beyer M-160s as overheads and an AKG D-12/D-20 on kick, recorded in a large stone stairwell. Huge sound.
By the end of the decade drum sets were getting much larger, drummers were more often than not only using one head or were cutting holes in the front of the kick, and micing rack toms from underneath inside was common, not only for the tone and separation but also becuse there were often too many damn cymbals in the way. THe thing is, with the proliferation of mics the problems with phase interference and comb filtering multiplied. I was very impressed with such setups at the time, but looking back on it I now realize that engineers and propducers could have saved themselves a lot of grief by just going back a few years to the simpler setups of a few years earlier. But the late '70s and '80s were crazy times, technology was expanding at breakneck speed, more and more channels were available and when people are offered such shiny new toys they're gonna want to use them. Even if the results don't turn out to be what they thought they would.
Also, remember that people were not preamp crazy the way they are now. You generally used the preamps built into the console for everything. No pick and choose. API, Helios, a few Neves (although Neve was not worshipped the way it is now - that started with Dan Alexander in the '80s), a couple others that have slipped my memory at the moment. In the mid 70s a great number of the bigger studios had custom built consoles as there were not many consoles you could order that could accommodate the new multitrack tape machines or new mixing techniques.
Also people were not so much into tape saturation for its own sake. People would record hot to obtain optimum signal to noise ratio, as there was not yet anything in the way of practical noise reduction* and tape formulations back then were not optimized for hot recording. Also you need to remember that the lower track count machines generally had greater track width, which produced a fatter sound..
* - It existed but wasn't widely accepted due to the PITA alignment setup and the fact that tapes recorded on one system often didn't decode the same on another.
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Jan 30, 2019 13:22:12 GMT -6
Pretty sure a condenser is needed, just not sure placement for that one. I'll post a video later of the tone I'm talking about. Definitely experiment with placement. A great LDC like, u67 or similar, will sound awesome on snare. Start at the side of snare, about a 1-3 feet back, say 8 o'clock-ish when looking down on the snare. It should sound pretty full and round, balanced. Raise the position vertical for less snare snap, lower for more snap. Kick might be really nice too, a lower position might also "see" the beater and get a fat attack. Hi hat might be an issue though, so either play super light touch on hats (probably what 70's guys knew how to do?) OR.. you'll have to solve the whole sound another way. For this you'll want higher signal from snare than hats, so you bring the mic closer. This sacrifices some fullness and makes the transient much louder. Bring it as close as you want, raise up to get a more "dead" snare sound when looking down on the snare. If you want more "snares" start moving the mic to the side of the shell and go lower until those snare rattles are where you like it. Also you can experiment with patterns. Cardioid you should be able to put the hats sort of where the null is. This will give a very loud snare that can take EQ and compression/distortion without screwing up the whole kit sound so much. Another 70's thing that was out there and made an audible difference to quality of drums: Dolby A. Also noise gates were around in the 70's and people/certain genres used them. (great post by J.Epp btw, using less mics worked great ^) |
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on Jan 30, 2019 14:59:05 GMT -6
Cool! I'm gonna try that for sure. I have a U67 clone that would be up for it.
I was going to ask about Noise Reduction and if that effected how drums sound. I always kind of liked it (at least when enabled on 'Satin' Tape emu Plugin...which I know sounds nothing like the really thing) but must mean something.
I actually just got a pair of old DBX 155s coming to use along side my 3340. Snare drums though the 3340 sound nice and fat, but can distort very quickly. Have to gain back the input quite a bit and crank the output, but then noise becomes an issue. Hoping the dbx will help solve that predicament.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Jan 30, 2019 16:42:29 GMT -6
Cool! I'm gonna try that for sure. I have a U67 clone that would be up for it. I was going to ask about Noise Reduction and if that effected how drums sound. I always kind of liked it (at least when enabled on 'Satin' Tape emu Plugin...which I know sounds nothing like the really thing) but must mean something. I actually just got a pair of old DBX 155s coming to use along side my 3340. Snare drums though the 3340 sound nice and fat, but can distort very quickly. Have to gain back the input quite a bit and crank the output, but then noise becomes an issue. Hoping the dbx will help solve that predicament. A lot of engineers disliked Dolby A noise reduction because alignment was a royal PITA and the NR changed the sound in ways that were widely regarded as often detrimental and somewhat unpredictable, due to the need to have playback perfectly aligned with record, which was not 100% reliable. I don't recall Dolby being used on any of the sessions I attended in that era.
dbx NR was not a professional format but was rather popular with home recordists - what is now known as the "Prosumer" market. It wasn't popular with consumers, as encoded tapes sounded really bad if played on equipment without dbx decoders, so commercially produced dbx cassettes were more or less nonexistent, while Dolby B with its less extreme companding was generally acceptable to consumers.
Something that was pretty common back then was pre-emphasis done at the mixing board. It was pretty simple - you'd just boost high frequencies by a specified amount (maybe 6dB) and frequency (really easy on desks like the API that used switched attenuators instead of pots) for record and cut by the same amount on playback. You didn't get as much noise reduction but you didn't have the weird alignment problems that came with companding.
The basic problem with Dolby A was that tapes recorded on one system frequently sounded unpredictably different on another system.
In modern times some people have been using the encoder sction of Dolby A as a type of signal processor - a sort of frequency sensitive compressor. Or so I'm told, I've never seen anyone actually do it.
The problem with the Teac/TASCAM 3340 is that the tracks are too skinny which really cramps the dynamic range. Not well suited for drums, really. What you need is a 1/2" 4 track MCI or something similar.
|
|
|
|
Post by theshea on Jan 31, 2019 1:20:25 GMT -6
Cool thanks, how do I watch those? I feel like I'm almost there, just questioning the placement of mics a bit. How close mic-ed, were close mics in the 70's? Like for the snare? About same as we would do it today or would they space things a bit more? I have a pretty decent small and dead tracking room....which is actually sounding very balanced and even across frequencies. Probably due to half of the walls and ceiling having 2-3 feet of rock wool thickness to really take care of low end buildup. Yes I totally agree the kit is probably 85% of it. I have a 60's/70's old ludwig that sounds kinda crappy (in a good way) and I spent about 3 months with it taking it apart multiple times and removing washers/nuts/springs whatever buzzed or made a sound. Spent time getting the heads to sound right in the room and with a nice tone. Went through about 4 or 5 different old hi-hats to find a nice pair that was crisp yet not too bright or loud like some of the modern zildjians. Things are sounding cool and alot times I'm getting the best result with 4 mics or less. But still struggling to get that full kit breakbeat sound, yet also close miced 70's at the same time..... if that makes any sense? I'll have to try that kick drum technique! the drums in the ubk video do indeed sound spectacular! i think i am gonna "invest" those 99 cents to watch episode 3 and check out his plugin mixing. |
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on Jan 31, 2019 10:44:44 GMT -6
the drums in the ubk video do indeed sound spectacular! i think i am gonna "invest" those 99 cents to watch episode 3 and check out his plugin mixing. Too rich for my blood....I'll stick with my $330 MWTM subscription  |
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on Jan 31, 2019 10:55:03 GMT -6
Cool! I'm gonna try that for sure. I have a U67 clone that would be up for it. I was going to ask about Noise Reduction and if that effected how drums sound. I always kind of liked it (at least when enabled on 'Satin' Tape emu Plugin...which I know sounds nothing like the really thing) but must mean something. I actually just got a pair of old DBX 155s coming to use along side my 3340. Snare drums though the 3340 sound nice and fat, but can distort very quickly. Have to gain back the input quite a bit and crank the output, but then noise becomes an issue. Hoping the dbx will help solve that predicament. A lot of engineers disliked Dolby A noise reduction because alignment was a royal PITA and the NR changed the sound in ways that were widely regarded as often detrimental and somewhat unpredictable, due to the need to have playback perfectly aligned with record, which was not 100% reliable. I don't recall Dolby being used on any of the sessions I attended in that era.
dbx NR was not a professional format but was rather popular with home recordists - what is now known as the "Prosumer" market. It wasn't popular with consumers, as encoded tapes sounded really bad if played on equipment without dbx decoders, so commercially produced dbx cassettes were more or less nonexistent, while Dolby B with its less extreme companding was generally acceptable to consumers.
Something that was pretty common back then was pre-emphasis done at the mixing board. It was pretty simple - you'd just boost high frequencies by a specified amount (maybe 6dB) and frequency (really easy on desks like the API that used switched attenuators instead of pots) for record and cut by the same amount on playback. You didn't get as much noise reduction but you didn't have the weird alignment problems that came with companding.
The basic problem with Dolby A was that tapes recorded on one system frequently sounded unpredictably different on another system.
In modern times some people have been using the encoder sction of Dolby A as a type of signal processor - a sort of frequency sensitive compressor. Or so I'm told, I've never seen anyone actually do it.
The problem with the Teac/TASCAM 3340 is that the tracks are too skinny which really cramps the dynamic range. Not well suited for drums, really. What you need is a 1/2" 4 track MCI or something similar.
Not sure I totally agree with you on the track width.... some of my favorite drum sounds were apparently recorded on a 4-Track Cassette recorder. But those are pretty distorted/low dynamic range drums. If I was going for something more jazz-like I'm sure that would factor in like you said.
Thanks for the insight on the 'manual' noise reduction via using the board. Never really knew about that.
I experimented last night with that crisp 70's snare sound. Bottom line is for the best result I found the snare needs to be extremely dead (like almost creative sound design dead, wont sound too natural) then stick a condenser 1-3 inches from the head. U67 clone was awkward to achieve this so a small condenser was used. Then I boosted a lot with helios EQ plugin and some light slow attack fast release 1176 compression.
Problem here was hi-hat bleed. My small diaphragm (Chameleon Labs TS-1) doesn't have the best off-axis from what I cant tell, so had to position it right to get it to work. Still might have to consider some sort of baffle for this effect. I normally never have used but this is an extreme case.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Jan 31, 2019 15:14:23 GMT -6
A lot of engineers disliked Dolby A noise reduction because alignment was a royal PITA and the NR changed the sound in ways that were widely regarded as often detrimental and somewhat unpredictable, due to the need to have playback perfectly aligned with record, which was not 100% reliable. I don't recall Dolby being used on any of the sessions I attended in that era.
dbx NR was not a professional format but was rather popular with home recordists - what is now known as the "Prosumer" market. It wasn't popular with consumers, as encoded tapes sounded really bad if played on equipment without dbx decoders, so commercially produced dbx cassettes were more or less nonexistent, while Dolby B with its less extreme companding was generally acceptable to consumers.
Something that was pretty common back then was pre-emphasis done at the mixing board. It was pretty simple - you'd just boost high frequencies by a specified amount (maybe 6dB) and frequency (really easy on desks like the API that used switched attenuators instead of pots) for record and cut by the same amount on playback. You didn't get as much noise reduction but you didn't have the weird alignment problems that came with companding.
The basic problem with Dolby A was that tapes recorded on one system frequently sounded unpredictably different on another system.
In modern times some people have been using the encoder sction of Dolby A as a type of signal processor - a sort of frequency sensitive compressor. Or so I'm told, I've never seen anyone actually do it.
The problem with the Teac/TASCAM 3340 is that the tracks are too skinny which really cramps the dynamic range. Not well suited for drums, really. What you need is a 1/2" 4 track MCI or something similar.
Not sure I totally agree with you on the track width.... some of my favorite drum sounds were apparently recorded on a 4-Track Cassette recorder. But those are pretty distorted/low dynamic range drums. If I was going for something more jazz-like I'm sure that would factor in like you said.
Thanks for the insight on the 'manual' noise reduction via using the board. Never really knew about that.
I experimented last night with that crisp 70's snare sound. Bottom line is for the best result I found the snare needs to be extremely dead (like almost creative sound design dead, wont sound too natural) then stick a condenser 1-3 inches from the head. U67 clone was awkward to achieve this so a small condenser was used. Then I boosted a lot with helios EQ plugin and some light slow attack fast release 1176 compression.
Problem here was hi-hat bleed. My small diaphragm (Chameleon Labs TS-1) doesn't have the best off-axis from what I cant tell, so had to position it right to get it to work. Still might have to consider some sort of baffle for this effect. I normally never have used but this is an extreme case.
Re drum sound, I was thinking more in terms of hard rock and the like. You want a big, fat sound you want track width. That's why a lot of rock guys prefer 16 track 2" to 24 track 2" - and why 16 and 24 track 1" have never been taken seriously by any pro recordists. The Helios 760 (later sold as the ADR 760 Compex) was (and still is with those who know ) THE drum compressor. Many people regard it as the finest FET comp ever made. Dunno how well the plugin emulates it, I don't use plugins.
You need to get a snare mic with good off-axis response. It makes things a lot easier. I question whether a baffle would do much good - it seems to me that anything big enough to be effective would really get in the way.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeremygillespie on Jan 31, 2019 17:19:16 GMT -6
Not sure I totally agree with you on the track width.... some of my favorite drum sounds were apparently recorded on a 4-Track Cassette recorder. But those are pretty distorted/low dynamic range drums. If I was going for something more jazz-like I'm sure that would factor in like you said.
Thanks for the insight on the 'manual' noise reduction via using the board. Never really knew about that.
I experimented last night with that crisp 70's snare sound. Bottom line is for the best result I found the snare needs to be extremely dead (like almost creative sound design dead, wont sound too natural) then stick a condenser 1-3 inches from the head. U67 clone was awkward to achieve this so a small condenser was used. Then I boosted a lot with helios EQ plugin and some light slow attack fast release 1176 compression.
Problem here was hi-hat bleed. My small diaphragm (Chameleon Labs TS-1) doesn't have the best off-axis from what I cant tell, so had to position it right to get it to work. Still might have to consider some sort of baffle for this effect. I normally never have used but this is an extreme case.
Re drum sound, I was thinking more in terms of hard rock and the like. You want a big, fat sound you want track width. That's why a lot of rock guys prefer 16 track 2" to 24 track 2" - and why 16 and 24 track 1" have never been taken seriously by any pro recordists. The Helios 760 (later sold as the ADR 760 Compex) was (and still is with those who know ) THE drum compressor. Many people regard it as the finest FET comp ever made. Dunno how well the plugin emulates it, I don't use plugins.
You need to get a snare mic with good off-axis response. It makes things a lot easier. I question whether a baffle would do much good - it seems to me that anything big enough to be effective would really get in the way.
The 760’s are great comps - I personally think a pair of Pye comps are the golden egg. Love those things and wish I could justify purchasing a pair. I use the Dolby trick a ton for BGV’s and it works wonderfully. I believe they have plugs for that now which I’ve been meaning to try out but haven’t gotten around to it. |
|
|
|
Post by nudwig on Jan 31, 2019 22:44:37 GMT -6
Problem here was hi-hat bleed. My small diaphragm (Chameleon Labs TS-1) doesn't have the best off-axis from what I cant tell, so had to position it right to get it to work. Still might have to consider some sort of baffle for this effect. I normally never have used but this is an extreme case.
When doing 70's style drums I've had luck with the FabFilter Pro G (and the UAD API channel strip) in adjusting the gate reduction to minimize the HH bleed while still keeping some if needed. Definitely agree that mics with nicer off axis response help, I love the KM84 for this. |
|
|
|
Post by theshea on Feb 1, 2019 0:14:19 GMT -6
Re drum sound, I was thinking more in terms of hard rock and the like. You want a big, fat sound you want track width. That's why a lot of rock guys prefer 16 track 2" to 24 track 2" - and why 16 and 24 track 1" have never been taken seriously by any pro recordists. The Helios 760 (later sold as the ADR 760 Compex) was (and still is with those who know ) THE drum compressor. Many people regard it as the finest FET comp ever made. Dunno how well the plugin emulates it, I don't use plugins.
You need to get a snare mic with good off-axis response. It makes things a lot easier. I question whether a baffle would do much good - it seems to me that anything big enough to be effective would really get in the way.
The 760’s are great comps - I personally think a pair of Pye comps are the golden egg. Love those things and wish I could justify purchasing a pair. I use the Dolby trick a ton for BGV’s and it works wonderfully. I believe they have plugs for that now which I’ve been meaning to try out but haven’t gotten around to it. would the waves kramer helios and pie plugs be a good substitude for the hw? |
|
