|
Post by bowie on Nov 9, 2017 15:51:47 GMT -6
Thx Kcatthedog, the pic insert won't pull from my comp so I'm going to try the attachment here and see if it works. Edit; it works. Yay.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Nov 9, 2017 15:37:01 GMT -6
Which I could add photos because one of the ones I build was particularly stylish. What's everyone using now that photobucket put up a wall?
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Nov 9, 2017 15:31:02 GMT -6
Serpent Audio SB4000 That is my plan anyway. I have shamefully been sitting on the PCB and front panel for no less than two years, however the back of my mind is still excited about it. I'm pretty sure you can get a case from Dan Deurloo. You can also get the bits and pieces from Serpent and just put it together. It looks like a ton of soldering, so I'd make sure you're comfortable with all of that before diving in. I've built a couple of those (which customers of mine ended up buying off me after hearing them) and I've been very impressed. What I wasn't impressed with were the parts kit from Serpent, which were missing several parts. Communication was also lacking. Regardless, the actual build was on-point. Yes, it's a TON of soldering, in small spaces, so make sure you have a steady hand. Once you find a rhythm, it's not so bad. Just take your time because it's tempting to rush through those five thousand resistors but putting just one in the wrong spot will cost you hours in trouble-shooting. Ask me how I know.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Oct 23, 2017 13:19:05 GMT -6
Yah they look the same but the windtech claims to be made in the usa. Interesting. Spock, that looks like a sponge on a stand. Very curious about it though. Yeah sponge Like is a good way to describe it, very effective in that it stayed out of the way. I think that's the way to go. After much research, I found a few saying that the sponge-type was the most sonically transparent so I bought some of the thinner Rycote replacements in bulk for $13 www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/766039-REG/Rycote_045004_InVision_Universal_Pop_Filter.htmland made my own holder using an old gooseneck that I liked. Now, I don't use my Stedmann anymore. The foam types aren't completely transparent (nothing is) but I've found the thin Rycote foams to be better than any of the mesh types when it comes to high frequencies and I don't get any of the occasional odd ringing/metallic noises I was getting with the Stedmann.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Oct 21, 2017 15:10:11 GMT -6
I do. I have colleagues who won't because they feel they don't understand the genre well enough to turn out a quality production. I listen to hip-hop/rap and will record it but find the challenges to be greater as you often have more inexperienced artists with poor quality beats/tracks, or no tracs at all, and many of them are frustrated to hear what they sound like when their voice is clear and forward in a mix. Your ability to "fix it" is often limited more so than in other genres. What you mention is exactly why I don't do it...I just don't know the genre. There's TONS of rap work available. I think because everybody can AT LEAST talk. I would say that out of the jobs available out there it's probably 60% rap...Maybe I should start listening. I respect that^. Many guys will take whatever jobs they can get because everyone's cash is green. I'll decline work if I don't feel I can truly benefit the artist. That said, if you are presented canned beats (which many inexperienced rappers have) it's not terribly hard to familiarize yourself with the general sonics of the genre and it essentially becomes finessing a 2-track beat with a vocal on it. Understanding the identity of the artist himself/herself is the key because, as with many forms of music, there's lot of mimicry involved and most want to have their production sound like a certain artist or trend. Trends in rap are very fleeting.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Oct 21, 2017 13:47:13 GMT -6
I do. I have colleagues who won't because they feel they don't understand the genre well enough to turn out a quality production. I listen to hip-hop/rap and will record it but find the challenges to be greater as you often have more inexperienced artists with poor quality beats/tracks, or no tracs at all, and many of them are frustrated to hear what they sound like when their voice is clear and forward in a mix. Your ability to "fix it" is often limited more so than in other genres.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Sept 28, 2017 13:18:15 GMT -6
Cheaper maybe until they hit you with the selling fee- I’m done with fleabay after a recent sale and will only work on reverb as it takes about 6% vs ebays 11%. ^This. People complain about the absurd fees but fail to support the alternatives. I think Reverb is still kinda clunky but I'm happy to use them when I can. As far as ebay global shipping goes, I've sent items through it many times and prefer it because you only need to get it to a domestic location. Then, it's not your problem anymore if it's held up in customs, mishandled, etc.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Sept 21, 2017 13:26:14 GMT -6
I agree with Doug. If you've don't that, this shouldn't be a big deal and might be a good experience as it will make you comfortable doing other simple repairs. ICs are a lot easier to remove with a good de-soldering unit. But, that doesn't mean you can't do it with basic equipment, so long as you've had a little practice and feel comfortable.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jul 31, 2017 13:30:52 GMT -6
Actually, I don't own a Warm, but I've used a lot of different Pultec-style EQs and have a P2P EQP1a I built myself. So far, of the couple dozen customers I've sold tubes to for their Warm Pultecs, there hasn't been a general consensus about how people feel about the stock sound of that EQ. Some ask for tubes that'll give a richer/warmer/smoother vibe. Others feel that it's a little dull and want to open up the top end. While others still don't have a specific complaint, they just want to enhance the overall sound. The thing about the Russian Tung Sols is that they are nice in the mids (for a modern tube) but don't a lot going on in the top end. And, like most modern tubes, the bass is somewhat smeared and lacks extension. In some gear, that's not a big deal and the TSs sound better than most of the other inexpensive, modern offerings. However, in something like a EQP where you're usually bringing out the bass and/or highs, some people feel a bit limited. My experience with Pultecs, and most EQs in general, is that people tend to be most satisfied with a fairly well-balanced tube. Tubes that boost or attenuate the top end often get less favorable feedback in those applications (though it entirely depends on the person, the gear, the style of music, etc). I think the best place to start is to figure out what you want to change (things you wish it did, things you wish it didn't do). Sometimes, it takes a bit of hands-on time before you notice certain patterns in your mixing, frustrations, etc to decide what you like or don't like about a piece of gear. Dude, first of all thank you, esteemed Sir for lending your input. I think it's the smearing in the lows you mentioned that I'd like to remedy. If it helps to get what I'm looking for, I only do VO full-time and I'm using the EQP-WA every day as part of my chain. I bought it to add a nice low-mid hug and some ballsy low-end for more authority in my tone. Having the added air is nice, but not my primary concern. I don't do mixes and I don't do music. What I think I need in a tube here is definition, warmth, punch, and low noise. What I know about tubes could fill a thimble so the idea of a well-balanced tube sounds like an improvement already. I'm not an advertiser here (but if my income ever allows it, THIS will be the first place I advertise on! ) so I don't want to spam the forum with info on products I sell. However, I'll try to give some general info to help you out. VO is very interesting when it comes to tubes as the midrange becomes a field in which little peaks and valleys in the spectrum can make or break the presentation, depending on the voice. A lot of the 1960/early 70s production tubes do a great job and blending clarity and smoothness. Sylvania, RCA, orig Tung Sol, Amperex, and to an extent, orig Mullard and Telefunken all had production periods in which they had good balance along with their own unique "tubey" characteristics that people love. I wish it was as simple as that but there are factors like condition, variations in production, etc that comes into play. You can PM or email (ProAudioTubes@aol.com) if you ever want to go into a more in-depth dialogue about which ones might be ideal for you. One more note; in the Pultec circuit, the 12AX7 has far more influence on tone and noise floor than the 12AU7. I do feel that a quality 12AU7 is a good idea but I usually discourage people from spending a ton on an exotic 12AU7 in this circuit as many of the more modest NOS brands do a comparable job (in this position) for far less money.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jul 30, 2017 20:51:42 GMT -6
Didn't bowie say he had one of these? Have to go look. Actually, I don't own a Warm, but I've used a lot of different Pultec-style EQs and have a P2P EQP1a I built myself. So far, of the couple dozen customers I've sold tubes to for their Warm Pultecs, there hasn't been a general consensus about how people feel about the stock sound of that EQ. Some ask for tubes that'll give a richer/warmer/smoother vibe. Others feel that it's a little dull and want to open up the top end. While others still don't have a specific complaint, they just want to enhance the overall sound. The thing about the Russian Tung Sols is that they are nice in the mids (for a modern tube) but don't a lot going on in the top end. And, like most modern tubes, the bass is somewhat smeared and lacks extension. In some gear, that's not a big deal and the TSs sound better than most of the other inexpensive, modern offerings. However, in something like a EQP where you're usually bringing out the bass and/or highs, some people feel a bit limited. My experience with Pultecs, and most EQs in general, is that people tend to be most satisfied with a fairly well-balanced tube. Tubes that boost or attenuate the top end often get less favorable feedback in those applications (though it entirely depends on the person, the gear, the style of music, etc). I think the best place to start is to figure out what you want to change (things you wish it did, things you wish it didn't do). Sometimes, it takes a bit of hands-on time before you notice certain patterns in your mixing, frustrations, etc to decide what you like or don't like about a piece of gear.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jun 14, 2017 11:36:39 GMT -6
Logitech M570 Wireless here since 2011, and similar Logitech wired one for the decade before that. Same^^. Used the wired version for over a decade(3 of them) they still work but recently switched to the new "blue ball" wireless version. I've been using those seemingly forever now. I like the fact that they can share the same USB receiver as the Logitech wireless keyboard and they are (relatively) reliable. All the great feedback about the Kensington might make me go that direction the next time I need a new mouse (having two 570s in the same room can be confusing at times).
|
|
|
Post by bowie on May 21, 2017 12:44:30 GMT -6
FWIW, I've had a number of customers who have owned both and owners of the originals tend to be very fond of them. The 6386 can handle ridiculous amounts of gain reduction without sounding crushed. However, those tubes are extremely expensive and you've got to keep in mind that it's going to be much worse in 5 or 10 years when you go to buy replacements. With the amount of junk being re-circulated on the market, it's not just a matter of finding a 6386, they should be be checked for balanced triodes and low noise. I get burnt buying noisy or unbalanced ones all too often. For what you're needing, you might be content with the 5670 and getting an adapter (such as EmRR mentioned) would be a great idea. 5670 tubes aren't expensive and there are a variety of types you can experiment with. Those just looking for gentle gain reduction are usually fine with the 5670. The 6AB6 is probably an even better option if you are able to use a drop-in mod.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on May 20, 2017 13:14:18 GMT -6
I've never had much overdrive-type distortion from the 4-button trick. Slamming the input of a comp (like Ragan was saying) or preamp tend to be better for that sort of thing. Each piece of gear does it in it's own way. Tip; compress the signal before pushing it into distortion so that you're getting a more even-handed saturation and not just hitting the peaks. It's a more uniform distortion instead of the ugly clipping from the dynamic peaks hitting hard.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Apr 3, 2017 17:31:08 GMT -6
I'm more concerned about AD because it's what everyone hears and it's cumulative across potentially dozens of tracks in each song. That said, both are very important and as someone who uses mostly hardware for mixing, my DA affects the sound others are hearing at some point too.
Monitoring-wise, I'm not as concerned as most converters these days are good enough that they probably won't affect my decision making ability to a great degree.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Apr 1, 2017 15:10:00 GMT -6
I'm a bit late in noticing this thread but my heart goes out to you guys. I feel absolutely gutted when that time comes.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Mar 10, 2017 9:57:54 GMT -6
Sorry to hear of your trouble. My American Tele in Fiesta Red isn't going anywhere though.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 28, 2017 17:01:42 GMT -6
This may or may not be helpful, but I used to think my mixes were "wider" sounding than the commercial material I was comparing them to. Listening back, I think they suffered from smearing (some of it was my gear, some was me over-processing) and a bit of scooping in the mids. It gave a sense of things being wider (left to right, top to bottom) but lost punch and depth down the center. Again, that may or may not be relevant to your situation but when evaluating width, I recommend keeping an eye on what's happening in the center because it's easy to lose track of that.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 27, 2017 19:13:37 GMT -6
I might as well just post a pic of my studio and guitars. I can't afford any of it, but it just keeps showing up.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 26, 2017 20:50:42 GMT -6
Correct about the 5751 not needing any adaption (I'm sure 5751 was just a typo). I haven't experimented with the 5755 though I have read about other's opinions and wasn't particularly motivated to explore them. Mostly because my customers expect things that are rock solid and I can't play around with items that may or may not work consistently. For those looking for something to play with, it might be a fun gamble. One warning about adapters; they may cause fitment issues in mics and other gear, particularly if the tube socket is collared. I've sometimes had problems with adapters and noise in extremely high gain positions, like a mic pre input.
As the "good stuff" becomes more rare I'd undoubtedly have to work at using adapters and finding good 12AX7 subs because the modern production just hasn't come along the way I was hoping it would have by this point in time.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 24, 2017 13:54:56 GMT -6
I've followed converter threads on GDIY and they usually go nowhere. I think there's less motivation anyhow as you can buy a great set of converters for $2,500 and that's all you need. With other gear, you're dropping that amount per pop and you can never get enough of the various comps, mics, pres, eqs, etc.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 16, 2017 22:49:53 GMT -6
My initial stuff was just wiring in guitar pickups around 17 years ago. Wow, what a mess. Apparently, more solder was better. I still occasionally find remnants from that era when I go to do something in one of my guitars. By the time I started building gear, I had made dozens of cables, fixed a lot of gear, and generally knew my way around a soldering iron so my first builds were very clean.
I've got to say though, I'm really surprised at the crude soldering work in some high end gear I come across. In fact, I'm currently fixing a pair of $5k mics for a client and the work inside is uninspiring to say the least. And, it's a brand everyone knows as being among the best of the best.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 13, 2017 11:23:48 GMT -6
I am so deeply sorry for you. Get well soon. Lol. No love for Win7?? I think it's the best OS I've used. 10 is cluttered. Every Mac I've used has contributed to what I swear must be an ulcer (though some of that may be that every mac I've used was during a PT session).
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 12, 2017 21:02:30 GMT -6
This is something I should have addressed years ago but no better time than the present, I suppose. I thought I remember a colleague of mine having an external HD that was set to periodically backup his OS, and his storage at certain intervals. I'm using Win 7 and about once a year I'll manually back everything up everything I care about onto a big HD. This is a disaster waiting to happen, and it does happen every few years. I need a better way. Is there some way to set up a drive that will kick on once a week or month and copy all the necessary bits? And, what kind of drive do you recommend.
If this seems ridiculously basic, then that's good news for me.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 11, 2017 0:54:01 GMT -6
That's what I'm using. After their customer support for the hardware version was lousy, I said I wouldn't buy anything else from them. But, I had $10 in app credit I wasn't going to spend anywhere else so I got the app. Very impressive. I've had several tuning apps and the Strobo results in a more in-tune sounding instrument (meaning, my ear agrees with it). For whatever reason, a lot of apps are just slightly off on the low E, especially if you detune. I can run them side by side with the Strobo and they give different readings,even if slight. Maybe it has to do with how they perceive overtones, I really don't know.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 10, 2017 20:39:43 GMT -6
Depends on the instrument and the part that's being played. The player really has to be playing a big sounding part or the arrangement has to allow for you to layer them in a way that's big. It's really hard to force an acoustic to do something if it's not already doing. They get boxy, or harsh, quick
I personally tune my instruments half a step down for the deeper sound with a more relaxed top end that often stays out of the way of the vocal a little better. That in itself makes them sound really big, even when you capo them. If it's something you think might help for that application, you might be able to talk the player into down tuning and capo-ing the necessary fret.
I personally position my mics based on what I'm hearing in the room. It might be XY, spaced, or any number of things but I never know until I actually hear it, and how it's being played. I couldn't recommend a specific technique as it might sound big on some guitars, annoying on others.
|
|