|
Post by bowie on Feb 10, 2017 16:09:43 GMT -6
bowie , these impalers probably won't work out on a sloped ceiling right? I have a sloped ceiling and I imagine you might be able to bend the prongs at a severe angle so that they're basically horizontal when they're in the ceiling. You could then use some adhesive as mentioned earlier but then you're going to be leaving cavities in the back of the panels if you go to remove them. My personal thing for trapping on the ceiling is to use Auralex bass traps (EDIT; meant to say diffusors) the various hollow, plastic shell types, and stuff them with acoustic treatment. This basically traps bass and diffuses the top (which is typically something I'm after). It's easy to mount them in ceilings with drywall screws. I have always been able to find used Auralex diffusors on ebay and craiglist, for half (or less) the retail price. Also, though the get endlessly bashed on the other site, I think the T-Fusors work fantastic, in every room I've used them in. This is the lower part of a slant ceiling right above my mix/work position. Just thought I'd share for anyone who ever wondered about the TFusors. The ability to bass trap + diffuse is great.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 10, 2017 12:12:56 GMT -6
I just used a bunch of these last week for hanging O/C and Rockboard; www.buyinsulationproductstore.com/acoustic-panel-impaling-clips/Cheap and very effective. If you need an idea of how many you'll need; I used 1ea for 1'x1' squares. 5ea for the heaviest version of the Rockboard + diffusors on top of them. A regular 703 4'x2'x2" panel does fine with 4 and you could probably use 3ea. TIP; I discovered it helps to hand-bend the prongs on these at a slight upward angle! It makes them sit closer to the wall as they settle in, giving a more snug look. Otherwise, the panels don't sit all that flush sometimes. I also used the expensive ($4ea) ones that hold them 2" away from the wall. If I had it to do over again, I wouldn't have bothered with the spaced ones.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 8, 2017 18:29:15 GMT -6
I've been using this mic for a week and all I can say is I get it. This is an incredible microphone. I highly recommend the MK U67 if you have the funds for it. Yeah it wears well! I somehow keep liking it more and more. I wish I would have bought it years ago. Well, ok, it didn't exist years ago, but you know what I mean. I want to get another while we've still got Max around. These things won't be available forever. Stop It!! My hand keeps gravitating toward my wallet every time I read this thread. I need another mic like a hole in the head but, honestly, with all the great words here and the enthusiasm my customers who are retubing them, I'm sooooo tempted to pick one up. I usually wait a couple years with any gear to see if the hype dies down but I'm hearing great things about these from people who don't even participate in forums. And, like you said, they may not be around forever. Wouldn't be the first time I seriously missed the boat by waiting...
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 7, 2017 21:00:16 GMT -6
Like buying a bag of chips and the damned thing is half air! Actually, it looks fine. They put the caps and resistors right at the terminals and such so what you're not seeing is the PCB normally found in mics. There's a number of ways to lay things out. So long as it's quiet, it should be alright if everything is well placed and secured.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 4, 2017 17:17:54 GMT -6
I don't know if anyone mentioned, but there's socketed and soldered. If it' socketed, I slip a tiny flat-head screwdriver under one end to get it started. When seating the new one, use the same screwdriver to help the pins on one side find their way in while I anchor/start the opamp on the other side of the socket. Never had a problem using that method. From your description you are referring to IC based op amps... these are 2520 style.... cheers Wiz I don't know if anyone mentioned, but there's socketed and soldered. If it' socketed, I slip a tiny flat-head screwdriver under one end to get it started. When seating the new one, use the same screwdriver to help the pins on one side find their way in while I anchor/start the opamp on the other side of the socket. Never had a problem using that method. Erm, they're talking about API style discrete opamp modules, not chips... Sure thing. I only looked at the original post with no mention to which piece of gear it was. Thx for the clarification.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 4, 2017 13:47:37 GMT -6
I don't know if anyone mentioned, but there's socketed and soldered. If it' socketed, I slip a tiny flat-head screwdriver under one end to get it started. When seating the new one, use the same screwdriver to help the pins on one side find their way in while I anchor/start the opamp on the other side of the socket. Never had a problem using that method.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 4, 2017 12:44:11 GMT -6
I've finally started building this. I got the wrong switches though.. Trying to get it right this time I studied the schematics and found none of the SPDT switches have the third pin connected. So why not use SPST switches instead? Asked the same question at GDIY, but the SA-3 thread there seems dead, so I'm trying here too.. If a switch only connects/disconnects one lead, why use SPDT? Funny you say that, it's was one of the first things I discovered in the world of DIY a few years ago; BOMs asking for SPDT when SPST is all that's required. Not sure why that happens so often. No worries though, just wire the SPDT to work as SPST and you're good to go.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 1, 2017 23:46:51 GMT -6
Don't discount the possibility of an EF86 being noisy. Those early mesh Mullards sound sweet but are very noise-prone. I find few of them that I can use for sensitive stages. Try swapping the 12AU7s in their respective positions and seeing if the noise changes. I don't have a schematic in front of me but I thought the 12AU7 was used in an output, or some later stages in those units. Anyhow, that's usually the case with the 12AU7. Because they're lower in gain, you'll rarely find them in input stages. In those situations, the 12AU7 can contribute but you don't want to spend a ton on a 12AU7 for a couple reasons. One being that, unless it's your end-all preamp, it's better to put the money into the more influential tube (EF86 in this case) and just get a competent 12AU7. The other is that there are a lot of nice 12AU7s that get overlooked, but rival the quality of some of the sought-after names when used in an output stage. I usually steer my customers toward some of the more reliable and cost-effective 12AU7 options like certain versions of Sylvanias, RCAs, etc. Some prefer to go all-out and put Mullards and Telefunkens in every stage. But, in many 12AU7 stages, the difference between a Telefunken and a good Sylvania are very subtle.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 1, 2017 20:44:05 GMT -6
Yikes. Terrible to hear. Hope you mend soon. I also hope you've got someone near that can help you out over thenext couple months.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 1, 2017 20:09:35 GMT -6
Hey there, Yeah, constructive critiques, tips, requests are always welcome It's a work in progress, and we are always working to improve where we can. [In my other life I edit a science journal, so I'm pretty immersed and comfortable/brow beaten with the world of critique]. Agreed Bowie - every reverb has a different level to an extent compared to to others. Factors to consider in relation to that are that we have used parity of the manufacturers settings (e.g. mix set at 30%). Nice as it would be to have actual industry standards, there sadly often aren't (and don't get me started on compressors! ). i.e. to have one form of parity removes another more often than not So in a case of doing that as a reference standard it provides parity in one sense (e.g. manufacturer belief of mix %) but not of course in the case of exact dB levels in all cases. Moving to the future 'best case scenario reverb shootout' measuring tails (at the moment) and setting that close enough (e.g. within 0.5dB) would sadly take much much much more time than we could afford to spend at the moment as a free site (anyone wanting to throw us some $$ so we can torment ourselves on super high end details is more than welcome ). If anyone has an insight into how we can do this an still maintain some form of social life that would be truly excellent. We aim, for the site, to be what we call 'semi-scientific', i.e. we do the basic achievable level within time/budget constraints. If we were going for a full academic journal peer review type level we would of course have 3-6 months for each experiment (and still probably expect a 50% rejection rate at the end. . . science...). With reverbs (even in the case of differing mix levels by manufacturer) you can (I think), still adequately determine the 'tone' of the plugin, which is the main thing to check. If anyone does spot a particular plugin that they would like the mix level to be higher or lower we'd welcome a heads up and estimate of how much to adjust by and will have a blast on it as soon as we get time to do it and repost for approval by the hive mind. Re Confirmation Bias - depends what aspect of confirmation bias we consider, we aim to remove as many potential biases as possible, but yeah, it's definitely a work in progress. For the moment, just focus on the tone. Thanks in advance for any wisdom, we'll keep on working and improving as time and ideas arise. Thanks for the addl info! Very helpful for the sake of context. Nice to see the open minded response as well. Some people get very defensive at any criticism. I like your approach.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 1, 2017 16:30:58 GMT -6
Interesting. Might be helpful though I'm hesitant to let myself get swayed/biased by that because I don't know if they tried to replicate other parameters besides the length. Of course the high/low pass, diffusion, early reflection time, etc will affect the character a lot and I don't know if we're comparing presets (which wouldn't help me). I like the idea. It's just odd that they say - "A way to break your myths and legends apart and dispense with the evil of all evils... 'Confirmation Bias'." ...then the reverbs are all over the place in terms of volume. This is my first exposure to the site though and I still applaud them for putting in the work they have. Not trying to bash them or anything. It would be near impossible to get each verbs set to perform identically because of everything involved. I'll be sure to check out some of their other comparisons.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 31, 2017 14:28:25 GMT -6
I love good preamps but I feel that preamp selection is almost minutia in comparison to how critical mic selection and placement are on an acoustic. More so than most other sources, IMO, because of the way the instrument projects, creating a variety of tones from different parts of the instrument. That said, V72s are lovely on acoustics (so long as it's not too lightly played). If there's magic coming out of the instrument, the V72 will capture it. Millennia M2a/b is another other fave. The highs are incredibly airy and the mids are lean, making them feel almost pre-EQ'd for acoustic. I was impressed by Shadow Hills as well. Very focused mids that can give larger instruments clarity without robbing them of their power.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 26, 2017 20:46:24 GMT -6
Depends on what you're doing but I think the Jazz is probably the most versatile. P offers a lot of in-the-pocket warmth and groove. I tend to lean toward Jazz-style basses for the "growl" and definition in the lows, which is helped out by the fact that they usually have some decent midrange content. Stingray does a similar thing but with more balls, IMO. Warwicks are an extreme form of that piano-like tight, clear bass guitar tone. My Warwick Thumb can sound obnoxiously aggressive when solo'd but in the context of a mix it's easy to work with and fairly bloat-free, even when turned up.
Being someone who uses a lot of DI'd bass, a big thing for me is upgrading the pickups. Even a lot of the expensive basses out there use mid-quality pickups (not all, but many). Better pups can give better focus and make recording much easier. Figuring out the right ones for the bass and the application can be tricky but worth the effort to nail the bass tone you're after.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 25, 2017 21:16:09 GMT -6
They're not as fashionable as they once were but I've been loving the Millennia NSEQ (transformerless tube EQ) for a number of years now. One of the few EQs I've used where I don't feel that the integrity of the source is being harmed (no smearing, grit, loss of dynamics or detail). Very transparent. There are better EQs for character, but I haven't personally used any hardware that was so well behaved across the spectrum. Nor have I used any plugins that felt as focused and (for lack of better words) "musical". One of the few pieces of gear that I've never considered selling, ever.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 25, 2017 18:33:21 GMT -6
I tend to trust AMI when it comes to sound quality. They can be expensive, but I've not regretted purchasing them. Christian, ever encounter any issue with smear from AMIs? Not in any AMI-equipped mics I've used. Almost the opposite, I like them because they tend to sound tight. I've not done a lot of mic transformer shootouts (just rough comparisons) but some who have seem to share the same sentiment. People tend to give me a lot of brutally honest opinions in how they feel about various components and gear and I've never heard a negative word about AMI transformers. Not that everyone is going to love them, but they seem to be well-received. One thing to keep in mind is that their popular T-series can be used in a lot of applications and some might be better suited for that xformer than others. What's your experience been?
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 24, 2017 12:16:53 GMT -6
I tend to trust AMI when it comes to sound quality. They can be expensive, but I've not regretted purchasing them.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 23, 2017 21:33:30 GMT -6
I bought a pair of these hokey-looking clips from GC about 15 years ago and they have actually been pretty great. They fit all sorts of smaller mics www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MHR122 Sometimes, even better than the expensive, but ill-fitting mounts that are sold for certain high-end mics (I'm looking at you Schoeps). No! Not the clothes pin ! Noooo! That's like buying KT88's from a guy with a van in the Walmart parking lot! Hey, he's also got smokes, gold jewelry, and fresh steaks with the label peeled off the package. Can't be all that bad, right?
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 23, 2017 20:09:13 GMT -6
I bought a pair of these hokey-looking clips from GC about 15 years ago and they have actually been pretty great. They fit all sorts of smaller mics www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MHR122 Sometimes, even better than the expensive, but ill-fitting mounts that are sold for certain high-end mics (I'm looking at you Schoeps).
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 21, 2017 14:00:52 GMT -6
gosh darn, that looks like fun!! You stole the words... That looks like a whole lotta fun.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 18, 2017 13:37:53 GMT -6
Thanks for your thought svart. Yes, it's a marvelous example of frequency construction. As for the snare, I'm gonna also look into keying/expanding a room mic and see if that makes the snare punchier with a sense of space. The meat of the drums comes from the close mics. The glue of the kit comes from the OH or rooms. You want the meat, so focus on getting more close mic perfection. ^This. If I were going after that separation and punch, I'd focus on the close mics, using room and OH for support. Space and width are two different things. That snare is super-wide, but not through spaciousness (room/OH). It's in the close mics and I think it sounds like a layered/sampled snare blended to fill out both the 'punch' and 'crack' at the same time. There may very well be several tracks dedicated to that snare. This is a great example of a simple arrangement having a lot going on in the mix so that the sparse instrumentation sounds larger than life. It's sometimes a maddening rabbit hole to go down because seems so damn easy, until you try to replicate it.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 17, 2017 23:04:52 GMT -6
"...gives you the genuine tone of the world’s most sought-after tube and transformer-based mic preamps — including Neve,® API,® Manley,® and UA — complete with their signature impedance, gain stage “sweet spots,” and component-level circuit behaviors." Pardon me, I've got to clean up some vomit...
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 17, 2017 19:18:06 GMT -6
Embarrassment, or the fear of, can be a great motivator. For me at least. Congrats on doing what you needed to do during the hard times and landing yourself new work. Hope it turns out great for you!
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 17, 2017 19:07:44 GMT -6
I cast my vote last year by going with StudioOne instead.
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 15, 2017 22:10:12 GMT -6
After years of Wellers Grabed a Hakko 888-D so much more consistent temp ! Between this and the Aoyue 8800 desoldering gun that I picked up for $150 and the $50 Scope I almost feel like a tech! What scope did you get and how are you liking it?
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 14, 2017 21:06:28 GMT -6
With the explosion of the pro-sumer market, this was inevitable. Like any other service or product, if the customer can recognise a difference, and cares about the difference, then you don't have to compete with the $10/hr guys because your clients are shopping a different level of quality. I understand your frustration in trying to figure out how to educate the unaware as to what a good recording is. I can't offer a lot of help there but I can tell you that word of mouth is a powerful thing and if you are leaving your clients happy, that will do more advertising and educating than you ever could on your own. That goes beyond just the quality of the product. People can record at any number of places these days. If they record with someone who loves what they do, makes them feel good about their music, and who can turn a very tense process into something uplifting, then you have a much better chance of earning their business, and their friend's business. And, it makes your job easier as their performances will be better.
It's not something you can fake, but if you have that sort of personality, embrace it and make it work for you in your business.
|
|