|
Post by indiehouse on Feb 14, 2024 20:44:35 GMT -6
I’m still on the Sterling Modular 2 bay. I don’t really have the time to change out a desk. It’s a lot of time and effort.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 31, 2024 12:24:18 GMT -6
You are missing my main point, that UA had and has a simple means to make things more equivalent between its lightly invested and more heavily invested clients and it chose and continues to choose not to do that. So, it just exacerbates and increases the cost inequity. You’re ok with that, I’m not: vivre la difference! You are mad because you didn't get a loyalty offer? Or because you did and it wasn't what you expected? If I remember, you've bought and sold off most of your UAD stuff? And now your upset because that doesn't qualify you as a "loyal" customer? Honestly don't care one way or the other, just trying to understand.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 30, 2024 17:12:00 GMT -6
I’m gonna see how it sounds compared to Ocean Way and Inspirata. I found myself needing to tweak Sound City. Backed off the room mics considerably. I worry that it pushes the guitar back too far, even with the close mic. But it’s def a noticeable improvement for smoothing the gritty top and giving a sense of overall space/amp in room vibe.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 30, 2024 7:34:51 GMT -6
On a whim, I tried this on a guitar track. I've been recording my amps with a Suhr RL IR, and honestly don't love it. It's really gritty and scratchy up top, like digital distortion (and yes, I've checked gain staging and I'm not clipping anywhere). I've never gotten a straight answer from Suhr on this, they always tell me that's how guitar amps sound when close mic'd. Well, I don't hear this gnarly top end on any of my fav records, so I call BS on it.
Anyways, I added Sound City in re-mic, tweaked some settings, and holy moses. It completely smoothed out the gritty top end, and really brought the guitar to life. Sounds way more amp-in-the-room than I've ever gotten before. Might be my go-to from now on.
Curious to know if others have tried this plug with load boxes and cab IR's?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 28, 2024 12:16:36 GMT -6
Selling my Stam SA-EQP1A's. I bought these new from Stam and paid $400 each for the NOS upgrade, which includes NOS tubes and an upgraded output transformer, a custom "Cinemag Peerles S217D replica made with the original L12 laminations as used on the original Peerless output transformer." Needless to say, these sound absolutely fantastic. Price includes shipping and insurance. These will ship in original boxes and I will provide packing photos for peace of mind. $1290 plus shipping and PayPal. Price is for one unit, not the pair. From Stam: Two iconic tube EQs in one piece of hardware The SA-EQP1A is one of our most ambitious projects to date. Until now, there hasn’t been any comparable product that would truly respect the sound and legacy the iconic tube EQ has been offering since the 50’s. That is, at least not without a hefty price-tag. At the beginning of the project, we weren’t sure if we wanted to build an exact replica of the EQP-1A or the popular MEQ-5. In the end, we opted to build a fusion of both equalisers into a single unit, thus adding the coveted mid-section of the MEQ-5 (200Hz to 7kHz) into the EQP-1A, in a manner that that carefully respects the ratios and frequency response of the timeless classic. Our version uses the exact circuit topology, with the option to add or bypass the mid-section of the popular Pultec MEQ-5. Unlike other replicas, we didn’t settle for two transformers (input/output) and decided to respect the original three transformer configuration using an inter-stage transformer: a critical component to obtain that superb low-end, silky high-end and tonal shaping heaven, with the added bonus of making the unit even more stable, providing a consistent performance and a lower noise-floor. Every single knob thoroughly follows the ratio and frequency response of the classic unit, but we also added an output gain dial so that two units can be matched with ease for stereo operation. The SA-EQP1A is built with premium components With the aid of a premium input and an inter-stage transformer as well as a Sowter output transformer, inductors, JJ tubes and a fully discrete class A circuit with premium Vishay capacitors, we accomplished our goal: to offer the authentic sound palette and complete functionality at an affordable price. The timeless technique of boosting and attenuating at the same time, to make use of the unit’s sweet EQ curves, can now be in your hands, and in your studio. Technical Specs Class A, all discrete circuit Sowter input , Interstage and upgraded output transformer Cinemag and Carnhill inductors WIMA Capacitors Original circuit and schematic MEQ5’s mid band section added (bypass) NOS 12AX7 and 12AU7 tubes XLR and TRS transformer balanced inputs XLR and TRS transformer balanced outputs Low frequency boost Low frequency cut Mid Frequency cut High frequency boost High frequency cut Switchable 115/230 volt IEC power inlet Dimensions: 19 x 3.5 x 6 inches – 2RU rack mountable
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 21, 2024 15:21:33 GMT -6
I'm regrettably putting my Foote P3EX up for sale. This is a fantastic compressor in great condition, but I have to raise some funds to pay off a bit of debt. Sigh. This is hand-built, tested and calibrated by Roger Foote himself. The makeup gain on this thing sounds AWESOME. This will ship in the original box, with original power supply. $1590 Shipped and PayPal'd. Here are the specs: > Stereo operation with linked controls > Transformer balanced inputs and outputs. > Discrete Class A Output stages > Peak (manual attack/release) or RMS timing > Hard Knee / Soft Knee operation which is available to both Peak and RMS > 5 frequency HPF with front panel rotary switch > Elma "wing" style collet knobs > Stereo side chain inserts on 2- TRS connectors > Main I/O on Neutrik XLR > Full "hardwire" bypass Audio Path Specs (no compression applied): 20 Hz: +0.07 dB 20 kHz: -0.34 dB Noise: -102.7 dB THD: 0.14% Crosstalk: -100.3 dB The I/O was designed to have euphonic coloration thanks to the steel core transformers and many hours of research to zero in on the most pleasing sonic signature.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 20, 2024 8:05:08 GMT -6
I just feel so guilty chucking this stuff in the landfill. Partly because of my eco-responsibility, and partly because I know how much I spent on this stuff. And I don’t use these anymore, aside from Melodyne and Pianoteq. I’ll probably recycle what I can and toss the rest. I mean, there’s no good reason to keep it, right? It’s all downloads now, besides the fact that these versions are grossly incompatible with todays OS.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 19, 2024 16:46:45 GMT -6
Anyone need a copy of Komplete 5? Ha.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 19, 2024 15:38:20 GMT -6
What the hell do I do with these? I've been storing them for years.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 19, 2024 15:32:10 GMT -6
It is modern sounding with some top end to it, not old school like an old RCA. I need to spend more time with it as I have not used it except for one recording. Sounds like a Samar VL37.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 16, 2024 5:15:35 GMT -6
So I just did a test where I put a buffer (a buffered pedal) in between my guitar and the Countryman DI. This time, there is no tonal loss when splitting out to amp. No high end loss. Interesting. Are you getting that as well? I guess I need to use a buffer if I want to split my signal. This is exactly what I was going to suggest. Or a buffered splitter. Or mod an Ernie Ball volume pedal with a buffer (several shops offer this) so you can split the signal there. I guess my ultimate question is, is this normal? And if so, why is no one else doing this? Or am I experiencing an issue that no one else is? And if so, why?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 15, 2024 16:00:22 GMT -6
This reminds me that I have never tried the UTA Vari-cap cable The video he posted long ago demonstrates why many cables sound so different. Since you mention loss of highs, it just reminded me. Some great mystery for me is solved if his video is accurate. I wonder if cable length or type is at play? I think it needs buffered?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 15, 2024 14:42:05 GMT -6
How about the Neural Tone King and Morgan Amps? To me, those are two of the most realistic sounding plugs. I picked up the Neural Tone King a while back! I’ve been rediscovering it over the past few days. That’s one of the best ITB options I have right now.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 15, 2024 14:07:16 GMT -6
So I just did a test where I put a buffer (a buffered pedal) in between my guitar and the Countryman DI. This time, there is no tonal loss when splitting out to amp. No high end loss. Interesting. Are you getting that as well? I guess I need to use a buffer if I want to split my signal.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 15, 2024 13:59:20 GMT -6
You can try Neural Amp Modeler if you don’t want to buy the full ToneX. It’s a free amp capture-type plug-in that Amalgam also offers packs for. I bought his Copper amp, the Carr Mercury, and the Benson packs during one of his sales. www.neuralampmodeler.com/userswww.amalgamcaptures.com/nam?page=2I started playing with Neural Amp Modeler a few months ago because I didn’t want to keep buying more stuff. No AAX? Bummer.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 15, 2024 13:47:30 GMT -6
So, I just dusted off my Countryman to try this out - Guitar -> Countryman with mic output going to interface and the amp thru going to the pedalboard -> amp -> Suhr RL. Basically, splitting the guitar signal at the DI. I'm hearing a slight loss of highs when the signal is split vs not split. Are you hearing that? Does it bother you? What is the "not split" signal path here? I haven't noticed any issues with the high end, but I'm not sure I've compared what you're comparing. So, here's what I mean. My guitar is plugged straight into the INST. input, and split out to my amp via the AMP. thru. When I unplug the AMP., my direct guitar tone gets noticeably brighter. Here's a sound clip I made strumming a G chord. The first is both cables plugged in, the second is just the INST. cable, not splitting out to amp. https%3A//soundcloud.com/adamjmonk/countryman-test%3Fsi%3D3cc98409f7184e938b90f0557779f4e0%26amp%3Butm_source%3Dclipboard%26amp%3Butm_medium%3Dtext%26amp%3Butm_campaign%3Dsocial_sharingon.soundcloud.com/Y8Zfdo7mCfHxuFMC8
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 15, 2024 13:31:55 GMT -6
I am using a Countryman to split the signal from my guitar into my interface (Lynx Aurora n) for DI. What kind of level on the DI should I be getting? Right now, it's EXTREMELY low, RMS around -55db peaks around -36db. Is that normal? I suggest making up that gain with a mic pre between your DI and interface. I have my chain set for around -12dB. I set my levels to match Line 6 Helix hardware since it is a good middle ground for digital plugins. I also have my reamp box levels set to unity gain in relation to the input levels. That way my reamped levels are as close to the original signal as possible. I leave these levels even when I change guitars, so the pickup level differences are maintained. So, a DI to take my instrument level down to mic level, a preamp to take mic level up to line level, then a reamp box to take line level back down to instrument level. What am I missing out on by leaving it at instrument level in the first place? Optimal signal to noise ratio?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 15, 2024 13:29:15 GMT -6
On a tangent here, but isn't weird that so many of us are working with guitar-based music when guitar is nowhere on the map of mainstream consciousness? Are we just old? Ha. Having similar thoughts lately. I have two young daughters who are discovering Taylor Swifts discography. So by proxy, I have been listening to a lot of Tay Tay. I figured I might as well learn something and listen with a critical ear. Very non-guitar centered music for a songwriter who writes mainly with guitar and piano (the documentaries are kind of cool to watch, funny enough). Anyways, I guess I do me. I don’t care what mainstream does. But, I’m up for trying something new.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 15, 2024 13:24:48 GMT -6
Yes! Anything you put in between is going to affect the tone. Older amp designs seem to be more sensitive. My 64 Princeton sounds far better when the guitar is plugged straight in than going through pedals or directs boxes. Once you start stacking pedals it matters less but if you have a guitarist that plays straight into the amp, he’ll probably notice if you plug a Di before. Electric Guitars always had some form of suck due to its wiring technology that is not compatible to itself at times with pedals.
Does not compute.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 15, 2024 13:06:41 GMT -6
Yes. I think with the free one you just get 10 free profile slots…and last I checked, you can’t delete and replace them. So if you do that, be careful what you download. I just bought the $99 (or around there) one and it’s unlimited slots. As for the sounds - it’s definitely a step up from the algo versions. I still think there’s a sameness to the profiles similar to the Kemper…I prefer the AxeFX…but it does sound pretty damn good. Well....dag. I figured. Also, I'm assuming it's per profile and not per amp. I think the amalgam stuff comes with 20ish presets per amp. I don't know if I want to spend that much. I was looking for a couple of different flavors for scratch tracking ITB, but I can just use what I've got...which is kind of my new goal for this year. I tried one of his free ones, the Swart AST clean, just because I have a Swart AST and wanted to hear how it compares to my current silent tracking setup, amp -> Suhr RL IR. Granted, different cab IR's, but the amalgam Swart is brighter and cleaner. One thing I noticed is that with my Swart amp, I can play clean and dig in for a little hair. I love that. With the amalgam ToneX, it stays clean no matter what. It's like, one tone...clean.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 15, 2024 11:01:12 GMT -6
Anyone using this? I was thinking about buying some captures by amalgam. Do I need the paid version (ToneX Max) to import these, or can I use the free CS version? I know there’s a limit on the number you can download with the free version. But does that limit apply to imports as well?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 15, 2024 7:34:30 GMT -6
I am using a Countryman to split the signal from my guitar into my interface (Lynx Aurora n) for DI. What kind of level on the DI should I be getting? Right now, it's EXTREMELY low, RMS around -55db peaks around -36db. Is that normal?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 14, 2024 17:32:28 GMT -6
8 x Countryman here, used for DI split on every guitar track, re-amped later if need be. Are you going from Countryman straight to interface? Any loss of high end?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 13, 2024 15:41:42 GMT -6
I use a Countryman with my Suhr RL too. Sounds great. So, I just dusted off my Countryman to try this out - Guitar -> Countryman with mic output going to interface and the amp thru going to the pedalboard -> amp -> Suhr RL. Basically, splitting the guitar signal at the DI. I'm hearing a slight loss of highs when the signal is split vs not split. Are you hearing that? Does it bother you?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 9, 2024 10:40:57 GMT -6
I have been having great results with cutting my guitarist with a di into a Suhr reactive load and then IRs... I can reamp later and he still gets the feel he likes during tracking. Are you splitting from the DI? What DI are you using? I've got Dan's Zod DI, but the thru sounds like crap. I think he said it was meant for a tuner, and something about the thru is basically a direct mult (not Buffered) so you are weighing down the input impedance of the main signal. In order for that to not be the issue you would have to use a buffer.
|
|