|
Post by illacov on Sept 9, 2017 20:58:09 GMT -6
Time to revisit them then. The noise floor on these is in the early -90s range and I'm able to peg the shit out this particular model with very little distortion. There's many Yamaha graphic eq for sure but this ain't one of the ones you're mentioning that has those negative attributes. Worth a shot! Thanks -L. No those are the ones! The B is just as bad, I even know a Yamaha rep who hates them ! Try some of the rotary Whites ! I remember a club that pulled those old Yamaha's and thought the Alesis was a giant step up ! Amazing. This thing is extremely quiet, clear and free from distortion. Maybe it's better suited for DAC to ADC loops than PA use? Alan Evans showed me how good his sounded with Zulu and it was bananas. I've tried other EQs and they didn't outperform the Q2031A. Strange that it's doing so well. But so far that's two owners with the exact same experience. I used it without Zulu as well and the experience was the same as far as noise, clarity and distortion. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Sept 9, 2017 19:32:04 GMT -6
Yamaha Q2031A. Monstrously good Graphic EQ. It takes socketed input transformers on the back (features a transformer in/out switch for flavors) and can be upgraded with an output transformer for each channel as well (factory option). Super quiet and over delivers compared to any plugin EQ I've ever tried. I run mine into Zulu and it also offers 10db of analog gain if you desire. SCHWEET. Thanks -L. Those look cool. Do you have stock transformers in it? What are they? No transformers installed in mine(yet). I have Altec line trafos that are octal. They should work. I'll report back with news. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Sept 9, 2017 19:31:08 GMT -6
Yamaha Q2031A. Monstrously good Graphic EQ. It takes socketed input transformers on the back (features a transformer in/out switch for flavors) and can be upgraded with an output transformer for each channel as well (factory option). Super quiet and over delivers compared to any plugin EQ I've ever tried. I run mine into Zulu and it also offers 10db of analog gain if you desire. SCHWEET. Thanks -L. See from my FOH and Wedge days the Yamaha Graphics were the worst! They were plentiful because people could finance them with the board! Those things have very little headroom and were noise machines! Give me a pair of Whites with Transformers any day ! Time to revisit them then. The noise floor on these is in the early -90s range and I'm able to peg the shit out this particular model with very little distortion. There's many Yamaha graphic eq for sure but this ain't one of the ones you're mentioning that has those negative attributes. Worth a shot! Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Sept 9, 2017 16:38:11 GMT -6
Yamaha Q2031A. Monstrously good Graphic EQ. It takes socketed input transformers on the back (features a transformer in/out switch for flavors) and can be upgraded with an output transformer for each channel as well (factory option).
Super quiet and over delivers compared to any plugin EQ I've ever tried.
I run mine into Zulu and it also offers 10db of analog gain if you desire.
SCHWEET.
Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Aug 21, 2017 15:26:01 GMT -6
Sounds great, man! I've got the Zulu setup over here. Do you generally stay around those settings you posted above? Still trying to get a handle on this thing. I like to bypass things to see where I've been and where I'm at, but it's a bit of a pain to set up a bypass workaround. How do you normally insert Zulu? I recommend spending some time with just it in the signal path instead of inserting it into a chain, just so you get to know what it does when you have it in a plain jane patch. Everything else is gravy from there. Bypassing the Deck and the Bias is a great way to get a handle on the sound of the unit with the tape circuit and Bias in bypass. This does the least amount of transient shaping, saturation and so on. A hardware bypass is a challenging prospect indeed, mainly because each setting is going to incur varying amounts of loss. I run into the same problem using a tape deck, where I park my send gain to the 2 track deck is going to change my perception of the dry track if I suddenly bypass it because I have to level match the send/return with the dry from the ITB mix, but an RMS match vs a peak level match will give very different results for the sake of comparison! Bypassing for AB is very different than bypassing just to have it out but not unplugged, especially for something like this (passive with no amp). Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Aug 21, 2017 6:49:58 GMT -6
Dude...nothing wrong with that. Sounds fantastic. I'm starting to really get to know the Zulu too. It fits perfectly for what you're doing. (Only wish it had an option for makeup gain.) With Zulu it's always BYO-PRE. I feel like the minute I add makeup gain to a design like this, it will be immediately accompanied by a request for switchable transformers, bypass for the active makeup gain section, some kind of parallel mix circuit, a hardwire bypass and oh yeah a $1000 price tag. LOL Those VP28 are monsters John, I want to see how much gain you lose with those driving Zulu. I'm straight with my Mackie 8Mix and I barely use em past 10-15db in front of Zulu. If I'm making up gain I have to use them very gingerly, since I may need no more than 2 or 3db to get them to pre Zulu amplitude level. It's all about how you spank em! Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Aug 21, 2017 6:43:19 GMT -6
Cool sounds you're getting Wiz!
I dig your treatments. Each attempt has high levels of merit and tone that I dig.
What's the vocal chain/treatment on this record?
Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Jun 23, 2017 8:18:40 GMT -6
Regardless of said tests, in application, the hardware pres, compressors and EQs (at least in my experience and some privately shared opinions by other insiders) get used far more aggressively than most assume. The extremes or later 3rds of analog equipment are still off limits in my opinion. Cleaner music styles or aesthetics where clarity is the ideal tend to benefit the most from high fidelity approaches. I mean if you did a test on a cleanish pop record where the digital/ITB was clear and the analog was darker and thumpier then the analog mix would be ruled out immediately because it was inappropriate for the genre. Especially since it would be a failure on someone's part in the process to do anything except go as clean as possible and at optimum for music that we expect to be clean and have way less overall character. That to me is more of an operating principles than a digital vs analog issue. **** I was just talking with a buddy about Steely Dan Aja, how they used Rane mic pres on some of the tracks. Now of course analog studio, analog tape and Roger Nichols plus Steely Dan et al. But that's one clean record for it's time and it's perfect like that. ****
But the same test on something like an Al Green recording? Or Radiohead? Percy Sledge?
The real battleground still lies in genres that benefit from distortion, aggressive tones and heavier aesthetics. That's what I'd like to see most.
Like a Portishead Dummy inspired shootout. Or a gut bucket funk shootout.
Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Jun 12, 2017 22:43:52 GMT -6
No the vocal sitting in the pocket and the song being easier to listen too is not attributed to just one piece of gear.. From what I know of Wiz 's workflow he reamps thru outboard and his console as well as analog pieces on the Mixbus; so just one piece out of all of those is not the deciding factor or the reason, however I'm sure it helped 🤠Wiz has good ears, has great recording and songwriting skills, know his space well so those are important factors too.. This is in no way intended to be a dig at the Zulu. If it was raw Vox only treated with Zulu and just Zulu on Mixbus compared to a non Zulu vocals and mix then one could say the sonic influences of Zulu are full in the blank here 😎 Its really worth pointing out that Wiz has explained in detail his working process regarding Zulu. This last song he posted featured it all over the record, aside from the mix buss (with the SA4000 compressor). I know what I hear that Zulu does contribute sonically on its own merits, but because of how Zulu acts with mixes and source material in general, it does allow you to "work," differently, so if Wiz can do things with Zulu he couldn't do before, which in turn reflects on how he uses the rest of his equipment, I consider that a win. Until you really sit with Zulu in your setup, its really easy to assume what it doesn't do, but the bass behavior, the tape compression, the saturation and the dynamic interaction, that stuff is real. The professional endorsers, the awesome independent practitioners and beyond, are hearing that stuff too. I was cutting vocals today with a 251 into a PM2000 and into Zulu to Lynx converters. There's a nice dose of realness to the way the vocals are focused with Zulu involved versus without. Tod made sure to split the signal, via an analog buss after the mic pres so that we could hear straight to digital versus without. This allowed us to record with no EQ or with EQ to show how it would sound with and without Zulu without needing to perform different takes for dry vs wet. The differences were pretty significant. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Jun 12, 2017 22:35:19 GMT -6
Hey Langston (or anyone else), What are your thoughts on achieving the sound of a Tascam MS-16 (not MSR-16) with the Zulu? I know y'all modeled a different Tascam for the pro-fi deck, right? Most people seem to be trying to emulate sounds using the hi-fi deck but I'm curious about the pro-fi. There doesn't seem to be as much talk or many samples involving the pro-fi. I know some people crap all over the Tascam machines or 1" 16 (or 1/2" 8 track) track in general but I happen to like the sound of some records which were done on an MS-16. Take the War on Drugs: Slave Ambient or Pavement: Slanted and Enchanted which apparently we're both recorded on an MS-16. Or maybe something like the earlier Black Keys albums, which were recorded on some type of Tascam. I'd be curious about your thoughts on achieving these sorts of sounds with the Zulu? Actually the Tascams are my personal favorite decks. Long term 38 fanatic. Don't forget the 8516 for Sharon Jones and Amy Winehouse. I think the DNA that Zulu has from our adventures with the Tascam and Teac machines we owned, informed the overall tone of the ProFI deck. As well between the Bias and Enhance controls, quite a few sonic parameters shift around as you turn those switches into different positions. Most of which are best evaluated in the context of your production. There's plenty of colors and dirt (intentional spelling) within Zulu aside from the HIFI stuff, one thing to point out that is key in all of this is that what you're doing into those tape machines informs the aesthetic just as much as the fact that you're using tape. But personally I think you'd be extremely happy with Zulu if you like the option of having bold colors on your recordings right beside the high fidelity sounds from tape. Thanks-L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Jun 9, 2017 5:43:49 GMT -6
You might find some old trannies on the curb to play with as well. I'll pass on those. Haha I got my start playing with the old trannies in the broken TV's on the curb. Later I found out I was cheating death since the caps held their charge long after the boob tube was unplugged. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Jun 7, 2017 7:40:07 GMT -6
Copped a pair of Joe Meek JM27.
Delish on overheads.
Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Jun 7, 2017 6:56:32 GMT -6
On my headphones, it sounded to me like the Zulu file was squeezed tight and lower in volume, so I tried them on my monitors. Gotta say I don't see any reason to jump on this, it really didn't sound better to me, just different. In the back of my head, I love the idea of the Zulu, so if anything, I was rooting for it to be a winner. Make a track with and without the UAD ATR-102 on the Smooth Vocal preset, or the 30 ips Mastering preset, cut the noise off, and you'll hear a nice improvement too. Is the Zulu better than that? I'd love to hear more comparisons before making any real judgements. Thanks for doing this John. Wiz has several examples that you'll find rather impressive in my opinion. John is still getting his bearings with Zulu. We chatted on the phone last night and he is extremely impressed with it but also needed some encouragement to turn the knobs til it felt good instead of overthinking things. I'm sure he will have some pretty sweet examples in the near future. Be glad to run something thru Zulu for you. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Jun 7, 2017 5:39:37 GMT -6
I am noob but I thought Zulu was passive therefore doesn't have a sound ? It has a massive range of sounds. It's using custom designed Altran transformers, special passive circuits and components to offer a pretty broad range of tones. Tracking more bass (different player), electric guitar and drums today. Zulu shall be all over it! Tapey goodness! Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Jun 6, 2017 22:02:59 GMT -6
I just cut 7 tracks worth of DI bass with no inline compression this week with only a DI box, a Rane MS1B and Zulu. Plenty of signal coming in, not a tweak fest, not a hassle. Good old fashioned record production. The bassist has recorded in numerous professional studios and remarked that with Zulu it was the best he has ever heard his bass in some 30+ years of playing.
Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Jun 6, 2017 20:36:13 GMT -6
How did you decide on Zulu settings - was that through trial and error or is there something a bit more scientific? Haven't had much chance to play too much with mine yet, but interested in other peeps settings. Yeah...I'm still figuring it out myself. The gain staging has been a little confusing to me. With this I went Upton--Stam73--Sta--Zulu. I have my sta output pretty cranked and it still comes in pretty low. If I were to turn the Enhance knob all the way down (CC), it would be super low. The Bias is the top end, so I wanted to roll that off. I noticed that with this particular chain, the MX Cal seemed to impart the best amount of saturation without distortion. To me, it definitely "smoothed" out the mic. Not as pointed in the mids. Just more pleasant. I'm wondering if I should track normally and then use the Zulu after to print...That way I'm not re-learning all of my gain staging while tracking. I track vocals, bass drums, guitars and everything else, with mine sans compressor, MX mode or HX mode, come in circa -12db. 1 click of Enhance or two, at most. John, skip the Sta Level and see if you can get appropriate gain coming in circa -12 or -18db. You shouldn't have to change your gain staging up. Try setting Zulu to Deck HI, HX mode, Enhance at 1 or 2 clicks, HI Headroom. I can get -18 or hotter with ease like this. Adding Enhance closes the gap even further. Plenty of vocal tracking and live tracking success stories, I'll get you squared pretty quickly. Feel free to call me. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 27, 2017 21:15:16 GMT -6
How are you guys using it for tracking? Hangin off preamp or comp cheers Wiz As prescribed Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 27, 2017 20:49:17 GMT -6
I think this is going to be well received by some people and regarded by folks like myself who think it's the equivalent of reamping some secret DI capture of Jimi Hendrix's guitar. No matter how much cleaner or true to the sound you think these new mixes are, the originals to me will always be the gold standard. Mono and stereo second were amazing feats considering the limit of their technology. The decisions they made were bold and done in the spirit of the moment. What about the stuff that got cut during bounces? The new mixes do sound "good," but also sound less like the albums. The generational loss and bounces did some cool things to their sound that I miss without them. Thanks -L. Were we hearing The Beatles' panning choices in the previous stereo versions? Did they ok the "drums on the left" stuff? I've read and heard from people that that stuff was all a mistake...Regardless, it sounded fantastic and everybody thought "Damn they're so cool they don't even need the drums in the middle..." The mono stuff is my preferred format to be honest. Stereo is a will do for me. However, considering Motown did the hard panned drums thing and Motown was according to Geoff Emerick's memoir the thing they were chasing. All interesting topics to say the least! Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 26, 2017 20:07:08 GMT -6
I think this is going to be well received by some people and regarded by folks like myself who think it's the equivalent of reamping some secret DI capture of Jimi Hendrix's guitar.
No matter how much cleaner or true to the sound you think these new mixes are, the originals to me will always be the gold standard. Mono and stereo second were amazing feats considering the limit of their technology. The decisions they made were bold and done in the spirit of the moment. What about the stuff that got cut during bounces?
The new mixes do sound "good," but also sound less like the albums. The generational loss and bounces did some cool things to their sound that I miss without them.
Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 21, 2017 23:44:34 GMT -6
Wow that gives me a new definition to distorted vocals 😱😀 Fempunk artcore man! They said they wanted some real cutting distortion for this one record and I wanted to track with it to work it into the performance so..... Microphones set to stun Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 21, 2017 10:55:17 GMT -6
Featured on this track but really the whole album in varying amounts: FET47 to 1073 to 1176 REVF all buttons in. 1073 dimed on input and output attenuated into 1176 input at 2 o'clock and ouput at 11 o'clock. malvinas.bandcamp.com/track/no-holesThanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 21, 2017 10:50:02 GMT -6
Hey, I was experimenting this morning using all button mode on my wa76s to drive distortion on a lead vocal. How do people usually go about this ? I am running logic so use its utility i/o plug and I do understand it has its on i/o as well. thx ! Insert a preamp before the 76. Crank some gain. 4 buttons mode works great with hot signal. I use it on punk vocals but make the singer back up from the mic. Sounds really gnarly. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 16, 2017 12:50:20 GMT -6
This thread made me go back to that wonderfully painful thread on groupdiy where they are fighting over who invented the dual 408 VF14 substitution circuit. One comment was made about the sand resistors being replaced with a much better alternative by danderloo. Something about how those resistors were contributing noises that sounded like tube noise, but once replaced with an alternative type, the noise subsided? Thanks -L. Which resistors was the discussion about? Almost certainly anything from back in the day was either wirewound or carbon composition. Looking at the pics, they were wirewound in the U47. Looks like the only sand resistor (on the studio 939 site for the MK47 kit) is the 1K5 5% resistor. The 6 watter. I'm not hip to whats in the power supply? Or elsewhere? dandeurlooCare to clarify which sand resistors in question were causing that issue? Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 16, 2017 11:04:41 GMT -6
Replacing the resistor helped my mic, but it is not the FINAL solution or fix for the tube noise. Well see there ya have it. Dan's claim was about resistor type but not value. So that's why I'm curious about Svart's build seeing as how he reports to have lots of success with various tubes with it. Even if his changes are considered "slight" for tube circuits, those slight changes can make big changes overall. Cathode resistor on the 251 circuit. Change the value from 1.8k to 2.7k. Obvious shifts in tonality. Mathematically small changes if you go based on percents but the ears don't lie. I see no reason why a circuit like this would be less sensitive to adjustments to operating parameters. Of course the talented folks who built this kit have far more experience with it and a better perspective. However, if the circuit needs mods or changes to perform better (sounds likely) with a broader range of tubes then I'm all for it. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 16, 2017 10:05:50 GMT -6
Fox Audio has a mic that's based on the ECC88/6922 tube. I've heard some clips with it and I was very impressed with it. Very old school, smooth top end, very solid and big proximity effect. I don't know who did this sort of thing with the 6922 before, if at all, but that's one tube that I really liked and its still in production. I know at one point he was doing a dual 6922 version as well. Thanks -L. Andreas Grosser famously once said that (paraphrasing) "Any tube can substitute for a VF14m, if it is a GOOD tube and you are willing to make other electronic allowances". This thread made me go back to that wonderfully painful thread on groupdiy where they are fighting over who invented the dual 408 VF14 substitution circuit. One comment was made about the sand resistors being replaced with a much better alternative by danderloo. Something about how those resistors were contributing noises that sounded like tube noise, but once replaced with an alternative type, the noise subsided? Thanks -L.
|
|