|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 21, 2021 17:53:45 GMT -6
I could justify ONE channel. If someone like, oh I don't know, audioscape maybe, could make a 69 pre/EQ for, oh I don't know, say $1100 a channel? Then I would definitely have 2-4 of them fairly quickly!! And you might have one too! And you . . . and you . . . and you! EVERYONE'S GETTING A HELIOS 69!! You know something I don't? Stam has one...he swears it will be done by April. I'm trying to decide if I want to set myself up for disappointment... stam can you comment on how closely your version follows the original design?
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jan 21, 2021 17:57:43 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 21, 2021 20:24:21 GMT -6
Can someone explain how the output transformer on these will change them from the original models or the Arny reissues?
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Jan 21, 2021 20:53:01 GMT -6
The CMOQ2S will add a bit of low end distortion. Looking closely they also did not keep the original pad / center tap approach. They are using a three resistor pre-transformer pad. Which is fine. I made the same decision, because the original design was wonky. Looks to me like the mic pre is the original three transistor gain stage, and then a second different four transistor output stage. The original card schematics I’ve seen don’t use that. But this is kinda like a “is a 1073 with no EQ a 1073?” A Helios “channel upper module” had the preamp, passive (lossy) EQ, and a second makeup stage, either a second 2128 or later ones had a 22113 seven transistor output. I spy a THAT1240 or similar input IC plus a second output Transformer on the EQ. Rad.
|
|
|
Post by drumsound on Jan 21, 2021 22:16:14 GMT -6
All very intersting. Does anyone know the price of the Realios?
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Jan 22, 2021 9:51:28 GMT -6
I could justify ONE channel. If someone like, oh I don't know, audioscape maybe, could make a 69 pre/EQ for, oh I don't know, say $1100 a channel? Then I would definitely have 2-4 of them fairly quickly!! And you might have one too! And you . . . and you . . . and you! EVERYONE'S GETTING A HELIOS 69!! You know something I don't? Stam has one...he swears it will be done by April. I'm trying to decide if I want to set myself up for disappointment... stam can you comment on how closely your version follows the original design? I'm strongly 'encouraging' audioscape to make a pre/EQ unit. Something that is very much close to the original but with about 10db more headroom before 'crunch' onset. No disrespect towards Matt, ever! The man is a circuit board WIZARD and great designer. and by the way, the H2 reissue (as previously mentioned) deviates tremendously from the original . . . to the point, I wouldn't even consider it. Deviating to lower noise and improve headroom (without changing the sound) as audioscape has done with the 76a is the way to go! If Bill Putnam Senior were around today, I could see him doing the same.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 22, 2021 10:38:24 GMT -6
Thought the EQ in the vids sounded great.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 22, 2021 16:58:01 GMT -6
All respect to EVERYone involved..... I'm not a huge fan of "fixing" obvious problems in clone gear. When I had my tech (a freaking AMAZING audio genius) do the first couple vp26's that I bought, he looked at the circuit for about a minute and said "do you want me to fix these so that they sound right?". I said "HELL NO!! - leave them as is". . And I've been happy with them ever since. Sometimes it's the mistakes that we end up loving about certain pieces of vintage gear. Knowing what to fix and what NOT to fix is where the art comes in.... I guess I'm kind of superstitious about it cause I'm not qualified to discern right from wrong and better from worse when looking at a schematic.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 22, 2021 17:33:39 GMT -6
All respect to EVERYone involved..... I'm not a huge fan of "fixing" obvious problems in clone gear. When I had my tech (a freaking AMAZING audio genius) do the first couple vp26's that I bought, he looked at the circuit for about a minute and said "do you want me to fix these so that they sound right?". I said "HELL NO!! - leave them as is". . And I've been happy with them ever since. Sometimes it's the mistakes that we end up loving about certain pieces of vintage gear. Knowing what to fix and what NOT to fix is where the art comes in.... I guess I'm kind of superstitious about it cause I'm not qualified to discern right from wrong and better from worse when looking at a schematic. Sure would like to know what the “mistake” in the VP26 is. To your point, I tend to agree...if you change them, they’re not the circuit anymore. That being said, I was asking for people to fix the headroom on the Helios a while back. I was wrong. Regardless, that eq video is impressive.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 22, 2021 17:37:17 GMT -6
And the tech’s name. Was it Jerome?
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Jan 22, 2021 17:52:41 GMT -6
The problem is the Helios desks were a moving target. They went through a couple iterations of different input transformers and pad arrangements.
|
|
|
Post by tasteliketape on Jan 22, 2021 18:01:43 GMT -6
And the tech’s name. Was it Jerome? 😹😹😹😹
|
|
|
Post by jsteiger on Jan 22, 2021 18:04:25 GMT -6
All respect to EVERYone involved..... I'm not a huge fan of "fixing" obvious problems in clone gear. When I had my tech (a freaking AMAZING audio genius) do the first couple vp26's that I bought, he looked at the circuit for about a minute and said "do you want me to fix these so that they sound right?". I said "HELL NO!! - leave them as is". . And I've been happy with them ever since. Sometimes it's the mistakes that we end up loving about certain pieces of vintage gear. Knowing what to fix and what NOT to fix is where the art comes in.... I guess I'm kind of superstitious about it cause I'm not qualified to discern right from wrong and better from worse when looking at a schematic. Wow cool. Yes please enlighten us. If the VP26 sounds "wrong" so does the VP28. If the VP28 sounds "wrong" so does the Silver Bullet. There is only one thing about the VP26 circuit that does not need to be there. I'm curious to know if you actually know what that is.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 22, 2021 18:05:08 GMT -6
And the tech’s name. Was it Jerome? No, It's Ralph. . Amazing tech, but the goal (for me) of the 26's was not a super fantastic sounding pre per his vision - it was for a legit Vintage API sound.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 22, 2021 18:11:10 GMT -6
All respect to EVERYone involved..... I'm not a huge fan of "fixing" obvious problems in clone gear. When I had my tech (a freaking AMAZING audio genius) do the first couple vp26's that I bought, he looked at the circuit for about a minute and said "do you want me to fix these so that they sound right?". I said "HELL NO!! - leave them as is". . And I've been happy with them ever since. Sometimes it's the mistakes that we end up loving about certain pieces of vintage gear. Knowing what to fix and what NOT to fix is where the art comes in.... I guess I'm kind of superstitious about it cause I'm not qualified to discern right from wrong and better from worse when looking at a schematic. Wow cool. Yes please enlighten us. If the VP26 sounds "wrong" so does the VP28. If the VP28 sounds "wrong" so does the Silver Bullet. There is only one thing about the VP26 circuit that does not need to be there. I'm curious to know if you actually know what that is. Hi Jeff! To be more specific - I personally don't view the vp26's to be "wrong". I love them just exactly the way they are. I believe Ralphs view was that the pre's could be "better" - I don't think it was his opinion that they were not API legit. As you and I both know, "better" is in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes better is worse depending on your perspective. I honestly can't remember what Ralph wanted to "fix", but whatever it was, he got nixed by me, and I was totally happy with the vp26's as you meant them to be and still have them (and the vp28's) a decade or so later. BTW, as to your note : the Silver Bullet is not the same as either the 26's or 28's. It's a tip of the hat to API, but Brad and my take on it - not a clone of either API's and/or CAPI's. I think you would find that the SB API side is quite a bit different sounding than the CAPI API take.... Cheers, bp PS - just to be crystal - I was not trying to throw shade on the CAPI's or any other clone - just noting that perspectives on a zeroxed clone of a vintage circuit vs. an "improved" version of a vintage circuit can vary quite a bit. PPS - so often we are myopic about getting a 100% clone, while "inspired by" can often be significantly better in many peoples eyes. (I think Rupert would fall into a "change and modernize" as it can be better. For whatever it's worth....
|
|
|
Post by jsteiger on Jan 22, 2021 18:20:53 GMT -6
Wow cool. Yes please enlighten us. If the VP26 sounds "wrong" so does the VP28. If the VP28 sounds "wrong" so does the Silver Bullet. There is only one thing about the VP26 circuit that does not need to be there. I'm curious to know if you actually know what that is. Hi Jeff! To be more specific - I personally don't view the vp26's to be "wrong". I love them just exactly the way they are. I believe Ralphs view was that the pre's could be "better" - I don't think it was his opinion that they were not API legit. As you and I both know, "better" is in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes better is worse depending on your perspective. I honestly can't remember what Ralph wanted to "fix", but whatever it was, he got nixed by me, and I was totally happy with the vp26's as you meant them to be and still have them (and the vp28's) a decade or so later. BTW, as to your note : the Silver Bullet is not the same as either the 26's or 28's. It's a tip of the hat to API, but Brad and my take on it - not a clone of either API's and/or CAPI's. I think you would find that the SB API side is quite a bit different sounding than the CAPI API take.... Cheers, bp PS - just to be crystal - I was not trying to throw shade on the CAPI's or any other clone - just noting that perspectives on a zeroxed clone of a vintage circuit vs. an "improved" version of a vintage circuit can vary quite a bit. Well, your verbiage of "I'm not a huge fan of "fixing" obvious problems in clone gear" to me sounds like the error is in the clone and not the original.
|
|
|
Post by audioscape on Jan 22, 2021 18:24:32 GMT -6
(snipped) I'm not a huge fan of "fixing" obvious problems in clone gear. Sometimes it's the mistakes that we end up loving about certain pieces of vintage gear. Knowing what to fix and what NOT to fix is where the art comes in.... Couldn't agree with this more, Bill. A LOT of knowing what to fix and what NOT to fix is the experience and first-hand knowledge of BEING an actual recording & mixing engineer - finding out weird uses for gear through trial and error, etc... If you look at these classic circuits from a very technical/clinical electronic engineer's POV - WITHOUT any knowledge of recording / mixing techniques, practices, etc - I can DEFINITELY see how a tech would look at a classic API, NEVE or WHATEVER circuit from the 60s or 70s and go "no, no, no... this should be done like THIS, THIS adds distortion and noise and shouldn't be there or should be subbed with "xyz".... THAT is where the magic is lost. It takes a very special breed to be good at looking at these classic circuits from BOTH perspectives on top of the perspective of being the USER / OPERATOR of said unit. So yeah, there's an art to it and a certain TOUCH to the classic recreation thing - basically, leave well enough alone UNLESS it substantially lowers noise WITHOUT affecting ANYTHING about the audio spectrum, etc... YMMV.... back on topic! hahaha
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 22, 2021 18:24:48 GMT -6
Hi Jeff! To be more specific - I personally don't view the vp26's to be "wrong". I love them just exactly the way they are. I believe Ralphs view was that the pre's could be "better" - I don't think it was his opinion that they were not API legit. As you and I both know, "better" is in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes better is worse depending on your perspective. I honestly can't remember what Ralph wanted to "fix", but whatever it was, he got nixed by me, and I was totally happy with the vp26's as you meant them to be and still have them (and the vp28's) a decade or so later. BTW, as to your note : the Silver Bullet is not the same as either the 26's or 28's. It's a tip of the hat to API, but Brad and my take on it - not a clone of either API's and/or CAPI's. I think you would find that the SB API side is quite a bit different sounding than the CAPI API take.... Cheers, bp PS - just to be crystal - I was not trying to throw shade on the CAPI's or any other clone - just noting that perspectives on a zeroxed clone of a vintage circuit vs. an "improved" version of a vintage circuit can vary quite a bit. Well, your verbiage of "I'm not a huge fan of "fixing" obvious problems in clone gear" to me sounds like the error is in the clone and not the original. I think we're having a "typed" misunderstanding....I'm 100% sure we'd be in agreement speaking face to face! <thumbsup>
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 22, 2021 18:30:47 GMT -6
(snipped) I'm not a huge fan of "fixing" obvious problems in clone gear. Sometimes it's the mistakes that we end up loving about certain pieces of vintage gear. Knowing what to fix and what NOT to fix is where the art comes in.... Couldn't agree with this more, Bill. A LOT of knowing what to fix and what NOT to fix is the experience and first-hand knowledge of BEING an actual recording & mixing engineer - finding out weird uses for gear through trial and error, etc... If you look at these classic circuits from a very technical/clinical electronic engineer's POV - WITHOUT any knowledge of recording / mixing techniques, practices, etc - I can DEFINITELY see how a tech would look at a classic API, NEVE or WHATEVER circuit from the 60s or 70s and go "no, no, no... this should be done like THIS, THIS adds distortion and noise and shouldn't be there or should be subbed with "xyz".... THAT is where the magic is lost. It takes a very special breed to be good at looking at these classic circuits from BOTH perspectives on top of the perspective of being the USER / OPERATOR of said unit. So yeah, there's an art to it and a certain TOUCH to the classic recreation thing - basically, leave well enough alone UNLESS it substantially lowers noise WITHOUT affecting ANYTHING about the audio spectrum, etc... YMMV.... back on topic! hahaha Yes Charlie!! As a side note, I've found over the years that often, my sense of perfectionism has a tendency to dangerously veer towards hurting the essence of my musical vision. Thankfully, that early DAW based phase didn't last long, and I've learned that allowing imperfection to remain in the music is a blessing, and makes the music more human and less like computer code. Knowing how far to go and when to stop is where the art comes into play. I now wish I had never said anything, but I still think my point is valid, and I'm glad you "get it". Hopefully Jeff does now as well, because I was not trying to imply that he ever did anything "wrong". Cheers all!!
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Jan 22, 2021 18:41:47 GMT -6
I've never seen anything on an API or Neve schematic that didn't need to be there. Those designs are pretty elegant. Helios? Less elegant. It's got some weird stuff going on, which is why people talk about headroom issues, and distortion. The way the first transistor is biased is "wrong". It's got low headroom because of how it was designed. That's the good and the bad of the sound. I have been told that the original desks were made to hit a budget, too, which is why they had unbalanced I/O. All part of the thing. jsteiger I'd guess C1, but I also wonder about C11.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 22, 2021 19:09:12 GMT -6
Hi Jeff! To be more specific - I personally don't view the vp26's to be "wrong". I love them just exactly the way they are. I believe Ralphs view was that the pre's could be "better" - I don't think it was his opinion that they were not API legit. As you and I both know, "better" is in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes better is worse depending on your perspective. I honestly can't remember what Ralph wanted to "fix", but whatever it was, he got nixed by me, and I was totally happy with the vp26's as you meant them to be and still have them (and the vp28's) a decade or so later. BTW, as to your note : the Silver Bullet is not the same as either the 26's or 28's. It's a tip of the hat to API, but Brad and my take on it - not a clone of either API's and/or CAPI's. I think you would find that the SB API side is quite a bit different sounding than the CAPI API take.... Cheers, bp PS - just to be crystal - I was not trying to throw shade on the CAPI's or any other clone - just noting that perspectives on a zeroxed clone of a vintage circuit vs. an "improved" version of a vintage circuit can vary quite a bit. Well, your verbiage of "I'm not a huge fan of "fixing" obvious problems in clone gear" to me sounds like the error is in the clone and not the original. I think if an original is what you're looking for, then "improving" it could push it towards a sonic that you're not expecting or hoping for. That's all I was trying to say. That's what I was expecting (and got) when I bought the vp26's!
|
|
|
Post by jsteiger on Jan 22, 2021 19:09:44 GMT -6
I've never seen anything on an API or Neve schematic that didn't need to be there. Those designs are pretty elegant. Helios? Less elegant. It's got some weird stuff going on, which is why people talk about headroom issues, and distortion. The way the first transistor is biased is "wrong". It's got low headroom because of how it was designed. That's the good and the bad of the sound. I have been told that the original desks were made to hit a budget, too, which is why they had unbalanced I/O. All part of the thing. jsteiger I'd guess C1, but I also wonder about C11. Yes. The 33µF cap between the input transformer and opamp is not "needed" BUT it was in circuit in the console when flipped to mic mode. This is part fo what makes it sound different than the OG 312. The 100pF is a low pass to help keep any RF junk out of there. Also not really "needed" but I for one was not about to second guess the legendary mind of Saul Walker.
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Jan 22, 2021 19:25:44 GMT -6
Yeah, that mic/line switching arrangement on one op amp is so freaking brilliant.
|
|
|
Post by jsteiger on Jan 22, 2021 21:29:08 GMT -6
Yeah, that mic/line switching arrangement on one op amp is so freaking brilliant. Agreed! One of a kind!
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 24, 2021 19:26:03 GMT -6
Temptation...is...strong...
|
|