|
|
Post by lee on Jun 30, 2024 13:57:57 GMT -6
I've come to the conclusion after years of going back and forth between hardware and software, that I really don't need hardware to do eq or compression. It's the harmonic distortion I get from pushing into those units that makes things sound analog (to my ears). Mentioned this in a few previous threads, but I found a guy on Reverb that wires up old transformers into little line level boxes. I have some old Beyerdynamic Mic transformers that are just magical, a pair of no name audio transformers that add this nice, focused dirt to things, and a set of old Neve transformers that make everything a little smoother and bigger. All together they cost me maybe 500 bux and they definitely do "the thing". I don't have any hardware to compare to at the moment, but taking a track that has some nice plugins on it for eq/compression, and hitting those boxes, sounds pretty much like what I remembered by outboard doing to the signal. If anyone here wants me to run some tracks for testing purposes, I'm happy to do it! I'm curious to hear what other people are hearing with these things. The power of boosting when you have some transformers after it....
I dove in deep after I read this comment of yours and bought some transformer boxes to put across my converter, a couple from Alex (fantastic seller) and another seller
Through experimenting with pushing mixes and stems into the transformers across the mix, getting the sweet spot, I've found not only the transformers to be literal mixing secret weapons, but the buildup of analog-ness (harmonic distortion I believe?) has continued to confirm what I think is happening with analog EQ's sounding better. The transformers allow me to BOOST the hell out of a certain frequency area with EQ that perhaps needs some work and just bully it into working. Lol. For example +9DB at 100hz into 2 sets of transformers then pull back 9DB of 100hz after the transformers - Whoa, very interesting gelled sound, it's about the same level but a different tone/shape so to speak. Did the same thing with high midrange, gells those frequencies together. No more poking. Soothe Schmoothe! Transformers I'm thinking, are how records existed before soothe and multiband compression
Thanks for the recommendation, buying transformer boxes certainly are a very wallet-friendly way to get some serious mixing horsepower into ones setup, and they look really cool!
This is my finding also, not with outboard transformers like you're doing, but why I think I find it less work to achieve what I want with HW EQs. All the ones in my possession have input and output transformers. |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,083 
|
Post by ericn on Jun 30, 2024 18:35:32 GMT -6
The power of boosting when you have some transformers after it....
I dove in deep after I read this comment of yours and bought some transformer boxes to put across my converter, a couple from Alex (fantastic seller) and another seller
Through experimenting with pushing mixes and stems into the transformers across the mix, getting the sweet spot, I've found not only the transformers to be literal mixing secret weapons, but the buildup of analog-ness (harmonic distortion I believe?) has continued to confirm what I think is happening with analog EQ's sounding better. The transformers allow me to BOOST the hell out of a certain frequency area with EQ that perhaps needs some work and just bully it into working. Lol. For example +9DB at 100hz into 2 sets of transformers then pull back 9DB of 100hz after the transformers - Whoa, very interesting gelled sound, it's about the same level but a different tone/shape so to speak. Did the same thing with high midrange, gells those frequencies together. No more poking. Soothe Schmoothe! Transformers I'm thinking, are how records existed before soothe and multiband compression
Thanks for the recommendation, buying transformer boxes certainly are a very wallet-friendly way to get some serious mixing horsepower into ones setup, and they look really cool!
This is my finding also, not with outboard transformers like you're doing, but why I think I find it less work to achieve what I want with HW EQs. All the ones in my possession have input and output transformers. Hey Lee, I have stated this before but I’ll say it again, the sound of any EQ is as much about what it does right & what it does wrong. The problem with a fair amount of digital emulations is the designers urge to correct the faults of the circuit. |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Boling on Jul 1, 2024 10:18:42 GMT -6
I went crazy building passive transformer boxes during the pandemic, I got hooked after getting a Wolfbox with an old Triad from MonkeyX. I have half a dozen pairs and they always bring something fun to the party. Hate the way your reissue LA-2A sounds? Throw some UTC's before and after it, way less suck. Want to add some more sauce to modern Neve, put some St. Ives or Marinair's around it. Emulate a Fairchild? UTC into Triad HS. So many fun combos! Funny enough after all these experiments I realized that the LTL Mass Driver and Royal Blues I already had do the same thing and are integrated better but hey, fun to learn! I still have them all on the patchbay ready to jump in anytime.
|
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Jul 1, 2024 16:13:37 GMT -6
I went crazy building passive transformer boxes during the pandemic, I got hooked after getting a Wolfbox with an old Triad from MonkeyX. I have half a dozen pairs and they always bring something fun to the party. Hate the way your reissue LA-2A sounds? Throw some UTC's before and after it, way less suck. Want to add some more sauce to modern Neve, put some St. Ives or Marinair's around it. Emulate a Fairchild? UTC into Triad HS. So many fun combos! Funny enough after all these experiments I realized that the LTL Mass Driver and Royal Blues I already had do the same thing and are integrated better but hey, fun to learn! I still have them all on the patchbay ready to jump in anytime. Agreed I wish I had 20 color modules but they are usually limited to Neve/Api and cost much more. Both options are stellar |
|
|
|
Post by lee on Jul 3, 2024 19:50:49 GMT -6
This is my finding also, not with outboard transformers like you're doing, but why I think I find it less work to achieve what I want with HW EQs. All the ones in my possession have input and output transformers. Hey Lee, I have stated this before but I’ll say it again, the sound of any EQ is as much about what it does right & what it does wrong. The problem with a fair amount of digital emulations is the designers urge to correct the faults of the circuit. You bet your ass, I often prefer the sound of limitations of design! |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,083
|
Post by ericn on Jul 3, 2024 20:17:55 GMT -6
Hey Lee, I have stated this before but I’ll say it again, the sound of any EQ is as much about what it does right & what it does wrong. The problem with a fair amount of digital emulations is the designers urge to correct the faults of the circuit. You bet your ass, I often prefer the sound of limitations of design! Man I am completely in agreement but , I am not sure Kim imitations is the right word, I think compromise is more appropriate here. |
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Jul 4, 2024 19:10:57 GMT -6
I’m actually really digging having zero eq/compression options and the tool just being the transformers to gain stage into.
Putting like 5 sets of transformers across a mix seems like it’s slashing my mixing work by like 50%. Elements of the mix are already glued, frequencies are not poking out or blooming nearly as much, things are already fairly focused sounding, a sense of glue and cohesion that normally would take me lots of tape plugins and CPU power to achieve
And not having EQ/compression options means I just slap them on any mix whenever without thinking about recalling settings or losing settings for other mixes
I’m just imagining the average mix back in the day may have gone through 25 sets of transformers between all the elements and multiple rounds of tape to reach its final master, all that distortion adds up to make a gigantic difference in the mix
|
|
|
|
Post by copperx on Jul 5, 2024 0:14:57 GMT -6
I’m actually really digging having zero eq/compression options and the tool just being the transformers to gain stage into. Putting like 5 sets of transformers across a mix seems like it’s slashing my mixing work by like 50%. Elements of the mix are already glued, frequencies are not poking out or blooming nearly as much, things are already fairly focused sounding, a sense of glue and cohesion that normally would take me lots of tape plugins and CPU power to achieve And not having EQ/compression options means I just slap them on any mix whenever without thinking about recalling settings or losing settings for other mixes I’m just imagining the average mix back in the day may have gone through 25 sets of transformers between all the elements and multiple rounds of tape to reach its final master, all that distortion adds up to make a gigantic difference in the mix
I'd love to hear more about your transformers. Did you DIY them? Is it a similar setup to what Darren Boling described? |
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Jul 6, 2024 2:01:04 GMT -6
I’m actually really digging having zero eq/compression options and the tool just being the transformers to gain stage into. Putting like 5 sets of transformers across a mix seems like it’s slashing my mixing work by like 50%. Elements of the mix are already glued, frequencies are not poking out or blooming nearly as much, things are already fairly focused sounding, a sense of glue and cohesion that normally would take me lots of tape plugins and CPU power to achieve And not having EQ/compression options means I just slap them on any mix whenever without thinking about recalling settings or losing settings for other mixes I’m just imagining the average mix back in the day may have gone through 25 sets of transformers between all the elements and multiple rounds of tape to reach its final master, all that distortion adds up to make a gigantic difference in the mix
I'd love to hear more about your transformers. Did you DIY them? Is it a similar setup to what Darren Boling described? No I bought passive stereo transformer boxes as described earlier in the thread, from sellers on reverb. Then I'm putting those stereo line xformer boxes as hardware inserts on my converter |
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Jul 6, 2024 8:19:11 GMT -6
I’m actually really digging having zero eq/compression options and the tool just being the transformers to gain stage into. Putting like 5 sets of transformers across a mix seems like it’s slashing my mixing work by like 50%. Elements of the mix are already glued, frequencies are not poking out or blooming nearly as much, things are already fairly focused sounding, a sense of glue and cohesion that normally would take me lots of tape plugins and CPU power to achieve And not having EQ/compression options means I just slap them on any mix whenever without thinking about recalling settings or losing settings for other mixes I’m just imagining the average mix back in the day may have gone through 25 sets of transformers between all the elements and multiple rounds of tape to reach its final master, all that distortion adds up to make a gigantic difference in the mix A signal path with 25 transformers? Most tracks didn’t go through that much outboard. Also the haze, hysteresis, and low end distortion just increases which prevents translation and kills immediacy. Modern transformers are better but 25 of them from the mic to the master for a track in a mix is some dumb over mixed pop thing that almost certainly will end up crappy or not as good as it should sound. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jul 6, 2024 11:57:25 GMT -6
I’m actually really digging having zero eq/compression options and the tool just being the transformers to gain stage into. Putting like 5 sets of transformers across a mix seems like it’s slashing my mixing work by like 50%. Elements of the mix are already glued, frequencies are not poking out or blooming nearly as much, things are already fairly focused sounding, a sense of glue and cohesion that normally would take me lots of tape plugins and CPU power to achieve And not having EQ/compression options means I just slap them on any mix whenever without thinking about recalling settings or losing settings for other mixes I’m just imagining the average mix back in the day may have gone through 25 sets of transformers between all the elements and multiple rounds of tape to reach its final master, all that distortion adds up to make a gigantic difference in the mix A signal path with 25 transformers? Most tracks didn’t go through that much outboard. Also the haze, hysteresis, and low end distortion just increases which prevents translation and kills immediacy. Modern transformers are better but 25 of them from the mic to the master for a track in a mix is some dumb over mixed pop thing that almost certainly will end up crappy or not as good as it should sound. Maybe he meant 25 total? Like not one track, but a 16 track board or something plus mixdown? |
|
|
|
Post by nobtwiddler on Jul 6, 2024 12:16:47 GMT -6
Just as an example... In addition to the Marinair transformers found in the channel modules, almost every input and output to the console is transformer-balanced, including the 1952 A&B line inputs, channel simple inputs, mix bus channel inputs, reverb returns and each 1272 module input & output. In total, a ten-channel BCM10/2 MkII uses 104 Marinair specification transformers! Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by damoongo on Jul 7, 2024 3:57:28 GMT -6
It adds up quickly in analog land…. Take a lead vocal on a classic track for example: That vocal could have conceivably hit 30 transformers before your ears heard it.
Tracking:
Microphone output 1,
Pre 2 (input/output)
Eq 2
Comp 2
Tape input 1
Mixing:
Tape out 1
Console line in 1
Eq 2
Comp 2
Console Chanel out 1
Console bus out 1
Console Mixbus 2
Mixbus inserts 4?
Mix tape deck input 1
Mastering:
Tape output 1
Mastering chain 4? (Two pieces with I/o)
Master tape input 1
Vinyl: lacquer cutting:
Tape out 1
Cutter input 1?
And I guess if you consider the fact that everything from mix bus to the lacquer could be stereo (L and R) it’s more like 45 transformers.
|
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Jul 7, 2024 15:13:55 GMT -6
It adds up quickly in analog land…. Take a lead vocal on a classic track for example: That vocal could have conceivably hit 30 transformers before your ears heard it. Tracking: Microphone output 1, Pre 2 (input/output) Eq 2 Comp 2 Tape input 1 Mixing: Tape out 1 Console line in 1 Eq 2 Comp 2 Console Chanel out 1 Console bus out 1 Console Mixbus 2 Mixbus inserts 4? Mix tape deck input 1 Mastering: Tape output 1 Mastering chain 4? (Two pieces with I/o) Master tape input 1 Vinyl: lacquer cutting: Tape out 1 Cutter input 1? And I guess if you consider the fact that everything from mix bus to the lacquer could be stereo (L and R) it’s more like 45 transformers. Right, and that doesn't seem excessive to me especially if were talking about era's where everything was analog.
I find transformers overall smoothen signals in one way or another. That's the main thing I hear it helping me with. Take the transformers out of the mix now I feel like I need a multiband compressor taming the low end of the vocal or need to put Soothe on the midrange of the snare, or I need to try to address those frequencies with EQ to stop them from poking/blooming.
Other than that the other thing I'm constantly learning is that arrangement must be done wisely or else no amount of analog will save you. Also as a guitar player and vocalist I'm seeing how subtle a change in my delivery with a certain lick or phrase can cause me mix problems or not cause me mix problems, which is something I never gave a shit about when I was just playing for fun through my amp as a teenager, that's also been interesting
Edit: And that's not to say methods like Multiband compression and Soothe don't work or get the job done they obviously do. I will still continue to use both of those tools in most if not all mixes I do, but I think the transformers help get you "there" quicker and with ease, and make it exciting to me right now to mix with them
|
|
|
|
Post by damoongo on Jul 7, 2024 18:23:41 GMT -6
make it exciting to me right now to mix with them [/div][/quote] This is extremely important too |
|
|
|
Post by Bat Lanyard on Jul 9, 2024 20:17:14 GMT -6
Back a few days from MWTM with Tony Hoffer in France and one of our tracks he used to demo to the group mixing on the console there.
Two days later when I thanked him before leaving for the experience of watching him work our track on the console he said it was making him rethink his setup (mixes at home ITB). It was interesting. 40 minutes in, no effects, and it was slamming. He's a genius, so there's that to consider as well. His ITB mixes were wonderful as well. I think it was the speed and punch maybe that captured him a bit. It was for sure "huge" really quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Jul 15, 2024 21:26:52 GMT -6
To add on: So its not just EQ, but I also find compressors and De-essers especially, working better when a stem is treated with the transformers. I'm guessing the clipping from the distortion just makes the job of a compressor or de-esser much easier. I find I'm able to push a de-esser much harder than before and it sounds right.
So not only do the xformers sound great as a standalone effect, but they are also making my digital tools shine and be more usable.
You can overdo it though to where the record is so smooth and the transients are really relaxed.
But coming from recording digital and mixing digital, that relaxed sound to me is actually super exciting. Sounds "expensive" and very classic
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Jul 15, 2024 22:42:09 GMT -6
It adds up quickly in analog land…. Take a lead vocal on a classic track for example: That vocal could have conceivably hit 30 transformers before your ears heard it. Tracking: Microphone output 1, Pre 2 (input/output) Eq 2 Comp 2 Tape input 1 Mixing: Tape out 1 Console line in 1 Eq 2 Comp 2 Console Chanel out 1 Console bus out 1 Console Mixbus 2 Mixbus inserts 4? Mix tape deck input 1 Mastering: Tape output 1 Mastering chain 4? (Two pieces with I/o) Master tape input 1 Vinyl: lacquer cutting: Tape out 1 Cutter input 1? And I guess if you consider the fact that everything from mix bus to the lacquer could be stereo (L and R) it’s more like 45 transformers. Right, and that doesn't seem excessive to me especially if were talking about era's where everything was analog.
I find transformers overall smoothen signals in one way or another. That's the main thing I hear it helping me with. Take the transformers out of the mix now I feel like I need a multiband compressor taming the low end of the vocal or need to put Soothe on the midrange of the snare, or I need to try to address those frequencies with EQ to stop them from poking/blooming.
Other than that the other thing I'm constantly learning is that arrangement must be done wisely or else no amount of analog will save you. Also as a guitar player and vocalist I'm seeing how subtle a change in my delivery with a certain lick or phrase can cause me mix problems or not cause me mix problems, which is something I never gave a shit about when I was just playing for fun through my amp as a teenager, that's also been interesting
Edit: And that's not to say methods like Multiband compression and Soothe don't work or get the job done they obviously do. I will still continue to use both of those tools in most if not all mixes I do, but I think the transformers help get you "there" quicker and with ease, and make it exciting to me right now to mix with them
Or you need better recordings. Good recordings, transformers with any sort of vibe often get in the way. Any transformer pre will get in the way of any non condenser mic on many instruments. Hence the racks of outboard and 500 series portable racks to spice up certain tracks that aren’t there but having to use say an API pre on everything will often make many things worse. |
|
|
|
Post by damoongo on Jul 16, 2024 1:09:47 GMT -6
Right, and that doesn't seem excessive to me especially if were talking about era's where everything was analog.
I find transformers overall smoothen signals in one way or another. That's the main thing I hear it helping me with. Take the transformers out of the mix now I feel like I need a multiband compressor taming the low end of the vocal or need to put Soothe on the midrange of the snare, or I need to try to address those frequencies with EQ to stop them from poking/blooming.
Other than that the other thing I'm constantly learning is that arrangement must be done wisely or else no amount of analog will save you. Also as a guitar player and vocalist I'm seeing how subtle a change in my delivery with a certain lick or phrase can cause me mix problems or not cause me mix problems, which is something I never gave a shit about when I was just playing for fun through my amp as a teenager, that's also been interesting
Edit: And that's not to say methods like Multiband compression and Soothe don't work or get the job done they obviously do. I will still continue to use both of those tools in most if not all mixes I do, but I think the transformers help get you "there" quicker and with ease, and make it exciting to me right now to mix with them
Or you need better recordings. Good recordings, transformers with any sort of vibe often get in the way. Any transformer pre will get in the way of any non condenser mic on many instruments. Hence the racks of outboard and 500 series portable racks to spice up certain tracks that aren’t there but having to use say an API pre on everything will often make many things worse. . Good points to bring up. But it sounds like he’s doing all this at mixing stage at line level , so with care given to impedance/loading he sould be fine. (Won’t be loading dynamic mics in unflattering ways etc.). Seems like he’s using transformers as inserts before and after plugin inserts at mixdown. Essentially adding transformers to plugins. That’s a lot of extra da/ad trips though. And the converter inputs likely are quite high impedance (10-20kohm) where as some of these xformers might be expecting a 600ohm load. Could have some 600ohm load resistors on the Pbay to use…. I have some on my bay for gear that is expecting 600ohm load, for when I’m patching direct to converters. (Rare though, as mostly feeding the mm1200 which has input transformers.) |
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Jul 16, 2024 1:18:43 GMT -6
Or you need better recordings. Good recordings, transformers with any sort of vibe often get in the way. Any transformer pre will get in the way of any non condenser mic on many instruments. Hence the racks of outboard and 500 series portable racks to spice up certain tracks that aren’t there but having to use say an API pre on everything will often make many things worse. Sounds like he’s doing all this at mixing stage at line level , so with care given to impedance/loading he sould be fine. (Won’t be loading dynamic mics in unflattering ways etc.). Seems like he’s using transformers as inserts before and after plugin inserts at mixdown. Essentially adding transformers to plugins. That’s a lot of extra da/ad trips though. And the converter inputs likely are quite high impedance (10-20kohm) where as some of these xformers might be expecting a 600ohm load. Could have some 600ohm load resistors on the Pbay to use…. I have some on my bay for gear that is expecting 600ohm load, but I’m patching direct to converters. (Rare though, as mostly feeding the mm1200 which has input transformers.) I am doing it as you described. My converter is Lynx Aurora N. I haven't heard anything I don't like from using the xformers this way (multiple hardware inserts sometimes in between plugins, again, as you described, line level), so If there was some issue with the Ohm load thing surely I'd hear there was something strange going on?
|
|
|
|
Post by damoongo on Jul 16, 2024 1:43:02 GMT -6
Transformers are designed to work optimally with specific impedances, and mismatched loads can cause changes in the transformer’s performance, affecting both frequency response and distortion. An incorrect load can cause the transformer to resonate, leading to high-frequency ringing.
But you’re doing all this to shape the tone anyway. So if you like it, you like it. It’s worth avoiding ringing though.
|
|
