|
|
Post by thehightenor on Feb 14, 2016 3:56:01 GMT -6
Oh that doesn't sound very positive on the reliability front.
It won't get a huge amount of constant use as I don't run a commercial facility and the valves for it are cheap enough in relative terms.
If it means a new set of valves every couple of years then I can live with it, new valves every 6 months would be another story!
But I would have trouble letting it go, the STA level sounds so gorgeous on my vocals as I'm tracking, it's like an instant "you made a record" device for me .... I think it's a magic unit, like no other compressor I've ever tried.
It seems to compliment a CM7 > BAE 1073D > STA Level. I think my CM7 was modelled on a 1950's U47 (IIRC) so their all kind of the same vintage :-)
Maybe I'll be posting in 6 months time telling you I sold it and bought an RS124 .... I'm thinking I have to have my own experience on this one and cross my fingers I have minimum issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Feb 14, 2016 7:22:57 GMT -6
Stalevel was designed to run 24/7 in broadcast environments, expected tube life in the order of years. If you look at the Collins 26U manual (similar tube line-up and circuit) it states a 5 year cycle between power up and power down. Will it sound different over time? Of course. Modern tubes aren't great in terms of longevity on average compared to 'back then' when production numbers were so much higher. Everything about a modern STA should be more reliable than an old one EXCEPT the tubes. If the organic changing nature of tube gear bothers someone, my personal feeling is it's not for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Feb 14, 2016 8:49:50 GMT -6
Hi Doug,
I'm with you, I am more than to live with organic changing nature of tubes, and when they do need changing, I'll look at it like having to change the tyres on my favourite car :-)
My voice is blown as I've had a bad cold, yet I just cut a rough vocal with this thing and it's THE best vocal sound/performance I've ever recorded.
I think the Retro STA Level is a very special unit, I am going to keep it and if there are any tube issues I'll just handle it accordingly at the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Feb 14, 2016 9:35:03 GMT -6
What's different is broadcast lived in GR at all times, so lower wear on the 6386. Recording can sit doing nothing at max GR current and eat tubes. Its why a vari-mu should never be left on 24/7 unless its doing something all the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Feb 14, 2016 9:53:49 GMT -6
Doug, that's interesting stuff, I'm not an expert on how this kind of gear works, so any explanation is great extra info.
It won't be used that much as it takes me a fair amount of time to write and record a new song.
How long should I be letting the Retro STA Level warm up before it's ready for a recording session?
The Retro STA Level allows you to add a 6386, but I'm not sure if you add it in parallel to the valves already there or if you're meant to remove the ones it replaces, I guess I should shoot an email over to Retro. That said I'm also not sure what a NOS 6386 would give me - it sounds great as it is. This tube gear really is a whole new world.
Thanks for your input.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Feb 14, 2016 10:03:47 GMT -6
Doug, that's interesting stuff, I'm not an expert on how this kind of gear works, so any explanation is great extra info. It won't be used that much as it takes me a fair amount of time to write and record a new song. How long should I be letting the Retro STA Level warm up before it's ready for a recording session? The Retro STA Level allows you to add a 6386, but I'm not sure if you add it in parallel to the valves already there or if you're meant to remove the ones it replaces, I guess I should shoot an email over to Retro. That said I'm also not sure what a NOS 6386 would give me - it sounds great as it is. This tube gear really is a whole new world. Thanks for your input. I don't own a sta.... yet...., but a word of caution, the voltages present inside that case are DEADLY, make sure you are unplugged and all capacitors are discharged before you even think about sticking your hands in there! |
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Feb 14, 2016 11:10:58 GMT -6
!! yes good point.
I just adjusted the meter zero with the potentiometer for that job which is inside and you need to do it whilst it's ON!
As I was doing it I did think careful there fella!
I think the high voltage stuff is behind a safety cover - but still, thanks for the heads up, I appreciate the reminder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 14, 2016 11:22:50 GMT -6
That's one thing I think about with mics too. Recently, I watched a great shootout between some high end mics, and I must say, it's a tossup between the U-87 and the Soyuz 0-17. It sure seems like the 87 would be worry free, so it surprises me it isn't more prevalent here with Realgear members.
This concerns me. Even if it's a year or two, I hope to own a Sta level, and would be bummed if it proved unstable. I remember tracks cowboycoalminer did when e first got the Sta, and they were something special.
Take a listen, it's nicely done, simple and to the point:
|
|
|
|
Post by rob61 on Feb 14, 2016 11:54:24 GMT -6
I have a vintage U-87 with the Innertube tube electronics mod and its spectacular. I don't have a Soyuz here, but I wouldn't trade it for that one. It takes about 30 seconds to put back the original FET electronics, which aren't bad either. You can get a vintage U-87 and the Innertube tube mod for about the price of a Soyuz. Something to consider.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Feb 14, 2016 11:55:00 GMT -6
That's one thing I think about with mics too. Recently, I watched a great shootout between some high end mics, and I must say, it's a tossup between the U-87 and the Soyuz 0-17. It sure seems like the 87 would be worry free, so it surprises me it isn't more prevalent here with Realgear members. This concerns me. Even if it's a year or two, I hope to own a Sta level, and would be bummed if it proved unstable. I remember tracks cowboycoalminer did when e first got the Sta, and they were something special. Take a listen, it's nicely done, simple and to the point: I use an 87 fairly regularly. I've found that it usually sounds good, but definitely isn't the magic powder. Definitely not nice enough that I would spend $3500 or whatever they go for new. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 14, 2016 11:59:39 GMT -6
Hey Doug - are you one to leave tube gear on all the time?
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 14, 2016 12:07:05 GMT -6
I agree jcoutiu, $3,500 and I'd take the Soyuz, or a MKU-47, or two Blackspade UM-17B's for sure. But at a little over $2,000 used in good condition, it's hard to beat. Soyuz has a new mic coming soon, the 0-19, its the same as the 0-17, except FET.
That could make that price point really interesting. If you like an M-49 though, you can't beat the Blackspade.
Cowboy, I'm curious about what you think made the Sta sound different, just the tubes?
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Feb 14, 2016 12:18:37 GMT -6
That's one thing I think about with mics too. Recently, I watched a great shootout between some high end mics, and I must say, it's a tossup between the U-87 and the Soyuz 0-17. It sure seems like the 87 would be worry free, so it surprises me it isn't more prevalent here with Realgear members. This concerns me. Even if it's a year or two, I hope to own a Sta level, and would be bummed if it proved unstable. I remember tracks cowboycoalminer did when e first got the Sta, and they were something special. Take a listen, it's nicely done, simple and to the point: To me an 87ai isn't an 87, Martin, there are a bunch of guys here who own 87's or have used them hundreds of times, including myself in the latter category, yourself as well if i remember correctly? they are also hit and miss ime, most bad ones due to abuse i think. Upon listening, the presence of reverberation totally negates any usefulness as to the true character of any of these mics imv, I'm all but sure compression, and filtering was used as well, I like to really zone in on specifics of a pure mic signal when I assess them, and the very first thing i listen for is S's, so just the reverberating/compressing of the S's rendered these samples immediately useless to me. I know, i'm a pita. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 14, 2016 12:23:15 GMT -6
No, you make a good point Tony. I do find I can hear through and get some valuable insight from shootouts like these. I know a few of these mics well, and they sound just like they sound to me, so I know the processing hasn't skewed the shootout too much. I like hearing completely straight files too though. I kind of put them together in my head when trying to assess something.
The 87 I used to have and used every day for decade was made in 1980, or maybe 1979, I forget. I can recognize that character in the one used in the shootout, but I'm sure side by side we'd hear differences.
Hmm.. I hadn't really thought about what processing they used in the video. I wonder if they tracked with any compression, used plugs after, or any compression at all. I think there was some reverb though. Personally, I like shootouts with some minimal processing, as long as it's done well. That's how I use them, so I find it informative. Again, that doesn't negate the value of a plain file either.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Feb 14, 2016 12:42:31 GMT -6
No, you make a good point Tony. I do find I can hear through and get some valuable insight from shootouts like these. I know a few of these mics well, and they sound just like they sound to me, so I know the processing hasn't skewed the shootout too much. I like hearing completely straight files too though. I kind of put them together in my head when trying to assess something. The 87 I used to have and used every day for decade was made in 1980, or maybe 1979, I forget. I can recognize that character in the one used in the shootout, but I'm sure side by side we'd hear differences. Hmm.. I hadn't really thought about what processing they used in the video. I wonder if they tracked with any compression, used plugs after, or any compression at all. I think there was some reverb though. Personally, I like shootouts with some minimal processing, as long as it's done well. That's how I use them, so I find it informative. Again, that doesn't negate the value of a plain file either. I couldn't disagree with this more, if i'm checking out a mic shootout, i don't want to check out your reverb, compressors, filters or anything else you have, even in my own environment i don't do that, I want the unvarnished truth. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 14, 2016 13:02:52 GMT -6
I understand that ,and don't have any issue with that either. There's nothing for me to disagree with, I sure wouldn't mind hearing any mic shootout flat as well as with some processing.
I still have found great value in these kinds of shootouts, but maybe that's just me. So far, in every shootout I heard when trying to make a decision about a mic, the mic sounded the same to me as when I heard it in the shootout. Granted, that's only a relatively small sampling, but it's worked for me. I haven't found any mic I've actually bought, used or tried to be significantly different from shootouts like the one I posted.
My original Blackspade UM-17, Neumann K-84, Avantone BV-12, Little Blondie, Gauge ECM-87, and the Soyuz 0-17 all sounded just like the files I'd heard online when I had them in my hand, and I believe there was some processing on those files.
It's all good Tony, to me at least :-)
We've gone a little off topic, sorry guys. Back to compression in the vocal chain?
I'd like to know what settings people here use when they stack compressors for a lead vocal. I have the WA76 compressor, and the Waves and UAD LA2A plugs. Eventually I'll probably end up with a WA2A, so I'm curious how people use them, what order, how much compression tracking, any compression later in the mix, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Feb 14, 2016 13:52:42 GMT -6
To follow up Tony's point, every batch of U87s sounds different to the last. Neumann was as consistent as any manufacturer but the facts remains that suppliers change. Sometimes you change one supplier for another, other times, a supplier makes subtle changes on (for instance) how it makes a certain capacitor or resistor or transistor. Any change to a single component will affect the sound of a microphone and considering ~2500 U87s have been made annually since 1967, that's about 120,000 microphones to date. That is a HELL of a lot of U87s and it would unrealistic to expect them to maintain exactly the same sound.
I have had and used tons of U87s over the years and kept two of my favorite sounding ones... a 1971 U87 and a 1987 U87ai. They are similar but there are subtle differences. The U87ai was the first year for that model variation and it used a U89i amplifier circuit with a K67 capsule. Someone at Neumann figured out that they could save money by making one amplifier circuit (the then fairly new U89 amp circuit) in the new U87ai microphone (which was due to be discontinued in favor of the U89). To make it sound like a U87, using a U67 seemed to do the trick.
Well not quite, but close enough to earn a cigar.
But I have digressed.... over the years subtle differences and mods have continued. The U87ai mics over the past 10 years also sound quite different to my 1987 U87ai. I'm sure not everyone's going to hear it but when you have owned them as long as I have you know them inside out. Winetree would be an even better chap to speak to this, so would Larry Villella amongst others around here. If I was in a session and pulled out 3 or 4 UM17 mics, I doubt I would hear the minute variations between each one but hear the overall UM17b character instead.
Now sir, with that cleared up... how can I tie in tracking compression and get this thread back on track?
Well, More so than many microphones, a U87 (any of the 120,000 of them) is heavily affected by the amount and type of compression used. Because it is so mid forward, using heavy compression can make a U87 sound REALLY honky, and if you like tracking with compression you have to be careful or you'll quickly hate the vocal sound results.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 14, 2016 15:05:59 GMT -6
I think I used to track with a DBX compressor when I had my U-87, but if I did, it was as minimally as possible. I was mostly writing and producing commercials then. I wish I could go back and listen to my commercial reel, just out of curiosity, but the tapes were lost, and since I also put everything on minidisk, and would need to get that signal out, and then into a digital format.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Feb 14, 2016 15:14:20 GMT -6
That's one thing I like about plugin compressors - I don't have enough money or room to own one of every industry std. compressor so decent plugins
like the UAD ones and the Powercore CL1B allow me to experiment and find the perfect mix compressor.
Sometimes I stack a UAD MK2 1176 and LA2A sometimes the other way around and also vary which is compressing and which is limiting catching the peaks.
Other times I tickle the signal with the Powercore Cl1B or smash it with the Cl1B.
Then I've had success using the completely transparent Waves Vocal Rider.
Plugins do make experimenting more realistic for a project studio.
Tracking with a hardware compressor has the added benefit of meaning you need to do less with the plugins and I have noticed the plugins are closer to hardware when not having to work so hard.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Feb 14, 2016 17:36:33 GMT -6
Well, I'm glad someone has found the Waves Vocal Rider to be transparent and useful... I've had no success with it whatsoever. i use a lot of plugins too, thehightenor, I just like tracking with the real things as much as possible. Best advice I ever received: Record finished tracks. |
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Feb 14, 2016 18:01:43 GMT -6
Well, I'm glad someone has found the Waves Vocal Rider to be transparent and useful... I've had no success with it whatsoever. I picked up the Vocal Rider because I found the Bass Rider to be quite useful. Maybe it's that I'm much pickier about how a lead vocal is treated, but the very few times I've found it helpful I've ended up using it quite sparingly. Most of the time I'm much happier manually automating. If I'm in a hurry I'll do some basic manual adjustments, and then slap on the VR. Strange things is, sometimes I don't 'agree' with the VR. Maybe in those cases, I don't have it tweaked right, but when it happens, I usually just trash it and go back and micro-manage the automation like I should have in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 14, 2016 18:24:34 GMT -6
Funny, M57, I tried the Waves Vocal Rider again recently, and found it didn't quite feel right, but the Bass Rider saved my ass a few times and balanced out my poor bass playing quite decently.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Feb 14, 2016 18:26:08 GMT -6
Well, I'm glad someone has found the Waves Vocal Rider to be transparent and useful... I've had no success with it whatsoever. I picked up the Vocal Rider because I found the Bass Rider to be quite useful. Maybe it's that I'm much pickier about how a lead vocal is treated, but the very few times I've found it helpful I've ended up using it quite sparingly. Most of the time I'm much happier manually automating. If I'm in a hurry I'll do some basic manual adjustments, and then slap on the VR. Strange things is, sometimes I don't 'agree' with the VR. Maybe in those cases, I don't have it tweaked right, but when it happens, I usually just trash it and go back and micro-manage the automation like I should have in the first place. I love vocal rider! the trick to it is to NOT ask too much from it, get your clip gain set nice, and then set the parameters on VR to subtle settings, then after you commit the automation, you can easily adjust what very little you don't like, i'm curious to see how it works on Jeff's Dawtomation™ analog automation control thingy. |
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Feb 14, 2016 18:34:06 GMT -6
Well, I'm glad someone has found the Waves Vocal Rider to be transparent and useful... I've had no success with it whatsoever. i use a lot of plugins too, thehightenor , I just like tracking with the real things as much as possible. Best advice I ever received: Record finished tracks. Well the Retro STA Level is my first big toob compressor so I'm being careful not to over do it tracking vocals (5 to 8dB GR) - you can do 15dB GR with the STA Level and not even notice! I'm then using a few dB of plugin GR to finish the job. Longer term I might get an LA2A type compressor and track with that then use the STA Level on mixdown but that would require going back to hybrid mixing and I'm not sure I won't to give up the easy recall ITB offers. Plus the STA Level seems to influence the way I sing so it has a positive effect when Im tracking. As for the Waves Vocal Rider, if I make the effort and set up all the various side chains in Cubase and feed it the mix into it's side chain I find I can adjust it quiet easily and it becomes a very useful completely transparent compressor with a very slow attack and release time :-) kind of a leveller. I automate it's output slider as well. You get this kind of MACRO, macro, micro dynamic control between automating VR output slider, VR itself and a plugin compressor(s) It's a pain to dial in but I've gotten some really smooth controlled vocals this way that still have great clarity. I definitely don't use it on every track, but I find Waves VR can be a very cool tool at times. |
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 14, 2016 18:53:56 GMT -6
Well, I'm glad someone has found the Waves Vocal Rider to be transparent and useful... I've had no success with it whatsoever. i use a lot of plugins too, thehightenor, I just like tracking with the real things as much as possible. Best advice I ever received: Record finished tracks. I've used this thing a ton! It kills on Bass! |
|
