Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » My Paris/Emu 1820M
| My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58391] |
Wed, 21 September 2005 12:25  |
Kim Glanville
Messages: 8
Registered: September 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
;DIV><FONT=20
> face=3D3D3DArial=3D20<BR>> > =
>
> size=3D3D3D2>Dimitrios</FONT></DIV><BR>>>=20
> =3D20<BR>> > <BLOCKQUOTE=20
> dir=3D3D3Dltr=3D3D20<BR>>> =
>=3D<BR>> =20
> >style=3D3D3D"PADDING-RIGHT: =
>0px;=3D20<BR>> =20
> > PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;=20
> =3D3D<BR>>>BORDER-LEFT: =
>=3D<BR>> =20
> >#000000 2px=3D20<BR>> > =
>solid;=20
> MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"><BR>>>=20
> =3D<BR>> =20
> ><DIV>"Tom=3D20<BR>> =
>> Bruhl"=20
> <<A=3D3D20<BR>>>=20
> href=3D3D3D"<A=3D20<BR>> =
>> =20
> =3D<BR>> =20
> =
>>href=3D3D'mailto:arpegio@comcast.net">Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58428 is a reply to message #58424] |
Thu, 22 September 2005 19:31  |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;> high gain fuzz<BR>>>distortion", "Fender Bassman", a HiWatt =
>>50 watt=20
>> stack, [bass rigs] - Ampeg<BR>>>SVT, Ashdown ABM-C410H, =
>>Trace Elliot=20
>> Commando, Sunn200S, '69 Ampeg SVT<BR>Classic,<BR>>>Ampeg =
>>B15, SWR=20
>> Basic Black, Fender Dual Showman, Mesa Boogie Bass=20
>> 400+,<BR>>Hartke<BR>>>Model =
>>2000.<BR>>><BR>>>Speaker=20
>> Cabs: American 2x12, British 4x12, Vintage 30 4x12, British=20
>> 2x12,<BR>>>American 1x12, Blonde 2x12, Fane 4x12, Greenback =
>>4x12,=20
>> Boutique 4x12, Bassman<BR>>>4x10, '65 Tweed 1x12, Fender Pro =
>>1x15,=20
>> Ampeg Portaflex, Ashdown 4x10 w/tweeter,<BR>>>Sunn 200S =
>>2x15,=20
>> Acoustic 360, Hartke 1x15, SWR Basic Black, Ampeg=20
>> 8x10,<BR>>Ashdown<BR>>>AMB410, SWR Goliath III, Hartke=20
>> 4x10.<BR>>><BR>>>Any suggestions on what combo may =
>>sound good=20
>> with a given sound would be<BR>>>fantastic. Mostly I'm =
>>looking to=20
>> get some nice hammond B3 and=20
>> wurlitzer<BR>>sounds<BR>>>happenning, so any suggestions =
>>specific=20
>> to those directions would be fantasmalistic!<BR>>>:o) Keep =
>>in mind=20
>> the rotary speaker effect can be inserted on any of=20
>> the<BR>>>amp/cabinet combinations without effecting the =
>>sound in any=20
>> way (other<BR>than<BR>>>to add the rotary effect) so feel =
>>free to=20
>> choose amps based on what would<BR>>>probably sound good IF =
>>it had a=20
>> Leslie. :o)<BR>>><BR>>>Oh, and the machine can also =
>>warp=20
>> between two amps or cabinets, so if you<BR>>>think "a criss =
>>cross of=20
>> 1/3 this amp and 2/3's this amp" would work, then<BR>>>we =
>>can do=20
>> that too.=20
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58429 is a reply to message #58419] |
Thu, 22 September 2005 19:42 |
Kim Glanville
Messages: 8
Registered: September 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
=
>>:o)<BR>>><BR>>>Cheers,<BR>>>Kim.<BR>><BR></BLOCKQUOT >E></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
>>
>>
>http://www.relic.9cy.com/Pretvaraci/Stup%20gun.gif
Aaron Allen wrote:
> That would be my thoughts, though I think most of the EDS repairs I heard
> were simply swaps. Perhaps he 'pre-repairs' cards for faster turnaround?
> AA
>
>
> "Rich Lamanna" <richard.lamanna@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:434ce901$1@linux...
>
>>Aaron, just wondering, so how then does TheSonic guy repair the cards?
>>Maybe
>>he has the schematics?
>>
>>Rich
>>
>>Man count thy days,
>>and if perchance they fly too fast,
>>for thy dull thoughts to count,
>>count every day thy last.
>>
>>Henton Londini - Anno Dom 1605
>>
>>"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
>>news:434a1e5c@linux...
>>
>>>D,
>>>Long story short is that when Ensoniq was bought out by Emu and Creative,
>>>lots of heads rolled. A good deal of hostility ensued. Papers vanished,
>>>mysteriously, and *no one seems to know where they went*.. the why is
>>>obvious when you think about it from a creators standpoint. If there are
>>>indeed roadmaps on the EDS cards I would be most definitely interested
>>>should you come across them.. but I hold little hope at this late stage
>>>in
>>>the public release of those documents.
>>>
>>>AA
>>>
>>>
>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>news:434a13c0$1@linux...
>>>
>>>>I have a couple of non working EDS cards (and no I did not burn them
>>>>with
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58432 is a reply to message #58428] |
Thu, 22 September 2005 22:03 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
sad. Her vocals were clean...riffs were phenomenal and interpretation
>skills
>> outstanding!
>>
>> Certainly a worth while performer to see if at all possible.
>>
>> Tyrone
>>
>
>would one of the Ensoniq SW-10 double switches work and/or could you
modify one?
On 12 Oct 2005 09:27:43 +1000, "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>I want to build my own footswitch for my keyboards for sustain. My idea was
>to have one momentary footswitch which acts like a normal sustain pedal,
>and one locking switch for each keyboard, so that if I was to have a big
>bass not or key pad which sustains while I add atmospheric bits over the
>top, I don't have to hold my foot down... and then hopefully wire it so
>that the momentary switch also momentarily releases the locking switch...
> so if I want to change bass notes I just press the momentary momentarily
>;o) and play the new bass note and it will still be locked on sustain, if
>that makes sense.
>
>Problem is I thought it would be easy to build, but I can't find momentary
>footswitches. All I need is some momentary switches like the one pictured
>and it will all be easy! I've been googling high and low... I'm ready to
>import them if I have to.
>
>Anyone got any clues where I might get such a thing?
>
>Cheers,
>Kim.The reason I wanted to make a custom switch is that I wanted to make it not
only lock the sustain in position, but also do so for multiple keyboards.
Hence the finished footswitch would have 6 (or maybe more) buttons, 3 which
act like "normal" momentary sustain switches, and 3 which act as locking
switches for each keyboard. I was really hoping to build one single device
which did all of this, as I already have a Behringer FCB1010, a GNX4 plus
the GNXFC, plus several analog pedals all on the floor. I wanted to avoid
cluttering it up even more so with a whole bunch of seperate pedals.
That said I will see if I can look up one of those none the less out of interest...
thanks for the idea.
Cheers,
Kim.
jon chaikin <jc@nonstopsound.com> wrote:
>would one of the Ensoniq SW-10 double switches work and/or could you
>modify one?
>
>On 12 Oct 2005 09:27:43 +1000, "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>I want to build my own footswitch for my keyboards for sustain. My idea
was
>>to have one momentary footswitch which acts like a normal sustain pedal,
>>and one locking switch for each keyboard, so that if I was to have a big
>>bass not or key pad which sustains while I add atmospheric bits over the
>>top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58458 is a reply to message #58450] |
Sat, 24 September 2005 09:04 |
AlexPlasko
Messages: 211
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
hear is the trick we
=
>do in=20
> the studio <BR>where we mult the return (on tape) or copy the track =
>(in a DAW)=20
> and <BR>squeeze one track and don't squeeze the other. =
>Play with=20
> the <BR>relative levels a bit, and maybe some EQ and you can get=20
> some<BR>sterling tones. (btw, this is not panned left and right, =
>this is=20
> a mono<BR>effect I am speaking of) I used to use my =
>Carl=20
> Martin compressor<BR>this way by using the 4 inputs on a Matchless=20
> DC-30. Run the<BR>guitar into the high gain input, then run a =
>shorty=20
> from the low-gain<BR>input on the same channel to the compressor, then
=
>run the=20
> comp<BR>out to the other channel in. This got the signal =
>to both=20
> channels, <BR>one side compressed and one not compressed. =
>I got=20
> some great<BR>tones, but it was pretty cumbersome to setup and =
>adjusting=20
> the<BR>volume got pretty involved...<BR><BR>The Barber Tone Press, =
>does it all=20
> in one box. You get volume,<BR>blend, and =
>compression. What=20
> I do is run the blend up to full <BR>compressor and then adjust the =
>compressor=20
> knob until I am hearing<BR>quite a bit of squeeze going on, and then =
>pull the=20
> blend back until<BR>I get just the right amount of uncompressed tone =
>going=20
> through.<BR><BR>Sounds flippin' amazing. I generally leave =
>it on=20
> all the time.<BR><BR>BTW, this thing really helps heavy music, it's =
>are not=20
> just for <BR>country like a lot of people think compressors are for=20
> live.<BR>With the Tone Press you can make even metal sounds much more=20
> <BR>massive and studly.<BR><BR>Works equally well on all my guitars =
>and all my=20
> amps. Even the <BR>Hiwatt, and that thing hates =
>pedals.<BR><BR>Oh, and=20
> it's 139.00... Get one. You won't believe =
>it.<BR><BR><A=20
> =
>href=3D"http://www.barberelectronics.com/tonepress.htm">http://www.barber=
>electronics.com/tonepress.htm</A><BR><BR>DC<BR><BR>no=20
> commercial relationship to this product....</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
>
>"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>www.partsexpress.com might have something
>www.mcmelectronics.com might have something as well
>www.markertek.com usually has it or can get it
A fantastic list of stores which are going straight in my favourites for
future reference, however I still can't find what I'm looking for.
I'm wondering if I should look into the option of removing the latching mechanism
from the latching switches to make my own non latching variety
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58460 is a reply to message #58447] |
Sat, 24 September 2005 14:46 |
Kim Glanville
Messages: 8
Registered: September 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
ave something
>>www.mcmelectronics.com might have something as well
>>www.markertek.com usually has it or can get it
>
> A fantastic list of stores which are going straight in my favourites for
> future reference, however I still can't find what I'm looking for.
>
> I'm wondering if I should look into the option of removing the latching
> mechanism
> from the latching switches to make my own non latching variety...
>
> Cheers,
> Kim.Clap your hands, listen to the echo, crank up some bass, listen to the
standing waves if any, add tube traps to the corners and ceiling edges
if necessary, add diffusers if it's all slappy echo, add / take a way
thick carpet/tapestries if it's too live dead. I prefer a medium sound.
I have carpet on the floor and bare walls. My room is 30x35 with 20ft
cathedral ceiling so it's a large enough space to get rid of a lot of
early reflection problems. Below are tips I got from the awesom Dave
Moulton. Enjoy
Making Your Home Control Room The Best That It Can Be:
Some Basic Principles
by Dave Moulton
Most of the articles we read on control room and studio acoustic design
seem to center around materials we might use to treat wall surfaces, and
some tips about using those materials for fun and profit. In this
article, I’d like to take a different approach, and present what I
believe are some basic principles of control room design. You’ll find
that these are actually pretty straightforward, and you can apply them
almost anywhere, including your own home studio. And where you can’t
apply them successfully, you’ll hopefully come to understand a little
better what sort of problem you have, and how to cope with it more
effectively.
I first came up with this list of principles while preparing for
participation on a panel on “Small Room Acoustics†for AES. It
occurred to me that we don’t usually think about what it is that we
want to get out of our control rooms, even though that is what is really
important. For those of you who are interested, the whole presentation
is available on my website at
http://moultonlabs.com/slides/smallrooms/index.htm
Anyway, I’ve got seven principles that need to be addressed in the
construction of ANY control room, including your bedroom, basement,
minivan or closet. If you systematically work through these, and do
your best to optimize your particular setup with the resources you have
at hand, you can actually get surprising decent monitoring quality,
often for very little cost. You’ll see.
The seven issues you need to deal with are: noise floor, room symmetry,
early reflections, decay time in the room, standing waves, loudspeaker
placement and loudspeaker behavior. We’ll deal with each of these,
briefly.
Noise Floor
Noise floor can be defined here as the level of noise in the control
room when it is “at idle,†which is to say nobody is talking, no
music is playing, all the eq
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58462 is a reply to message #58460] |
Sat, 24 September 2005 20:03 |
DT
Messages: 42
Registered: July 2005
|
Member |
|
|
ealing with reducing such a noise floor.
First, you’ve got to shut out noises from elsewhere in the building or
outside. Then you’ve got to reduce noise from machinery in the room.
Room isolation (shutting out the noise) can be difficult and expensive.
However, in your bedroom control room, you can usually make big
initial improvements for very low cost simply by “weatherproofingâ€Â
all of the doors and windows, as it is through these passages that the
bulk of the sound leakage occurs. Certainly, that’s where to start,
and see how far you can get.
A big problem here has to do with air conditioners. Aside from the
noise that window air conditioners make when they’re running, they
also allow sound to fairly freely pass through them, severely
compromising isolation. Solutions to this vary widely,
including using a “split†unit (that isolates the compressor
outdoors in a separate unit and puts a separate heat exchanger on the
inside wall), the construction of baffles around the air conditioning
unit to reduce the noise of both the unit and from outside, and
installing central AC with oversize ducts and baffles, etc.
You are gonna have to suss out what works for you in your particular
case. Just keep in mind that it can be really hard to get it really
quiet while keeping it really cool for really cheap! Also, keep in mind
that the very simple option of going without AC is usually a pretty
unpleasant way to go. You can try it, of course, but be prepared to
change your mind after your first 12-hour session.
Meanwhile, machine noise is insidious. Manufacturers are generally
indifferent to the noise their equipment makes. The only solutions
(aside from not buying equipment that makes noise – a radical thought,
eh?) are to isolate the machinery in remote “machine rooms†(a
closet?) or to put them in “iso†boxes (containers that hold in the
noise). Iso boxes can be homemade, and you can get away with cheesy and
cheap (how do you spell “cardboard?â€Â), although you may have to make
some provision for cooling air flow. Remote machine rooms seem very
elegant (and at their best, they really are), but they can bring on
infuriating computer problems (when you have to trundle from
keyboard/monitor to CPU, 20 feet back and forth and down on your knees
in the back of the closet, ten times in quick succession!). In the case
of air conditioner fan noise, time sharing may be the best solution –
you run the AC at all times EXCEPT when mixing. That’s what I do –
with a handy remote control I got.
So what’s a reasonable noise floor? I say you’ve got to get below
40 dBA SPL with all the machinery on. That’s not easy to do to
do, but it’s worth trying for. Assuming you can hear audio down to 10
dB below the noise floor, that 40 dBA noise floor gives you a
signal-to-noise ratio of something like 60 dB from the standard
calibrated mix level used by the film industry (85 dBC from one speaker,
as heard at the mix position). This spec will also yield an overall
acoustical dynamic range of approximately 75 dB. Doesn’t sound like
much, I know, but you’ll be surprised by how good it actually is, when
you get there!
Symmetry
Room symmetry is hardly ever mentioned, yet it turns out to be
critically important for the reliable monitoring of stereo images.
Without getting into “why†this should be so, I suggest to you that
it is usually the single most effective thing you can do to make your
control room start sounding really good and turning out decent mixes.
What you want here is “lateral†symmetry, which is to say that both
sides of the control room are identical in shape and materials, that
there is a “median plane†down the middle of the room, and that the
two sides of the room constitute “mirror images†of each other.
Needless to say, the loudspeakers need to also use this median plane
(see below).
Unfortunately, such symmetry by necessity includes furnishings, windows,
etc. The good news is that most rooms are rectangular and rectangular
rooms start out life being symmetrical by definition, at least until you
start adding doors, windows, closets and fireplaces. I generally
recommend that you set up the median plane along the long axis of a
rectangular room. You’ll have to fiddle with furnishings, etc., and
it can be a pain to deal with doors and windows, but you can usually
obtain decent symmetry with a little effort in any rectangular room.
Again, the solutions here are common-sense ones, and you simply
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58494 is a reply to message #58462] |
Mon, 26 September 2005 10:42 |
Kim Glanville
Messages: 8
Registered: September 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
thing was backwards,
so I wrote it out backwards...
"Toboredom sayno".
So there ya go. ;o)Hartley sold out 'eh?
Wow man, never thought I'd see that one.
AA
"EK Sound" <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote in message
news:434e7831@linux...
> Which is now owned by Loud Technologies... AKA Mackie.
>
> David.
>
> Aaron Allen wrote:
>> this may sound completely ridiculous, but have you contacted Peavey
>> online?
>> I've had several of their old 70's amps that may have the big chrome
>> switch I think you are looking for dude.
>> Ampeg would be another viable source for this. Ask for replacement parts.
>> Ampeg is owned by St Louis Music now, fyi.
>>
>> AA
>>
>>
>> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:434e00fb$1@linux...
>>
>>>"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>>
>>>>www.partsexpress.com might have something
>>>>www.mcmelectronics.com might have something as well
>>>>www.markertek.com usually has it or can get it
>>>
>>>A fantastic list of stores which are going straight in my favourites for
>>>future reference, however I still can't find what I'm looking for.
>>>
>>>I'm wondering if I should look into the option of removing the latching
>>>mechanism
>>>from the latching switches to make my own non latching variety...
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>Kim.
>>
>>If you have to pull it apart, you may find this useful.
AA
"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:434f0010$1@linux...
> Swen has a couple sticky C-16 mute buttons. They work, but they're sticky.
> I
> think a very small amount of splashed beer may be the culprit. It's a
> bizarre tale involving a beer that was dropped onto the floor 4-6 feet
> away
> from the mixing area. The beer landed upright, but shot a stream of beer
> up
> into the air, and a few drops landed on the mute buttons on channels 15 &
> 16.
>
> Any way to easily clean? Spray a little contact cleaner in there?
>
> Jimmy
>
>
We'll try it.
Deej, you're a gentleman.
Jimmy
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:434f0980@linux...
> Make sure the inputs and outputs are both patched. also, If it's s/pdif,
> chances are that he won't see a thing on the meters. None of my spdif
> devices show signal on the Paris aux meters. Have him set the device to
full
> wet and solo the return. That will tell him if anything is happening.
>
> Deej
>
> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:434eff73$1@linux...
> > Hi, all.
> >
> > My buddy Swen abd I have both succesfully clocked our Paris rigs to
Lucid
> > clocks. Yay!
> >
> > I have not yet tried to route digital signals to external FX boxes, but
> Swen
> > has, with no luck. He says that when he patches an FX send to a digital
> > output in the Paris patchbay, there's no signal on the mixer aux
channel.
> > The same basic patch works with an analog output engaged, just not the
> > digital.
> >
> > His Kurzweil KSP8 shows lock to the Lucid, and Paris locks perfectly as
> > well.
> >
> > Any knowledge?
> >
> > Jimmy
> >
> >
>
>"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>Gently lick while applying suction.........
>
>Eeeeiiiiwwwwww.... I know we love Paris, but.... but... but Eeeeeiiiiwwww....
>;o)
And don't forget the "stepchildren". ("Old School" reference)
:)http://www.channld.com/mts.html
On 14 Oct 2005 01:46:17 +1000, "Dale" <dalebradleycello@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>Does anyone know of some room analysis software for a mac?
>
>Dale
>
>
>jef knight <thestudio@allknightmusic.com> wrote:
>>Hey,
>>
>>I just spent the last 2 months re-building my studio. The original
>>layout/design were giving me tons of problems in the low end, and
>>nothing seemed to make it better. It's just the problem inherent in a
>>smalle
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58496 is a reply to message #58494] |
Mon, 26 September 2005 10:55 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;I used the software SMAART to anylize the room but the traps I'd need
>>would take up too much space. The problem is that the boom goes up as
>>you get close to the foam wall.
>>
>>For me an eq won't help because the mix position is fine, so I think
>>I'll do some mixes there over the weekend and if they sound fine. Still,
>
>>I don't know what I'll do if they are bass-wonky.
>>
>>jef
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Mike wrote:
>>> Has anyone analyzed their control room and had success with adjustments?
>Ive
>>> never done this and not sure if its for me.
>>>
>>> 1) What did you use to analyze it?
>>> 2) How did you know what to do to fix problems?
>>> 3) What did you do to fix the problems?
>>>
>>> I guess Im wondering if it is worth it to buy an analyzer like the Rane
>RA27
>>> or something - or - would I be better off just learning my room as is.
>
>>>
>>>http://www.mhlabs.com/
i suppose i should do them all on one post huh...
On 14 Oct 2005 01:46:17 +1000, "Dale" <dalebradleycello@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>Does anyone know of some room analysis software for a mac?
>
>Dale
>
>
>jef knight <thestudio@allknightmusic.com> wrote:
>>Hey,
>>
>>I just spent the last 2 months re-building my studio. The original
>>layout/design were giving me tons of problems in the low end, and
>>nothing seemed to make it better. It's just the problem inherent in a
>>smaller room.
>>
>>So, what I did was knock out a couple of walls (that were part of the
>>studio not the house) so I could turn the gear 90 degrees so the room is
>
>>now wider than it is long. I have 4" wedge foam in 6'x2' panels a foot
>>apart on the rear wall and just drywall on the front, for the "live
>>end/dead end" effect. Sounds great in the mix position but is just a tad
>
>>boomy outside of that.
>>
>>I used the software SMAART to anylize the room but the traps I'd need
>>would take up too much space. The problem is that the boom goes up as
>>you get close to the foam wall.
>>
>>For me an eq won't help because the mix position is fine, so I think
>>I'll do some mixes there over the weekend and if they sound fine. Still,
>
>>I don't know what I'll do if they are bass-wonky.
>>
>>jef
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Mike wrote:
>>> Has anyone analyzed their control room and had success with adjustments?
>Ive
>>> never done this and not sure if its for me.
>>>
>>> 1) What did you use to analyze it?
>>> 2) How did you know what to do to fix problems?
>>> 3) What did you do to fix the problems?
>>>
>>> I guess Im wondering if it is worth it to buy an analyzer like the Rane
>RA27
>>> or something - or - would I be better off just learning my room as is.
>
>>>
>>>and how much do you get paid...now i gets the whole brother thing.
;o)
On 14 Oct 2005 12:16:49 +1000, "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>The dude who sits behind me is only in the office once or twice a week. The
>rest of the time his PC has his screen saver, which was a couple of words
>set on that 3D microsoft screensaver where the words dance around all over
>the place. Only thing is it was set so fast that it was near impossible to
>read.
>
>It seemed to say "Onya [something] robot". I spent a while looking at it
>and couldn't make out what was in the middle, or think of what it might mean...
> like what was a normal sentence that would start with Onya and end in Robot...
>
>Then today at one point I caught it when the screen saver was only very slightly
>shaking the words about, and read what it said...
>
>It said "Onyas Moderobot"... which of course means very little...
>
>...so Micheal the guy next to me suggested that the whole thing was backwards,
>so I wrote it out backwards...
>
>"Toboredom sayno".
>
>So there ya go. ;o)yes, not as sturdy as the best latching switches usually used
for "true bypass" switching of footpedals, but momentary foot
switches seem to be rarer than duck's teeth lately. Marshall
have some for their TSL amp footswitches, but I've replaced a
few of them for customers over the last couple years, and
they're much more expensive too. They look like conventional
footswitches though, with a metal button and lock nuts for
mounting. I'll find a Marshall part no. and get back to you.
"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Hmm... I did already check Jaycar. Didn't see those parts though. Do you
>think that big rubber one would be ok for foot use? It certainly seems suitable
>size and shape wise, but I'm wondering if the plastic would be up to the
>task of being kicked around. It doesn't mention foot use in the description.
>
>Cheers,
>Kim.
>
>"simmo" <simmo@bigfoot.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>Kim, try Jaycar Electronics, part no. SP-0732 or SP-0755 for the
>>momentary, page 86 and 87 of their current catalogue. They look
>>a bit weird but they work. www.jaycar.com.au >simmo
>>
>> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>Yehy, can't seem to see anything there either. This seems to be one of
>those
>>>items that you'd think you could get easily, but when you go looking they
>>>seem near impossible to find.
>>>
>>>Thanks for the suggestions... actually I haven't checked out the Roland
>>>products yet so I'll do that now, but I really wanted to build my own
so
>>>I could d
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58511 is a reply to message #58496] |
Mon, 26 September 2005 18:53 |
Kim Glanville
Messages: 8
Registered: September 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
ire album this
>
> way.
>
>>>The repro heads stripe to tape, and send back to monitor post tape.
>>>
>>>Cheers
>>>
>>>
>>>"cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Yeah, I wont really need to lock to Paris especially if I track a click
>>>
>>>to
>>>
>>>
>>>>the tape machine then use the same click in Paris I can visualy line up
>>>
>>>the
>>>
>>>
>>>>tracks to the click later. But in your method, if I undertand things
>
> correctly,
>
>>>>you would not have gotten "tape compression" as you were just getting
>
> the
>
>>>>electronic through put? Seems like you;d actually have to record. to
>
> get
>
>>>>the tape "sound" or am I wrong?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I used to do this with a TEAC 80-8. I wish I still had it. Latency isn't
>>>>
>>>>an
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>issue. The signal path through the components of the tape machine is
>
> faster
>
>>>>>than your A/D and D/A conversion so in all likelihood, you will have
>
> around
>
>>>>>1.2ms latency (the AD/DA latency in Paris).
>>>>>
>>>>>The way I did it was to patch the preamps directly to the deck, then
>
> send
>
>>>>>the returns to 8 paris inputs and record them. Sounded great. I also
>
> striped
>
>>>>>a smpte track to tape and sync'ed Paris to the deck using my old Opcode
>>>>>Studio 64XTC. If you've got a box with this capability, you'd be goodto
>>>>
>>>>go
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>if you just wanted to lock Paris to the deck. I just didn't like losing
>>>>
>>>>a
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>track to the stripe and actually it worked better, IMO, just to track
>
> the
>
>>>>>tape returns because I wasn't losing a generation every time I played
>
> back
>
>>>>>the tape afterwards.
>>>>>;o)
>>>>>
>>>>>"cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote in message news:43526a05$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>My old 1" 16 keeps staring at me from the corner of my control room.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I keep wonderiing if I should be tracking drums and bass on it then
>>>>>
>>>>>bouncing
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>in to Paris..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Is anyone else doing that here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>My problem is my old board is gone. I would need to use Paris as a monitor
>>>>>>portion of a console. I think I'd need to send my pre amps in to tape,
>>>>>
>>>>>open
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>a Paris project and send the outs of the tape machine there, and send
>>>>
>>>>that
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>to the musicians as a monitor, I wonder if there will be too much latency
>>>>>>and it would screw with perfomances. It seems like this should work
>>>>>
>>>>>though.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Then right after the take, roll it back, hit record on paris, and play
>>>>
>>>>the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>tape into paris.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Rewind and record over that take for the next song.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Does this sound like it's worth the effort?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>Hi Dave… a few comments.
I think it is understood that you would use “Repro” mode to get the tape
sound and that this will cause tape delay.
You would NOT be using the sync head in this environment. You record using
the record head and play back using the play head, so your comments about
the frequency response of the sync mode are not germane.
As to your comment:
“Also, the material would have to be transfered off the tape in less than
8 hours to keep the "sheen" of the analog recording.”
This is correctly based on some truisms about tape. Tape will start to loose
its top end after hundreds of plays or after long periods on the shelf, but
your comment ignores the thousands of good sounding records made using analog
recorders during the last 40 or so years. Most of those records were not
recorded and mixed in 8 hours. 8 months is more typical.
Dark Side of the Moon took many months to record and mix and has more real
“sheen” than any digital pop-rock record I’ve ever heard. I am not talking
about pumped up “Air”, but true high frequency information.
It should be obvious that I am a fan of analog tape, and in the absence of
all-analog recordings, I like to do analog/digital hybrid recordings. I have
often used my Ampex and Rexox 2 tracks just this way.
I have also had good luck going the opposite way from the common method.
I have produced several projects that started digital, that I moved to analog
48 just prior to mixing. Actually I worked that way exclusively for several
years. Next budget that allows… I will go that route again.
Respectfully,
Gene
"Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_nospam_@shaw.ca> wrote:
>This is actually incorrect. On a 3 head R-R machine, the
>Sel/Sync head (record head) and the Repro head (playback
>head) will produce different results. If you try to record
>to tape then play back with the Repro head, you *will* have
>a very noticeable delay based on tape speed and the distance
>between heads. During record, the electronics pass the
>input signal back to the output stage directly. The signal
>being output at that point has not been anywhere near the
>tape. Only recording in "Repro" mode will do this (with
>delay). The frequency response of the Repro head is also
>much better as it is optimised for playback, where the
>Sel/Sync head is optimised for recording. Also, the
>material would have to be transfered off the tape in less
>than 8 hours to keep the "sheen" of the analog recording.
>Past that point the smallest domains self align as a result
>of print-through, eliminating the highest frequencies from
>the recording.
>
>David.
>Hi Gene,
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58537 is a reply to message #58511] |
Tue, 27 September 2005 09:11 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
audio path would emulate the tape
transfer characteristics of "actual tape". I would love to
sit down with Rupert and discuss how he gets it to do this! :-)
David.
gene lennon wrote:
> "W. Mark Wilson" <wmarkwilson@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>I've read numerous times that tape holds it's broadest freq and dynamics
>
> for
>
>>about 5 seconds and that after 30 seconds, given a means of audible
>>comparison, there is a noticeable difference. I have never had the
>>opportunity to run a test but always assumed, based on the profile of the
>
>
>>writers who espouse this notion, that this aspect of tape was accurately
>
>
>>represented. Given a chance, I would lunge, not walk, at an opportunity
>
> to
>
>>test this.
>>
>>Dubya
>>
>
> I think this may be true to an almost immeasurable degree, but it is also
> true that analog alignment tapes were rated to hold plus or minus one tenth
> of one db accuracy for 5 years or 1000 plays over the full audio spectrum,
> and most Ampex alignment tapes were recorded on standard Ampex 206 tape.
>
> Generally I would start hearing 256 (my normal first choice) become dull
> only after hundreds of passes. There is no arguing that this is one area
> where digital is vastly superior.
> Gene
>Ahh, yes, but you didn't mention "other" DAWS
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:43530c7c$1@linux...
>
> "Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>But you can't do that in Paris.
>>It only sees dual mono, (split tracks).
>
> Yes, yes, yes, but there are so many people here now using other
> DAW's... so just in case it might help anyone:
>
> On the original version of one particular song I had, tracked &
> being mixed in CubaseSX, as follows:
>
> 33 total tracks, @ 24-bit / 88.2k.
> 47 instances of various plugins.
> And about a dozen instances of the SX EQ.
>
> CPU usage was hovering between 88% & 90%.
>
> After re-tracking 14 stereo L/R keyboard tracks into regular
> stereo interleaved files/tracks, copying & pasting the exact
> channel settings (plugins & all) from one of the L/R dual mono
> channels it was replacing (except that I changed the pan
> settings, of course) and deleting the original L/R tracks each
> time, the CPU usage dropped down to about 80%. This is on an
> AthlonXP 2800, BTW.
>
> So, apparently it DOES make a difference, albeit not a huge
> one... though enough to be able to insert another CPU-hungry
> plugin, at least! lol
>
> Neil
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>--
>>Martin Harrington
>>www.lendanear-sound.com
>>
>>"Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:4352e197$1@linux...
>>>
>>> "Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>>>Off the top of my head, I would say yes.
>>>>You're processing 2 files, (dual mono), 2 plugins, as opposed to one
>
>>>>stereo
>>>
>>>>file and one plugin.
>>>
>>> OK, I'll try re-doing some L/R tracks into stereo interleaved
>>> tracks & report back if I notice a difference in CPU usage.
>>>
>>> Neil
>>
>>
>.........me too. I will be going down to Austin in the near future. I called
Neve in Wimberley and talked to the manager (not Rupert) about a month ago.
He told me I could come out there and see the place. I'm going to ask some
questions. It's about an hour south of Austin.
"Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_nospam_@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:43533a80$1@linux...
> Test tapes were recorded at low levels (185-200nWB) on low
> print tape for this exact reason... to maintain frequency
> response over time. Taking a roll of 250 or 456 to the edge
> of its retentivity will produce significant print in just 1
> day. The finer domains will easily realign to this higher
> level changing the frequency response of the recorded
> material... hence my suggestion to get it transfered as soon
> as possible.
>
> Regarding the Portico... I still don't see how having a tape
> head circuit in the audio path would emulate the tape
> transfer characteristics of "actual tape". I would love to
> sit down with Rupert and discuss how he gets it to do this! :-)
>
> David.
>
> gene lennon wrote:
> > "W. Mark Wilson" <wmarkwilson@verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> >>I've read numerous times that tape holds it's broadest freq and dynamics
> >
> > for
> >
> >>about 5 seconds and that after 30 seconds, given a means of audible
> >>comparison, there is a noticeable difference. I have never had the
> >>opportunity to run a test but always assumed, based on the profile of
the
> >
> >
> >>writers who espouse this notion, that this aspect of tape was accurately
> >
> >
> >>represented. Given a chance, I would lunge, not walk, at an opportunity
> >
> > to
> >
> >>test this.
> >>
> >>Dubya
> >>
> >
> > I think this may be true to an almost immeasurable degree, but it is
also
> > true that analog alignment tapes were rated to hold plus or minus one
tenth
> > of one db accuracy for 5 years or 1000 plays over the full audio
spectrum,
> > and most Ampex alignment tapes were recorded on standard Ampex 206 tape.
> >
> > Generally I would start hearing 256 (my normal first choice) become dull
> > only after hundreds of passes. There is no arguing that this is one area
> > where digital is vastly superior.
> > Gene
> >"Dave(EK Sound)" <audioguy_nospam_@shaw.ca> wrote:
>Test tapes were recorded at low levels (185-200nWB) on low
>print tape for this exact reason... to maintain frequency
>response over time. Taking a roll of 250 or 456 to the edge
>of its retentivity will produce significant print in just 1
>day. The finer domains will easily realign to this higher
>level changing the frequency response of the recorded
>material... hence my suggestion to get it transfered as soon
>as possible.
>
>Regarding the Portico... I still don't see how having a tape
>head circuit in the audio path would emulate the tape
>transfer characteristics of "actual tape". I would love to
>sit down with Rupert and discuss how he gets it to do this! :-)
>
>David.
>
Well, we both agree about what happens to tape. We just disagree about how
much of an issue it is and over what period of time.
Last year, concerned about saving some old 2” tapes, I finally converted
them to digital. Most were 15 years old or older. The tapes that were well
recorded 20 years ago still sounded good. I didn’t bake them or anything.
Just a few passes back and forth before I did the transfers. I didn’t even
see any obvious flaking. Ironically, most of my old DAT tapes are useless.
I hope CDR and DVD longevity is better.
The Portico is interesting. If it works as promised, it implies that much
of the “tape sound” is actually from over saturating the record head as opposed
to saturating the tape. That would stand everything I was ever told on its
head if it’s true.
GeneI track on an MCI 2inch 24 track. I track on Paris the same time in case the
tape plays up also if I have the killer take on tape and band want to try
another I do taht on Paris as I can do as many takes as possbile. It gets
costly on tape.
I then transfer the basic band tracks to Paris and do all my overdubs and
mixing from Paris.Hank
>Yes, that will work just fine. Personally, I would hit
>record in Paris at the same time. When you are done,
>transfer the tape tracks to the same Paris project
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58557 is a reply to message #58537] |
Wed, 28 September 2005 07:03 |
rich
Messages: 22
Registered: July 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:4353d772$1@linux...
> So one ADAT card can't send and receive? Just one or the other?
>
> And wouldn't it be 24 bit, not 20 bit?
>
> Hmmm....
>
> Jimmy
>
>
> "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
> news:4353d669$1@linux...
> >
> > I have my KSP8 setup with analogue ins X4 (multed together from the
cards)
> > with the 4 stereo returns coming back in on an ADAT card. Works like a
> charm
> > :)
> >
> >
> > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > >Howdy!
> > >
> > >I've never paid much attention to this, but do the ADAT cards work
well?
> > Any
> > >known issues?
> > >
> > >Swen has ADAT ins and outs on his Kurzweil KSP8....
> > >
> > >Jimmy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>Yes Yes! It's sort of like a Black and white movie.
Or even more closer to how model based Sci Fi movies looked cooler than CGI
ones do.
Also, it sort of Platonic, or was that Aristitotle? an actor has to be somehow
bigger than life, different.
Recordings are like this too. "when the levee breaks" does not sound liek
a bnad in a room, it sounds like a movie. (although A John's said he would
go for a sound of the band practicing)
That is why I like analog delay pedals and space echo's and spring reverbs
so much too.
I only wish I could get them without hiss, I don;t like that so much.
"Gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>Seems like a worthwhile test. I will put it on my list.
>But…
>I’ve been thinking about what appeals to me about tape. (This could be dangerous.)
>
>I think the fact that you don’t get back what you put in is part of what
>I like about analog tape!
>
>This is not what you would theoretically want, (don’t tell George Massenburg)
>but just like a Neve console changes the sound but in a good way, and a
C12
>mic sounds different than the sound in the room, but in a good way, and
just
>about every tool in the studio that I like is a tool of change as opposed
>to a tool of accuracy, I think that most of the artifacts and distortions
>that come from tape are musical.
>
>I also like that fact that you can use technique to shape the effect, but
>you never know exactly what you are going to get without listening back.
>
>All this uncertainty gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling. Kind of like a drummer
>compared to a drum machine.
>
>Keep in mind that I am a VERY early digital audio user and promoter going
>back before the CD was even a standard, and I do love digital for what it
>can do.
>
>
>Back to your test… I am afraid that I may discover that the one-month-old
>tape has changed slightly from the original. But the question is…will I
still
>prefer the deteriorated analog tape to the first digital copy. You know
my
>answer. I’m just crazy that way.
>Gene
>
>
>
>EK Sound <spamnot.info@eksoundNO.com> wrote:
>>:-) well at least we are keeping our disagreement civil!
>>
>>I invite you to a test... record a live performance directly to tape,
>>then transfer it immediately to a digital format. Store the tape
>>properly for a month and repeat the transfer. Compare the two files
>>to see if there is a difference. I would be interested in your
>>observations myself.
>>
>>DAT absolutely sucks... I am so glad it is finally going away. It
>>really makes you wonder what really is the best archival format.
>>
>>I am of the opinion that the whole "tape sound" does have *something*
>>to do with the heads and electronics as you have mentioned... how much
>>remains to be seen. It will be interesting to see what DJ learns in
>>his visit to Portico.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>David.
>Thanks Graham, Im staying at the Residence Inn in Plano, taking digital
imaging training at Kodak for 2 weeks.
"Graham Duncan" <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message
news:43530099@linux...
>
> Yes, I'm in Dallas right now. My Paris rig is living with my bandmate in
> Illinois, though :)
>
> Where are you staying? If you'd like, you could check out the studio I'm
> helping my mom get started. We're in Oak Cliff.
>
> Graham
>
> "Rob Arsenault" <info@studiomanitou.com> wrote:
>>In town for a bit and would love to chat with fellow Parisites.
>>
>>Rob_A
>>
>>
>I've been using Seagate and Western Digital 80 and 120 GB drives, some
w/ 8 meg cache, some w/ 2 meg cache. No problems. Some projects are
up to 48 tracks of playback, some have recorded w/ as many as 22 live
tracks.
Gantt
John wrote:
> What IDE drives are the fastest for the most Paris tracks, my western
> digital is crap and just died so i need a new one pronto. I hear
> smaller drives are faster too. So which ones are fastest?
>
> Thanks,
> JohnI use my ADAT cards for I/O w/ my old Quadraverb 2 and for the occasional
ADAT transfer, which works fine if you know how to avoid the bugs...
My Q2 makes strange noises sometimes, however. I don't think it likes
44.1K sample rate too much.
Gantt
uptown jimmy wrote:
> Howdy!
>
> I've never paid much attention to this, but do the ADAT cards work well? Any
> known issues?
>
> Swen has ADAT ins and outs on his Kurzweil KSP8....
>
> JimmySwen is trying to send and return Paris digital info via the SPDIF jacks to
the Kurzweil AES/EBU jacks. He's using XLR (AES/EBU) to SPDIF cables
specified by Kurzweil and endorsed by several online bigshots. No go.
The cables are 6 feet long, which is supposedly the outside edge for this
sort of thing. Maybe the cables should be shorter? Four feet?
He's clocking the KSP8 and Paris to a Lucid clock via BNC with no problems.
Just no signal transfer on the digital buss.
I, however, am enjoying perfect signal transfer between my Paris rig and my
Kurzweil Rumour and Mangler, via SPDIF, through my new Digipatch, which is
an excellent piece of kit. Awesome setup. Zero latency, perfect clarity,
infinite patchability of several FX boxes across three MEC/submixes. Thanks,
Deej!
Next I'll try to chain multiple FX boxes in the Digipatch. That's where the
sweet stuff is, IMO, when you have chained FX pulsing and percolating in
series. Groovy, baby.
Awesome for me, headache for Swen. If anyone knows about that cabling thing
(versus a dedicated digital translation device), let me know...
Jimmy
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43542d25@linux...
> The adat card can send and receive digital info. It can only send sync. It
> cannot slave to ADAT sync from another device. It's a control freak.
>
> ;o)
>
> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:4353d772$1@linux...
> > So one ADAT card can't send and receive? Just one or the other?
> >
> > And wouldn't it be 24 bit, not 20 bit?
> >
> > Hmmm....
> >
> > Jimmy
> >
> >
> > "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
> > news:4353d669$1@linux...
> > >
> > > I have my KSP8 setup with analogue ins X4 (multed together from the
> cards)
> > > with the 4 stereo returns coming back in on an ADAT card. Works like
a
> > charm
> > > :)
> > >
> > >
> > > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > >Howdy!
> > > >
> > > >I've never paid much attention to this, but do the ADAT cards work
> well?
> > > Any
> > > >known issues?
> > > >
> > > >Swen has ADAT ins and outs on his Kurzweil KSP8....
> > > >
> > > >Jimmy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>I tried this too. It's basically a no go, no matter what *should* be
happening. I'm interfacing the AES I/O of both a Quantec Yardstick and a
Power Technology DSP/FX card with Paris through an M-Audio Digipatch using
Hosa CDL-313 AES to coaxial converters. These do the job. This is one
situation where throwing money at it is the only reliable
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58575 is a reply to message #58557] |
Wed, 28 September 2005 11:31 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
software. Just common sense.
> > >
> > > Deej
> > >
> > > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > > news:4353d595@linux...
> > > > It's not an issue in practical terms for a lot of people here.
> > > >
> > > > But it is certainly an issue.
> > > >
> > > > Jimmy
> > > >
> > > > "benjamin" <none@a.a> wrote in message news:4353d2e0$1@linux...
> > > > > I can't believe this is still an issue.
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.exetools.com/07-2001.htm
> > > > >
> > > > > Check out anti-pace universal
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>Rock and roll.
Will relay the info.
Jimmy
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43546ba7$1@linux...
> the CDL is a bidirectional AES>spdif converter.....and yeah, going
directly
> from the KSP 8 into the CDL with the AES cables and then directly to/from
a
> CDL/MEC with the spdif cables will work........at least it works for me.
>
> ;o)
>
> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:435466a6@linux...
> > Or just skip the Digipatch altogether, and run the 75 ohm SPDIF between
> the
> > CDL-313 and Paris, right?
> >
> > But there's got to be some translation going on, not just a cable
changing
> > sides from one side to the other....
> >
> > Jimmy
> >
> >
> > "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> > news:435455fc$1@linux...
> > > Run the AES cables from the KSP8 into the respective AES I/O of the
> > CDL-313.
> > > Run a 75 ohm coax from the spdif output from the CDL-313 into the
s/pdif
> > > input of the Digipatch and run a 75 ohm coax from the s/pdif input of
> the
> > > Digipatch to the s/pdif output of the CDL-313 and you're good to go.
> > >
> > > Deej
> > >
> > > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > > news:43545355@linux...
> > > > So the AES to SPDIF cables go between which two pieces of kit?
> > > >
> > > > Paris and Digipatch, or FX to Digipatch?
> > > >
> > > > Jimmy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:4354526f@linux...
> > > > > I tried this too. It's basically a no go, no matter what *should*
be
> > > > > happening. I'm interfacing the AES I/O of both a Quantec Yardstick
> and
> > a
> > > > > Power Technology DSP/FX card with Paris through an M-Audio
Digipatch
> > > using
> > > > > Hosa CDL-313 AES to coaxial converters. These do the job. This is
> one
> > > > > situation where throwing money at it is the only reliable
solution.
> > > > >
> > > > > Deej
> > > > >
> > > > > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:43544510$1@linux...
> > > > > > Swen is trying to send and return Paris digital info via the
SPDIF
> > > jacks
> > > > > to
> > > > > > the Kurzweil AES/EBU jacks. He's using XLR (AES/EBU) to SPDIF
> cables
> > > > > > specified by Kurzweil and endorsed by several online bigshots.
No
> > go.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The cables are 6 feet long, which is supposedly the outside edge
> for
> > > > this
> > > > > > sort of thing. Maybe the cables should be shorter? Four feet?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > He's clocking the KSP8 and Paris to a Lucid clock via BNC with
no
> > > > > problems.
> > > > > > Just no signal transfer on the digital buss.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I, however, am enjoying perfect signal transfer between my Paris
> rig
> > > and
> > > > > my
> > > > > > Kurzweil Rumour and Mangler, via SPDIF, through my new
Digipatch,
> > > which
> > > > is
> > > > > > an excellent piece of kit. Awesome setup. Zero latency, perfect
> > > clarity,
> > > > > > infinite patchability of several FX boxes across three
> MEC/submixes.
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Deej!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Next I'll try to chain multiple FX boxes in the Digipatch.
That's
> > > where
> > > > > the
> > > > > > sweet stuff is, IMO, when you have chained FX pulsing and
> > percolating
> > > in
> > > > > > series. Groovy, baby.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Awesome for me, headache for Swen. If anyone knows about that
> > cabling
> > > > > thing
> > > > > > (versus a dedicated digital translation device), let me know...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jimmy
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:43542d25@linux...
> > > > > > > The adat card can send and receive digital info. It can only
> send
> > > > sync.
> > > > > It
> > > > > > > cannot slave to ADAT sync from another device. It's a control
> > freak.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ;o)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:4353d772$1@linux...
> > > > > > > > So one ADAT card can't send and receive? Just one or the
> other?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > And wouldn't it be 24 bit, not 20 bit?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hmmm....
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jimmy
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > news:4353d669$1@linux...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I have my KSP8 setup with analogue ins X4 (multed together
> > from
> > > > the
> > > > > > > cards)
> > > > > > > > > with the 4 stereo returns coming back in on an ADAT card.
> > Works
> > > > > like
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > charm
> > > > > > > > > :)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >Howdy!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >I've never paid much attention to this, but do the ADAT
> cards
> > > > work
> > > > > > > well?
> > > > > > > > > Any
> > > > > > > > > >known issues?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >Swen has ADAT ins and outs on his Kurzweil KSP8....
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >Jimmy
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>I know. I wasn't being facetious. My reply to your post wasn't meant to
imply that you would do this. I was just throwing it out there and happened
to be reading your post when I thought of it.
:O)
"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:43546fb9$1@linux...
> No, really.
>
> I mean it.
>
> Jimmy
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58577 is a reply to message #58557] |
Wed, 28 September 2005 13:15 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> >I've never paid much attention to this, but do the ADAT
> > cards
> > > > > work
> > > > > > > > well?
> > > > > > > > > > Any
> > > > > > > > > > >known issues?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >Swen has ADAT ins and outs on his Kurzweil KSP8....
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >Jimmy
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>Here's where I got both of mine. It's a brick & mortar and the service is
good......human beings to talk to who actually know about their products.
http://www.sbfilmaudio.com/
Deej
"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:43546fe8@linux...
> Rock and roll.
>
> Will relay the info.
>
> Jimmy
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> news:43546ba7$1@linux...
> > the CDL is a bidirectional AES>spdif converter.....and yeah, going
> directly
> > from the KSP 8 into the CDL with the AES cables and then directly
to/from
> a
> > CDL/MEC with the spdif cables will work........at least it works for me.
> >
> > ;o)
> >
> > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > news:435466a6@linux...
> > > Or just skip the Digipatch altogether, and run the 75 ohm SPDIF
between
> > the
> > > CDL-313 and Paris, right?
> > >
> > > But there's got to be some translation going on, not just a cable
> changing
> > > sides from one side to the other....
> > >
> > > Jimmy
> > >
> > >
> > > "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> > > news:435455fc$1@linux...
> > > > Run the AES cables from the KSP8 into the respective AES I/O of the
> > > CDL-313.
> > > > Run a 75 ohm coax from the spdif output from the CDL-313 into the
> s/pdif
> > > > input of the Digipatch and run a 75 ohm coax from the s/pdif input
of
> > the
> > > > Digipatch to the s/pdif output of the CDL-313 and you're good to go.
> > > >
> > > > Deej
> > > >
> > > > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:43545355@linux...
> > > > > So the AES to SPDIF cables go between which two pieces of kit?
> > > > >
> > > > > Paris and Digipatch, or FX to Digipatch?
> > > > >
> > > > > Jimmy
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:4354526f@linux...
> > > > > > I tried this too. It's basically a no go, no matter what
*should*
> be
> > > > > > happening. I'm interfacing the AES I/O of both a Quantec
Yardstick
> > and
> > > a
> > > > > > Power Technology DSP/FX card with Paris through an M-Audio
> Digipatch
> > > > using
> > > > > > Hosa CDL-313 AES to coaxial converters. These do the job. This
is
> > one
> > > > > > situation where throwing money at it is the only reliable
> solution.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Deej
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:43544510$1@linux...
> > > > > > > Swen is trying to send and return Paris digital info via the
> SPDIF
> > > > jacks
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > the Kurzweil AES/EBU jacks. He's using XLR (AES/EBU) to SPDIF
> > cables
> > > > > > > specified by Kurzweil and endorsed by several online bigshots.
> No
> > > go.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The cables are 6 feet long, which is supposedly the outside
edge
> > for
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > sort of thing. Maybe the cables should be shorter? Four feet?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > He's clocking the KSP8 and Paris to a Lucid clock via BNC with
> no
> > > > > > problems.
> > > > > > > Just no signal transfer on the digital buss.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I, however, am enjoying perfect signal transfer between my
Paris
> > rig
> > > > and
> > > > > > my
> > > > > > > Kurzweil Rumour and Mangler, via SPDIF, through my new
> Digipatch,
> > > > which
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > an excellent piece of kit. Awesome setup. Zero latency,
perfect
> > > > clarity,
> > > > > > > infinite patchability of several FX boxes across three
> > MEC/submixes.
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Deej!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Next I'll try to chain multiple FX boxes in the Digipatch.
> That's
> > > > where
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > sweet stuff is, IMO, when you have chained FX pulsing and
> > > percolating
> > > > in
> > > > > > > series. Groovy, baby.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Awesome for me, headache for Swen. If anyone knows about that
> > > cabling
> > > > > > thing
> > > > > > > (versus a dedicated digital translation device), let me
know...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jimmy
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:43542d25@linux...
> > > > > > > > The adat card can send and receive digital info. It can only
> > send
> > > > > sync.
> > > > > > It
> > > > > > > > cannot slave to ADAT sync from another device. It's a
control
> > > freak.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ;o)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > news:4353d772$1@linux...
> > > > > > > > > So one ADAT card can't send and receive? Just one or the
> > other?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > And wouldn't it be 24 bit, not 20 bit?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hmmm....
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Jimmy
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "John Macy" <spamlessjohn@johnmacy.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > news:4353d669$1@linux...
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I have my KSP8 setup with analogue ins X4 (multed
together
> > > from
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > cards)
> > > > > > > > > > with the 4 stereo returns coming back in on an ADAT
card.
> > > Works
> > > > > > like
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > charm
> > > > > > > > > > :)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >Howdy!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >I've never paid much attention to this, but do the ADAT
> > cards
> > > > > work
> > > > > > > > well?
> > > > > > > > > > Any
> > > > > > > > > > >known issues?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >Swen has ADAT ins and outs on his Kurzweil KSP8....
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >Jimmy
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58603 is a reply to message #58557] |
Wed, 28 September 2005 22:49 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
..
>>
>>
>> What type os setting do you use?
>> I can;t seem to trust Nolimit on the Mix bus as it always gives me a very
>> flat looking WAV.
>>
>>
>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>> >I've been mixing with NoLimit across the Global bus.
>> >
>> >Deej
>> >
>> >"Eugene B" <martinlancer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:435bf479$1@linux...
>> >>
>> >> Do most users prefer to mix in paris with or without
>> >> the eds stereo comp across the mix buss?
>> >
>> >
>
>OK I just verified sample accurate sync between Paris and SX3 for 10:00, so
I'm happy. This is using the cubase metronome.
Flip phase and I get total cancellation..100%
Next step is the audio. I seem to remember you having to set up RME as the
master clock to avoid clicks and pops...is that right??
rod
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Looks like you've got it. Occassionally, I'll get some stubbornness from
SX.
>when this happens, I dicipline it bygoing to the SX transport window and
>toggling between internal and idle. Then, when I hit the Paris transport,
>everything locks up.
>
>Deej
>
>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote in message news:435cf489$1@linux...
>>
>> OK, I got the transport part of it going. Amazing what the brain is
>capable
>> of with a few hours sleep! One missed checkbox cost me 2hrs of grief last
>> night. I still havn't tried the audio part yet, but Cubase and Paris look
>> like there staying locked via adat 9 pin sync.
>> rod
>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >With the Cubase 1.06 and dakota card, everything was taken care of with
>> the
>> >adat 9 pin sync. And it was pretty simple also.
>> >I was really hoping the SX 3/ RME would be as easy.
>> >Rod
>> >"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>> >>Rod, I'm fairly sure you'll have to send the transport commands via
>midi/
>> >
>> >>MTC and the sample sync commands via adat card... at least I've always
>> had
>> >
>> >>to on external sync'd transports.
>> >>
>> >>AA
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:435c7ec8$1@linux...
>> >>>
>> >>> Deej, I've look for some old post I thought I saved from when you
went
>> >
>> >>> through
>> >>> this, but I can't find them, so, please forgive, but I need your help.
>> >I
>> >>> finally installed the RME 9652 and Cubase SX3. I can't get them to
>sync
>> >up
>> >>> at all. Cubase just sits there when I press play on Paris (I have
the
>> >adat
>> >>> sync hooked up) I have tried everything I can think of, changing
>settings
>> >>> in the 9652 control panel to recieve adat sync, set cubase to recieve
>> >
>> >>> sync,
>> >>> etc. I'm just talking transport sync so far...havn't even tried audio
>> >yet.
>> >>> I previously had Cubase 1.06 sync'd up perfectly (sample accurate)
>with
>> >
>> >>> Paris
>> >>> using a Frontier Dakota.
>> >>> etc(but it's late so I may be missing something) Do you have any
>tips?????
>> >>> Rod
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>Well, how does it *look* ---- or how does it *sound*??? I mix for the sound
thingy.
-Carl Amburn
"cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote in message news:435d0c5b$1@linux...
>
>
> And this does not give you a block wave form?
>
>
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >I'm mixing with the channel faders fairly hot, the submix faders down to
> >where the submix isn't quite hitting oiverload (in my most recent imx.
this
> >was around -2.2dB , then using NoLimit for making up the gain and then a
> >little more......usually a threshold setting of
> > -4.4dB. This yields a sound which is, to my ears, sorta like using
> a
> >nicely colored bus compressor like a VariMu.
> >
> >Deej
> >
> >"cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
> >news:435bfd41$1@linux...
> >>
> >>
> >> What type os setting do you use?
> >> I can;t seem to trust Nolimit on the Mix bus as it always gives me a
very
> >> flat looking WAV.
> >>
> >>
> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >> >I've been mixing with NoLimit across the Global bus.
> >> >
> >> >Deej
> >> >
> >> >"Eugene B" <martinlancer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:435bf479$1@linux...
> >> >>
> >> >> Do most users prefer to mix in paris with or without
> >> >> the eds stereo comp across the mix buss?
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
>Nope. I'll send you an MP3 if you want to hear the results. If you've got an
editor that can open MP3's you can see for yourself.
Deej
"cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote in message news:435d0c5b$1@linux...
>
>
> And this does not give you a block wave form?
>
>
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >I'm mixing with the channel faders fairly hot, the submix faders down to
> >where the submix isn't quite hitting oiverload (in my most recent imx.
this
> >was around -2.2dB , then using NoLimit for making up the gain and then a
> >little more......usually a threshold setting of
> > -4.4dB. This yields a sound which is, to my ears, sorta like using
> a
> >nicely colored bus compressor like a VariMu.
> >
> >Deej
> >
> >"cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
> >news:435bfd41$1@linux...
> >>
> >>
> >> What type os setting do you use?
> >> I can;t seem to trust Nolimit on the Mix bus as it always gives me a
very
> >> flat looking WAV.
> >>
> >>
> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >> >I've been mixing with NoLimit across the Global bus.
> >> >
> >> >Deej
> >> >
> >> >"Eugene B" <martinlancer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:435bf479$1@linux...
> >> >>
> >> >> Do most users prefer to mix in paris with or without
> >> >> the eds stereo comp across the mix buss?
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
>Yes. That was my experience, unless you're using an external clock. I'm
locking Paris and the RME interfaces to a Mytek clock distributed by a Lucid
box.
Deej
"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote in message news:435d0f6d$1@linux...
>
> OK I just verified sample accurate sync between Paris and SX3 for 10:00,
so
> I'm happy. This is using the cubase metronome.
> Flip phase and I get total cancellation..100%
> Next step is the audio. I seem to remember you having to set up RME as the
> master clock to avoid clicks and pops...is that right??
> rod
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >Looks like you've got it. Occassionally, I'll get some stubbornness from
> SX.
> >when this happens, I dicipline it bygoing to the SX transport window and
> >toggling between internal and idle. Then, when I hit the Paris transport,
> >everything locks up.
> >
> >Deej
> >
> >"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:435cf489$1@linux...
> >>
> >> OK, I got the transport part of it going. Amazing what the brain is
> >capable
> >> of with a few hours sleep! One missed checkbox cost me 2hrs of grief
last
> >> night. I still havn't tried the audio part yet, but Cubase and Paris
look
> >> like there staying locked via adat 9 pin sync.
> >> rod
> >> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@kc.rr.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >With the Cubase 1.06 and dakota card, everything was taken care of
with
> >> the
> >> >adat 9 pin sync. And it was pretty simple also.
> >> &g
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Paris/Emu 1820M [message #58755 is a reply to message #58603] |
Tue, 04 October 2005 23:42 |
Kim Glanville
Messages: 8
Registered: September 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
ming =
off the =3D
>> >>backside of the=3D20
>> >>figure 8.</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Vocals didn't need =3D
>> >>compression. I was=3D20
>> >>singing and watching</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>levels so that made this =3D
>> >>possible. They did=3D20
>> >>seem slightly</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>compressed sounding though. =
Even =3D
>> >>when the=3D20
>> >>wave got</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>squared off in Paris it =
didn't gack
or
>> >=3D
>> >>even sound=3D20
>> >>clipped.</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>I rerecorded those spots =
because they
>> =3D
>> >>looked=3D20
>> >>bad...</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Odd but kinda cool. =
</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2></FONT> </DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Vocals in the mix need lots =
of high
=3D
>> >>end. Not=3D20
>> >>a problem either.</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>It was a disco thing with =
that sizzly
>> =3D
>> >>sound that=3D20
>> >>only a condensor</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>should get. What I found was =
that these
>> >=3D
>> >>things took=3D20
>> >>Paris' eq </FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>sweetly. The esses didn't =
go over
=3D
>> >>the=3D20
>> >>edge and tone was smooth</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>as silk. I did use La2a's =
across =3D
>> >>them at=3D20
>> >>mixdown though. The eggs</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>recorded nicely and again =
sounded =3D
>> >>natural. =3D20
>> >>One on each side of the mic. </FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2></FONT> </DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>These are the first ribbons =
I've used
>> =3D
>> >>except for=3D20
>> >>some Beyer M160s way back.</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>These are floating my boat =
right =3D
>> >>now. I think=3D20
>> >>they will rock on brass and </FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>crunch guitar. I'll find =
out =3D
>> >>about=3D20
>> >></FONT><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>that when a 7 horn band =
comes in=3D20
>> >>soon.</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>They needed a lot of gain. =
I was =3D
>> >>afraid to=3D20
>> >>get any closer than about 4" from them.</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Delicate little buggers you =
know.=20
=3D
>> >>Of course I=3D20
>> >>used a popper stopper for safety</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>which darkens the sound a =
bit too.
=3D
>> >></FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2></FONT> </DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>At $700 or so for the =
matched =3D
>> >>pair.</FONT><FONT=3D20
>> >>face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>I think this is quite a bargain =
compared to =3D
>> >></FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>the R121s etc. The Lundahls =
=3D
>> >></FONT><FONT=3D20
>> >>face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>are supposed to give them more clarity =
across
>the=3D20
>> >>board.</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Natural is what I call them. =
=3D
>> >></FONT><FONT=3D20
>> >>face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Not a bad choice if your looking for =
=3D
>> >>ribbons.</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2></FONT> </DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Thanks to John Macy for =
turning us
on
>> =3D
>> >>to them. Jon,=3D20
>> >>the owner of Shiny Box</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>was very helpful throughout =
the
>buying=3D20
>> >>process. He also took great care in first</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>matching mics then matching =
=3D
>> >>transformers then=3D20
>> >>matching the mics w/transformers.</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Painstaking I would say. I =
know =3D
>> >>it took him=3D20
>> >>at least a day or so.</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2></FONT> </DIV>
>> >><DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>
>
>
------=_NextPart_000_005F_01C5DD70.7832ADB0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Dale and Cujo,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Heres what I can tell you about the=20
46Ls:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I haven't any ribbons to AB them =
with. My=20
experience with</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Beyer M-160s was less than stellar so I =
am=20
certainly biased.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The information </FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial size=3D2>I=20
got from Jon at Shiny Box is that the Lundahls make the</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>mics more clear from top to =
bottom. I know=20
John Macy is </FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>preferring the =
standard</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>46s over his Royer 121s on e. =
gtrs. I am=20
going to hammer</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>them tonight with some crunch guitars =
for yours and=20
my benefit.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'll A-B them with a 57, 421 414 so you =
have some=20
basis for my</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>comments. I'll gain match too =
using the same=20
pre.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Maybe I'll post a short mp3 too. =
It's so=20
subjective with all the variables.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'll give you my gut feeling =
though.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"cujo" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com">chris@nospamapplemanstudio=
..com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:4365146f$1@linux">news:4365146f$1@linux</A>...</DIV><BR><BR>=
I saw a=20
pair of the SE ribbons at a dealer. <BR>They do look really well =
constructed,=20
and I guess they are supposed to be<BR>a tad more airy than the Royer. =
They=20
aint super cheap though as are the shiny..<BR>I really do want to know =
about=20
the diff in the tranny of the Shiny box mics,<BR>I am thinking a pair =
of these=20
may fit the bill as room mics. Of course you<BR>afiten get what you =
pay=20
for<BR>I also want to know how they sound on a crunchy master gain=20
marshall.<BR><BR>I heard a clip of DJ's gemini in action, how does the =
5000=20
compare?<BR><BR><BR>"DJ" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net">animix_spam-this-ahole=
_@animas.net</A>>=20
wrote:<BR>>I can't wait to give one of these SE ribbons a try. I'm =
very=20
impressed with<BR>>the SE stuff. We just used a matched pair of =
SE3's on=20
some guitar overdubs.<BR>>We compared them to a matched pair of =
Neumann KM=20
184's and a pair of AKG<BR>>C460B's before we committed to them. =
The SE3's=20
sound great. I think this<BR>>company is hitting some home =
runs with=20
some high quality products at very<BR>>good=20
prices.<BR>><BR>>Deej<BR>><BR>> "Dale" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:dalebradleycello@yahoo.com">dalebradleycello@yahoo.com</A>=
>=20
wrote in =
message<BR>>news:4364187c$1@linux...<BR>>><BR>>> A=20
buncha questions about these "ShinyBox" mics I hear tell=20
of....<BR>>><BR>>> So how does the ShinyBox sound compared =
with=20
Beyer M160 & Royer (both<BR>of<BR>>> which I have used)? =
Does a $310=20
mic (46L) really outperform a Royer?!?<BR>>><BR>>> I just =
scanned=20
the shinybox.com, but didn't see much description of=20
the<BR>>practical<BR>>> difference between the 46, 46C, & =
46L=20
except about the transformers. How<BR>>> are the spendier ones=20
better?<BR>>><BR>>> I don't suppose anyone has got one of =
the new=20
SE Electronics Ribbon mics<BR>>> to report on? I have one of =
their tube=20
mics (SE 5000) which I like a lot.<BR>>><BR>>> =
thanks,<BR>>>=20
Dale<BR>>&a
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed May 06 11:14:45 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.23290 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
