Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
There is nothing greater than the power of human belief, as all of the great religions show. Nik ________________ Reply Header ________________ Subject: Re: Tubes in Pre-amps: your expertise and honest opinion. Author: Richard Sales <richard@glasswing.com> Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 15:58:53 +0000 On 4-Jan-07, at 6:41 AM, Krispen Hartung wrote: > I see tube amps in museums, with model Ts, computers the size of > >rooms, and two-headed cows. and photos of all the bone headed people who couldn't hear the difference between an Ipod/mp3 recording of a train and the one coming at them! :) Sorry. Just jazzing you! I've tried and owned lots of amps new and old. There is only ONE that sounds the way I want it to sound. I don't give a shirt if it's old or new, vintage or Wal Mart. I just care about the sound. If someone can find me an amp that costs no more than the one I have that does the job I will most certainly BUY IT! Now, I could get a Victoria amp - and I hear they're nice. But they cost a LOT more than my old Panaramic/Magnatone. Why should I buy it? Same with AER amps. For what I would pay for some of the new amps I have been told I would like, I could buy TWO of my fave vintage amps - which I am in the process of doing. Total cost $1,040 USD. Anvil flight cases & spare NOS tubes are extra. I was in another studio recently and they had ALL the groovy old amps. Tried em all. Didn't like 'em for what I WANT. As Ravi Shankar should have once said when he first heard a shrutti box, "Close, but no sitar!!" It took me a long time to step away from the digital marketing modern hype 'technology is always improving' machine and hear for myself. I've tried tons of effects boxes and tube guitar pre's etc. All I can say is there is a sweet spot - and this is certainly a matter of taste - that, once you find it, you say "Eureka!" In my case, it's a 1960 PANaramic amp and Phillips parlor resonator guitar. Old Echoplex and volume pedal. (I might eventually trade my Echoplex for a Fulltone echo.) I have a nice collection of old guitars. I currently use the newest guitar I have because it sounds how I want it to sound. This Christmas I gave my daughter my 1969 Martin D35 that John Fahey said was the best sounding Martin he'd ever played. Why? Well... I love my daughter, but also, as killer as it is, It's not the sound I want. I know what I want and I hear it and I'm satisfied. No more purchases necessary. Why do so many guys who master the hits and have enough money to buy the most advanced Prism etc converters and the latest of anything keep using old technology and so forcefully dis plug ins? Read it in the new Mix Magazine - interviews with mastering wizards. Now, I USE THE WAVES Ultramaximizer because I just can't AFFORD some of that stuff, or the Dunleavy speakers etc. I send music to THEM when it really counts. I KNOW you can get sort of close with the Waves Ultramaximizer, but when your rolling next to the Corvettes, you wanna make sure your Smart Car is as well tuned as can be. Now, interestingly, in the SAME issue of MIX where 4 out of 4 mastering engineers emphatically say they very rarely use plug ins because they don't like them, in the next article MIX reviews all the latest mastering plug ins with glowing reports. What's up with that? I think it's called advertising dollars and knowing what their audience wants to (and can afford to) hear. I use an old Mackie D8B that's completely digital - eq's, compressors and all. It works for me for now. I think a lot of this stuff is financial. I'm looking at a big upgrade to the studio. To SSL or not to SSL? How many more hundreds of thousands of dollars should I spend? I have HUGE DREAD of hype because I've dumped so much money into HYPE holes. Both vintage and the latest technology. It takes a very clear and open mind to sort through all the marketing and dig your way out of the hype holes - and it comes from all directions - vintage, transistor, software etc. The advantage of vintage stuff is it increases in value - at least for now. But my old Jupiter 8 is finally worth what I paid for it. I wouldn't sell it for twice that. I like the sound. So today's Roland could be tomorrows Telefunken! It's all about ears and there are no easy conclusions, with or without them. Oh! Not completely true! If you don't notice the hype holes, just keep walking and you'll fall right on in - no effort or listening required. Vintage or Not. If plug ins work for you, and they sometimes do for me, then Hari Bol! But I think our goal on this list or any information watering hole is to inspire inquiry at the root level - the ears in this case. To find the technology that does what our ears are longing to hear. And the more you use them, the more finely tuned they get. There are no easy across the board answers. Wise the man who doesn't defend himself when not being attacked R > > K- > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fluke" <fluke@gotadsl.co.uk> > To: <donh@mindspring.com>; > <"Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com"@arsenic.violacea.com> > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 2:57 AM > Subject: Re: Tubes in Pre-amps: your expertise and honest opinion. > > >> Speaking as a designer of SS audio circuits with > 15 years experiance >>> behind me, we can satisfy the tube purists (both audiophile and guitar >>> player) without too much trouble... >> ...but only until the blindfolds come off. >> >> Nik >> >> --------- Original Message -------- >> From: donh@mindspring.com >> To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com >> <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> >> Subject: Re: Tubes in Pre-amps: your expertise and honest opinion. >> Date: 02/01/07 19:37 >> >>> >>> Or at least perhaps until the blindfold comes off... >>> >>> > Then the mysterious are resolved, and we >>> >can let the DSP/SS engineers of the future continue developing a >>>> SS >> amp that >>> >will eventually satisfy the tube purist via a blind test. >>> > >>> >>> >> >> ________________________________________________ >> Message sent using UebiMiau 2.7.2 >> > On 4-Jan-07, at 6:41 AM, Krispen Hartung wrote: <excerpt> I see tube amps in museums, with model Ts, computers the size of rooms, and two-headed cows. </excerpt> and photos of all the bone headed people who couldn't hear the difference between an Ipod/mp3 recording of a train and the one coming at them! :) Sorry. Just jazzing you! I've tried and owned lots of amps new and old. There is only ONE that sounds the way I want it to sound. I don't give a shirt if it's old or new, vintage or Wal Mart. I just care about the sound. If someone can find me an amp that <italic>costs no more</italic> than the one I have that does the job I will most certainly BUY IT! Now, I could get a Victoria amp - and I hear they're nice. But they cost a LOT more than my old Panaramic/Magnatone. Why should I buy it? Same with AER amps. For what I would pay for some of the new amps I have been told I would like, I could buy TWO of my fave vintage amps - which I am in the process of doing. Total cost $1,040 USD. Anvil flight cases & spare NOS tubes are extra. I was in another studio recently and they had ALL the groovy old amps. Tried em all. Didn't like 'em for what I WANT. As Ravi Shankar should have once said when he first heard a shrutti box, "Close, but no sitar!!" It took me a long time to step away from the digital marketing modern hype 'technology is <italic>always</italic> improving' machine and hear for myself. I've tried tons of effects boxes and tube guitar pre's etc. All I can say is there is a sweet spot - and this is certainly a matter of taste - that, once you find it, you say "Eureka!" In my case, it's a 1960 PANaramic amp and Phillips parlor resonator guitar. Old Echoplex and volume pedal. (I might eventually trade my Echoplex for a Fulltone echo.) I have a nice collection of old guitars. I currently use the newest guitar I have because it sounds how I want it to sound. This Christmas I gave my daughter my 1969 Martin D35 that John Fahey said was the best sounding Martin he'd ever played. Why? Well... I love my daughter, but also, as killer as it is, It's not the sound I want. I know what I want and I hear it and I'm satisfied. No more purchases necessary. Why do so many guys who master the hits and have enough money to buy the most advanced Prism etc converters and the latest of anything keep using old technology and so forcefully dis plug ins? Read it in the new Mix Magazine - interviews with mastering wizards. Now, I USE THE WAVES Ultramaximizer because I just can't AFFORD some of that stuff, or the Dunleavy speakers etc. I send music to THEM when it really counts. I KNOW you can get sort of close with the Waves Ultramaximizer, but when your rolling next to the Corvettes, you wanna make sure your Smart Car is as well tuned as can be. Now, interestingly, in the SAME issue of MIX where 4 out of 4 mastering engineers emphatically say they very rarely use plug ins because they don't like them, in the next article MIX reviews all the latest mastering plug ins with glowing reports. What's up with that? I think it's called advertising dollars and knowing what their audience wants to (and can afford to) hear. I use an old Mackie D8B that's completely digital - eq's, compressors and all. It works for me for now. I think a lot of this stuff is financial. I'm looking at a big upgrade to the studio. To SSL or not to SSL? How many more hundreds of thousands of dollars should I spend? I have HUGE DREAD of hype because I've dumped so much money into HYPE holes. Both vintage and the latest technology. It takes a very clear and open mind to sort through all the marketing and dig your way out of the hype holes - and it comes from all directions - vintage, transistor, software etc. The advantage of vintage stuff is it increases in value - at least for now. But my old Jupiter 8 is finally worth what I paid for it. I wouldn't sell it for twice that. I like the sound. So today's Roland could be tomorrows Telefunken! It's all about ears and there are no easy conclusions, with or without them. Oh! Not completely true! If you don't notice the hype holes, just keep walking and you'll fall right on in - no effort or listening required. Vintage or Not. If plug ins work for you, and they sometimes do for me, then Hari Bol! But I think our goal on this list or any information watering hole is to inspire inquiry at the root level - the ears in this case. To find the technology that does what our ears are longing to hear. And the more you use them, the more finely tuned they get. There are no easy across the board answers. Wise the man who doesn't defend himself when not being attacked R <excerpt> K- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fluke" <<fluke@gotadsl.co.uk> To: <<donh@mindspring.com>; <<"Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com"@arsenic.violacea.com> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 2:57 AM Subject: Re: Tubes in Pre-amps: your expertise and honest opinion. <excerpt>Speaking as a designer of SS audio circuits with > 15 years experiance behind me, we can satisfy the tube purists (both audiophile and guitar player) without too much trouble... ...but only until the blindfolds come off. Nik --------- Original Message -------- From: donh@mindspring.com To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com <<Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> Subject: Re: Tubes in Pre-amps: your expertise and honest opinion. Date: 02/01/07 19:37 <excerpt> Or at least perhaps until the blindfold comes off... > Then the mysterious are resolved, and we >can let the DSP/SS engineers of the future continue developing a SS </excerpt>amp that <excerpt>>will eventually satisfy the tube purist via a blind test. > </excerpt> ________________________________________________ Message sent using UebiMiau 2.7.2 </excerpt> </excerpt>