1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

pendulum vs. drawmer 1969

Discussion in 'Pro Audio Equipment' started by osmuir, Apr 8, 2001.

  1. osmuir

    osmuir Guest

    ok. so i need a good stereo compressor. preferebly no super expensive.

    these two look lik egood options:
    the pendulum electro optical compressor, and the 1969.

    and the 2 mic pre's on the 1969 would be really nice.

    but is the pendulum better enough to warrent no getting 2 mic pre's and a DI for only 250 more?

    thoughts? any other contenders to jump into the ring?

    and i'll probably be buying one of those from you fletcher, so i expect good advice :)

  2. Melange

    Melange Guest

    You = short on $
    Pendulum = no mic pres
    1969 = mic pres
    You = want mic pres
    You = get the 1969
  3. miketholen

    miketholen Guest

    never heard the Pendulum but I know the 1969 sucks pelican $*^t!
    I'm sure that Fletcher has refined the original design. or he at least has an opinion on it. Mike
  4. RandomGuest

    RandomGuest Guest

    Feb 10, 2001
    I sincerely hope you meant the 1960 when referencing Pelican $*^t...and frankly, I whole heartedly agree with the 1960 sucking Pelican $*^t [though I usually said it sucks hamster dick...by why quibble over deragatory animal anaolgies].

    The only thing we kept from the 1960 for the 1969 were the chassis, the meters, the power transformer, and the DI stuff...other than that...it's a total rebuild.

    As for comparing it to the Pendulum stuff...we're talking total apples and oranges here. There are two Pendulum 'Variable-MU' style compressors, and an 'Opto Attenuator' based model...the compression cell in the 1969 is 'J-FET' based...which covers 3 of the 4 potential 'gain reduction cells' most commonly found...
  5. miketholen

    miketholen Guest

    I don't pay much attention to that Drawmer stuff so I probably was referencing the 1960, Don't wanna offend anyone who has anything invested into such a thing.
    I used one once at a studio in town and it was completely unacceptable,(and I'm not just being a gear snob!)
    1960 or 69 whatever it was it was Flippin' Horrid Bile Inducing Gag Material...
  6. osmuir

    osmuir Guest

    ok fletcher: opto pendulum v 1969: which is more flexible in both tracking and mixing for the money? where do each excel?

    actualy comparison please... whimper.

    basicly i want, at this point, a damn good compressor with the most flexible bang for the buck. the 1969 has pre's. i figgure since you designed it they don't suck. so that is a plus...

    thus: does the j-fet control cell thingidingy on the 1969 give me more flexibility? is this flexibility a trade off for the pendulum sounding amazing in one or the other specific area?

    etc. etc.

  7. RandomGuest

    RandomGuest Guest

    Feb 10, 2001
    First off, I didn't design it!! It was designed for me, it was designed to incorporate my likes and dislikes...but I absolutely did not design it.

    The differences aren't subtle. I find both units very useful. I think in terms of flexibility, the '69 has a bit more. In terms of tone, I really like the '69 (I really, really like the OCL-2 as well...but in different applications, at different times.

    I'd love to give you a definitive answer, but I'd be full of $*^t if I did and I try to avoid that whenever possible. The best thing to do will be to try them both, and see which works best for your style of working, for your music...obviously, the '69 works best for me most of the time because it was built for me/my uses.

    Sorry, I just can't come up with a better answer than that.
  8. osmuir

    osmuir Guest

    fair enough. thanks fletcher.

Share This Page