Kurt Foster, post: 467658, member: 7836 wrote:
i'm going for a pair of the 121's.

I've owned a few of those. They rock too. You can't go wrong with Royer.

If you could swing a Mojave MA-1000 you would have a 251 ish that would complete it.

Davedog, post: 467659, member: 4495 wrote:
Japanese Neve. They're not kidding. It was clear and spacial and had a brown tinge to everything. It was really stoopid simple to dial up things. Guitars were crazy good through it. Drums too. I think your M508 may have the same preamps.

yep! both the 406 and the 508 ... same type of eqs too! i can't swear to it but i think i recall hearing somewhere the mid eq's are inductors.

audiokid, post: 467661, member: 1 wrote:
If you could swing a Mojave MA-1000 you would have a 251 ish that would complete it.

i've decided to forgo an 87 type mic. the 414's will have to cover that duty as well as any CK12 things.

if i change my mind i think i will opt for a mic parts S87. Dave's getting enough of my money with the 2 121's ... $2600. :eek:

but i am a firm believer that transducers are the most important part of an audio chain. so, i've decided to go with a few good mics instead of the WARM and GAP clones that are so interesting. but still, i really would like a chance to play with those things. for what i plan to spend on mics, i could get a silly sh*tload of mics and outboard from GAP / WARM.

audiokid, post: 467657, member: 1 wrote:
I owned the PM-1000 and loved it. It was simple and warm sounding.

Edited:
it's been a while since I even thought about the consoles I've owned. It was a Yamaha 1608 (not the PM-1000) that I owned. I used the 1608 on tour but when I was off the road tracked with it. It was really nice. Wish I still had that over the O3D that sounds like razor blades in comparison. The 1608 eqs and mic pres are warm and open sounding. Never the less... for the record I just had to correct my post here.

audiokid, post: 467664, member: 1 wrote:
Edited:
it's been a while since I even thought about the consoles I've owned. It was a Yamaha 1608 (not the PM-1000) that I owned. I used the 1608 on tour but when I was off the road tracked with it. It was really nice. Wish I still had that over the O3D that sounds like razor blades in comparison. The 1608 eqs and mic pres are warm and open sounding. Never the less... for the record I just had to correct my post here.

was it like this one?

Attached files

Kurt Foster, post: 467665, member: 7836 wrote:
was it like this one?

 

Yes.
I also remember how heavy it was. It was built like a tank.

pretty. cool too. i like the built in patch bay.

Kurt Foster, post: 467667, member: 7836 wrote:
pretty. cool too. i like the built in patch bay.

Actually I believe it might have been 4 into 2 with the bay but for sure it was the 1608.

looking at the owners manual for the RM1608. it's not the same guts as the M series. it's not transformer balanced and the input gain structure is very different. the eq are interesting looking. it sure is pretty though!

The 1608 I had was Neve-like sounding. So they say....
I am remembering comparing it it the old British Soundcraft. I much preferred the Yamaha 1608. But the soundscraft was gritty and rocking. More API-like.
two great old consoles in my day.

I must admit your thread is reminding me of great memories of how easy it all was back then. I’d love to have a nice vintage console now.

audiokid, post: 467671, member: 1 wrote:
I must admit You thread is reminding me of great memories of how easy it all was back then . I’d love to have a nice vintage console now.

even if i were going to record to DAW, i would look at a M406 for front end. it's not a console but more like a box pa head that can be rack mounted in 4 spaces. typically they are selling for $350 or so... that's 6 "Neveish" mic pres for dirt cheap. they can be found already modded too. i saw one a few months ago that had di's and phantom power swiches for the first two channels for dirt cheap, ..... like a buck and a half.

i like the minimalist approach. it emphasizes the need for talent and a good song. i only fear my ability to actually use the gear will be limited by my access to talented players and songwriters. that's going to be a far bigger challenge to surmount than assembling a decent recording system.

I still go round and round about having a console. I had a shot at an Amek Angela years back when I started Drool'nDogg but I thought the footprint might limit me too much so I bought a modded Ghost instead and captured on the HD24. But I'm really into the edits and the HD24 wasn't an edit friendly system. That's when PT started for me. I got an 003 surface and a Toft 8 channel as a side car to go with all the outboard I was collecting. Still not quite fitting my needs although I made a few records with that rig. Enter PTHD10 and now I'm home. For me. I am as old school as anyone but my clientele doesnt make it worth ringing out a take with zero mistakes. It's expensive for them and with the advent of editing as they all can access info about, you can't keep telling them to do it again while trying to answer the question, "Cant we just fix it?" Now its all about getting the best energy and emotion out of a take with as few mistakes as possible and fix and repair if needed. It's really unbelievable what you can do with comping a guitar lead out of 4 or 5 passes.

Now I have control surfaces. Big Mice!. And a rack full of different voices of preamps to go with the transducer choices I have made based on the old school thought of "Mic don't lie"....

But "IF' I had the room and choice, I would be rocking a Harrison 3232 or a Helios. Those are the noises in my head from my school days.

The input is where the flavor comes from off the floor. Mic choice and placement> preamp flavor and speed> control of signal> capture....and then to get more modern...recall-ability a tool we didn't have in the old days except in the really high-end rooms. Even then all those passes over the heads with tape meant something was going to sound different....perhaps day to day.

Davedog, post: 467673, member: 4495 wrote:
It's really unbelievable what you can do with comping a guitar lead out of 4 or 5 passes.

oh yeah, i know. i've taken some real gherm parts and made them sound brilliant. it's disheartening .... :sick:

Davedog, post: 467673, member: 4495 wrote:
I am as old school as anyone but my clientele doesnt make it worth ringing out a take with zero mistakes. It's expensive for them .....

"I. R. Producer" so it's going to be a private studio. i'm not going to have any clientele. my plan is to find good songs, record them with the best group of musicians and singers i can find and then try to find a way to monetize the recordings or songs. i will be footing the bill, including paying the musicians for the sessions. i plan on doing it like it was done in the 60's. a group of musicians working up an arrangement and recording it live off the floor. not sure i can pull it off though, the talent pool in my zip code is pretty shallow .....

The console that interests me the most is the Harrison thats fully automate able. I forget the model maybe 10c? But if i understand correctly all the settings are instantly recallable, every knob and fader. Its digtally controlled but a fully analog signal path.

Given the price of these yamaha mixers they seem like a great option for people looking to add pres/eq to their system. For thr cost of an ART or warm pre, maybe less, you get more channela, xformers in your pres, and eq, which seems to be a lost art in modern recording. Eq on the way in can cut down 50% of pluggin eq easily, just for things like hpf lpf ect.

My gripe with mixers is their intrusion on the sweet spot. Normandy's control room never sounded better than when it was empty.

I hate banking around on control surfaces. It becomes cumbersome to try and read the tiny scribble strip at the top (why never at the bottom where the masking tape would go?), so they work for me best when the channel count on the surface is about equal to the track count, or double so you can bank just once. Pluggin control is never intuitive on them either. I miss the speed knob on the novation nocturn.

I think the ability to only move a single fader at a time is the worst feature of mouse mixing.

To me a 4ch control surface would be great. Snap to the track with a single click on my right hand, four faders on my fingers for the left hand.

Ive never had to recall large sessions but it seems really annoying to me. My new place will be set and forget and digtally controlled analog stuff. Just rambling.

Kurt anything special for a di box? There's some pretty neat options out there.

What about monitors?

kmetal, post: 467675, member: 37533 wrote:
I hate banking around on control surfaces. It becomes cumbersome to try and read the tiny scribble strip at the top (why never at the bottom where the masking tape would go?), so they work for me best when the channel count on the surface is about equal to the track count, or double so you can bank just once. Pluggin control is never intuitive on them either. I miss the speed knob on the novation nocturn.

Kyle....This is where the old-school thought process can be a help. I plan my sections @ mixdown and put my tracks in partitions where I can snape to them if needed. However, my method at mix is to already have automated all the faders that are simply static or maybe ducked at some point and put the hand mixed stuff together. I use an Artist Mix and an Artist Control so I have 12 faders at all times.

kmetal, post: 467675, member: 37533 wrote:
Kurt anything special for a di box? There's some pretty neat options out there.

What about monitors? My gripe with mixers is their intrusion on the sweet spot. Normandy's control room never sounded better than when it was empty.

i think i'll just get some transformer based passive DI's.

for monitors my plan is, IK Multimedia iLoud MTM monitors and a pair of the CLA NS10's.

i can't change my stripes.

the control area is going to be pure sh*t. i doubt i could do anything to make it worse. my answer is to use the NS10's and mix to the mids letting the low end take care of it's self.

Davedog, post: 467676, member: 4495 wrote:
Kyle....This is where the old-school thought process can be a help. I plan my sections @ mixdown and put my tracks in partitions where I can snape to them if needed. However, my method at mix is to already have automated all the faders that are simply static or maybe ducked at some point and put the hand mixed stuff together. I use an Artist Mix and an Artist Control so I have 12 faders at all times.

Im having trouble seeing what you mean by hand mixed vs automated stuff. Could you elaborate a bit more if you get a sec?

Normandy had 48ch mackie mcu which was cool (tho they were a bit flaky). Triad had only 8 ch and it was "okay" but really best for final automation, to clunky for general level setting/adjusting thru the whole mix.

I used to think the artist mix was ridiculous with just 4 faders but it seems much more sensible to me at this point.

I feel like so much will get done with samps object based editing that the faders will mainly be for quick access during mix like muting or watever, and final touches.

Kurt Foster, post: 467687, member: 7836 wrote:
i think i'll just get some transformer based passive DI's.

for monitors my plan is, IK Multimedia iLoud MTM monitors and perhaps a pair of the CLA NS10's.

i can't change my stripes.

Cool. Ive heard good things about those IK speakers. Would love to hear what you think about the CLAs if you end up with them.

kmetal, post: 467688, member: 37533 wrote:
Im having trouble seeing what you mean by hand mixed vs automated stuff. Could you elaborate a bit more if you get a sec?

When I print a mix, I print inside the session in real time. Therefore all my faders are considered "live" at any point during the pass. On some material I like to manipulate particular instruments by hand as it gives it more of a real feel. When I do a couple of these (saving as) then I'll find the feel I want and then turn the automation on for those tracks so it remembers that pass. Then I live with it for a while and if I like it and the client likes it it goes to Mastering.

kmetal, post: 467688, member: 37533 wrote:
I feel like so much will get done with samps object based editing that the faders will mainly be for quick access during mix like muting or watever, and final touches.

Well, yes, and also yes but having access to these at any time in setting a mix is essential to dialing it in for it's time stamp. We mix for a moment in time. Don't you think? We'll never pass this way again is apropos.

Kurt Foster, post: 467687, member: 7836 wrote:
i think i'll just get some transformer based passive DI's.

for monitors my plan is, IK Multimedia iLoud MTM monitors and perhaps a pair of the CLA NS10's.

i can't change my stripes.

i NEVER recommend monitors any longer. Ever. What someone hears as opposed to what I hear is totally dependent on environment for one and totally dependent on their hearing as opposed to mine.

I too, have heard good things about the iK monitors. I love their plug-ins and have their catalog and use it often.

Avantone has always been a surprising company since I first bought a couple of their mics when the first started up. Their quality control has always been top notch.

I almost bought the CLA 200 power amp when my amp went down earlier this year. I use a heavily modified Parasound so it was a great challenge for my tech guy to fix it. Thank goodness he looks forward to these kind of challenges! I get it back next week which helps tremendously as I have a new project going forward. And his repair wound up being cheaper than a new power amp. The temp amp is great, (Crown D75) just not enough grunt when I want things loud. Plenty of clear mids and highs though!! I did some recording back in the day at a place that had Urie 815 soffits and they were tri-amped with crown. D75 on the upper mids and tweets.

Another suggestion I have is to get yourself a small 500 series rack and populate it with some pres that will give you a different color than the Yammies as well as provide some slots for a compressor or two. The 500 form has come a long way since it first came about and now its a very high quality and space efficient way to get noises into the patch bay.

I can recommend the Radial Workhorse Sixpack which you can find used for under 400. Really good rail voltages and tank built construction.

You can add API pres/comps/EQs.....The Burl preamps are genuine! My tech John McAllister builds a mic pre that is gorgeous sounding for under 800. Hairball Audio makes the BEST DIY or they build it 1176 circuits available. Blue/Red/RevA in full racks and also in 500's. I have a Bluey. It kills and is authentic. My studio guru has the blue stripe in a full rack. Also unbelievable.

You can get a lot of bang for the buck in a small space with a 500 rack. I have some seriously sweet comps in my big 11 space rack. One of the best is the Grace m502. Electro-optical. Smoother than an LA3A and not the same at the same time.

With the 6 pack you could get a couple of real Neve preamps. Or some clone. The Avedis is really in the Neve ballpark. I have two in consecutive serial numbers.

I guess I'm just suggesting to not be married to the single noise of the Yammie pres. They are great and your skill level should be benefitted by a larger palette of colors.

Davedog, post: 467693, member: 4495 wrote:
The Burl preamps are genuine!

i'm a BIG fan of BURL. the guy who builds them used to run a competing studio in the SF area back in the day called Lumberjack. i think he lives in Cottage Grove now.

if i were going to get more preamps / inputs ...... i would probably pick up an old an AMPEX mic mixer. remember i will only have 8 tracks and 4 buss's. the ablity to sub mix inputs would be a bonus.
most of the records i love were done with only one type of pre. i have never thought it was necessary to have a palette of pres. one good type of preamp is good enough for me.

Davedog, post: 467693, member: 4495 wrote:
I have some seriously sweet comps in my big 11 space rack. One of the best is the Grace m502. Electro-optical. Smoother than an LA3A and not the same at the same time.

fwiw i love LA3's. desert island comps imo. and since i am going to tape, the need for compression is less that when going to a digital recorder. just the act of recording to tape provides a lot of gain reduction. ever notice how the old school studios in the 60's only had one or two limiters?

Kurt if you decide to go with a small 500 series rack my tech has a single Burl B1 he took in trade for some work. He's got no use for it. It'll be a very competitive price. I have two of em and they are "No Shit" sounding!!

Another piece for your thoughts might be the Serpent Chimera. LA3A in a 500 and great reviews. Its a piece that has been around for quite a while and the fact that theres almost ZERO used ones tells the story

i'm pretty settled on trying out the GAP LA3 Jr.'s. i think i will get one to try them out and if i like, get more. Marco has a pair of the full size GAP 3a's and he says he loves them.

i might look for a vca based DBX kind of thing to augment the LA3 Jr's. but it's going to be a very simple rig. oddly enough i was looking at an old
BI - AMP quad limiter on E Bay. that brought back memories. :barefoot:

i'm already going into this for stupid silly amount of cash as it is. itrw, i could do everything i can do with this rig on a simple TASCAM 24, @ $1000. but i love tape and the way it goes down so i don't really see why i shouldn't go for it one more time.

for the last 15 years we have been trying to keep the house and estate intact in order to pass it on to my Wife's Son. but sadly, he just passed away and now we're left with no one we want to leave it to. ..... so we both have come to the conclusion to reverse mortgage the place and get off the fixed income month to month cycle. that means, a newer car, new roof and some house remodeling, a she shed for Mama ... a few toys for me. maybe a riding lawn mower ....lol! .... better than leaving it for the County to dispose of or worse yet leave it for Medicare to seize after they take us away. if there's nothing there, they won't bother us.

Kurt Foster, post: 467697, member: 7836 wrote:
i might look for a vca based DBX kind of thing to augment the LA3's. but it's going to be a simple rig. oddly enough i was looking at an old BI AMP quad limiter on E Bay. that brings back memories.

I remember those. You could boil a snare really quickly with them. DBX 160A.

Davedog, post: 467698, member: 4495 wrote:
I remember those. You could boil a snare really quickly with them. DBX 160A.

i cut my teeth on one (quad limiter). my first compressor back in my 4 track days.

thumbs up on the 160A.

another factor is i need to keep the number of pieces of equipment down because i don't want to get into an over elaborate patch panel. my past experiences have taught me that patch panels and cabling increase the cost of adding pieces exponentially. i'm trying to keep it down to 144 patch points.

i considered db25 / tt bantam panels but i still have a load of 1/4" trs cables from my last rig that i couldn't unload and i am compelled to use that. that way i'm only into the patching system for $350. i will just have to be sure to anchor / secure the cabling in the back of the rack.
 

Attached files

Ive witnessed the Medicare drain with an extended family member. Not good.

I was wondering if your going to need a mixdown tape machine too? And also if you have any plans or thoughts about mastering your stuff, and digitizing it for distribution.

To expand on Kyles post, have you found a tape machine/machines yet? Are you set on the 1/2" format for your 8 or are you also looking at the 1/4" 8 track machinery?

i love the form of the smaller machines but not the performance. at least in the multi track. i would love to get big tape ...1" and a 1/2" 2 track but i think it's going to be 1/2" 8 and a 1/4" half track. they seem to be the most robust format in terms of required maintenance. Audient ID14 to get a 2 mix into a computer ...... i'm looking for Otari 5050's.

on all these used pieces, i'm biding my time and waiting for clean examples to come up.

Just out of curiosity is it possible to get a 16track record head for 1/2" machine and/or a 4 or 8 track for the 1/4"? What about linking the machines, is that possible?

Just wondering about options with those machines.

I wish your studio was around when i was in mt last band. We scrapped the studio recordings we did cuz the vibe wasn't right (too generic) despite being "good recordings" technically. Ended up using my tascam 34 in the band practice basement and it fit much better. Woulda been nice to have more tracks and mics ect. I love the concept you have. As a player i hate headphones, and prefer live tracking especially for basics.

kmetal, post: 467710, member: 37533 wrote:
Just out of curiosity is it possible to get a 16track record head for 1/2" machine and/or a 4 or 8 track for the 1/4"? What about linking the machines, is that possible?

Just wondering about options with those machines.

I wish your studio was around when i was in mt last band. We scrapped the studio recordings we did cuz the vibe wasn't right (too generic) despite being "good recordings" technically. Ended up using my tascam 34 in the band practice basement and it fit much better. Woulda been nice to have more tracks and mics ect. I love the concept you have. As a player i hate headphones, and prefer live tracking especially for basics.

i wish it was too Kyle. it would have been fun.

they make 1/2" 16's and 1/4" 8's but they often lack high frequency performance. also, they are 2 head machines so they are pigs to calibrate and they really need noise reduction to achieve reasonable s/n performance. a good 1/2" 8 can be used sans any N/R in the right hands.

the little Fostex 1/2 tracks perform well but a lot of the parts are plastic. not very robust. they're great for songwriter studios where they aren't being beat day in and day out.

we do this thing called "wild syncing" or "flying in parts" to extend tracks. also we will have different elements at different places on the same track multed to different channels and then switch between the channels at the appropriate place in the mix. last, a lot of different parts must be pre mixed to the same tracks. you really learn to live with what's been recorded already and how to mix into pre exsisting tracks. a lot of people are surprised how much stuff we can get on 8 tracks.

i'm on the hunt for TASCAM 40 / 50 series or OTARI 5050 1/2" & 1/4" machines that run @ +4. i could go with a TASCAM 38 / 32 in a pinch but i would have to deal with stepping down the levels going to tape and they would wear out a lot faster.

My last 38 had a million hours on it and required a pinch roller in it's tune up. You could not kill the thing. I get the +4 performance level thing.

Just for fun I started looking online at machine prices. Shock. I wonder how long this trend will last? The prices on everything tape machine based have tripled in a year. Tripled.

Davedog, post: 467713, member: 4495 wrote:
My last 38 had a million hours on it and required a pinch roller in it's tune up. You could not kill the thing. I get the +4 performance level thing.

Just for fun I started looking online at machine prices. Shock. I wonder how long this trend will last? The prices on everything tape machine based have tripled in a year. Tripled.

yeah, a lot of people are getting really tired of doing music on computers.

if i had the room and a person who could handle the upkeep i'd invest in refurbed MARA machines. they're doing a 1" 8 track on a MCI JH 24.
shuwhheeet @30ips!

probably about the time i go and buy a used machine, some company will start making new ones. that would be about right.

You could get a CLASP system and only buy one reel of tape. But you'd still need a 'puter LOL

Davedog, post: 467715, member: 4495 wrote:
You could get a CLASP system and only buy one reel of tape. But you'd still need a 'puter LOL

mmmm .... yeah, not gonna happen. no daws. stereo files via USB only.

 
ummm, ....yeah ....

Attached files

kmetal, post: 467710, member: 37533 wrote:
Just out of curiosity is it possible to get a 16track record head for 1/2" machine and/or a 4 or 8 track for the 1/4"? What about linking the machines, is that possible?

You burn a track on both machines to link. And you better have a sync that doesnt drift. I did a lot of work in a friends studio that was a 38 tape machine and he had 6 sampling keyboards and electronic drums. All 80's and 90's stuff. We sync'd with SMPTE through a Fostex sempte generator/reader. We'd put all the tracks down and then sample some of them to clear space on the recorder and then when we were ready to mix we'd get it all lined up and burn to a masterlink ADAT.

38's won't sync chase.... Fostex machines do. you can lock midi / fsk / smpte to a 38 but you can't get a 38 to lock to anything. some of the bigger TASCAMS will chase to smpte.