x
pcrecord 2 December 2014

Hi there,

I sold a couple of things on eBay and I'll get around 1k available by the end of the month
Many of you know about my setup :
1 Focusrite Liquid saffire 56
1 UA 4-710 (ADAT to the 56)
2 ISA Two (through the 4-710 converters)
1 UA LA-610 mk1 (Through a mytek AD96 converter to the 56)
1 dbx 576 which I want to replace. (to the AD96)

I thought a lot about a second used LA-610 mk1 which fits to my budget.
My idea is to have a pair of LA for either vocals, acoustic guitars, bass or any combinaison of those.

I could save a bit for a LA-610 mk2 but I feel having 2 mk1 is a better approach
Someday, I could even change the tubes of both units to make them a better match.

I was not about to buy gear without asking here if I'm on the wrong path..

You thoughts ?

Tags

Comments

anonymous Wed, 12/03/2014 - 04:11

I think you should follow your instincts, pal.

You know best what you want your workflow to be. You seem to really like the 610, and having a pair of them would allow you to process either multiple instruments/vox or strap them to a drums/bass or a backing vox submix, or even to the 2-Bus.

If you are happy with the 610 you have now, and you feel that a second one would benefit you, far be it for me to talk you out of it.

I guess I would ask how you are sitting mic-wise. Are you happy with your current mic locker? Or do you feel that you need something else to round it out?

Boswell Wed, 12/03/2014 - 04:57

DonnyThompson, post: 421743, member: 46114 wrote: You seem to really like the 610, and having a pair of them would allow you to process either multiple instruments/vox or strap them to a drums/bass or a backing vox submix, or even to the 2-Bus.

A second LA-610 would be nice, and for variety, you could go for the Mk II, particularly if you wanted to use it for lower-output microphones, since the noise levels are significantly less than the Mk I.

However, if you had thoughts about getting another Mk I in the hope that you could have a pair of them working together (e.g. on the 2-bus), then you would need stereo linking facilities which the 610 does not have. This is quite apart from the difficulty of being able to match the compression characteristics of a new unit to your existing one.

pcrecord Wed, 12/03/2014 - 05:22

Thanks Donny, I try to have at least a pair of everything. The LA-610 is my best preamp and a pair will be used often, that's for sure ;)

As for mics :
2 ksm44, 1 ksm32, 2 Cascade Fat Head Ribbon
4 akg c1000s, 1 c2000b, Akg drum kit with 4 c418, D112
1 Sennheiser E602, 2 E835, 2 sm57, 1 MD421, 1 Studio project C1

At some point I'll be looking for a couple more vocal mic (a tl103 and/or some tube mic)
But I'm not badly served for now.

pcrecord Wed, 12/03/2014 - 08:58

Boswell, post: 421744, member: 29034 wrote: about getting another Mk I in the hope that you could have a pair of them working together (e.g. on the 2-bus), then you would need stereo linking facilities which the 610 does not have.

I'm aware of the advantages of the MK2 and that's why I created this thread just to shake my decision. With lower-output microphones like ribbons, I actually use the ISAs preamp which gives me more than enough power but of course it could be nice to have a different preamp option...
Using it on the 2-bus wasn't my intention but I can't say I won't re-amp a bass or another instrument at some point. I've tried to process a mix with 2 channels on the 4-710 once and I know very well, it's hard to match the gain and comp on a L/R signal...
By having a second mk1, my intention is mainly for tracking and my idea was to have the closest match as possible for stereo tracking X/Y or Mid/Side or Blumlein.
I guess the sound of both units will be similar. I mean I doubt the difference will throw me off my chair. Am I wrong ? ;)
Any of you compared both ?

Boswell Wed, 12/03/2014 - 09:37

My point was that the LA-610 does not have any facility for stereo linking, so although you can use them as pre-amps, you cannot use the compressor section of a pair of them on a stereo signal of any sort (X-Y pair, M-S pair, 2-bus mix etc) no matter how closely matched their individual compressor characteristics happen to be. If you are happy to get another LA-610 Mk I and use it together with your present unit purely as pre-amps for a stereo-generating mic pair, then that's great, and you should be able to enjoy their lovely sound in stereo.

I've been at sessions where there was an X-Y pair of AKG C414s going through LA-610 pre-amps, but I've never heard mics in M-S configuration through them, so there's a degree of envy going on here. One advantage of M-S usage is that it's much less sensitive to differences between the M and S channel pre-amps, but I'm not sure I would extend that to using a Mk I as one channel and a Mk II in the other, although it's a thought.

pcrecord Wed, 12/03/2014 - 10:31

Boswell, post: 421749, member: 29034 wrote: My point was that the LA-610 does not have any facility for stereo linking, so although you can use them as pre-amps, you cannot use the compressor section of a pair of them on a stereo signal of any sort (X-Y pair, M-S pair, 2-bus mix etc)

Very True ! In those cases, I would need to bypass the comp or put the peak reduction to zero. Thanks for reminding me. ;)

I will certainly make some tests and post a few here

Tommy osuna Sun, 12/07/2014 - 21:16

I have the 610 love it also for that cool mojo I also got the Pacifica by a designs which I have been using a lot lately . I have to say there two different animals . I also like that it's a single space with 2 pre amps in it

I realize you would have to save a bit more but I think It would be worth the wait

They have the punch that the 1073'3 have with a real cool high end that's for lack of tech terms very focused

Cool love cool gear (:

kmetal Sun, 12/07/2014 - 22:59

Maybe a Manley tube mono. It's nice it's clean, but analog clean, and still has some thicker lower mid tube vibe. I think you'd find it a lot more versatile than the 610, and of somewhat of a different nature. If u can get your hands on an older one better. I've paired it w 414s on vocals and 57s on dirty organ keys, and it's is a killer killer di for clean and electronic type stuff. Expensive but A different animal than the 6-10, and if u saved a couple hundred more u could probably get one.

audiokid Sun, 12/14/2014 - 11:32

Joel, generally speaking.

How have VU's been holding up and/or what are you seeing as weakness in available parts and supplies?

I had two VU's go on me within a few months, then 2 pots on the 1176's. UA is excellent, all where covered on warranty but I do hear that its getting harder to get stuff and also quality control.

Sort of related in regards to parts. RODE Mic has the world most sophisticated manufacturing plant now. They build precision parts for a lot of companies we may be surprised to know, that I doubt we will even know about ;)

Gette Sun, 12/14/2014 - 14:12

audiokid, post: 422264, member: 1 wrote: How have VU's been holding up and/or what are you seeing as weakness in available parts and supplies?

We have seen a trend in meter failures across many brands, especially the ones using the once trusted and famed Sifam meters. Sifam moved production of their meters outside of the UK (India/china). Down side, is quality and reliability has gone down, but so has the cost of them.... Currently, I have not seen any availability of true "High-end" analog meters. Unless you purchase New old stock Sifam. If any one knows of a brand or solution, please do share....

audiokid, post: 422264, member: 1 wrote: I had two VU's go on me within a few months, then 2 pots on the [="http://www.uaudio.com/hardware/compressors/1176ln.html"]1176[/]="http://www.uaudio.c…"]1176[/]'s. [[url=http://="http://www.uaudio.c…"]UA[/]="http://www.uaudio.c…"]UA[/] is excellent, all where covered on warranty but I do hear that its getting harder to get stuff and also quality control.

POTS, This is a topic of great debate (explain in a moment) and arguably one of the most common areas, were compromises in quality are taken to lower costs of manufacturing.

Carbon pots were used in the original designs of the 1176, so in this case, it may be an effort to retain the original "sound" of the classic.
Carbon is also used in the 610.

The short version of the deferences: Carbon is cheap, in most cases below a buck a piece. They require maintenance in the form of cleaning and ultimately will have to be replaced at some point. Conductive plastic (also used in high end faders such as the P&G's used on large format consoles) Are very expensive, usually sealed,requiring low maintenance. Unlike carbon, were replacement is inedible, the life cycle of CP's are huge (I have seen them above a million cycles! Imagine someone turning a pot or sliding a fader that many times! :D) Conductive plastic can, in cases, outlast the gear it was installed in.

My P&G 3000 faders (Conductive Plastic) on my 34 year old console, are in excellent shape..... Just needed to clean them and check the wipers....

To help show cost, Using my console as an example. The gain and Q pot on the Amek is a dual Concentric (22K/220K) pot. (one of the most expensive configurations, well of course...)

The originals are carbon and did clean up well, but will need replacement in the next few years.
Carbon versions are $8.40 each or in higher quantities (100+) as low as 5.60 each
Custom Conductive plastic versions are $32.54 each or $22.12 in quantities of 100 or more. (if not required to order 10,000 pieces in order to even get them built)

Now if only one channel was needing replacement, $130.16 and the odds would be very likely I would never have to deal with them again. Now times that by 36..... See where it gets very pricey. BUT have the reliability and longevity, that for me, pays for itself. Cheaper to re-load with carbon, but might have to do it a few times, plus the hassle of dealing with it....

You will find CP pots (not just faders) in high-end consoles (Neve, SSL etc) So the cost is not so prohibitive that they are not used at this scale. Likewise, Rack gear that I have seen using CP's are Focusrite (ISA, Red) and Tube - Tech, there is more just not coming to mind.

audiokid, post: 422264, member: 1 wrote: Sort of related in regards to parts. [[url=http://[/URL]="http://rodemic.com/"]RODE[/]="http://rodemic.com/"]RODE[/] Mic has the world most sophisticated manufacturing plant now. They build precision parts for a lot of companies we may be surprised to know, that I doubt we will even know about

This does not surprise me.

pan60, post: 422272, member: 40762 wrote: Yes Gette, what did you do to it?

I re-tubed it and cleaned the Pots and switches.

kmetal Tue, 12/16/2014 - 03:01

audiokid, post: 422224, member: 1 wrote: Kyle, whats the difference between the DI on this and say a GR MP 2NV? Or, what is your interpretation to being killer to other DI's?
Thanks

I can't say how it compares to GR MP, which I imagine is real sweet Chris. The Carlecs (lol Carlecs, no auto correct, Calrecs-edit)don't have 1/4" ins, which would be closest to the Gr, I got access to. Compared to tech 21, svt (pro hybrid, not the beastly real thing), eurakas, little labs, art, 512c, and re amping boxes, all that kind of stuff. The Manley was the one that truly created a sense of reality and dimension to DI keys. It tends to lend the same tendencies to everything so, my comment was more just in general, it stood out as a DI, compared to the other usual fare I've used. Sonically it's like a thick low mid airy thing and a round top, it really just makes the keys sound a little less tame. Where the others were good, and do just fine, this ones the only one that ever stood out to me as exceptional. I wasn't looking for it to do that it was just a surprise one day. ;)

Congrats PC!!!!!!!!!

x

User login