Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[trebor_zaid]

Hello, well I finally got a board (hopefully, we are working out the shipping) and it's a PM-1000, 16 channel version. Are these boards modable? Will it need to be recapped? What does that entail as far as this board goes? SHould I just leave board as is? This is my first "vintage" console so any help would be cool. Thanks

[Phil]

I've done some mods to mine -- mostly to make it more comvemient to use as a recording console. It's about to undergo some more drastic modification, but the details are probably too cumbersome to list on the forum. PM if you're interested, or if you just have questions, I'll try to answer here.

Phil

[Scott Helmke (Scodiddly)]

It's fairly easy to add direct outs to each channel, which is probably the big thing you'd want.  

Some people like to just take out the input modules and rack-mount them as mic preamps.  There are also EQ mods (mostly just shifting the EQ frequencies) and such.

[josh]

FWIW regarding direct outs, I find that the line amp (final gain stage at the fader) and the output transformer both add a lot to the color of the console.  The most obvious way to add direct outs is from the pan pot, which is post-fader-amp and also pre-output-tranny (obviously since the output tranny in a stock console is in one of the master/group channels).  This is not the way a normal console would have an insert ...  if you want an insert the obvious place to put it is at the input to the fader amp, but you'll be shortchanging yourself on tone IMHO.

If you are not going to need more than four direct outs at a time, then I wouldn't modify it for direct outs, just use the output busses.  If you are going to need more than 4 direct outs, you can hijack the output transformers from the talkback channel, the echo sends, the monitor sends and get three or four direct outs, I would just hardwire three or four channels for direct out and leave the rest stock ...  so you'd have say channels 1-4 direct out, the rest bussed, for a total of 8 direct outputs.  The 1-4 "hardwire direct" would be louder and sound different since they lack summing and make-up gain stage (they'd be less colored).

If you really hunt through the board and scavenge every output tranny, I think there are like 15 output transformers in the console, so you could wire direct outs for nearly every channel but that's a LOT of work and basically you end up with a lot of useless master/monitor channels etc.

I wouldn't mod the EQs if it were me.  They work fine the way they are and they are designed to work that way.  However I did a fair amount of work determining exactly how you would mod them if you want to...  You can access that on my PM1000 project page:
http://www.krashjones.com/pm1000/

[trebor_zaid]

There is a set of Line A-Out and Line B-Out XLR jacks in the back. Each has 4 outs. Signal is derived from Master Faders. Can I not mod these or use these for my outs? Thanks so much for your responses!!!

Also, what about recapping this beast? Will it need it?

[Phil]

trebor_zaid wrote on Thu, 15 September 2005 07:45

There is a set of Line A-Out and Line B-Out XLR jacks in the back. Each has 4 outs. Signal is derived from Master Faders. Can I not mod these or use these for my outs? Thanks so much for your responses!!! Also, what about recapping this beast? Will it need it?

The Line A and Line B outputs are each transformer isolated, and are parallel outputs from the associated master. I suppose you could disconnect the Line B transformer, for example, and drive it from something else, but it will be tricky. In fact, almost everything you do to modify this board will be tricky due to the way the module connector board is wired. You can quickly find yourself with a rat's nest of pigtail connectors from each module if you don't plan very carefully. Study the schematic in detail before attempting any mods, and familiarize yourself with the levels from stage to stage.

Although the board has an impressive monitor matrix built-in, you'll find that there is no simple one-knob way of adjusting control room monitor levels. Also, as supplied, the talkback mic doesn't dim the control room monitors. That may or may not be important to you. There is also a simple mod that uses one echo send as an aux headphone feed to the cue buttons on the headphone amp; a mod that I found most helpful. That also frees up the cue circuit to be used as a solo button, which the PM-1000 sorely needs.

Recapping is all the rage these days. If you think it needs it, do it. If not, don't.

Phil

[Scott Helmke (Scodiddly)]

Speaking of internal connectors... I've only just been working on a single input module for a friend, but it looks like only one side of the multipin buss connector is being used.  Am I nuts, or are there a bunch of available pins?

[Phil]

Scott Helmke wrote on Fri, 16 September 2005 04:07

Speaking of internal connectors... I've only just been working on a single input module for a friend, but it looks like only one side of the multipin buss connector is being used.  Am I nuts, or are there a bunch of available pins?

There are available pins on the male connectors on the modules, but the the female connector board assembly in the console frame has each horizontal pair of pins tied together. In order to take advantage of the 'available pins', the female connector assembly would have to be removed (or at least loosened), traces cut, and jumper wires soldered. Mucho work involved. Of course, if the module is out of the frame, and you have no intention of using it in a PM-1000 frame, then yes, the pins are available.

Phil

[trebor_zaid]

So what the hell? How in the world did they record with this thing back in the 70's? Or was this more of a live board or PA? Since modding it was a pain in the arss, how did they use this board in studio?

[Phil]

trebor_zaid wrote on Fri, 16 September 2005 14:11

So what the hell? How in the world did they record with this thing back in the 70's? Or was this more of a live board or PA? Since modding it was a pain in the arss, how did they use this board in studio?

These were primarily sound reinforcement or PA, boards back in the 70's, and that's one of the reasons for the monitor matrix above each master. However, they're built so well you would swear they could take a direct hit from heavy munitions. They also sound good, and, in my opinion, it's worth the small amount of effort it takes to make them a good recording console.

You can solve the monitoring volume problem fairly easily. Get a small mixer to sum the four outputs together, and use that as a gain control for the control room speakers. I took another route, and built a passive gain knob using a ganged potentiometer. I also inserted a six position rotary switch ahead of the pot so I could switch to other inputs, if I so desired. Minimal cost, and no active circuitry added to the monitoring chain.

I was happy with the performance of the PM-1000 amplifier stages, and saw no need to modify them. I still don't, but everyone is different. I spent my effort into re-routing some signal flow, and building a sidecar to handle extra inputs and efx returns. The next time-consuming project (for me) is individual on/off switches for each channel's phantom power. Not hard to do -- just a lot of holes to be drilled and switches to be wired. Oh, and of course one simply must install yellow LED's as phantom power indicators on each channel.

Another easy mod is moving the power supply out of the frame and mounting it underneath, fastened to the pedestal, away from the audio. Power supply noise is not really a problem, but moving it opens up a lot of room inside the board's frame for all sorts of fun and games.

Phil

[hargerst]

trebor_zaid wrote on Fri, 16 September 2005 16:11

So what the hell? How in the world did they record with this thing back in the 70's? Or was this more of a live board or PA? Since modding it was a pain in the arss, how did they use this board in studio?

Like the Tascam Model 10, you were really limited to four tracks of recording back then.  You had 4 channel recorders and that was pretty much it.  The big multi-tracks were still in the future.

[trebor_zaid]

Hey guys, thanks so much for your advice. I am think I am going to take this monstousity to a pro. music shop and have what I need done to it,...done. Outs on every channel and "see" if it needs re-capping. If any other advice can be offered, I would greatly appreciate it. There are a couple of vintage music/workshops here in Memphis where reside.

I will denitely try the power supply mod myself. I "think" I can handle that   !

Oh   , I have 2 more questions. Is phantom power needed "per" channel, or can I fly with out "per" channel? AND, I am buying a PM-400b from Ebay as a sub-mixer for toms and mix down. In the PM-1000 manual I have, it shows how to use a PM-400 with your PM-1000 connection/signal flow wise. And for $50, it's worth a try to get the PM-400.

How can I best utilize the PM-400 sub-mixer w/ the PM-1000?

thanks again.
r

[Phil]

trebor_zaid wrote on Sat, 17 September 2005 18:16

Hey guys, thanks so much for your advice. I am think I am going to take this monstousity to a pro. music shop and have what I need done to it,...done. Outs on every channel and "see" if it needs re-capping. If any other advice can be offered, I would greatly appreciate it. There are a couple of vintage music/workshops here in Memphis where reside.

They will probably suggest taking the directs from the coupling capacitor just before the pan circuit, and that's a good spot. You'll have adequate level there. Think about making the directs as a send/recieve TRS insert connection. The inserts on the master channels operate at -20db, and are just about useless. There's not a lot of extra space on the back panel, but if you use TRS 1/4 inch jacks, it is do-able. I brought a pigtail out just above the banana jack on the rear of my modules, and plugged them into a sub-connector strip that connects to the TRS jacks on the rear panel. That way, the modules can be unplugged and removed completely from the console. There may be a better way, but that was the best one I could think of.

Quote:

I will denitely try the power supply mod myself. I "think" I can handle that   !

Yeah, that one is cake for sure. If you'll use a hole saw and cut a hole in the bottom of the wood frame, Yamaha left enough cable for you to feed through the hole and plug it in to the power supply below -- no extra wiring needed.

Quote:

Oh   , I have 2 more questions. Is phantom power needed "per" channel, or can I fly with out "per" channel?

You already have phantom on every channel. On mine, I just wanted a way to disable the phantom on individual channels so the input transformer primary could be floating. I sometimes will use some T-power Sennheisers, ribbons, and condensers, and I'm just more comfortable with providing a 'friendly' input for the various mics to work into. Additionally, a floating primary could be safely grounded on one side if it was necessary to plug in an unbalanced or electronically balanced signal source.

Quote:

AND, I am buying a PM-400b from Ebay as a sub-mixer for toms and mix down. In the PM-1000 manual I have, it shows how to use a PM-400 with your PM-1000 connection/signal flow wise. And for $50, it's worth a try to get the PM-400. How can I best utilize the PM-400 sub-mixer w/ the PM-1000?

Unless I misunderstand your question, that should be a simple plug and play using the sub inputs. Be aware that the sub ins are -20db, so be careful not to overload them.

Phil

[trebor_zaid]

Yes, thanks for the reply. I wanted to know also how best to use the sub? Toms, vocals, horn sections, etc? Or is the sub-mixer good mainly for just mix down or monitoring?

[antiguru]

are all of the old PM series mixers of the same general quality as the pm-1000?  I have the chance to grab some PM-4000 channel strips and am wondering if it's worth my time.

  thanks!

[josh]

No, they're not all the same.

PM1000 had discrete (almost)Class A topology.

PM2000 (successor, obviously, to the PM1000) had op amps, but is still reported to sound good, nearly like a PM1000.  I suspect it's the transformers.  I'm not that much of a believer in discrete-class-A-is-the-only-way ...  I've heard some great sounding op amps!

And everything goes down hill from there.  How far down hill and the slope of the hill, I dunno for sure.

[Scott Helmke (Scodiddly)]

I don't think I'd turn my nose up at some PM-4000 modules.  That's still a viable console for national-level live shows.

[trebor_zaid]

What other modules are good? I am looking for some outboards also, and some lunch boxed modules would suit me most bueno! Any modules that came out in the 80's that would be worth hunting down and boxing?

[Frob]

what about the predecessors to the pm1000 like the pm700? any good?

[bounce]

My understanding is that only the PM1000 and PM2000 have the Neve-esque preamp gain block design.

mckay

[hargerst]

Frob wrote on Wed, 28 September 2005 19:00

what about the predecessors to the pm1000 like the pm700? any good?

The PM1000 was the first console Yamaha introduced.

[Frob]

ive seen a pm700 does any one know about the <1000 series?

[josh]

I don't know how anyone would call PM-1000 or PM-2000 "Neve-esque", at least not in terms of tone, or circuit design.  In fact the PM-1000 and PM-2000 have so little in common it's hard to even talk about them being similar except maybe for subjective tone.

The PM-1000 is rather different than Neve designs in a number of ways.  The PM-2000 is a whole lot less similar to classic Neve stuff (1272, 1073) than is the dissimilar PM-1000.

I think the reason people called this "Japa-Neve" is because it was a high-quality Japanese console, not necessarily to equate it to a Neve other than to identify that it is of similar sound quality, while not similar in sound character.  Most of the color of the PM-1000 likely comes from the transformers, and most of what people hear similar from PM1000, PM2000 and Neve console channels is the characteristic transformer-preamp sound.  IMHO anyway.  I bet I could take a TL-072 op amp and breadboard it into a databook reference design for 60dB of variable gain with nothing more exotic than standard polyester capacitors, tack an old Yamaha PM-series transformer on the input and output and most AEs would instantly compare it with a Neve.  If I added phantom power, an EQ stage, a clip LED and a VU meter, put it in an expensive extruded aluminum rack chassis, I bet I could sell them for $1k/each.  Of course if I was really smart and enterprising, I would make a pair of these with no controls whatsoever, only an output transformer, and a bunch of resistors on the front end connected to 24 input jacks and call it a "summing bus" and sell it for $5K.

FWIW I don't think PM-700 was a modular console.  That's a 4-channel behemoth if I recall correctly.  Well I can't exactly recall, I wasn't born by the time it was out.  But I have read the schematic.  4-channel or 8-channel, but fixed one way or the other, not modular like PM-1000 or PM-2000.  My guess is it has transformers in and out and discrete transistor topology like a PM-1000, but you can easily verify this by downloading the schematics from Yamaha and evaluate it yourself.  If it has transformers then it'd be worth getting just to steal the iron.

[NelsonL]

Frob wrote on Wed, 28 September 2005 17:00

what about the predecessors to the pm1000 like the pm700? any good?

I'm not a tech, far from it, but here;s what I've learned in researching this subject over the last few years.

The PM 700 and 430 have the same design-- just more channels on the 700 I believe, could be wrong. The 430 is not a modular design-- can't speak towards the 700 in that regard.

The preamps aren't discrete and would supposedly benefit from an IC upgrade, but they won't be drop in replacements so it's a little tricky. There are smallish input transformers on each pre-- it's a 8x2 design so there are 2 decent looking output transformers  

The line amps in the 430 and 700 are discrete. These things are full of Yamaha's potted opamps-- I've read that they're API 2520 compatible which means they're would be a lot of replacement options.

As for how it sounds, I have a 430 that has potential-- it's been a while but I remember it sounding kind of muddy--       definitely not sterile though. Right now it needs to be cleaned up and recapped and I don't know if I'll ever get around to it.

Hope that's useful

Liam

[luckybastard]

you guys talking about these pm1000's have gotten me really curious. how hard would it be to put a power supply on a few modules and put it in a lunchbox. the only experience in electrical stuff i have is with building my tube hamptone from a kit. i do have people around who could do it though. if i had modules, what else would i need to complete a project like this...

[Phil]

luckybastard wrote on Thu, 29 September 2005 13:05

if i had modules, what else would i need to complete a project like this...

Money and transformers.

I've always wondered -- what do you guys who lunchbox the PM-1000 modules do with the fader assembly you saw off? Also the wood frame? They seem like good parts, and it seems a shame to simply toss them.

[Scott Helmke (Scodiddly)]

It's not especially hard - I'm doing a pair right now for a local guy.  You mainly need a power supply (44v) and a box.  Output transformers are nice, but not strictly necessary.

You can get the manual (including schematics) from Yamaha with a bit of searching.  And the modules are pretty easy to work on, since just about every interesting signal goes to the pot or whatever with actual wire, instead of the pots being integrated into the circuit board.  So it's easy to grab outputs, swap the fader for one of the echo-send pots, etc.