R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => Brad Blackwood => Topic started by: Patrik T on January 15, 2011, 02:40:52 am

Title: For the HEDDs
Post by: Patrik T on January 15, 2011, 02:40:52 am
Simple question:

Have you found the processing options so valuable for your work, that you know your "grand total" outcome would be "less stellar" if you hadn't the HEDD available?


Best Regards
Patrik
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: lowland on January 15, 2011, 06:39:29 am
For me the HEDD is first and foremost a great set of converters, with digital processing as a useful extra.

I use the processing less and less as time goes by, at the moment it's on roughly 10% of material. I'm glad I have the processing, after all it can be useful to impart analogue-like mojo on all-digital chains, but if you took it away from me tomorrow it wouldn't be the end of the world. Not so the converters...
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: bblackwood on January 15, 2011, 08:02:22 am
It's rare for me to use the processing - I think I used it on one track in the last year - but the converters are why I have the box. Still haven't found an ADC I like better...
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: dietrich on January 15, 2011, 08:39:51 am
I am also very partial to the HEDD convertors. The processing options always depend on project. I never auto pop them in like when I first started using the hedd
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Allen Corneau on January 15, 2011, 09:09:28 am
I, too, use the HEDD for it's converters, however, I use the processing on probably 90% of the material I master. It may be just a little bit of only one process or all three.

I don't have as much outboard gear as a lot of other folks so the HEDD becomes a bigger part of getting "that sound", especially the "tape".
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Greg Reierson on January 15, 2011, 09:13:31 am
The converters sound great all the way to the top, which is not always the case. Almost never use the process. When I do it's a touch of Pentode.

GR
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Ed Littman on January 15, 2011, 11:19:25 am
Patrik T wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 02:40

Simple question:

Have you found the processing options so valuable for your work, that you know your "grand total" outcome would be "less stellar" if you hadn't the HEDD available?


Best Regards
Patrik


I try not to depend on any of my gear to that length. With that said, I do use the triode, pentode often & feed my chain with the DAC.

Ed
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: gertvanhoof on January 15, 2011, 01:27:49 pm
My unit primarily serves as a transfer A-D-A converter, but the processing does come in handy as a complement to EQ. Mostly Pentode and Tape flavours here, although the Tape algorithm chokes the top end when driven hard - just as a tape machine would Wink

Best regards,
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: jdg on January 15, 2011, 03:39:45 pm


i am the only person i know that dislikes the HEDD.

the version i had, the AD started distorting about -3dBFS.
below that, it did sound pretty good.

i also did not like the DAC.  
i had the DAC in the avocet as my DAC for a while, and was happy to see it go.

why am i so weird (please dont answer that)

but i did like the processing on the HEDD
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: bblackwood on January 15, 2011, 04:11:54 pm
jdg wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 14:39



i am the only person i know that dislikes the HEDD.

the version i had, the AD started distorting about -3dBFS.
below that, it did sound pretty good.

You should try another one, something was wrong with that one - the HEDD's ADC can get level like few other boxes (if you're so inclined)...
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Ed Littman on January 15, 2011, 04:25:41 pm
jdg wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 15:39



i am the only person i know that dislikes the HEDD.

the version i had, the AD started distorting about -3dBFS.
below that, it did sound pretty good.

i also did not like the DAC.  
i had the DAC in the avocet as my DAC for a while, and was happy to see it go.

why am i so weird (please dont answer that)

but i did like the processing on the HEDD


I have the current version of the hedd & I felt when the adc is hit hard it folded especially on heavy sustained guitars. Not as drastic as your experience but it prompted me to upgrade to a lavry gold. I do like the dac very much.

Brad...maybe mine has got trouble too.

John...you never sent me those cookies you kooky.

Ed
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: lowland on January 15, 2011, 04:38:37 pm
bblackwood wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 21:11

the HEDD's ADC can get level like few other boxes (if you're so inclined)...

I don't know many other boxes (haven't heard the Lavry Gold ADC, for example) but the HEDD does it for me in that department, to the point where I haven't so far felt a strong need to look around. Mind you, in the scheme of things my particular unit is sort of 'intermediate' in the development path, a few years old but with upgraded converters, and it's interesting that a couple of people seem to be saying that newer units didn't work for them - certainly I've had no sense of the ADC distorting at -3dBFS or otherwise folding.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Ed Littman on January 15, 2011, 04:45:40 pm
hummm....I should also rephrase my claim. ...not say hit hard but pushed cause on certain material like sustained distorted guitars would create artifacts before the adc was clipped.

Ed
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: dietrich on January 15, 2011, 05:24:27 pm
jdg wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 15:39



i am the only person i know that dislikes the HEDD.


why am i so weird (please dont answer that)





So maybe I would think the g14 sounds good too?
and that the 5500 is good with the op amps and the 550m's are overated? Cool
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: TotalSonic on January 15, 2011, 05:38:08 pm
Ed Littman wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 16:45

hummm....I should also rephrase my claim. ...not say hit hard but pushed cause on certain material like sustained distorted guitars would create artifacts before the adc was clipped.

Ed


Where as in my tests you can clip a good bit into Lavry Gold and Burl B2 even with sustained distorted guitars and still end up with music without noticeable crackling.  Have never used the HEDD though!  (thinking of a converter upgrade sometime later this year - but for some reason Cranesong has never been part of my shortlist as I really don't need the extra bells and whistles).

Best regards,
Steve Berson
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: TotalSonic on January 15, 2011, 05:40:07 pm
dietrich wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 17:24

jdg wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 15:39



i am the only person i know that dislikes the HEDD.


why am i so weird (please dont answer that)





So maybe I would think the g14 sounds good too?
and that the 5500 is good with the op amps and the 550m's are overated? Cool



You might (I'm very happy with my 5500 - although certainly don't use it on everything).  Got to agree with John that the Shadow Hills Mastering Comp is an ergonomic nightmare once you get over the initial cool steam punk look of it though.

Best regards,
Steve Berson
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Greg Reierson on January 15, 2011, 05:55:01 pm
lowland wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 15:38

my particular unit is sort of 'intermediate' in the development path, a few years old but with upgraded converters, and it's interesting that a couple of people seem to be saying that newer units didn't work for them - certainly I've had no sense of the ADC distorting at -3dBFS or otherwise folding.



I have an older upgraded unit too and it's very clean right up to the top and even a bit beyond. When it was in the shop I borrowed a Prism and found I couldn't get anywhere close to the same level. I have an analog meter running parallel with the input of the HEDD and it can take +2 easy, sometimes +3 or +4.

There are so many versions and revisions. Maybe I have the lucky combination.


GR
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: bblackwood on January 15, 2011, 05:59:34 pm
Greg Reierson wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 16:55

There are so many versions and revisions. Maybe I have the lucky combination.

I'm fairly certain the latest-greatest is v6, which is what I have here. Very, very good.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: jdg on January 15, 2011, 06:04:09 pm
Ed Littman wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 13:25



John...you never sent me those cookies you kooky.

Ed


i know!

i haven't sent out any... xmas was a nightmare with multiple sickness and travel.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: bigaudioblowhard on January 15, 2011, 06:08:21 pm
I will never get over the Nazi Submarine look of the SHMC, and its a dream to operate.
I don't even look at it. I keep my head up in the soundfield. Its laid out perfectly and I always know which controls I'm holding onto. Those big knobs and switches just feel so good and solid as I smoothly click...click...click 'em.

"Herr Capitain, fir limitschwein zulage!"

bab
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: bblackwood on January 15, 2011, 06:09:04 pm
bigaudioblowhard wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 17:08

I will never get over the Nazi Submarine look of the SHMC, and its a dream to operate.
I don't even look at it. I keep my head up in the soundfield. Its laid out perfectly and I always know which ones my hands are on. Those big knobs and switches just feel so good and solid as I smoothly click...click...click 'em.

"Herr Capitain, fir limitschwein zulage!"

bab

Was this intended for another thread or are you tired of talking about the HEDD?
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: bigaudioblowhard on January 15, 2011, 06:10:46 pm
I was trying to defend the SHMC against Steve's blood libel.

(am I going too far? please delete my OT remarks)

bab
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: bblackwood on January 15, 2011, 06:48:14 pm
bigaudioblowhard wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 17:10

I was trying to defend the SHMC against Steve's blood libel.

(am I going too far? please delete my OT remarks)

bab

Haha, no, I missed that reply earlier. Carry on!
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Allen Corneau on January 15, 2011, 07:11:31 pm
jdg wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 14:39


the version i had, the AD started distorting about -3dBFS.
below that, it did sound pretty good.



Do you remember if you were processing on the AD side or the DA side?

when I first got the HEDD I was processing on the AD side and found that it started to get a little crunchy if I pushed it too much. Now I use it o the DA side and it's much better.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: TotalSonic on January 15, 2011, 09:53:56 pm
bigaudioblowhard wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 18:08

I will never get over the Nazi Submarine look of the SHMC, and its a dream to operate.
I don't even look at it. I keep my head up in the soundfield. Its laid out perfectly and I always know which controls I'm holding onto. Those big knobs and switches just feel so good and solid as I smoothly click...click...click 'em.

"Herr Capitain, fir limitschwein zulage!"

bab


Mark -
Sorry to seemingly bad mouth your baby - but sounds to me like you've been watching "Das Boot" a bit too much.  Guess the Hebrew in me feels much more sympathy with something like the flashy British sports car finish of my Focusrite Blue more than say, "German submarine."

Anyway - to be much more fair about it my time spent with the SHMC has been very limited and just at a couple of AES's (which is obviously not a good place to make an evaluation beyond superficialities).  But after initially going ooh and aah at it's steam-punk vibe as soon as I started grabbing knobs and trying to get some sounds I felt pretty disoriented - it just didn't feel intuitive to me at all.  I kind of prefer things much more straight forward and without steeper learning curves (i.e. a reason why I rarely use things like the Flux Limiter either).  Coupled with longer wait times to get one, steeper pricing than I usually like (everything here is either 2nd hand or offers excellent bang for buck), along with occasional reports of problems with the build or obtaining quick service - has made me definitely shy away with it.  

Anyway - I was just noting that John - who has seemingly owned nearly every model of mastering comp at one point or another - had one for a while but then sold it (and seems to have ended up with the Maselec and Foote Designs comps instead).  However - if you are getting great use out of yours and in fact hold it dear then obviously other folks can end up with completely opposite opinions!!

And to everyone else -
Sorry for my small kidnap of this thread!

Best regards,
Steve Berson
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Alécio Costa - Brazil on January 15, 2011, 11:46:33 pm
Very happy with my Hedd since August, 2008.
I love Crane.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: lowland on January 16, 2011, 03:35:53 am
bblackwood wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 22:59

I'm fairly certain the latest-greatest is v6, which is what I have here. Very, very good.

So have you had more than one unit over time, Brad?
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: bblackwood on January 16, 2011, 07:18:28 am
lowland wrote on Sun, 16 January 2011 02:35

bblackwood wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 22:59

I'm fairly certain the latest-greatest is v6, which is what I have here. Very, very good.

So have you had more than one unit over time, Brad?

Sorta - I had one at Ardent (those were early HEDD converters, as I left Ardent in '03), but I've also had mine upgraded.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Viitalahde on January 16, 2011, 07:23:52 am
I love my HEDD. Great set of converters - and I liked the HEDD converters the least in the GS converter tests. Somehow I still manage to cope with them..

I do use the processing, just a touch of Pentode at times, or perhaps a touch of Tape. I think they're invaluable and have truly saved my ass a couple of times.

I recently found out mine is equipped with the latest set of converters after all, so no need to upgrade here.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: urm eric on January 16, 2011, 09:18:45 am
jdg wrote on Sat, 15 January 2011 14:39




i also did not like the DAC.  
i had the DAC in the avocet as my DAC for a while, and was happy to see it go.

why am i so weird (please dont answer that)



Not entirely weird - I hope! I had the Avocet for a while and though I didn't actively dislike it, I tended to use it only as an controller with an external dCS DAC. That dCS now feeds the analogue path and I use the very nice Crookwood DAC in the console for monitoring (and sometimes, for the hell of it, vice versa).

Cheers,
Eric
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: 24-96 Mastering on January 16, 2011, 10:23:45 am
bigaudioblowhard wrote on Sun, 16 January 2011 00:08



"Herr Capitain, fir limitschwein zulage!"



On behalf of all Germans, I object to this stereotypical portrayal, jawohl!



On the HEDD: I'm with jdg on the converters. When I compared, I thought them to be not handling transient peaks close at high levels in a way i cared for; I found it softens them a bit when approaching full scale. Maybe that's what people mean when they say the HEDD handles overs graciously?

The processing options I use a bit, maybe on 5% of projects; though very subtly (usually no higher than 1).

Schnitzel.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: lowland on January 16, 2011, 01:24:36 pm
Viitalahde wrote on Sun, 16 January 2011 12:23

I love my HEDD. Great set of converters - and I liked the HEDD converters the least in the GS converter tests. Somehow I still manage to cope with them..

That made me laugh! The HEDD never seems to do especially well in converter tests, but that doesn't matter a hoot to me in terms of everyday usage - the unit just has that certain something, and on the (mercifully brief) occasions when I had to soldier on without it I got withdrawal symptoms.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Bonati on January 18, 2011, 12:41:10 am
I just used the Hedd A/D for the first time in a while. My partner took our Prism AD-2 on a little trip for some archive transfer work. Hooked up the Hedd and used it on about 4-5 sessions in a row. Sounded great and didn't change the way I work at all. If the Prism has to leave again I won't be feeling handicapped.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Matt_G on January 22, 2011, 09:37:17 am
24-96 Mastering wrote on Mon, 17 January 2011 01:23



On the HEDD: I'm with jdg on the converters. When I compared, I thought them to be not handling transient peaks close at high levels in a way i cared for; I found it softens them a bit when approaching full scale. Maybe that's what people mean when they say the HEDD handles overs graciously?

The processing options I use a bit, maybe on 5% of projects; though very subtly (usually no higher than 1).


I'd agree with these comments whole heartedly. The HEDD 192 was my first set of converters, I had the D/A board upgraded but never bothered with the A/D. That aside, it rated fairly well in my recent GS converter poll. In actual use though it does seem to compress transients a little on the A/D side for some reason compared to other units & so it can sound a little pushed or squashed when going for level in that regard.

I remember doing an album for a client with the HEDD converters & then getting the Lavry Gold A/D just after that project & when I was asked to master a radio edit of one of the songs from that album, I did it through the same logged settings but captured through the Lavry Gold instead. When the client heard it he rang me & asked what I'd changed & when I explained it was only the AD converter he was amazed. He actually paid me to re-run the whole album through the Lavry Gold AD because there was more detail & in his words "sounds more expensive". Since then I've sold the Lavry bought a PM Model 2 which I rated better than the Lavry, but now have a sale pending on the PM Model 2 unit & running Forssell exclusively & it's even more revealing of transient detail than any of the other units I've had in here. Superior imaging, detail & a very tight low end. The headroom is marvellous, very open & no signs of stress.

I still have the HEDD & on occasion, maybe 5% of jobs I use the processing but very little & if I do it's usually a touch of pentode. The D/A is pretty good & I used it in conjunction with the Lavry Gold AD for sometime. Now I have 2 Forssell units; one for my analog loop; the other is my main monitoring DAC.

What can I say, I'm a drummer & transient detail is very important imo.
 

 
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: jdg on January 22, 2011, 01:09:24 pm
Matt_G wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 06:37

I'm a drummer


its ok, nobody is perfect  Very Happy
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Matt_G on January 23, 2011, 09:00:52 am
jdg wrote on Sun, 23 January 2011 04:09

Matt_G wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 06:37

I'm a drummer


its ok, nobody is perfect  Very Happy


Of course not, but pretty damn close is good enough for me Razz

I was waiting for all the drummer jokes...
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Table Of Tone on January 23, 2011, 12:57:32 pm
Matt_G wrote on Sun, 23 January 2011 14:00

jdg wrote on Sun, 23 January 2011 04:09

Matt_G wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 06:37

I'm a drummer


its ok, nobody is perfect  Very Happy


Of course not, but pretty damn close is good enough for me Razz

I was waiting for all the drummer jokes...

A drummer goes into a music shop and asks the guy behind the counter how much is that red saxophone?

The guy replies, "Why do you want a saxophone? You're a drummer'
The drummer replies, "How do you know?"
The guy replies, "Because that's a fire extinguisher!"
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Matt_G on January 23, 2011, 10:09:01 pm
ba-dom.. tish!
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: HDTT on January 25, 2011, 08:23:39 am
Be honest here I have used Mytek, Weiss, DAD now Hedd and it's a VERY good sounding ADC & DAC, I master Classical work mostly archival material for audiophiles and needless to say picky customers and it does the job, I don't use any tape emulations, really don't like them anyway, as a straight ADC it is up there with the best.
The way I bumped into the HEDD is my DAD went back for service and and took a unreasonable amount of time (and I still haven't gotten it back, all you DAD owners hopefully your unit doesn't give you trouble if it does it will take a few months to get it back) so Ryan at Vintage recommend I give it a try and I got to say I have been impressed I might even sell my DAD, If I ever get it back Rolling Eyes
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Joe_Caithness on February 08, 2011, 02:55:47 pm
I have nothing to add other than reading this confirms I really want one.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Viitalahde on February 08, 2011, 03:10:13 pm
The speaker upgrad and the room change made me use less HEDD processing, as well as driving my Knif compressor less.

It didn't make me appreciate the HEDD as a converter any less - maybe even more so.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Ruairi O'Flaherty on February 09, 2011, 12:42:51 pm
Like everyone here I've found that I use less and less of the processing over time and when I last upgraded my amps I took a big step back from using it.  I still like to use a little on the 2 bus(s) when mixing.  

When I do use it it's nearly always a touch of Pentode, Tape can be fun for tracking or truly anemic mixes, Triode is awful to my ears.

I'm just about to set up a Sadie rig and for various reasons I'm considering a swap out of the Hedd for something else, at the moment I only use the A/D.... I'll do some listening and report back at some point.

Cheers,
Ruairi

Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Patrik T on February 09, 2011, 03:41:57 pm
Viitalahde wrote on Tue, 08 February 2011 21:10

The speaker upgrad and the room change made me use less HEDD processing, as well as driving my Knif compressor less.


This has happened here too. I love it. A combination of more precise gear and better room response.

It's also a true joy to find that you just-can-not dial in anything on the tracks that are more or less perfect for their own good.


All the best
Patrik
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Alécio Costa - Brazil on February 17, 2011, 04:40:38 pm
Pentode to me seems to let things brittle. Nothing against Triode, although it misimproves noise foor a bit.
Tape is used most of the time.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Bonati on February 18, 2011, 04:02:06 pm
For those using the Hedd as their primary A/D/A, have you clocked the A/D path differently than the D/A path? I've heard this is possible but haven't experimented yet on my own.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Greg Reierson on February 18, 2011, 04:27:24 pm
Bonati wrote on Fri, 18 February 2011 15:02

For those using the Hedd as their primary A/D/A, have you clocked the A/D path differently than the D/A path? I've heard this is possible but haven't experimented yet on my own.


Don't! I found a serious internal clock crosstalk while testing a freshly upgraded unit and then had the same result with a new unit supplied by Crane Song. There's a thread either here or on GS about it.

The short story is that the clocks interfere with each other and introduce some nasty artifacts into the signal. It was significantly worst at higher rates (176/192) and much less noticeable at lower rates. Do some careful listening first if you attempt it.


GR
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Greg Reierson on February 18, 2011, 04:36:34 pm
Found it: http://www.gearslutz.com/board/mastering-forum/568170-proble m-192khz-sample-rate.html

Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Ruairi O'Flaherty on February 18, 2011, 06:51:18 pm
Greg Reierson wrote on Fri, 18 February 2011 21:27

Bonati wrote on Fri, 18 February 2011 15:02

For those using the Hedd as their primary A/D/A, have you clocked the A/D path differently than the D/A path? I've heard this is possible but haven't experimented yet on my own.


Don't! I found a serious internal clock crosstalk while testing a freshly upgraded unit and then had the same result with a new unit supplied by Crane Song. There's a thread either here or on GS about it.

The short story is that the clocks interfere with each other and introduce some nasty artifacts into the signal. It was significantly worst at higher rates (176/192) and much less noticeable at lower rates. Do some careful listening first if you attempt it.


GR



Thanks for the heads up on this issue Greg' I'd never heard of it.  I'm just on the cusp of going to a separate computer for playback and capture so this could well have arisen, will do some listening for sure.

Cheers,
Ruairi
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Bonati on February 18, 2011, 06:54:57 pm
Thanks Greg - that's good to know. Also too bad - was hoping this was a trick the Hedd could pull off.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: SafeandSound on February 19, 2011, 06:34:59 am
I have never heard the HEDD but I am put off by the digital harmonic generation. Reminds of the digital radiance generator on a TC Finalizer. Crying or Very Sad
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: lowland on February 19, 2011, 07:30:26 am
SafeandSound wrote on Sat, 19 February 2011 11:34

I have never heard the HEDD but I am put off by the digital harmonic generation.

Don't be - there's always the in/out switch, you know! Even if you never used the processing the HEDD would still be good value, though like many before you you'd likely find moderate processing a useful mastering tool, even if only once in a blue moon.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Jerry Tubb on February 19, 2011, 02:23:55 pm
lowland wrote on Sat, 19 February 2011 06:30

SafeandSound wrote on Sat, 19 February 2011 11:34

I have never heard the HEDD but I am put off by the digital harmonic generation.

Don't be - there's always the in/out switch, you know! Even if you never used the processing the HEDD would still be good value, though like many before you you'd likely find moderate processing a useful mastering tool, even if only once in a blue moon.


Agree with Nigel here.

I occasionally use the Crane Song Phoenix for a little tape saturation sound.

Similar algorithms designed by the same guy Dave Hill.

Can be really nice when you need it.

JT
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Ruairi O'Flaherty on February 19, 2011, 07:11:30 pm
SafeandSound wrote on Sat, 19 February 2011 11:34

I have never heard the HEDD but I am put off by the digital harmonic generation. Reminds of the digital radiance generator on a TC Finalizer. Crying or Very Sad


As the others have said don't be.  Dave Hill is not a gimmick kinda guy.  I was originally sold on the idea of HEDD by the saturation options and as I said I use them rarely now but they are still sweet when they are the right choice.  For me the HEDD justifies it's price purely as an AD/DA with some processing thrown in as a bonus.

As Jerry said Phoenix can also be just the thing on certain mixes.

Cheers,
Ruairi



Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: lowland on February 20, 2011, 03:52:11 am
True, Ruari - the 'analogue-like' processing loomed fairly large for me as a feature when I originally bought the beast as I had no analogue outboard at the time. Once I acquired some the HEDD's processing became less important, though as explained earlier I still give it a whirl from time time, mostly with the Tape control on tracks that may need a little extra gravitas.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: SafeandSound on February 20, 2011, 10:10:33 am
Fair point , not that much hardware that has digital enhancements going on these days so it's quite unique I suppose.
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: jackthebear on February 20, 2011, 05:21:58 pm
Ruairi O'Flaherty wrote on Sun, 20 February 2011 11:11

[  For me the HEDD justifies it's price purely as an AD/DA with some processing thrown in as a bonus.



Couldn't agree more.......
Title: Re: For the HEDDs
Post by: Dave Rose on March 05, 2011, 04:17:32 pm
The pentode on my machine really creates a level boost...which can be mistaken for it sounding better. I use the effects less now than when I first bought it, but still get some great sounds on the right material, gives it that bit of beef if needs be.