R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down

Author Topic: 80-200Hz fatness?  (Read 11313 times)

zetterstroem

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #45 on: December 11, 2005, 02:22:12 pm »

you should have bought the manley holger...  Very Happy

just did an album with plugs..... the manleys (summing mixer and comp)made it nice and phat....

(i still hate plugs.... but the record sounds ok.....)
Logged
Noting the music industry's complaints that illegal downloading means people are getting their music for free, he said, "Well, why not? It ain't worth nothing anyway." (b.dylan)

Thomas Detert

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #46 on: December 11, 2005, 02:28:15 pm »

lagerfeldt wrote on Sun, 11 December 2005 16:18


Hello Thomas, nice to see you here!

I couldn't find the VEQC 2000 on the website?


Hello Holger , nice to see you as well  Smile

unfortunately this "VALVE EQ / OPTO COMP." is discontinued ,
but the THORAX is some kind of follow up to the VEQC !

Their DEEP and AIR Knop is some kind of magic  Smile

My VEQC is followed by an API 2500 and to my ears it sounds great! Especially on the low end !!

But i am not a ME , just a little recording guy  Laughing

They have a Forum:
http://www.recording.org/forum-38.html

or look here ( Discontinued Lines )
http://www.gtamusic.com/sebatronprices.htm

cheers,
Thomas


The VEQC 2000:
http://www.gtamusic.com/gtaaudio/VEQCFrontAngle1reduced.gif






Logged

lagerfeldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 582
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #47 on: December 12, 2005, 07:08:52 am »

zetterstroem wrote on Sun, 11 December 2005 20:22

you should have bought the manley holger...  Very Happy

just did an album with plugs..... the manleys (summing mixer and comp)made it nice and phat....

(i still hate plugs.... but the record sounds ok.....)


Nah, as u may remember I tested the Manley against the G10, the Manley sounded like an old shoebox in comparison  Twisted Evil

I just mixed a track for a client ITB (apart from slight 2bus compression from the GSSL). Sounds absolutely wonderful, open, and warm. I've moved away from the Waves plug-ins when mixing and using almost only Sonalksis for EQ+Comp, so much better and analog sounding.

lagerfeldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 582
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #48 on: December 12, 2005, 07:11:35 am »

Thomas Detert wrote on Sun, 11 December 2005 20:28
My VEQC is followed by an [b

API 2500[/b] and to my ears it sounds great! Especially on the low end !!

But i am not a ME , just a little recording guy  Laughing



You are so modest Cool It's okay to be little as long as the music sounds big, right?  Razz

Interesting with the VEQC, I've never heard of it before. The API 2500 is a jewel though.

zetterstroem

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #49 on: December 12, 2005, 10:53:21 am »

"It's okay to be little as long as the music sounds big, right?"

reminds me of ammitsb
Logged
Noting the music industry's complaints that illegal downloading means people are getting their music for free, he said, "Well, why not? It ain't worth nothing anyway." (b.dylan)

ammitsboel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1300
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #50 on: December 12, 2005, 12:37:33 pm »

Has anyone tried mastering with the Joemeek compressor?
I think the Joemeek idea could be very appropriate for mastering.
Logged
"The male brain is designed for ecstasy" -Dr. Harvey "Gizmo" Rosenberg

ammitsboel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1300
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #51 on: December 12, 2005, 12:43:35 pm »

lagerfeldt wrote on Mon, 12 December 2005 12:11

It's okay to be little as long as the music sounds big, right?  Razz
I think you got that wrong.
It's cool to be little when the music is big.
You could also say that everything else gets bigger when you are small... or maybe you just don't have that grab of detail if you are too physically big?

Zetterstroem and Lagerfeldt!
Why aren't you in the womp? you silly clowns!!

Regards
Henrik
Logged
"The male brain is designed for ecstasy" -Dr. Harvey "Gizmo" Rosenberg

lagerfeldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 582
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #52 on: December 12, 2005, 04:24:51 pm »

ammitsboel wrote on Mon, 12 December 2005 18:37

Has anyone tried mastering with the Joemeek compressor?
I think the Joemeek idea could be very appropriate for mastering.

Now, don't go contaminating my thread you little person Smile

I must confess I never heard of the WoMP before it was too late.

zetterstroem

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #53 on: December 12, 2005, 08:09:34 pm »

"Why aren't you in the womp? you silly clowns!!"

i din't have a studio to work in these days..... (as you know)  Embarassed

and anyway i don't like sports...  Very Happy
Logged
Noting the music industry's complaints that illegal downloading means people are getting their music for free, he said, "Well, why not? It ain't worth nothing anyway." (b.dylan)

Thomas Detert

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #54 on: December 13, 2005, 02:39:42 am »

lagerfeldt wrote on Mon, 12 December 2005 13:11


You are so modest Cool It's okay to be little as long as the music sounds big, right?  Razz

Interesting with the VEQC, I've never heard of it before. The API 2500 is a jewel though.



Yeah, the API is the best thing that i ever bought !  Smile
The VEQC is not really recommended for mastering , but on the SUBS-Groups for Drums it's a secret weapon and gives you punsh and air, especially if your sound is produced ITB.

There will be an update of the VEQC 2000 very soon:

SEBATRON wrote


Posted: Sat May 21, 2005 12:36 pm

The THORAX comp circuit is a major evolution of the VEQC comp circuit.
Although both are optical in nature and driven by Class A discrete circuitry.

How do they differ?
The THORAX comp circuit has a much wider dynamic range allowing it to react over a wider range of signal level and conversely attenuate ( compress ) over a wider range.The THROAX also has greater flexibility in adjusting the compression time dependant curve because of the extra parameters available to the user….
Namely the Attack and Release parameters which have been factored ( or spread ) out over the three-position A/R toggle switch….from fast to slow …..
Additionally the THORAX compressor is faster than the VEQC meaning that it can operate in a peak mode more effectively and is desirable in certain percussive situations…..

On the other hand the VEQC is in its own class of units ,, and fills a void here.It's a stereo based valve EQ/Comp/Exciter.
Drums in particular are really interesting when sub-grouped through this unit.
The circuit anomalies seem to create more of a 3-D image to a premix.
I used to sub group just kick and bass through the early prototypes in sessions and just that could totally change a mix. Mono in but Stereo came out.
The passive E.Q network is great for chomping out a big mid section of frequencies and highlighting upper harmonics generated in the valves with the variable Air feature…The two mid bands are unfortunately quite close together so sometimes it can be a let down if you need to be a bit more surgical. However , it’s not really designed to be such a box. Like I say ,, more of complete set of E.Q and Comp that acts either subtly or destructively to create sound timbres not really attainable on most current gear.
It can get you to a place real quickly once you get a feel of the signal path.
Don’t buy it if it’s your only compressor ,, but if you own many compressors and you only use this one then you would definitely have your own sound.
The VEQC will be upgraded shortly with the same THORAX comp circuitry.
I suggest hanging out for that.

Quote:
So please ramble at length


THORAX
Transformer balanced input.
D.C valve filament for quieter operation.
Anodes driven by H.T rail.
Voltage selector on back for 110/220 vac operation.
Complete Steel box and front panel …. No Aluminium.
Discrete Class A circuitry throughout.
No intergrated circuits.
All parts readily available.

Mic pre:
XLR inputs on front and back.
D.I input for a wide range of impedances.
Switchable phase , phantom and a three way attenuating pad.
Air and Deep for upper and lower spectrum control.
Variable Colour control .
Variable output level.

Compressor:
Optical attenutaion …. feedback compression.
True bypass also shunts off detection circuitry .
Variable colour and gain selectable via the ‘drive’ control.
Compression timing constants spread over a three way toggle.
Variable output level….blah blah …..

Metering:
Switchable and variable for different situations …. High , med , low ranges .
Preamp and Main output levels.
Gain Reduction.

The THORAX can also be thought of as two vmp channels linked up with a dynamic dependant attenuation circuit ( compressor ) patched into the middle of the last quandrant .
You see, ,, the approach was not preamp then add EQ then add a Comp section….
It’s setup around a totally discrete signal path with the various passive networks ( EQ/Comp) added as tangental signal modifiers that don’t impede the quality of the signal at all. That’s why when you kick in the Comp section of the THORAX there is absolutely NO signal degradation.
The E.Q is deliberately targeted at frequencies that are hardest to manipulate using digital E.Q./ plug ins etc ….
These two points ( air and deep ) are the ones that make the analogue gear worthwhile….. the valves , the passive networks ….
With the variable colour and E.Q functions you can get some very inspirational tones and flavours. The D.I can be a killer for bass and guitars and being able to immediately dial in a bit of compression makes it quick and reliable to use.
Vocals can be softly compressed with a nice slow attack/release or Squashed quite effectively when compression times are shortened.
At the highest Ratio , you can scream and then whisper into the mic and the meter will barely move.
If you want to really squash , to go further , try the drive control in ‘ Hot ‘ mode.


Cool  

cheers,
Thomas
Logged

ammitsboel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1300
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #55 on: December 13, 2005, 12:30:56 pm »

zetterstroem wrote on Tue, 13 December 2005 01:09

i din't have a studio to work in these days..... (as you know)  Embarassed
...if you don't have any gear then you can still use your computer plugs and arrange them in a weird way that you would normally newer think of and then explore the result for it's pros & cons. Someone here might be able to evaluate your result in a way that you would newer think of yourself. This might actually be usefull, don't you think?
zetterstroem wrote on Tue, 13 December 2005 01:09

and anyway i don't like sports...  Very Happy

I see the womp as a give and take, not a sport.
Anyone that likes working with music should be in the womp.

Regards
Henrik
Logged
"The male brain is designed for ecstasy" -Dr. Harvey "Gizmo" Rosenberg

Guest

  • Guest
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #56 on: February 05, 2006, 11:56:55 am »

Hi all

I have used a side chain comp with a hpf 120hz leaving the rest of the mix alone, this has helped me really tighten the bass line and electro kick in some dance stuff i've been mastering.
Logged

Ged Leitch

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1057
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #57 on: February 05, 2006, 12:44:25 pm »

cuesonic wrote on Sun, 05 February 2006 16:56

Hi all

I have used a side chain comp with a hpf 120hz leaving the rest of the mix alone, this has helped me really tighten the bass line and electro kick in some dance stuff i've been mastering.



Don't you mean a low pass filter? Smile
Logged
http://bitheadmastering.co.uk/

"...But I don't wanna be a pirate!"

Bob Olhsson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3968
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #58 on: February 05, 2006, 01:02:16 pm »

You know for the life of me, I can't imagine how one would characterize the sound of tape saturation as "80-200Hz fatness."

To me the most desirable quality one can achieve in the 80-200Hz. range is called "balls." The lack of it is generally the sound of electronics that are being overtaxed which, unfortunately, no signal processing can restore although Dave's suggestion of trimming some of the low end can help minimize further taxing of electronics. A careful touch of fast release compression on the bass and drums can glue the low-end together with distortion in some cases but in others it just makes them sound more wimpy. The right reverb in the drum mix can help sometimes too.

My experience with harmonic generators like max-bass has been that it is far safer to use them on individual elements of a mix. They can sound very impressive in the room where they were set up but it rarely translates to what things are going to sound like elsewhere. Aural illusions are very very fragile compared to a clean recording of awesome sounds.

lagerfeldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 582
Re: 80-200Hz fatness?
« Reply #59 on: February 05, 2006, 03:31:40 pm »

Bob, you may be totally right.

IF we were talking about actually recorded stuff, which we are not. I'm talking about synth/sampler based dance music so there's no real acoustics involved (in terms of the recording), no way of enhancing something that's not there to begin with.

You are also talking about reverb on the drum mix, that's rarely used in that context on dance music.

Which means you need a different approach and sometimes you need to mess around a bit more or do different stuff.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up