Print

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

[Ruairi O'Flaherty]

Hey folks,

does anyone here have any experience using a Neve 33609 or one of the many variants (C, J, JD, Chandler etc) in a mastering setting?  They seem popular among mixing engineers for 2 buss use but who knows what that means.  Obviously there are big differences between the various iterations.

For the technically inclined among the audience I'm really curious about your thoughts on the diode bridge as a gain control device.  In the 33609 context it is surrounded by two transformers and followed by another after the output amp.  These transformers probably have more to do with the sound of the units than the diode bridge?  Naturally the level drop required to use the bridge in a comfortable zone means mucho make-up gain.


Thanks,
Ruairi

[Bob Boyd]

I tried a current Neve 33609 and it didn't do anything for me.  I have the Chandler LTD-2/M's which are based on the 2254 design and like them quite a bit.

[Adam Dempsey]

Love the mastering modified LTD-2's for a touch of grab & tone if the mix is right for it.. Gets some use on maybe 30% of projects lately. Can't say I've tried the 33609.

[Phil Demetro]

The LTD2 is the only compressor my signal path now. I'd say that it took me a while to find a way that I like to use it. Kinda does that Neve thing, I guess. But maybe not like all Neves? It doesn't really have the same thru-tone as my Neve EQ - which is basically a 1081 eq/lineamp with gold plated switches.
This era Neve had Marinair transformers. What does the LTD2 have? Carnhill's? St. Ives?

[TotalSonic]

I was fairly impressed with the Vintage Design CL1mk2 (which is based on the 2254) when I checked it out at AES 2007 here in NYC. I definitely want to get it into the studio this year for a more thorough demoing.  All controls on it with the exception of the makeup gain (which can just be left off) are on switches, there is an adjustable side pass high pass filter control on it, and there is a true bypass switch on it as well - which makes it kind of setup nicely for mastering.  

http://www.vintagedesign.se/en06/CL1MK2.htm

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[David Glasser]

Ruairi O'Flaherty wrote on Tue, 18 March 2008 15:10

does anyone here have any experience using a Neve 33609 or one of the many variants (C, J, JD, Chandler etc) in a mastering setting?

I used to have a 33609C which I sold. My only bout of seller's remorse.

[jfrigo]

It's funny, but the 33609 seems uncommon in mastering studios compared to other popular mix bus and mastering compressors. Also, though I liked it as a drum bus comp, I wasn't as wild about it on the mix bus. Then again, I haven't tried it in the mastering studio, so with more experimentartion maybe I'd like it better.

[Ross Hogarth]

i am a mixer not a mastering engineer
and
i find the 33609 pretty grabby even for mixes
i used to use mine all the time but ultimately found it did not have enough control for me

[Ruairi O'Flaherty]

Thanks for all of the great responses, keep 'em coming.  The original 33609 and the C variant have a very different set of transformers when compared to the current J and JD variants.  The originals had a Marinair 31267 on the input, a 10468 after the diode bridge and a LO1173 on the output.  The newer models use Belclere transformers which are not universally loved.  I assume the Chandlers are using the Carnhill "replicas".

David can I ask what it was about the 33609C that you miss?  Did you use it in a mastering context before it's sale.

Ross can you elaborate on what you mean by grabby?  I'm pretty sure I know what you mean though - I sold a Millennia Origin a while back for a similar reason.  Did you find the lack of an attack control annoying?  

I've started building a 33609 style compressor but I'm thinking seriously about adding an attack control - at very least I'll do some listening to it when I have the GR circuit up and running.  I'm using an all original transformer line-up.

thanks,
Ruairi

[Ed Littman]

Ruairi O'Flaherty wrote on Tue, 18 March 2008 17:10

Hey folks, does anyone here have any experience using a Neve 33609 or one of the many variants (C, J, JD, Chandler etc) in a mastering setting?  They seem popular among mixing engineers for 2 buss use but who knows what that means.  Obviously there are big differences between the various iterations. Thanks, Ruairi

A few years back I went to Jan Folksons studio to shoot out a few comps. IIRC what was in the list was the 33609,c2,stc-8,es-8,6386,& manly vari-mu.
Jan can chime in if he's around, but I remember that we both liked the 33609 on everything we passed through it. We knew it was a one trick pony...but the right trick. In comparison we both dismissed the Manly, & both the pendulums added to much sizzle to the high end(I think it was due to the input gain, or lack of proper operation of said above)The top 3 were the c2, stc-8 & the 33609.

I ended up getting the ltd-2(m)& use it along with the stc-8 quite often.
Ed

[compasspnt]

I have a 33609 in my mastering room, along with an STC-8 and a Vari-Mu.

I find the Neve can work well occasionally on smoother material, but isn't as nice on punchy things.

Th STC-8 will always work on anything, but I never drive it hard, just going 1 or maybe up to 2 dB GR; but it always has a nice bass tightening effect.  Somewhat reminiscent of the old NTP's.

The V-M can work on many things if you only barely see the GR meter move, but I NEVER let it start pumping.

[zmix]

Phil Demetro wrote on Tue, 18 March 2008 19:26

The LTD2 is the only compressor my signal path now. I'd say that it took me a while to find a way that I like to use it. Kinda does that Neve thing, I guess. But maybe not like all Neves? It doesn't really have the same thru-tone as my Neve EQ - which is basically a 1081 eq/lineamp with gold plated switches. This era Neve had Marinair transformers. What does the LTD2 have? Carnhill's? St. Ives?

The LTD-2 is a completely different amplifier topology from the 33609 / 1081.  The LTD-2 uses the same single ended class A output as a neve 1073 / 1064 / 1066

I've extensively modified a few of these LTD-2 because I considerthem way way too pokey for mastering, in fact I am a mixer and I think they are too pokey for that , too!

You may be interested to read about my Chandler LTD-2 modifications.

[lowland]

The LTD-2 is also my only analogue compressor - can't see me getting rid of it in a hurry as it does a certain 'something' I haven't heard elsewhere, and I like the bypassed (not hard-wire) sound of it a lot too. It's been especially nice of late on big cinematic orchestral stuff.

I'm currently enjoying a demo of the Vertigo. I think it would make a good complement to the Chandlers as it can sound much smoother, among other things - sensitive GR metering, too, with movement happening pretty much as I start to detect compression taking place: definitely not the case with the Chandlers!

[jdg]

i have a zmix modded ltd-2(m) pair.

the new ratios make me use them 2 or 3 times as much as i previously did.

awesome tone and "Glue" at 1:5:1

[TotalSonic]

lowland wrote on Wed, 19 March 2008 10:42

I'm currently enjoying a demo of the Vertigo.

I was very impressed with it in my brief trial of it as well.  Unfortunately weak dollar vs. euro makes the cost of this a little out of reach right now - and I wanted to demo other options prior to making a decision also - but definitely people looking for another great option for a mastering compressor should check it out.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Ruairi O'Flaherty]

zmix wrote on Wed, 19 March 2008 14:08

The LTD-2 is a completely different amplifier topology from the 33609 / 1081.  The LTD-2 uses the same single ended class A output as a neve 1073 / 1064 / 1066 I've extensively modified a few of these LTD-2 because I considerthem way way too pokey for mastering, in fact I am a mixer and I think they are too pokey for that , too! You may be interested to read about my Chandler LTD-2 modifications.

Hey Chuck,

I was aware of the different output on the LTD-2.  In fact I have a  pair of 283s and LO1166 so perhaps I can make a comparison on the outputs when I build mine.  

You were one of the "technical" folks I had in mind at the top of the thread.  What do you think of the diode bridge as a gain reduction device?  Is it a concept worth updating with cleaner transformers and output amps or does the bridge have a strong sonic foot print/distortion of its own?  I'll be answering these questions myself over the next while on my own build but I'd love to hear your thoughts or DC's?

Thanks to everyone else for your input.

Cheers,
Ruairi

[Bob Boyd]

Ed Littman wrote on Wed, 19 March 2008 08:02

I ended up getting the ltd-2(m)& use it along with the stc-8 quite often. Ed

Yep, these are my only 2 analog comps right now and I find myself double compressing with them fairly often.  A little gain reduction with each can go a long way.  Very different, very complimentary.  

They can work very well together.

[TotalSonic]

On the topic of comps - but OT of diode bridge designs - this FET comp caught my eye recently - http://www.altamodaaudio.com/unicomp.html - definitely curious to demo it as well - has anyone heard it yet?

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[zmix]

Ruairi O'Flaherty wrote on Wed, 19 March 2008 15:07

zmix wrote on Wed, 19 March 2008 14:08 The LTD-2 is a completely different amplifier topology from the 33609 / 1081.  The LTD-2 uses the same single ended class A output as a neve 1073 / 1064 / 1066 I've extensively modified a few of these LTD-2 because I considerthem way way too pokey for mastering, in fact I am a mixer and I think they are too pokey for that , too! You may be interested to read about my Chandler LTD-2 modifications. Hey Chuck, I was aware of the different output on the LTD-2.  In fact I have a  pair of 283s and LO1166 so perhaps I can make a comparison on the outputs when I build mine.   You were one of the "technical" folks I had in mind at the top of the thread.  What do you think of the diode bridge as a gain reduction device?  Is it a concept worth updating with cleaner transformers and output amps or does the bridge have a strong sonic foot print/distortion of its own?  I'll be answering these questions myself over the next while on my own build but I'd love to hear your thoughts or DC's? Thanks to everyone else for your input. Cheers, Ruairi

Hi Ruairi,

Thanks for the kind words.

Is this technology still valid or should it be updated?

The diode bridge was used by several designers in the mid 1960s; Neve and Dolby, for example, both used them in their gain reduction circuits.

Diode bridges were also used in "ring' modulators, which are essentially a diode ring based amplitude modulator

Neve did something a bit radical (and necessary) by reducing the level to a fraction of it's original value when sending it through the diode bridge.  Apart from the obvious, they did this to utilize the extremely linear part of the diode's curve.  Their feedback topology helps further linearize the system.

The interesting part comes when the diode bridge exceeds it's range, and this more than anything gives the circuit it's characteristic sound.

Clean up the circuit?

I don't know what to say, I think that there are probably more sophisticated ways to control gain, but the more important question is: "what does it sound like"?  
I use my class A variants on things like guitar because they do add quite a bit of color.. not so much in their tonality but in their dynamic 'crunchiness'...  I suppose that if universal audio got the gain reduction curves correct then their 33609  would be an example of what the design sounds like without any color or hair. Despite the hype and enthusiasm of their fans, they have not introduced any additional harmonics (like those generated by transformers and single ended gain stages).

Who knows?

[bigaudioblowhard]

Wally Traugott used the 33609 as his main axe for ages during his final years at Capitol. I believe it was an earlier model. Though he had a coupla 2254E's in his Neve Mastering Console in RR1 at the Tower, I recall he rarely ever used em. In fact, I used the other 2254E's Capitol owns, with the Shep Power Supply (very important).

That 33609 is on Barry Manilow, Juglio Iglesias (Crazy), Babs (not me), The Presidents Of The United States, Soul Asylum, almost everything he did in the late '80's untill he retired in '97.

bab

[prolearts]

Does that CL1MK2 unit have all switched pots? The chunky tick marks on the unit seem (to me) to imply it. Seems like a good value, even with the exchange rate ($3600 at Mercenary).

J. Ward
Chicago Mastering Service

[TotalSonic]

prolearts wrote on Thu, 03 April 2008 10:53

Does that CL1MK2 unit have all switched pots? The chunky tick marks on the unit seem (to me) to imply it. Seems like a good value, even with the exchange rate ($3600 at Mercenary). J. Ward Chicago Mastering Service

Jason -
The CL1mk2 has switches (not pots) on all controls except for the make up gain (which is on continuosuly variable pots) - which can just be left at their most left position for 0dB gain - so if you don't use make up gain then everything is very easily completely recallable on the stock version.

I was pretty impressed with it in my brief demo of it at the Mercenary booth AES 2007 here in NYC - but obviously that's not a decent place to really judge a compressor.  I definitely want to demo one out in my studio this year.  I agree the price seems like very good bang for buck.

Best regards,
Steve Berson