bblackwood wrote on Thu, 24 November 2005 07:23 |
Or Paul Frindle... |
compasspnt wrote on Thu, 24 November 2005 14:21 | ||
Of course! After all, he did actually design them! |
ssltech wrote on Fri, 25 November 2005 17:23 |
huh...? -Is it time to wake up? -I was napping hardcore! -okay, here's the sequence: Paul mentions that it wasn't quite constant-Q, but they certainly dropped the old constant-bandwidth behaviour, and the bandwidth basically used to widen rather a lot depending on how much you boosted or cut, and narrowed as you boosted (or cut) less. Keith |
Quote: |
If anything dared to go wrong during the 6 months or so that it took to record and mix, it was a race to see who could call the component number on the board first!!! |
Quote: |
Can i tell by looking at the knob color? |
steveeastend wrote on Sat, 26 November 2005 02:53 |
do you know something about the brand "Westec"? Does this name say anything to you? |
Quote: |
So yes, I'm referring to the eventual response (the 'derived' response after the filter section and the direct path have been summed), and yes this certainly confuses things! Keith |
ssltech wrote on Sun, 27 November 2005 03:42 |
Agreed. ...And it's uterly perverse that in order for the derived (summed) response to maintain a constant Q, the Q of the sidechain filter has to be variable, whereas a constant-Q sidechain filter will produce a varying Q when summed. That's why one has to be cautious and specific if at all possible. One of the jobs I have to do over Christmas is to go and decommission an Oxford. It's sad that it's working perfectly (as I understand it) but the clients just want something else. -Pehaps I can get a few last moments with it before I yank the cables... Keith |
Paul Frindle wrote on Sun, 27 November 2005 08:11 |
We must all move on and look to the future rather than dwell in the past, however let's not throw away and lose entirely the deep experience gained over the decades. |
ssltech wrote on Sun, 27 November 2005 17:21 |
I almost pulled a Capricorn out in 2001 and replaced it with an Oxford. -It should probably have been a very quick swap, since both systems tended to have the same cables run to the same places and the existing MADI runs would have been hard to pull out & replace. Also the full analog & digital patchbays in the control room also had the cabling running to the right locations... -very convenient! I certainly recognised right away that the Oxford was a significant improvement over the Capricorn, though I -along with several others- was also struck by the nagging feeling that the world wasn't really 'converging' along this operating methodology, and that the place in music recording of the fixed-architecture 'Console-as-hub' scenario really didn't seem to be panning out universally. -Sad, because -as you imply- the excellence which had been developed was also being 'lost'. -Not by necessity but usually the case, none the less. In the end we didn't buy one. This was right at the end of the official support period from Sony, though the unit itself appeared to be a good deal more stable than the Capricorn which it was being considered to replace. Keith |
Quote: |
ssltech I think I might have a few of the unstuffed AAD boards in case anyone ever wants to try a fourth flavour! |
ssltech wrote on Mon, 28 November 2005 13:57 |
"G+" was a marketing thing only. ...<snip> The term "G+" was picked up by most people, but there is NO difference to the computer. You can add a brainstorm remote, a DK audio phasescope,. and re-wire the entire console with OFC cable if it makes you feel better. I don't remember if there were any other things but those three were the big things. Keith |
raal wrote on Fri, 02 December 2005 00:20 | ||
hi keith, SSL newbie here. isn't OFC wire kind of a big deal? i was under the impression it makes a marked difference in the overall sound of the board. if it does, rewiring a whole console seems like a costly operation, no? is there a ballpark figure you could give for having this done, and do you think it's worth it? thank you. |
raal wrote on Thu, 01 December 2005 19:20 | ||
hi keith, SSL newbie here. isn't OFC wire kind of a big deal? i was under the impression it makes a marked difference in the overall sound of the board. if it does, rewiring a whole console seems like a costly operation, no? is there a ballpark figure you could give for having this done, and do you think it's worth it? thank you. |
Paul Frindle wrote on Thu, 01 December 2005 20:00 | ||||
No - don't bother - honestly. |
ssltech wrote on Wed, 30 November 2005 19:18 |
I thought that the big deal with the compressor is that a lot of people like to alter the threshold range sensitivity instead of the makeup... |
Wayne Kirkwood wrote on Wed, 09 August 2006 10:00 |
FYI I think Trevor S. designed the '242. Haven't visited PSW in awhile. There's a reference to this link over in Prodigy and I wanted to update this post. I've updated the SSL ref index: http://www.tenmilecreek.net/images/SSL/ssl_drawings_index.ht m |