TAC Bullet B2 or TAC scorpio ?

I would like a decent sounding analogue console, and these two models seems to be quite available as seconf hand.
I'm not afraid of making some maintenance.

Anyone as an advice or opinion on these Tac are welcome ?

Thanxs

Flaheu,

The Scorpion are a older and bigger console console than Bullet, but if you have space for it, you shall defineite choose the Scorpion.

It is more rugged and more easy to maintenance compare with the very small and compact Bullet.

The Scorpion is very nice sounding, and have with a sweet eq-section, and if you have luck, maybe it have Penny & Giles faders.

Inside the modules there are plenty of space, so it is easy to do some modification if you need.

The only problem can be the integreted LED-meters, that can be hard to find if there are some broken, but there are a company that make a substitute for them.

--Bo

Post the same question at

http://forum.analogconsole.com/viewforum.php?f=1&sid=ae78771b70a100837c7927e799477b73

jim

We stock parts for both the TAC Bullet and TAC Scorpion.

The Scorpion seems to be the favoured console although this may be due to size / facilities / availability rather than sound.

We manufacture a couple of upgrades for the Scorpion.
http://www.audiomaintenance.com/acatalog/aml_electronic_products.html

A "Langley-Designs" line input conversion.... which makes the input line level only (+/- 20dB).... aimed at the DAW users. (AML-16-004)

A "Langley-Designs" mic input upgrade.... (AML-16-007)

We also manufacture a replacement for the bargraphs....(AML-07-001)

Colin
www.audiomaintenance.com

Not sure I agree with the Comment about the Scorpion being more rugged and easier to maintain than a B2. They both use channel cards into a pcb socket frame. The B2 may have one advantage over the Scorprion in terms of configurability. It was designed to meet several types of installations from FOH to post-production. So you can get different channel card configurations in blocks of 4. One type is all balanced line in in stereo pairs, and another is mic/pre channels with switchable mic/line inputs. Plus the group outputs have different configurations as well, including AES/BU outs and video sync. My board is a 28 channel with 8 groups that I have configured for all mic/pre cards on input except for the first 4 block, whihc is 4 stereo line pairs for effects returns. It's a very nice board and sounds super sweet.

As for maintenance, I think you have to expect some degree of upkeep no matter what bard you get. These are aging beasts now that everyone's gone gaga over digital, which means that the expertise for keeping them in tip top shape is going to become less and less as time goes on. Still with a little effort an basic soldering skills, you can do most of the upkeep yourself.

By the way, my console has Penny and Giles faders as well. Some of the later B2 models switched to Alps, but the 28 channel version I have along with a smaller 10 channel version I picked up for spares both use P&G faders.

Ok thanks guys,

But sound wise, what are the major difference ?

I'm quite sure that topology wise they should both share the same basics and are full of TL07xx.

The music I'm in is mostly rock, but maybe I could use it also for small live gig as an FOH. My actual needs are 16 channels but more is for sure a bonus.





:thumb:

For livesound I always liked the Scorpion. They sounded better (whatever this is) than the usual Soundcraft liveconsoles we had in our PA company.

For recording I do know some Scorp users which could have easily bought bigger boards but remained with it since it was fine for them.
I once recorded a demo with my band on a Scorpion and later did the production on a SSL4000E. The demo seemed to have a lack of bass which was not a matter of EQing. We used the Scorp Preamps for everything on the demo and SSL-pres for everything except vocals and bass (Tubetech) on the production.
The preamp in the Scorp is a ssm2015 chip which is not bad at all. A lot of more expensive gear used the same IC as preamp (several Amek desks). Some people don´t like it though and since it´s an instrumentation OAmp it´s not easy to find something better to replace with (SSM2019 is the uptodate version which has a different footprint, though). The weak point in the scorpion might be the insert. It´s driven from the preamp chip or with EQ in circuit from one of the TL072 EQ chips. The loading resistance forms with the circuit a high pass which could lead to the lack of lowend I mentioned before. But IIRC it has been discussed here before, try a search.

Anyway I still like these boards and if I could get one for a decent price in good condition I´d throw my Tascam M3700 out of my studio.
:guinness:


Edit: meanwhile I did throw the M3700 out and bought a Scorpion which is highly modified now

[quote author="jensenmann"]The preamp in the Scorp is a ssm2017 chip which is not bad at all. A lot of more expensive gear uses the same IC as preamp (Midas XL200,...)[/quote]

Actually it's a SSM2015 in the scorpion. This 'weakness' can be remedied with a Langley mod from AML - http://www.audiomaintenance.com/acatalog/aml_electronic_products.html

Makes a massive difference :grin:

FWIW all my band tech specs sent out in the early 90's stated 'No TAC scorpion or Peavey desks' ! I hated them so much at the time. :shock:

I like my Scorpion II very much. Not a totally clean sounding desk. There's a little "grit" in the signal when you push the preamp, but I find it satisfying for rock and metal.

Anybody has the schematics ?
So I look what's can be modified or upgraded ?