Purusha
Well-known member
Hey Luny Tune, are you still watching this topic? Is it possible to hear the samples about the test mentioned before? OEP vs Lundahl vs no tranny...
Passive EQ + GSSL. Great 2-buss insert!
- Thread starter Luny Tune
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
[quote author="SSLtech"]///but with all that padding, it'll sound a little 'dead'... :shock:
Keef[/quote]
:shock: :green: :green:
Youz on FIRE, Keef!
:thumb:
Keef[/quote]
:shock: :green: :green:
Youz on FIRE, Keef!
:thumb:
[quote author="Tillmann"][quote author="SSLtech"]///but with all that padding, it'll sound a little 'dead'... :shock:
Keef[/quote]
:shock: :green: :green:
Youz on FIRE, Keef!
:thumb:[/quote]
He never said he wished to be cremated....
Sorry, that joke was shit.
Keef[/quote]
:shock: :green: :green:
Youz on FIRE, Keef!
:thumb:[/quote]
He never said he wished to be cremated....
Sorry, that joke was shit.
Luny Tune
Well-known member
Wow! :shock: I didn't think there would be this interest! :grin:
Great! I will dig out the test files this evening.
I agree completely with Black Dog. There's absolutely no need to spend the extra money on Lundahls here. Everybody can hear for themselves later though... :wink:
Thanks for assisting with the great drawing, Black Dog! That's a keeper! :razz:
Great! I will dig out the test files this evening.
I agree completely with Black Dog. There's absolutely no need to spend the extra money on Lundahls here. Everybody can hear for themselves later though... :wink:
Thanks for assisting with the great drawing, Black Dog! That's a keeper! :razz:
Luny Tune
Well-known member
All files are 44.1 KHz/24 bit/wav and takes up about 24 MB of disk space each. These are somewhat subtle we're changes listening for so I thought a linear file format was needed.
I've done my very best in trying to even out the levels to a point where there's just no difference in the perception of loudness so that only the influence of the trannies is audible.
Mix through GSSL without transformers.
Mix through GSSL with Lundahl LL5402 transformers.
Mix through GSSL with OEP 262A2E transformers.
Mix through GSSL with Lundahl LL5402 as input transformers and OEP 262A2E as output transformers.
Throwing the input transformers in there was possible because of the passive eq I built into it. The filter itself is not active of course.
Please post your opinion!
I've done my very best in trying to even out the levels to a point where there's just no difference in the perception of loudness so that only the influence of the trannies is audible.
Mix through GSSL without transformers.
Mix through GSSL with Lundahl LL5402 transformers.
Mix through GSSL with OEP 262A2E transformers.
Mix through GSSL with Lundahl LL5402 as input transformers and OEP 262A2E as output transformers.
Throwing the input transformers in there was possible because of the passive eq I built into it. The filter itself is not active of course.
Please post your opinion!
alo luny
first,let me congratulate for this fenomenal song.what a voice,and emotion the singer has.i`m druling my keyboard.
as for the ssl,with my cheap heaphones it`s hard to tell,but i liked the first(no mods),and then the last(lundhall in, oep out),tough very subtlle.
best regards
pedro
first,let me congratulate for this fenomenal song.what a voice,and emotion the singer has.i`m druling my keyboard.
as for the ssl,with my cheap heaphones it`s hard to tell,but i liked the first(no mods),and then the last(lundhall in, oep out),tough very subtlle.
best regards
pedro
Purusha
Well-known member
A quick question. What is the use of the CANs for the OEPs? Should I buy them also or it's not necessary?
BTW Luny Tune, thanks for the files!!!
BTW Luny Tune, thanks for the files!!!
Luny Tune
Well-known member
I'm not absolutely sure, Purusha. I'm not sure if the cans are really necessary in the output there, but I thought it was better to be safe than sorry.
Purusha
Well-known member
OK. Thanks.
I just listened to the first 10 seconds of each sample cause I don't have DSL internet connection available. Will have to download the whole files some other day from another place.
The difference is really subtle. The most noticeable is with Lundahl in and OEP out obviously. The sound there opens up the most. Hmm, I can't really say if the OEPs are really that much different or better to spend few more bucks. I got the impression that OEPs smooth out the highs a bit and Lundahl add some air in the mix. I have to check this in the morning again on my Genelecs but hey if I can't hear it on some other common speakers than also anyone else won't, right?
What do you hear, guys?
I just listened to the first 10 seconds of each sample cause I don't have DSL internet connection available. Will have to download the whole files some other day from another place.
The difference is really subtle. The most noticeable is with Lundahl in and OEP out obviously. The sound there opens up the most. Hmm, I can't really say if the OEPs are really that much different or better to spend few more bucks. I got the impression that OEPs smooth out the highs a bit and Lundahl add some air in the mix. I have to check this in the morning again on my Genelecs but hey if I can't hear it on some other common speakers than also anyone else won't, right?
What do you hear, guys?
Luny Tune
Well-known member
The step from no trannies to one set of trannies IS somewhat subtle. However, when I listen to A/B on good speakers there's just NO way that I'll ever let a mix leave my studio without having been through a set of trannies. OEPs or Lundahls. I don't personally notice a difference in character between the two. Sometimes I think I hear "something" but listening to it again I'm not sure. So I'm open to the possibility that there MAY be a difference, but it's clear to me that it's so insignificant that I don't really care.
But when you add yet another set of trannies the change is quite significant. In fact it's just more of "the same" that happens with just one set. I can only recommend stuffing the passive eq in there and enjoy the ekstra set of trannies that provides. :razz:
This cracked me up the other day:
Langevin on their tube- and transformerless version of the Pultec EQP1A:
People often ask us if our Pultec EQ's sound like the old ones to which we reply, "Yes! But better! The originals had three transformers in the signal path whereas ours can be used completely transformerless. Our Manley Enhanced Pultec has a vastly superior B+ power supply, with regulated and balanced heater supply. Our line amp is known to be killer-sounding. The components we use today just weren't available 20 years ago. So, if you want a project with crackling carbon pots, dirty open frame wafer switches, 5% and 10% tolerance noisy carbon resistors, exposed tubes sticking out the back of the 3U chassis, etc., go pay top dollar for an antique Pultec!"
But when you add yet another set of trannies the change is quite significant. In fact it's just more of "the same" that happens with just one set. I can only recommend stuffing the passive eq in there and enjoy the ekstra set of trannies that provides. :razz:
This cracked me up the other day:
Langevin on their tube- and transformerless version of the Pultec EQP1A:
People often ask us if our Pultec EQ's sound like the old ones to which we reply, "Yes! But better! The originals had three transformers in the signal path whereas ours can be used completely transformerless. Our Manley Enhanced Pultec has a vastly superior B+ power supply, with regulated and balanced heater supply. Our line amp is known to be killer-sounding. The components we use today just weren't available 20 years ago. So, if you want a project with crackling carbon pots, dirty open frame wafer switches, 5% and 10% tolerance noisy carbon resistors, exposed tubes sticking out the back of the 3U chassis, etc., go pay top dollar for an antique Pultec!"
jensenmann
Well-known member
Very nice song, indeed
The differences are really subtle. Maybe my speakers (JBL4312B/NS10) aren´t good enough for judging things like that :roll: or in other words the circuit isn´t too fuzzy about trannies or not. The version I liked most was OEP+Lundahl but I couldn´t necessarily tell you what the difference really is. It´s more like the OEP+LL versions "feels" better. :roll:
I guess for me this improvement wouldn´t be worth the price of two OEPs+2xLundahls
The differences are really subtle. Maybe my speakers (JBL4312B/NS10) aren´t good enough for judging things like that :roll: or in other words the circuit isn´t too fuzzy about trannies or not. The version I liked most was OEP+Lundahl but I couldn´t necessarily tell you what the difference really is. It´s more like the OEP+LL versions "feels" better. :roll:
I guess for me this improvement wouldn´t be worth the price of two OEPs+2xLundahls
mattmoogus
Well-known member
[quote author="Luny Tune"]This cracked me up the other day:
[/quote]
I havnt heard the Manley/Langevin pultec but Id tend to agree about the tubes and transformers not being the desirable part of the pultec circuit. The eq circuit itsself is really where the magic is and when it surrounded by neutral sounding amps I think its even more versatile than the normal setup.
M@
[/quote]
I havnt heard the Manley/Langevin pultec but Id tend to agree about the tubes and transformers not being the desirable part of the pultec circuit. The eq circuit itsself is really where the magic is and when it surrounded by neutral sounding amps I think its even more versatile than the normal setup.
M@
Luny Tune
Well-known member
Well, I have both the Pultec with its tube and trannies and I have the passive filter without the tube and the difference to me is clearly the silky high end and the warm low end with the gain stage in the Pultec. The filter alone is on the other really crisp and has a very..."precise" feel to it. I love both of them but there's no chance that the filter alone will warm anything up on it's own. It needs the tube gain stage (and transformers) for that. In my opinion of course... :grin:
By the way, the Manley Pultec and the Langevin Pultec are two different products although the filter section itself may be identical.
By the way, the Manley Pultec and the Langevin Pultec are two different products although the filter section itself may be identical.
[quote author="mattmoogus"]
I havnt heard the Manley/Langevin pultec but Id tend to agree about the tubes and transformers not being the desirable part of the pultec circuit. The eq circuit itsself is really where the magic is and when it surrounded by neutral sounding amps I think its even more versatile than the normal setup.
M@[/quote]
Funny, I've heard a lot of people say that it's ALL about the transformers on the Pultecs and that's why they're so good. I'm not saying one is right or wrong, it's just interesting how subjective it all is. I've not worked with a Pultec-style circuit without transformers and the like, so I can't personally comment. I have worked on original Pultec and Tubetec's EQ's and they are very, very nice (DUH, everyone says in unison)!
:grin:
Actually, I think some of the early German EQ's, solid-state included, are based on the same type of principal as the Pultec circuit (low phase distortion, etc). I've used those and like them a lot.
T
I havnt heard the Manley/Langevin pultec but Id tend to agree about the tubes and transformers not being the desirable part of the pultec circuit. The eq circuit itsself is really where the magic is and when it surrounded by neutral sounding amps I think its even more versatile than the normal setup.
M@[/quote]
Funny, I've heard a lot of people say that it's ALL about the transformers on the Pultecs and that's why they're so good. I'm not saying one is right or wrong, it's just interesting how subjective it all is. I've not worked with a Pultec-style circuit without transformers and the like, so I can't personally comment. I have worked on original Pultec and Tubetec's EQ's and they are very, very nice (DUH, everyone says in unison)!
:grin:
Actually, I think some of the early German EQ's, solid-state included, are based on the same type of principal as the Pultec circuit (low phase distortion, etc). I've used those and like them a lot.
T
mattmoogus
Well-known member
I guess it depends on your method of working. I tend to use nice sounding mics and pres (always with transformers) when tracking and get the sound straight up. Ive found my solid state transformerless pultecs incredibly useful for tracking (even though I made them for mastering) because I can take a sound thats already beautiful and make it brighter, or deeper etc without overcooking it and loosing any of the original character that I like. I agree a similar eq with really warm amps still sounds nice, but I dont find them quite as useful.
Luny Tune, what were you using to drive the 'naked' filter circuit? It can present very heavy loads at some settings and if the output stage preceeding it cant drive it, the eq will sound less than great...
M@
Luny Tune, what were you using to drive the 'naked' filter circuit? It can present very heavy loads at some settings and if the output stage preceeding it cant drive it, the eq will sound less than great...
M@
mattmoogus
Well-known member
Oh, the wav files just downloaded!
Hate to be a party pooper but I vastly prefer the transformerless mix. If I was mastering it, thats the one Id want! The low end is much nicer, smoother and more extended, the side stick sound has the perfect balance of snap and detail without being harsh. In the OEP version it sounds trashy and the bass sounds kinda distorted, and the kick sounds constrained.
Its a great piece of production though, cool song, great sounds and great mix. To me, the OEPs only takes away from the lovely sounds you pulled. It would be interesting to know which one your mastering engineer picks.
M@
Hate to be a party pooper but I vastly prefer the transformerless mix. If I was mastering it, thats the one Id want! The low end is much nicer, smoother and more extended, the side stick sound has the perfect balance of snap and detail without being harsh. In the OEP version it sounds trashy and the bass sounds kinda distorted, and the kick sounds constrained.
Its a great piece of production though, cool song, great sounds and great mix. To me, the OEPs only takes away from the lovely sounds you pulled. It would be interesting to know which one your mastering engineer picks.
M@
Luny Tune
Well-known member
Thanks Matt! Great input. :grin:
I think you're absolutely right that it's (also) a matter of working methods. But don't misunderstand me, I really think the "naked" eq totally rocks! I love it. I'm just saying that I do hear a difference and that the difference is "silky smooth" which, in my opinion, you can't say about the naked eq stage. I don't think "smooth" equals "rich" as many manufactorers seem to promote 'cause the naked eq is certainly rich. It's just more crisp. To me, anyways... :grin:
This is also to say that it's driven well with my equipment and I love what it does. It's actually in the path on the test file with Lundahls+OEPs. So you can hear there that it's driven as well as going straight into a GSSL which is the case on with the other files.
It was important to me that I had the levels evened out so there wouldn't be that wow-factor arising due to higher volume on either test file. So it's great to have your view on this since I know that we can judge these files fair!
I don't use tube gear other than the Pultec så that is exactly where I get the tube sound if I want it and thus there are not many trannies in my gear other than the ones I've installed. :wink:
I think you're absolutely right that it's (also) a matter of working methods. But don't misunderstand me, I really think the "naked" eq totally rocks! I love it. I'm just saying that I do hear a difference and that the difference is "silky smooth" which, in my opinion, you can't say about the naked eq stage. I don't think "smooth" equals "rich" as many manufactorers seem to promote 'cause the naked eq is certainly rich. It's just more crisp. To me, anyways... :grin:
This is also to say that it's driven well with my equipment and I love what it does. It's actually in the path on the test file with Lundahls+OEPs. So you can hear there that it's driven as well as going straight into a GSSL which is the case on with the other files.
It was important to me that I had the levels evened out so there wouldn't be that wow-factor arising due to higher volume on either test file. So it's great to have your view on this since I know that we can judge these files fair!
I don't use tube gear other than the Pultec så that is exactly where I get the tube sound if I want it and thus there are not many trannies in my gear other than the ones I've installed. :wink:
Brad McGowan
Well-known member
I'm assuming that the resistor change that was made to the circuit when adding output transformers is the same regardless of the make of transformer used? Is that a correct assumption?
Has anyone out there tried some Jensens or Cinemags?
thanks,
Brad
Has anyone out there tried some Jensens or Cinemags?
thanks,
Brad
The difference is very subtle on these indeed. I'm monitoring at home so it's hard to say. Tried it on some swank Sennheiser open-eared phones and then on home speakers so that subtlety may have something to do with not having great monitor choices here. Usually I can really pic out detail differences on nice headphones, but this was just the opposite. I heard more difference on the cheap speakers with a graphic EQ set in iTunes than on the headphones. I think that both transformers in line make the mix punch a bit more on the low-end and gels the mix together a bit more yet by doing that, reduces the separation a bit, however subtle. The biggest difference was on the low-end. A bit more punch on the kick and the bass sounds a bit bigger, which to you sounded trashy, Matt? I can see the constrained and distorted comment, but I don't think it's bad. I think that I liked both transformers the most, but would definitely settle for all four examples.
Also, hearing how the entire song flows from top to bottom might make me change my mind. Maybe the added punch isn't what the track needs. But... :roll: ... whatever....
T
Also, hearing how the entire song flows from top to bottom might make me change my mind. Maybe the added punch isn't what the track needs. But... :roll: ... whatever....
T
Luny Tune
Well-known member
Yes, there is that other thing that Matt adresses, and now you Tillmann. Is this what this particular mix needs? Maybe...maybe not, but I mixed the song without transformers on the output. The GSSL is at work on the master insert but it wasn't fitted with transformers at the time. Had there been transformers in the unit I might have made different choices when mixing, so it's quite difficult to judge anything in that respect based on this. This is hardly a "neutral mix", if I can put it like that. This is a promo mix of the song and was done on my Soundtracs MIDI PC desk but I only had the GSSL at that time. No G1176s, Pultec og the built in passive eq in one of the GSSLs. I used dbx163 and RNC comps, Logics native stuff and other curious gear. I think I did pretty well, but I can't wait to hear what happens when I introduce all my diy gear to it. :razz:
This test was only to have som evidence of what transformers bring to the picture, and how Lundahls and OEPs differ in the GSSL particularly.
I would love it if someone could do the same with the G1176, by the way.:wink:
(FYI: My girlfriend writes and sings, I play and produce. Nice little arrangement. :wink
This test was only to have som evidence of what transformers bring to the picture, and how Lundahls and OEPs differ in the GSSL particularly.
I would love it if someone could do the same with the G1176, by the way.:wink:
(FYI: My girlfriend writes and sings, I play and produce. Nice little arrangement. :wink
