SSL 4k channel strip?

[verbos]

I went for this project a couple years ago, the SSL channel compressor I mean. I had only designed 1 sided PCB's in Illustrator so I had someone design the board for me in a real PCB program. I had 50 boards made. I never got it to work!

The problem is..... at least one of the dual pots (that was supposed to be board mounted) has one half reversed on the layout. There are no mounting holes on the board since it has 4 board mounted pots, they were to hold the board. Since they are layed out wrong that can't happen. However, the LED board which is attached and planned to be cut away for the metering, could be left attached and it's mounting holes used to mount the board, but then you'd need to come up with another LED board. The pots can be wired 2 (this is probably better anyway, cuz then you can use ANY size pots.

THE OFFER STANDS! anyone who agrees to troubleshoot the board, can have one for free. You then get it to work and report back to me/us. I would then sell off the remaining boards at a fair price, including the errata info. I do have the Gerber files and everything too, so someone could edit the files for the next production round too.

I have 3 front panels printed for an 8 channel unit in a Paia FracRack. I sure would love to complete that project!

PM me if you want to know more....


Mark

PS. this board is designed for the metal can AD536AJH and it's only about $8 from Digikey.

 

[verbos]

Oh and BTW....

I have an idea that I have been thinking about for a while that I'd like to bounce of you guys. I have built a bunch of synthesizer modules using Vactrols. Those are an LED and a photocell in a light-tight package. Buchla used them in lots of his modules, especially his filters and that gave me the idea. In cases, like the SSL EQ, where the exotic pots are hard to come by, you could make the resistive elements vactrols (or any old photo cells and LED to save cash - see http://www.musicsynthesizer.com/Hairball/hairball.html ) and control the whole stack with a single 100k linear pot. you could then tune in the curve of the response, the resistance and get a switch real easy.

IN FACT. Buchla designed a bandpass filter that had voltage control of frequency and bandwidth. these could be used for the 2 mid bands and a sallen-key design, like Don's Lopass Gate could be whipped up for the Hi and Lo bands. Add in a couple summing stages and you have a perimetric EQ without any funky pots, plus you can control it from voltage Of course you could then trim for the control range (or not).

No?

Mark

 

[Rob Flinn]

Hi Jakob - is there a Calrec compressor in your collection perhaps, I don't recall ever seeing a schematic for one.

I could be wrong but I thought Calrec used A&D compressors in there desks. Anyone verify this?

 

[hitchhiker]

maybe I'm missing something but why not design a ch strip with the
SSL ch comp and the calrec EQ ?

I'd be keen on trying that, but I've never heard the calrec.

cheers,
Lance

 

[tony dB]

very interesting ideas going on here Gentlemen, do not stop the flow :sam:

Butta, i'm in for some stuff you plan to come up with in multiples of 4 if they're close to SSL (or better!)

:sam:

Tony

 

[aurt]

I've got schematics for an 82E132 EQ card that looks very interesting. All the coupling caps are doubled up back to back and strapped to V+ to bias them properly. The outputs of the op-amps are also strapped to V+, to force class A behavior, I think. No shelf/bell on the LF. They seem like they might sound better than the 02s, etc. Perhaps someone can enlighten?

 

[henk]

I would like to get a copy of that great ssl eq.
Please send it to htgerbenzon(at)hotmail(dot)com

thanks

 

[SSLtech]

I think that is the G-series version... The least loved of all, if it is. -It might be the EQ-P (Pultec attempt)... I can't remember the numbers offhand!

The problem was that the bandwidth varies with boost/cut, and widens with more boost or cut... makes narrow cutting impossible, and also no bell/shelf option on either the HF or LF. that's the big problem with "constant 'Q' " circuits, they just don;t work well in rock and roll.

The G was supposed to replace the 'E'. Eventually there was sucha rebellion from users that it was dropped and only offered as special order,... which basically nobody asked for.

The ones to get are the 82E02 or the 82E242. The big difference is in the hi-pass.lo-pass filter slopes and the prescence or lack of a bypass switch for the high/low pass filters. The EQ itself essentially didn't change between the two versions.

Keith

 

[aurt]

I believe the 82e292 was(is) the G series eq. Yes, the main difference between it and the E series is that it is "constant bandwidth" versus the "constant Q" of the E. That and trading the bell/shelf option for the Hz*/3. The 132 seems to be something else entirely, perhaps a B series?
Sorry Henk, I don't have it scanned, or I'd put it up. Maybe I'll have someone do that for me. The desk whose documentation the scheme is in was seemingly Criteria's A room desk at one point, and does not seem to have any of the eqs in question (1/2 and 1/2 E & G). Then again, there are quite a few anomalies in the docs, and a mishmash of other oddities (xformer and xless ch. amps, an occasional mix mode meter mod).

 

[zmix]

[quote author="JPrisus"]Thanks SSLtech! I thought they were referred to as 'black' or 'brown' by the color of the VCA 'can' or something like that... but some of these stories have been told and re-told so many times they've become legends in and of themselves by now.[/quote]


The name "Black" and "Brown" referred to the color of the LF collet knob's color insert.

 

[zmix]

[quote author="SSLtech"]
incidentally, the later 'J' series consoles still use precisely the same circuit when switched to 'E' mode (constant bandwidth, as in the 242 and the 02) as opposed to the 'G' mode (constant Q as in the 'G' series console EQ)

With the exception of the brief dalliance with the 'G' series' original EQ design (the one with the "x3" and divide by 3" midrange switches) the EQ design itself has remained unchanged since the '02. The 242 just added bypass switches and another filter pole (18db instead of 12dB per 8ve). The current EQ still in production is the same, plus the ability to switch all bands between constatnt 'Q' and constant bandwidth... Nobody seems to like the constant bandwidth, so they tend to leave things in the "02/242" 'E' position.

Keith[/quote]

One other *big* difference is that the "E" series EQ has a bell/shelf on the LF eq....

I LOVE the e-series eq..!

I would love a pair in my rack...

 

[SSLtech]

[quote author="aurt"]I believe the 82e292 was(is) the G series eq.[/quote]The 82E242 is the black-knob 'E', the 292 must therefore be the 'G'...sounds right.
[quote author="aurt"]Yes, the main difference between it and the E series is that it is "constant bandwidth" versus the "constant Q" of the E.[/quote]other way round, actually... the 'G is constant 'Q', which is what's wrong with it... Even on the narrowest bandwidth setting, you cannot notch, since the constant 'Q' (i.e. constant angle of the slope of the bell at all gain settings) means that the more you dip, the wider it gets.... not bad for boosting, but utterly without use for cutting in Rock & roll applications.
[quote author="aurt"]That and trading the bell/shelf option for the Hz*/3. The 132 seems to be something else entirely, perhaps a B series?[/quote]No, the 'B' was the earlier 82E02, but populated with tantalums and usually unvarnished PCBs... I have one here in my spares kit. -Since we've eliminated the 'G' version (I knew the number was similar!) then this has to be the unloved Pultec option.
[quote author="aurt"]a mishmash of other oddities (xformer and xless ch. amps, an occasional mix mode meter mod).[/quote]Ah yes... meters to line in in mix was a common bolt-on goodie... I myself didn't like it, since it removed the opportunity to switch the channel meter to meter group out (which were usually used as the extra 32 FX send buses in mix!) It was rarely documented, and I only really encountered it here in the US... in the UK most folks took the meters as they came.
[quote author="zmix"]One other *big* difference is that the "E" series EQ has a bell/shelf on the LF eq.... [/quote]I mentioned this a number of posts ago... in fact not just the LF, but the LF and HF bands.
[quote author="zmix"]The name "Black" and "Brown" referred to the color of the LF collet knob's color insert.[/quote]yup.

Keith

 

[zmix]

[quote author="SSLtech"]
[quote author="zmix"]One other *big* difference is that the "E" series EQ has a bell/shelf on the LF eq.... [/quote]I mentioned this a number of posts ago... in fact not just the LF, but the LF and HF bands.[/quote]yup.

Keith[/quote]

I do know about the HF bell, but that is of minor importance to me, the bell in the lows is *fantastic* on drums.... I have demonstrated this difference many times over the years to studio owners. previously proud of their spanking new G series... I have helped sell many E series retrofits!

I would love a to buy or build a pair of these. I do have a pair of CF82E02 cards, and some pots... But not enough to complete the job....

What about doing a law-faking- taper on a linear pot? Or wiring the sweep in reverse?

I do realise that I tend to EQ on an SSL intuatively, that is, I know what sounds like what based on where the knob is positioned...

 

[SSLtech]

[quote author="zmix"]What about doing a law-faking- taper on a linear pot? Or wiring the sweep in reverse? [/quote]
You can wire it in reverse, but you can't fake a reverse log with a linear and a 'tugging' resistor, it's been done to death here and everyone thinks at first it can be done... but it can't. I know, I tried many times over!

Retrofits... well I made and sold retrofit SSL EQs in the 1980's/1990's... mine were based on Neve type SVF designs, but were constant-b/w as per the Neve and 'E' SSL versions. Leif Mases also made & sold retrofits, he preferred mine to the E and G, but he preferred his even more!

The G always sucked to me. The E was much better, but still not my first choice. (It got me a lot of silver, gold & platinum gold discs though!)

Keith

 

[zmix]

[quote author="SSLtech"][quote author="zmix"]What about doing a law-faking- taper on a linear pot? Or wiring the sweep in reverse? [/quote]
You can wire it in reverse, but you can't fake a reverse log with a linear and a 'tugging' resistor, it's been done to death here and everyone thinks at first it can be done... but it can't. I know, I tried many times over!

Retrofits... well I made and sold retrofit SSL EQs in the 1980's/1990's... mine were based on Neve type SVF designs, but were constant-b/w as per the Neve and 'E' SSL versions. Leif Mases also made & sold retrofits, he preferred mine to the E and G, but he preferred his even more!

The G always sucked to me. The E was much better, but still not my first choice. (It got me a lot of silver, gold & platinum gold discs though!)

Keith[/quote]

I recall speaking with Leif at the AES convention in NY in the late 80's when he was offering those cards. The studio manager I was with said (after Leif had left) "People are not booking the room because it sounds'better than an SSL', they are booking the room because it sounds like an SSL..."


SSL was the greatest company to deal with over tech support issues.

 

[SSLtech]

[quote author="zmix"]The studio manager I was with said (after Leif had left) "People are not booking the room because it sounds'better than an SSL', they are booking the room because it sounds like an SSL..."[/quote]Leif and I never made a fortune doing it. -Incidentally, must've been in the -90's because Leif's came out in 1990... a year after I engineered a 3-month album for him on a console fitted with my own version. We chatted about it a lot, went throught the schematics and he came up with a more refined version which suited what he wanted. He always said it was something that he'd considered doing for a few years, predating the actuality of working on mine, but I'd thought about it for a long time too... never actually getting off my butt and doing it until the late 80's.

[quote author="zmix"]SSL was the greatest company to deal with over tech support issues.[/quote]AFL.

(Abso-F*cking-Lutley)!

Werd.

Keith

 

[zmix]

[quote author="SSLtech"]ncidentally, must've been in the -90's because Leif's came out in 1990... a year after I engineered a 3-month album for him on a console fitted with my own version. We chatted about it a lot, went throught the schematics and he came up with a more refined version which suited what he wanted. He always said it was something that he'd considered doing for a few years, predating the actuality of working on mine, but I'd thought about it for a long time too... never actually getting off my butt and doing it until the late 80's.

[quote author="zmix"]SSL was the greatest company to deal with over tech support issues.[/quote]AFL.

(Abso-F*cking-Lutley)!

Werd.

Keith[/quote]

Right you are, Keith. It was probably the 1990 AES. Leif was touting a flatter shelf response at all gain settings.

Can you tell me more about the 'pultec' attempt EQ? I don't TR that one...