Svart
Well-known member
:green:
Oh i didn't mean it like that...
Oh i didn't mean it like that...
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
No, you cool.
I like Jensenmann's knobs.
His avater's I mean.
:green:
I like Jensenmann's knobs.
His avater's I mean.
:green:
Svart
Well-known member
my console uses j111 fets for reference.
alesis X2
alesis X2
jensenmann
Well-known member
:green:
Learner
Well-known member
[quote author="Andy Millar"]
- SV vs wein bridge simply doesn't matter. What it can affect is the 'law' of the controls, and it's amazing how much that can appear to affect the sound (when all it's really affecting is how quickly you can get the right sound). [/quote]
Hi Andy,
Thanks for your piece of mind, the advise is invaluable.
I guess when you said the law you are refering to the law of the pot resistance?
I am thinking about wiring up some filter bits, actually its more like modding urei's SVF EQ. :grin:
With some rediculous long chain just to avoid pots in the signal path, something like....
linear pot -> DC -> log amp (adjustable law) -> ADC -> serial to parallel shift register -> dual digital pot for Fc
All that in a place of a dual gang pot, talk about beating about the bush
:shock:
But I think the log amp part would be fun to fiddle with :grin:
I think may be I should just use a VCA or multiplier to cut out the digital stuff....
- SV vs wein bridge simply doesn't matter. What it can affect is the 'law' of the controls, and it's amazing how much that can appear to affect the sound (when all it's really affecting is how quickly you can get the right sound). [/quote]
Hi Andy,
Thanks for your piece of mind, the advise is invaluable.
I guess when you said the law you are refering to the law of the pot resistance?
I am thinking about wiring up some filter bits, actually its more like modding urei's SVF EQ. :grin:
With some rediculous long chain just to avoid pots in the signal path, something like....
linear pot -> DC -> log amp (adjustable law) -> ADC -> serial to parallel shift register -> dual digital pot for Fc
All that in a place of a dual gang pot, talk about beating about the bush
:shock:
But I think the log amp part would be fun to fiddle with :grin:
I think may be I should just use a VCA or multiplier to cut out the digital stuff....
Andy Millar
Well-known member
Wonderful stuff! And it should allow you to get any 'feel' you like on the controls.
Reminds me of a pot we tried making once, it was motor driven with one wafer of the pot feeding throung an A-D, a bit of simple digital furkling, a D-A and back into the motor. By changing the furkling factor we could make it act like a centre detent pot, a pot with step indents all the way round, or a sprung 'return to zero' pot. I can't remember what it was for, but it didn't matter after a while, it was just great fun trying to make it work!
Reminds me of a pot we tried making once, it was motor driven with one wafer of the pot feeding throung an A-D, a bit of simple digital furkling, a D-A and back into the motor. By changing the furkling factor we could make it act like a centre detent pot, a pot with step indents all the way round, or a sprung 'return to zero' pot. I can't remember what it was for, but it didn't matter after a while, it was just great fun trying to make it work!
Svart
Well-known member
:thumb:
I was really interested in cloning a pair of 9000 EQs. the pots are impossible to get but I think i could do some swapping of wafers on ganged pots to get what I want.. however time is not on my side and this is one for the back burner.. :sad:
I was really interested in cloning a pair of 9000 EQs. the pots are impossible to get but I think i could do some swapping of wafers on ganged pots to get what I want.. however time is not on my side and this is one for the back burner.. :sad:
Andy Millar
Well-known member
Depends what you want (and how close to the real thing):
The gain pots don't need to be centre tapped - I have no idea now why I put 9k53 resistors to the centre tap, must be some very subtle 'law bending', it will work without them although you won't know that 'zero is zero'. (And 9k53? That's just showing off. Why didn't I use 10k like I usually do? We must have used more elsewhere for some reason.)
For a rackmount, you could have seperate bell and shelf sections, this would reduce the four-gang pots down to two two-gangs.
Otherwise the only specials are the dual antilogs, and I think these are available off the shelf now?
The gain pots don't need to be centre tapped - I have no idea now why I put 9k53 resistors to the centre tap, must be some very subtle 'law bending', it will work without them although you won't know that 'zero is zero'. (And 9k53? That's just showing off. Why didn't I use 10k like I usually do? We must have used more elsewhere for some reason.)
For a rackmount, you could have seperate bell and shelf sections, this would reduce the four-gang pots down to two two-gangs.
Otherwise the only specials are the dual antilogs, and I think these are available off the shelf now?
Mlewis
Well-known member
Andy,
Very glad to have you here.
Everyone seems to have gone summing box crazy lately and neve have just brought out the 16 channel 8816 which retails at £2173.75 inc. VAT.
If it's not too much trouble, how would you go about designing the SSL rival? would you simply take line amp boards from the 9k and sum them into the 9k mix amp card or would that bump the price past the neve?
Would you mind describing your preffered input/mixbus/mixamp configuration for this type of application if that differs from the console?
fully ballanced mix bus or not?
DC coupled throughout?
any info would be very much appreciated
thanks
Mark.
Very glad to have you here.
Everyone seems to have gone summing box crazy lately and neve have just brought out the 16 channel 8816 which retails at £2173.75 inc. VAT.
If it's not too much trouble, how would you go about designing the SSL rival? would you simply take line amp boards from the 9k and sum them into the 9k mix amp card or would that bump the price past the neve?
Would you mind describing your preffered input/mixbus/mixamp configuration for this type of application if that differs from the console?
fully ballanced mix bus or not?
DC coupled throughout?
any info would be very much appreciated
thanks
Mark.
Andy Millar
Well-known member
Quick reply - I'll need to think a bit before the long reply!
This came up a couple of weeks ago when I was chatting with my nephew who's a protools engineer, largely working on classical recordings, and he was saying how much he dislikes the protools summing bus, which started me thinking.
Just checking the wish list:
16 Line inputs?
Pan?
Level control?
2 balanced outputs?
Should be really straightforward, 16 inputs isn't much gain so it may not need anything as sophisticated as the 9k mix amp - this was designed for potentially 128 inputs.
The one fancy touch I would strongly recommend is making it fully balanced throughout, I just need to think about how to do this with two gang rather than four gang pan pots.
I see the Neve offers 'instant recall', do you know if this includes pot positions? And is it useful in any case?
I actually need to build such a box for myself, but additionally with selection of each input onto one of two stereo busses, and I was thinking more in terms of £21.73!
This came up a couple of weeks ago when I was chatting with my nephew who's a protools engineer, largely working on classical recordings, and he was saying how much he dislikes the protools summing bus, which started me thinking.
Just checking the wish list:
16 Line inputs?
Pan?
Level control?
2 balanced outputs?
Should be really straightforward, 16 inputs isn't much gain so it may not need anything as sophisticated as the 9k mix amp - this was designed for potentially 128 inputs.
The one fancy touch I would strongly recommend is making it fully balanced throughout, I just need to think about how to do this with two gang rather than four gang pan pots.
I see the Neve offers 'instant recall', do you know if this includes pot positions? And is it useful in any case?
I actually need to build such a box for myself, but additionally with selection of each input onto one of two stereo busses, and I was thinking more in terms of £21.73!
NewYorkDave
Well-known member
If you're talking about panpots, here's a balanced implementation of the "Orban type."
http://groupdiy.twin-x.com/albums/userpics/10031/balpanpot.jpg
If the mix amp is balanced-to-ground (not floating), then it may work best if the pot wipers are grounded.
"B" means linear taper in the USA; it may mean something different elsewhere.
http://groupdiy.twin-x.com/albums/userpics/10031/balpanpot.jpg
If the mix amp is balanced-to-ground (not floating), then it may work best if the pot wipers are grounded.
"B" means linear taper in the USA; it may mean something different elsewhere.
Mlewis
Well-known member
thankyou very much for your reply.
my wish list would probably be 24 channels but otherwise your wish list seems ideal and it's easy enough to just add a few more channels and bump the gain or whatever.
probably high on people here's wish lists would be no or few exotic parts so dual or single pots only would be good.
it may not be particularly helpful to ask for the forum's wishlist because nobody here can ever agree when it comes to features!! but since i'm on the subject here's a few things that i'd have on my wishlist but i'm certainly not suggesting these as requirements:
solo - but that does seem a bit too extravagant unless theres a sneaky, easy way of doing it that i don't know!
- some simple controll room features, like monitor output attenuator etc
- just thinking out loud now, but maybe a facility to use an external (ie. tube or more coloured) mix amp instead of the internal squeaky clean mix amp for when a dirtier mix is required.
from what i understand the pot positions are sent via USB to some computer software for recal later. i can see your point about the recal. it's a nice touch but it really isn't vital and does no doubt require exotic pots everywhere complicating things (for us DIYers anyway)
once again, thankyou for taking the time to give this some thought
Mark.
my wish list would probably be 24 channels but otherwise your wish list seems ideal and it's easy enough to just add a few more channels and bump the gain or whatever.
probably high on people here's wish lists would be no or few exotic parts so dual or single pots only would be good.
it may not be particularly helpful to ask for the forum's wishlist because nobody here can ever agree when it comes to features!! but since i'm on the subject here's a few things that i'd have on my wishlist but i'm certainly not suggesting these as requirements:
solo - but that does seem a bit too extravagant unless theres a sneaky, easy way of doing it that i don't know!
- some simple controll room features, like monitor output attenuator etc
- just thinking out loud now, but maybe a facility to use an external (ie. tube or more coloured) mix amp instead of the internal squeaky clean mix amp for when a dirtier mix is required.
from what i understand the pot positions are sent via USB to some computer software for recal later. i can see your point about the recal. it's a nice touch but it really isn't vital and does no doubt require exotic pots everywhere complicating things (for us DIYers anyway)
once again, thankyou for taking the time to give this some thought
Mark.
synthetic
Well-known member
Does a summing mixer need a pan pot? It seems that most of the panning would be done in the DAW mixer. In my opinion, a summing mixer only needs an L/C/R switch, and possibly a stepped attenuator or defeatable fader for the level as well. This would make the sum mixer easily and predictably recallable.
Total Recall could be handled by a text note in the session folder.
Total Recall could be handled by a text note in the session folder.
JustinS
Well-known member
[quote author="synthetic"]Total Recall could be handled by a text note in the session folder. [/quote]
I have to say I was a little bemused about Neve putting that into their summing mixer... I mean how hard is 16 faders and pan pots to get right?? And if you have to "remix" it, presumably they weren't right in the first place yeah??
I kinda think also that if you want to add a little "flava" to your mix bus... then pump it through an eq or compressor that has the "flava" you're after... heck even just pump it through another line stage.
Justin.
[/quote]I have to say I was a little bemused about Neve putting that into their summing mixer... I mean how hard is 16 faders and pan pots to get right?? And if you have to "remix" it, presumably they weren't right in the first place yeah??
I kinda think also that if you want to add a little "flava" to your mix bus... then pump it through an eq or compressor that has the "flava" you're after... heck even just pump it through another line stage.
Justin.
synthetic
Well-known member
Good point - it probably needs a master insert for your SSL compressor and a master fader for fades.
So Andy, when can we order boards? :shock: :grin:
So Andy, when can we order boards? :shock: :grin:
SSLtech
Well-known member
Andy, a shaft-encoder version of the 'furkled' stepper motor arrangement ended up as the 9K/"A"-series machine control panel wheel.
It can be a scrub wheel for frame jog, a detented wheel for shuttle, a multi-detented wheel for shuttle (additional detents at 2x/4x/16x or whatever), and a sprung-return shuttle wheel. -There's probably more, but I can't remember.
With 9-pin control, this becomes a monster tool! -I'm seriously surprised that otehr people don't use it. -If Soundmaster or Motionworks had built it into a comprehensive controller, it'd be stunning!
Summing amplifiers: I like 'em. With or without panpots, with some line-inputs for FX returns from outboard gear... for that panpots might be a worthwhile addition. -perhaps some inputs with or without, or even a modular aproach?
Keith
It can be a scrub wheel for frame jog, a detented wheel for shuttle, a multi-detented wheel for shuttle (additional detents at 2x/4x/16x or whatever), and a sprung-return shuttle wheel. -There's probably more, but I can't remember.
With 9-pin control, this becomes a monster tool! -I'm seriously surprised that otehr people don't use it. -If Soundmaster or Motionworks had built it into a comprehensive controller, it'd be stunning!
Summing amplifiers: I like 'em. With or without panpots, with some line-inputs for FX returns from outboard gear... for that panpots might be a worthwhile addition. -perhaps some inputs with or without, or even a modular aproach?
Keith
Svart
Well-known member
you guys have a schemo for the 9k summing section? i'm very interested in this.
:thumb:
:thumb:
Mlewis
Well-known member
if pan pots arent needed because all the panning is done in the DAW then it might aswel be a stereo channel with a mono/stereo switch i guess (i seem to remember Jacob having this on his summing box). that'd save some front pannel space too.
If it's all coming from a DAW then the level adjust would be fairly redundent too wouldn't it? except of course for adjusting to the output level and ballancing of ones soundcard.
i for one would probably need most of my channels to have pan pots because i mix mono hardwear channels with DAW channels and if you can remember that channel 12 was swiched to LEFT then it's just as easy to remember that it was panned hard left, isn't it?
i'd also need the level adjust so that i could send channels from the DAW to a compressor at maximum level to preserve signal to noise ratio then reduce it down after the compressor for the mix
a choice of mono modules with pan and stereo modules with mono/stereo switch perhaps?
If it's all coming from a DAW then the level adjust would be fairly redundent too wouldn't it? except of course for adjusting to the output level and ballancing of ones soundcard.
i for one would probably need most of my channels to have pan pots because i mix mono hardwear channels with DAW channels and if you can remember that channel 12 was swiched to LEFT then it's just as easy to remember that it was panned hard left, isn't it?
i'd also need the level adjust so that i could send channels from the DAW to a compressor at maximum level to preserve signal to noise ratio then reduce it down after the compressor for the mix
a choice of mono modules with pan and stereo modules with mono/stereo switch perhaps?
Andy Millar
Well-known member
I'll be back thinking about the summing amp when I've got over one of our traditional British colds... I suppose there may be SOME benefits of living in the sunny US rather than the damp UK.
Mlewis
Well-known member
yeah... it's a real bummer this winters cold/flu bug. get well soon.
Similar threads
