Finest Audio in West Texas

In Testing NOW!

We've been busy testing and evaluating lots of gear in the past few weeks...Look for our reviews at MojoPie.Com or check back here in a few months.  Just to name a few, we are reporting on:

- ADesigns Pacifica Preamp

- Pearlman TD1 Mic

 

 

---

 

In keeping with Wireline Studio's relentless search for professional, higher end, multi-application gear, we will be posting reviews for some newer products introduced or showcased at the Summer NAMM in Austin....In some cases, I initiated the contact, in some cases, the manufacturers initiated the contact; in either case, the equipment representatives were told UP FRONT that we do NOT sugar coat reviews (we call them like we hear them) and that we will NOT accept free equipment - as with all reviews of gear, integrity is first and foremost, therefore any gear reviews prepared by any staff member of Wireline Studio was based on gear that was bought and paid for...

With that said, check either here or WWW.MojoPie.Com for upcoming reviews on:  

FULL BORE GEAR REVIEWS:  In the following sections, we examine many well known (and not so well known) pieces of gear...doesn't matter if its high end, budget, or whatever...we call them as we hear/use them, good or bad.

Many of these reviews have been submitted for publication on gear oriented sites (without their help, a lot of this would have been impossible), however due to space constraints, the original editorials have been truncated to fit the needs of the formal sites.  Here, we offer the full blown, unabridged editions of the reviews...very wordy sometimes, often too detailed, but our reviews nonetheless.  Please note I fully believe that our reviews at places such as www.mojopie.com are by far more suited for the majority of people, but for us obsessive types, the following reviews are presented.

Take a few moments and read what our opinions are, based strictly on real world, hands on experiences...

 

So, What is This Section All About?

Good question.  This is where we post the full blown, somewhat technical and in depth reviews of gear Wireline Studio has meticulously tested over the past several months.  Many of these reviews have been shortened for space contraints at several popular gear oriented sites...here's where you get the full, unabridged information.  This is also the place to find out about high end gear that Wireline Studio not only endorses, but represent as a specialty outlet.

 

---

 

Samplitude Professional Version 9.01

© Ken Morgan, 2006

 

 

Samplitude has been arguably simply the best PC based DAW for several years.  The user base seems to be fiercely loyal, and for good reason: sonic superiority and ease of use (after overcoming a pretty steep learning curve).  Let me be upfront by saying this review may be biased, as I have been a Samplitude user for many years.  The following represents daily personal experience as well as telephonic or other correspondence with some very high profile, well known engineers and producers (who shall, at their requests, remain unnamed for this review).  Also note that a fully comprehensive review of such a feature packed and extensive application would take up 50 pages, therefore this review is based on the highlights (and low points) most applicable, as deemed by the reviewer.  All testing was done using RME Fireface ADDA and with either an AMD64 2G DDRAM or an Intel based P4, 1G RAM, both single core systems.

 

That said, let’s get on with it.

 

Samplitude is a high end audio and MIDI recorder, editor, sequencer, and mixing program designed for PC use.  With a new street price of around $1000, Samplitude is obviously targeting the professional higher end users, and has a feature set to match the price.  Good news for Mac users: there are numerous reports that the Samplitude runs flawlessly with Mac’s “Boot Camp,” so the rest of the DAW world can now join the party.

 

Samplitude (and its bigger brother Sequoia) feature the usual stuff found in most DAWs, such as VST/DX support, VSTi support, Remix agent, and so on.  What sets Samplitude apart from the rest of the pack is the unique ‘object editing’ process, in which a portion of a wave can be tweaked, manipulated, mangled, or whatever with its own set of plugs, all done non-destructively.  What this means to the user that if you want to add a 2db boost to the lead guitar break, while adding some echo, an eq boost, etc…the kicker is all of this is done non destructively.  Users can ‘freeze’ the object to free up CPU space if desired/needed, and unfreeze at any time to make any additional tweaks.  This is a form of automation that is much easier and more intuitive to use than any other method I’ve encountered.

 

The visuals of Samplitude 9 have improved drastically over all previous versions.  The on screen mixer is much easier to read; and the new feature of ‘drag and drop’ effects from one channel to another has been a God-send.  The track view has changed drastically as well.  To the far left, a new window has been added that shows everything you need to know about the selected track: input sources, output destination, what plug ins are on and engaged, etc. The proprietary effects are simple to understand, easy on the eyes, and very well marked.    These are very welcomed and much needed enhancements/additions. It should also be noted that several mixer, track view, and other skins are available from Synthax, Magix’s primary distributor.  Thanks!

 

Another thing that makes Samp 9 special is the ‘hybrid engine’ approach.  Simply put, users can decide on how much CPU is used for a project, and how the computer will process your tracks.  You can set the system so everything is routed via ASIO, or everything routed through the VIP (the command set of instructions on how tracks, effects, and routings are handled in the box), or a pre-selected points in between.  That’s right: two separate engines!  This is a major deal, as it allows for tracking to subgroups, effects monitoring while tracking, and overall unity in work flow.  To the best of my knowledge, there is nothing else like the hybrid engine system.  (A reply from the Magix lead development team states that the VIP [virtual project] buffers are larger than the ASIO buffer, thus resulting in better and more stable playback…I’ve found this to be true)  It does have some issues (discussed below), but is a powerful tool to allow real time monitoring, with effects and routing.  Frankly the hybrid engine is a major breakthrough that will be surely copied by other PC based DAWs…giving much of the real time processing of ProTools a major run for its money.  Samplitude did not invent software effects mixing and monitoring, but they sure got it right.  The use of two separate buffer systems and engines provide the benefits of both hard disc recorder and real-time mixer, all in one application.

 

Until Version 8, most of  Samp’s internal effects were kind of cheesy.  So, to solve this, the Magix Corporation went out and got one of the most respected software effects guys out there, Sacha Eversmeier, of “DigitalFishPhones” (premier plug ins at zero cost) fame.  In Version 8, Sascha introduced the Analog Suites, a set of specialty effects including a magnificent tape emulation system, killer compressors, and a superlative 2 buss mix compressor.  According to Samplitude, these are not meant to be emulations of popular hardware, but in all honesty, for many things it’s pretty tough to tell the difference between Samp plugins and high end hardware.  In version 9, these proprietary plugs were improved to allow greater user control, and added “Amphibia,” an absolutely jaw dropping channel strip/tube emulator/mix sweetener that has become an indispensable tool in our sonic arsenal.  A very pleasant surprise is the factory presets.  They are in general very usable, if not just right for the application.  If you get a chance, visit Sascha’s site at www.digitalfishphones.com for some very interesting insights and suggestions.  Great stuff!

 

Also added was (finally!) a superlative reverb, known as “Variverb.”  This reverb is stupidly easy to use, yet offers a sense of realism and depth that has caused me to completely quit using the UAD Dreamverb, Plate Reverb, Realverb, and most other 3^rd party VST reverbs.  To this user, the addition of the Variverb was well worth the upgrade cost from Version 8.  And yes, with the hybrid engine engaged, reverb tails are now present!

 

Traditional automation has been vastly improved in Version 9.  Users can now automated aux sends, aux returns, of course track faders, etc…There have been some reported issues with automation with certain VSTi programs, however most users have reported success with automations in general.  To this user, reliable automation was the major roadblock in our quest to become a mixerless studio.  To drive home the point: we have de-commissioned our console (a tremendous sounding Ramsa 8716) and mix now in the box.  That is indeed quite an accomplishment.  I am told by the Magix development team that any VST automation issues reported by forum members and users will be addressed in the next maintenance update.

 

(Remember, this review is as unbiased as I can make it, but it’s very difficult to critically analyze the primary tool used to feed my family, pay my mortgage, etc…)

 

Samp’s proprietary EQs have traditionally been very good, if not superlative.  It is a traditional 4 band EQ, and does exactly as advertised.  Samp 9 continues with this excellent EQ, no major changes there.  Track, folder, and overall file management has been improved from Version 8.

 

Now the only question that really matters: Are there any sonic improvement offered by Samplitude 9 from previous versions?  In my opinion, yes, a dramatic one; not just an improvement in clarity, separation, and spatial perception, but an apparent improvement in all aspects of the audio heard, and in the results of editing.  Lows are deeper and more pronounced, mids remain punchy are not muddy in the least, and the highs are crisper and sharper without being harsh.  I don’t know how this was accomplished, but it was.  Some users have reported they cannot determine a difference, yet this reviewer has done significant blind testing (with the aid of an assistant) and with all things being equal, selected the Samp 9 playbacks as being superior exactly 100% of the time.  Samplitude 9 was chosen to remix/remaster some higher end client projects, after they were already done and ready for delivery to the client or shipped for mass production.  Note that the Version 8 mixes were done with a console, and the Version 9 mixes done totally in the box.  I never thought I would say this, but in these cases, in the box provided better results than out of the box.  Again, this is no insignificant matter.

 

Samplitude 9 is not without issues, though.  For one, Magix is still behind cutting edge features such as hardware insert latency automatically compensated for (this has been a feature of other high end DAWs for a few years – Magix’s development team has assured us that this will be added in an update, but when?  Don’t know)…Samplitude also added a somewhat half-hearted auto music maker, which frankly has no real purpose for the high end audio user.  Robota, a digital drum VSTi introduced in Version 8, is still in Version 9, and like the auto accompaniment tool, has no real function (my opinion only).  Samplitude 9, when in hybrid mode, is fairly CPU intensive as well.  Attempting to use other CPU intensive 3^rd party effects (such as the magnificent WizooReverb 2) caused both our systems to lock up, requiring a hard re-boot to continue working. To continue using Wizoo, we had to reset the hybrid engine to classic mode (the way most DAWs work) or make radical changes in Wizoo’s CPU consumption.

 

Another issue important to some users is interfacing with hardware controllers. Most suggest the more popular controllers work well, within the controller’s limitations.  Once interesting issue is now the Tascam US2400 has been discontinued, there are no 24 bank devices available.  The Mackie XT is reported to be performing well, as are the single track devices from Frontier Designs and Presonus.  

 

One high end user stated emphatically that Version 9 was very unstable (but the .01 patch corrected much of the instability problems he was having); while another high end user focusing more in the remote classical field stated that the new features should give even the most hard core ProTools users something to think about.  I agree with the latter; as the obvious sonic superiority of Samplitude combined with the hybrid engine is actually a much better sounding system, with almost all of the ‘benefits’ offered by ProTools’ use of proprietary DSP cards.  Samplitude 9 works seamlessly with UAD and TC Powercore systems, however our use of UAD plugs has all but disappeared, as the proprietary plugs in Samplitude are, again in this reviewer’s opinion, superior than anything offered by UAD. 

 

One question that is being raised by many (forum users, high end users, and especially myself) is: who exactly is Samplitude’s targeted market group?  Samplitude has shown time and again its superior sonic quality, targeting the highest end users, but then add in consumer/hobbyist ‘features’ such as Robota, Auto-Accompanying routines, and other ‘features’ that are of little or no value to the high end user.  Granted, unless these things are activated, they just sit there and don’t take away from any of Samp’s ultra high end feel. One might guess that Magix is steering the high end users to the company’s flagship, Sequoia, but Sequoia includes these dubious features as well.  To this reviewer, the company’s long term vision is as important as the immediate results of daily use.  It would be appreciated if some sort of announcement regarding exactly who the target demographic for Samplitude really is, and end the speculation once and for all.  (A reply from Magix suggested that the auto jam is a handy tool to use as an audio sketchpad, and Robota as a drum box…I can see where Magix is coming from with these…for some Samplitude and/or Sequoia users, these have been reported as useful…Point conceded!)

 

It would appear the more CPU horsepower (as in dual core) the more efficiently and powerfully Samplitude 9 runs.  We did not test this, yet the overwhelming majority of reports and forum exchanges suggest this to be the case.

 

In a nutshell, Samplitude 9.01 is an extremely powerful recording, editing, mixing, and mastering tool that has no equal.  Understanding how the object editing is critical, as once this is understood and mastered, making music in Samplitude 9 becomes almost too easy.  We have looked at and considered nearly every other platform currently available (including Nuendo, ProTools HD, Cubase, Sonar, SAWStudio, you name it…) and have re-committed to Samplitude.  I make my living as an engineer, and since upgrading to Samplitude 9, my life has become much easier, my products much better sounding than ever before, and find I have better results with less effort than ever before.

 

(Addendum: Thanks to Volker Muhle and the entire development team at Magix for their input and clarification on this review.  Also thanks to everyone who provided their individual input, either by phone, email, or on the Samplitude forums.)

Rane C4 Compressor/Limiter © Ken Morgan, 2006

Compressors, the topic of many a discussion among the pro audio community, really are subjective devices.  They come in all flavors, price ranges, soft and harware versions, digital and analog, tube or solid state, optical or Voltage controlled (VCA), and in reality are not all that exciting but are a necessity of life.  A very pleasant surprise in the world of compression, though, is the Rane C4.  If you thought this device was just for live use, think again.

What it is: The Rane C4 is a 4 channel device, with each channel featuring a digitally controlled compression circuit with the usual controls (attack, release, threshold, etc), but sweetens the deal with a highly accurate and effective de-esser (more accurately, a dynamic EQ), automatic release setting, side chain capability, and tops off with a hard knee limiter.  Yes, this is a digital device, conducting all of its firepower via DSP, but somehow retains the old school warmth and...well...reality of pure analog devices we all lust for.. Retailing at $999.00, the C4 is housed in an extremely sturdy steel chassis, 2 rack spaces, and features a real internal power supply connected with a standard EIC power cable (no wall warts!)  Even loaded with great features, All this comes out to around $250 a channel, (very low end territory) but this is no low end sounding device!  Each channel also features a fully adjustable (and very accurate) knob to adjust the de-essing frequency and levels, compression bypass, plus an overall channel output.  Channels 1+2 and 3+4 can be stereo linked, to address any stereo input sources.  The neatly laid out front panel has knobs and switches a-plenty, but is very intelligently laid out and easy to read.  The rear panel features both ¼” and XLR ins and outs (all balanced) plus the sidechain plugs.  Again, lots of things in a small amount of real estate, but very easy to understand.  Rane obviously put a lot of thought into the ergonomics of it all. 

What it does:  In a nutshell, everything one could hope for in the realm of dynamics control.  Since our studio is primarily geared and designed for working with acoustic intruments and voices, this is where we focused our testing.  All tests were done in actual tracking situations, a real world, trial by fire, application.  Preamps used included a pair of ADesigns P1s and an EM-Silver, a pair of OSA MP1-Cs, and AN old style Mindprint Envoice.  Using the line inputs of the studio’s RME Fireface800 and Samplitude 8.3, we fired everything up and got to it.  All testing was done on the inbound signals to get a real time, real life feel for what the C4 is capable of, and how well it performs under pressure.   

-         Acoustic Guitars: Using our pair of Martins (D1936 and 000-1CE) and the mentioned preamps, we set the compressor channels to the factory recommended presets.  We found that the presets sustained way too long, but a simple adjustment of the release knobs fixed the problem.  We ended up using about a 4:1 ratio, quick attack and medium (50 ms) release to capture some absolutley killer tracks.  There were no traces of un-natural pumping or breathing sounds normally associated with lower cost compressors – the Rane just did its job without noticable coloration.  One cool note: the front panel allows for a frequency- dependant compression setup, so that certain frequencies will be bypassed for each individual channel.  This feature allowed the lows from the Dreadnaught sized Martin to be controlled without effecting the highs much at all – a VERY cool feature (that should be included on compressors costing 10 times as much)  On each track, no further dynamics manipulation was needed; the C4 got it right coming in, without coloration or artifical frequency manipulation.  The obvious benefit is this cuts mixing time in half.

-         Banjo:  Since the project we tested the device was a country gospel project, we added some banjo tracks, with the same attack times but a bit longer release time (banjos are not known for their sustain….)  The results were the same: powerful, dynamic, but controlled tracks. All notes on the instrument were equally loud or soft, virtually eliminating any dead spots on the neck or the instrument’s skin.  Both claw style and ‘modern’ style (using a thumbpick) were tracked, with equally remarkable results.  using an RCA SK46 ribbon mic, the results were exactly what we were looking for.

-         Vocals: Ah, yes – everyone’s favorite topic…Our vocalist for the project (female alto) is very dynamic in her singing, and goes from a whisper to a powerful and loud voice in a very short time.  As such, tracking her without benefit of inbound compression could have been a real headache.  Connecting a Peluso 2247 to an OSA pre feeding the one channel of the C4, we were able to capture her extreme dynamics without sacrificing the feel.  Again, a little went a long way, with attack and release times about medium, threshold approx -5db.  We were able to capture the purity and soul of her singing, without sacrificing the sound.  Remarkable results, but considering the per-channel price, extraordinary.  We got the same results with a soprano and male baritone/bass for backup singers.  At this point, we realized that Rane really has a winner with the C4.  But there’s more!  With vocals, the de-essing (dynamic EQ) capability really saved the day.  Our vocalist needed just a touch of de-essing at around 4K…we simply adjusted the frequency and threshold during her runthoughs before the actual takes, found the spot, and the occassional escessive sybilance just disappeared.  Again, this feature allows tracks to be captured right on the way in, reducing the mixing time dramatically.

-         Drums:  Since our trial by fire project was a bluegrass/gospel album, we brought in a drummer for test purposes.  This application is really where the C4 not just did the job, but showed off a bit.  One channel assigned kick duties, fattening up the kick without becoming overbearing; one channel on snare, again giving us a fatter yet controlled snare (with the snare volume controlled by the kick’s sidechain….very dynamic, very easy, very cool), and the remaining pair of channels assigned overhead duties.  In our tests, each channel was set up just a bit differently to take on the unique properties of each source, and in each instance, the results were pleasant and musical, with no artifacts, no pumping/breathing, and no unpleasant color.  If for no other reason, the C4 should be considered a top contender for studios that track a lot of drums.

-         Bass Guitar:  Our house bass (an old EMG loaded Fender) has mucho sustain by itself.  In our tracking efforts with an ADesigns REDDI, we had to roll the release button to the fastest setting to avoid bass notes from ringing out too long.  Once we found the sweet spot, the instrument smoothed out, and, like all other results, required no additional dynamics (and very little EQ) treatment. 

Conclusions:  While the C4 is seemingly designed for live application, it is a potent and extremely versitile tool, offering features, quality, and sounds that place it in a class of dynamics controlling devices costing 10 times as much per channel.   I really don’t have anything to complain about (a rarity) with the C4: it offers its goods at an affordable price. and does exactly what it is supposed to do.  No, the C4 is not an esoteric piece, nor was it intended to be a replacement for Fairchilds, LA2s, etc….but it is no slouch, either.  On the per-channel basis, there is nothing I’ve encountered that can touch its versitility and bang for the buck.  It should be noted that exactly all of the tracks for the bluegrass/gospel project that had the C4 in line to the convertors were keeper tracks.  Mixing such a project has never been easier, either in the box or externally.  Whether you use the Rane C4 on the inbound signal or in mixdown (really the preferred method) is up to the user, but there are some things (drums especially) that just seem to be easier to address on the inbound.   The versitility of the C4 is really a marvel; all features work as they should, without any unwanted color or pumping.  The Rane C4 comes highly recommended for any studio needing to track multiple cases of excellent sounds at an affordable price (and isn’t that all of us?) 

(Addendum:  Rane's Serato line, including the above reviewed C4 and many other Rane DSP controlled products, are available as ProTools compatable plug ins, and are already in use by many top engineers using the PT platform.  One such application that is gaining a tremendous amount of popularity and use is loading the Serato stuff into PT Venue rigs as well as ultra high end recording applications.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Audix SCX25 Mics

© Ken Morgan, Wireline Studio,  2006

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

The Audix company has long been known for providing good quality products, alternatives to the “me-too” thinking in the mic business for many years.  The SCX25 provides a fresh and extremely powerful alternative to the usual sounds, with versatility and affordability.  The pair comes shipped in a very sturdy aluminum case, with the unique mounts and a couple of cables, all ready to go.

 

WHAT THEY ARE:

 

The Audix SCX 25 mics are high quality “lollipop-style’ mics designed to nest comfortably inside of a piano.  The capsules are full sized, but the housings are roughly the size of a SDC, making mounting in tight spots much easier.  The clever mounting designs allow for meticulous placement inside the piano, attaching to the soundboard bracings, eliminating the need for boom stands.  These cardiod condenser mics provide a smooth and articulate sound on any sized piano with minimal phasing/placement concerns. 

 

We tested the mics on a 7 ft Yamaha grand and an older upright of unknown origin…in each case, the mics presented us with an deadly accurate reproduction of what was heard at the sources.  To be honest, I did not expect the accuracy and clarity from a pair of mics that together cost less than one brand name or ‘esoteric’ device.   We were more than pleasantly surprised at how easily we were able to capture the nuances of each piano.  These mics made mixing so much easier, especially when capturing close micing in stereo.  No EQ was used on our test examples, as none was needed.

 

It should be noted that these mics are very sensitive to the preamps used…we originally tested them with a pair of OSA MP1C 500-series preamps (very VERY API-ish)….good stuff…then we tested them with a pair of ADesigns P1s…again, very good, but very different.  Next pres were from our trusted Ramsa console; again, superlative results, but very much different from the others.  Here’s where some subjectivity comes in – these mics really shine their brightest when used with the most transparent pres available to a studio.

 

Now a reality check: most smaller shops (like ours) don’t have pianos laying around (special thanks to the folks who let us remote test these mics!)…so why should you investigate further?  Simple answers:

 

1. Guitars.  We ran our 2 wildly differing Martins and a Jurassic era Ventura classical through the SCX25s…and they simply blew us away.  They need a bit more gain for fingerstyle than most other condensers in our locker, but once dialed in, the SCX mics gave us some rather unique sounding and highly accurate detailed guitar tracks.  They seem to impart a fuller overall sound to any acoustic guitar, without sticking out like a sore thumb.  If for no other reason, a studio would be wise to seriously consider the SCX 25 as a tool to capture acoustic guitars with a slightly unique flavor, one that will spice up just about any style of music.  We used them as test mics on a light rock project, and almost all of the tracks ended up in the final mix.  They are THAT good.
2. Drums.  We tested the SCX 25s as a pair of overheads in the well known Glyn Johns technique.  In this capacity, the mics worked very well, and provided (again) a somewhat unique quality to the overall sound…again, they required a bit more gain than most mics in our locker, but once they were tweaked, sounded very warm, full range, harmonically rich.  Again, we ended up keeping the test tracks for the project, adding just a touch of 125hz to bring up the floor tom…that’s all that was needed.  I believe these mics, when used as overheads, are better suited for jazz and light rock, genres that seem to do better when drums are clear, precise, and articulate as opposed to punchy.
3. Vocals: We found the SCX25 to be a very good choice for light hearted voices, such as female ballads, etc.  These are not punching, in your face mics (nor should they be) but smooth, almost tender.  Being honest, I don’t believe the SXC25 would be a first choice for vocals, but for some female voices singing soft, almost sensual songs, this would be THE one to grab first.  Again, our tests revealed the mics to be very sensitive to the preamp choices, and would be perfect for the smooth, soft, and sultry sounds needed for some emotional songs (think a slightly different flavor of ribbon here….doesn’t work on everything, but what it does work on it works on better than anything else out there)
4. Stringed instruments:  We tested the SCX 25 on arco bass and cello, again with the same superb results…with each test, the instruments provided a very smooth and accurate representation of the source instruments…particularly pleasing was the cello, as the SCX25 captured the almost sensual warmth of the instrument without any need for additional EQ…in essence, it was the PERFECT choice.

 

DOWNSIDES:  None, really.  The cleverly designed soundboard mounting system is made of plastic, and feels like the tightening screws could present some tension problems after a certain time.  The actual mic holders are also plastic – I would have preferred a higher quality small shock mount to hold the mics in place…but the mounts provided did their job without complaint, so perhaps I’m being a bit too picky about this.  To be fair, the people at Audix state there is virtually no handling noise or sympathetic resonances resulting from their much smaller than average chasses, and I would have to agree…

 

CONCLUSIONS:  Audix really has identified a sonic niche with the SCX25 microphone, a niche that is unique sounding yet highly usable in just about any mic locker, large or small.  They maintain a certain unique round sounding quality while still providing a clear, accurate, and pleasantly versatile sounding track.  In all of the tests we ran, the tracks recorded with the SCX25s sat very nicely, with minimal EQ or other treatments needed, perfect for those occasions in which an SDC is too clear and an LDC is just too much for the source.   In short, the Audix SCX 25 mic makes the job of mixing a whole lot easier...We will definitely be adding the Audix SCX 25 to our ever-growing mic locker in the very near future.

 

Special thanks to Bill Perser and Brett Weidmann for their assistance in these tests…

Very special thanks to Lofty at Audix and Jay at Guitar Center Houston for their providing the test mics, and for being so patient.  

 

(This is a First for Us...a Co-review...look for many more!)

tfpro P10: Come experience the Mighty Twin

By Ken Morgan and Steve Langer, Copyright and added September 28, 2006

Do you like recording channels? A recording channel to me contains a mic pre, a compressor section and an equalizer section. As part of Ted Fletcher's resurgence as an audio designer and manufacturer, tfpro brought out the P10, which is also designated as the Mighty Twin. It's a dual recording channel. It features extensive controls (somewhat over the top at times), an effects loop for each channel and switchable stereo linkage for the compressor section.

 

What's over the top about it? Let's think 30 knobs, the nice aluminum ones. Let's think about a knob that switches input from line, instrument, dynamic and condenser microphones. And, please note the utter coolness of the condenser mic switch slicing 15 dB off the gain. Has anyone else noted the problem with certain mic pres giving you so much gain on condenser mics that you've got to turn the gain control all the way down to try to avoid clipping on condenser mic placements on loud sources?

Even though the P10 gives you lots of control, most users will find it easy to navigate with its logical layout and easy to read print on the faceplate.

The Mighty Twin features a variable phase control. It allows the engineer to adjust the phase of a mic from 0 to 180 degrees (instead of the usual one or the other button). It allows control and correction of slightly to severely misaligned microphones.

The compressor section attempts to emulate four different flavors of compressor. Ted Fletcher, of course, successfully emulates his famous compressor sound with one of the settings. He doesn't achieve complete success with the other three settings which mimic certain characteristics of other famous compressors. However, you get four distinct flavors of compression. Use of the four compressor settings over a long period of time revealed all four settings to be useful. The large VU meters can be switched from input mode to gain reduction at the push of a button.

The EQ section features a four band semi-parametric layout with a 12 dB cut or boost range. Each channel finishes off with a master channel output control and LEDs to indicate the presence of signal and overload.

Many people find it easy to get acoustic guitar sounds to tape yet find it difficult to fit into the mix. The P10 allows the user the opportunity to use compression and EQ when tracking to get an acoustic sound more in line with where it'll be when mixed. Some people disagree with this approach and say don't compress or don't EQ until final mixdown. The talent seems to perform better when it sounds like a record in the headphones. That's just an observation.

Using a Peluso 2247 microphone, a Martin D1936 acoustic guitar sounded huge with the compression selection set to position three. The engineer set the compressor with a fairly fast response and slow release time. He set the EQ to roll off the low end and a slight roll off of the high end as well. He used his ears to dial in the sound. The session ended with two keeper tracks for an indie film.

Next, the P10 saw duty on an old Ventura Classic guitar tracked with a modded Oktava MK319. Again, another keeper track to be featured in the above mentioned indie film.

On electric guitar amps, the P10's variable phase control allowed multiple mic'ing of the guitar amp without need to precisely set the distances. The P10 allows a lot of flexibility. You can put a condenser on channel one and a dynamic on channel two. You can give one compressor and EQ treatment to channel one and yet another to channel two. It's almost as if you got channels from a quality recording console with the added feature of the variable phase.

As a DI, the P10 performed well on both synth and bass tracks. Again, dial in the sound. The DI did not exhibit any obvious coloration or unpleasant artifacts.

The P10 got more use for drum overhead channels than anything else while being evaluated. The engineers used these mostly in the context of the three-mic drum technique. While some of the most famous drum tracks in Rock music feature this often debated recording technique it's more difficult to get the overheads to work than most assume. Regardless of the mics used over the kit, the P10 always allowed for a superlative picture of the kit. The toms came across as powerful and articulate. The cymbals rang true and clear. The P10 put across the sound of each mic without trying to imprint it's own sound in place of that of each mic.

If only used for drums, then the P10's performance makes its price a good value and a worthwhile investment. It's been missed at both studios in which it was evaluated when it comes time to record drums and acoustic guitar.

An engineer rigged the P10 up as a master mixdown device strapped on the backend of a summing unit. The P10 outperformed it's in the box counterparts and did so easily in A/B listening tests. It exudes "power" in this application.

The unit, while well received by the evaluators, also features a niggle or two. One evaluator wanted a compression makeup gain before the EQ section. Everyone also found it possessed that English self noise. It's not something you'd be troubled with for 99.9 percent of popular music tracking. However, if you wanted to record some quiet passages of Classical music, then you might want something quieter. However, if you're doing that sort of work, then you likely own something extremely quiet. Another evaluator wanted to see a switch that changed the signal path to allow the EQ to come before the compression.

Ted Fletcher seems to be in the midst of an unexpected resurgence. His compressor, the P38, gets raves from the best ears in the world as a preeminent mix buss and mastering compressor. One of the evaluators owns an early version of the P38 and agrees with its reputation.

The Bottom Line: All in all the tfpro P10 should be in every working studio on the planet. It possesses a good mic pre with an outstanding compressor section and a good EQ section. The added features such as the variable phase make it stand out from its competition. Recommended.

Link relating to this review: tfpro

EWI Rack Cases - A Real World Review: 

Recently, I was presented a golden opportunity to record a location job for a wonderful youth orchestra…problem was, I needed to carry a whole lot more than my normal location rig could handle.  Frantically, I searched the net looking for reasonably priced high quality racks and cases that could be depended on to safely protect my high end pres and other goodies, and get it pretty quickly.  I quickly got pretty well educated as to the unglamorous life of racks, road cases, and so on. 

I found the folks at Audiopile.Net, and called them on the phone to see if we could get things from Washington State to Texas in a short time. Speaking with Liz, an extremely pleasant, professional, and understanding person, I explained my predicament.  Liz shipped me a 12 space rack with almost no notice whatsoever, even managed to hold up the UPS truck so my rack would go out THAT DAY.  Here’s the story.

1.     What It Is: The EWI series of racks are Chinese made, yet very sturdy and high quality racks designed to protect nearly anything inside. 

When the UPS dropped off the 81 lb box, I was somewhat taken aback by how sturdy the shipping box was…or should I say shipping boxes…inside the outer container was another box, this one actually holding the rack.  Carefully removing all the shipping materials was somewhat challenging, as the rack was shipped to ensure the gorillas at UPS could not damage this box (although they did lose it…3 days late on delivery…got lost in Texas…but that’s a different review).  Anyway, inside the boxes was the rack with caster board.  This particular rack was brand spanking new, as one could still smell the fresh adhesive smell and the wood (aired out in less than one hour) There were easy to read instructions on how to connect the overbuilt casters (two of which are foot actuated locking casters…nice touch!) and two bags of higher quality rack screws with washers.

Here’s a cool thing about the EWI rack:  doors.  Simple concept, yet the front and back doors are interchangeable, and can be mounted on either side, regardless of vertical orientation.  A GREAT feature when wrapping up a remote session.  I remembered back to days of yon when doors had to be oriented exactly right, or they would not shut.  The latches are butterfly type locking latches, which look and feel as strong as any such latches on the market today.  The doors are also lined with soft cell foam, another nice touch, to protect any knobs or handles that may protrude.  The doors themselves are a couple of inches deep, facilitating rack mounting nearly anything you can throw at it, regardless of depth, handles, knobs, whatever.  The rack has two ultra sturdy spring loaded (yet quiet operating) handles on each side, making lifting a whole lot easier.  Rounded ball corners on every place 3 sides met up made this, in theory, the perfect road rack.

2.     What It Does: Allows users to get any rack mountable gear to and from a jobsite without worrying about damage.

I was kind of expecting to run into problems when it came time to rack up an OSA 11 space 500 series, chassis, 4 compressors, A Fireface 800, Tango 24, and Focusrite Octopre…I just KNEW the rack rails would not line up right…I am happy; no I am ecstatic, to report the rack rails (on both sides) lined up perfectly…no slanting, no holes that didn’t align, no problems whatsoever.  So far, this 12 space rack was far exceeding my expectations…but now its showtime….

The unit rolls effortlessly maintaining a straight course (Hooray! No pulling to one side or wobbly wheels so common in other low cost racks!).  Doors come off and go back on almost without effort or thought.  The foot actuated locking wheels keep the rack from rolling when it’s supposed to be still.  Assembly was stupidly easy, and the added 2 bags of rack screws allowed me to fully secure every piece I have, with plenty to spare. 

3.     Why You Need This:

If you are a musician, sound company, remote studio, in house studio, or just have a need to rack mount a lot of gear, I strongly encourage you to visit the people at www.audiopile.net and talk to them about your needs.  Their pricing is more than fair, and their customer service is superlative.  Liz is an absolute professional and knows her stuff, and even though I knew she was busy, took a few moments just to visit.  Somehow, (I don’t want to know how she did it) she kept UPS from leaving her location until my rack was on the truck.  Amazing service from a tremendous dealership, and great people to work with in getting what you need, when you need it, at a price you can afford.

Audiopile.net also carries a rather extensive line of cables, snakes, even mics (look for an upcoming review on their small diaphragm pair)…Liz and Mark are great folks to work with, and have made a new fan (and customer)…Although this rack was originally meant to be just for the remotes, I have decided to order another 12 spacer in the next few weeks for the permanent control room.  This is some sturdy yet good looking stuff.  While good quality racks are not glamorous things, they are a necessity of any studio, mobile or not.

I highly recommend this product.

 

---

---

 

 

 

 

 

 

OKTAVAMOD.COM 319 Re-Build

I.  What it is:

The Oktava mics have been around for quite a while now.  I had one laying around that had not been used in years, as it just didn’t seem to give me satisfactory results on anything (and it was one of the first mics I bought when I started the move out of the bedroom studio to a dedicated facility…) While looking through the net, I found a couple of references to Oktavamod.com a service that takes the less than stellar Oktava lines  and makes them something useable, even special.

II. What It Does:

I was skeptical to as to what to expect, to say the least, but for $99 bucks, it seemed like a no brainer.  I contacted Michael Joly, proprietor of OktavaMod.Com and we coordinated the transaction.  As soon as Michael (more on him in a bit) received my package, he notified me he had the mic, and following his instructions, paid the $99 via Paypal, and waited.

Wasn’t a long wait, either…the mic arrived in almost record time (8 days from send to receive)…I opened the well packed box delivered by the gorillas at the US Postal Service, and saw that Michael had cleaned up the grill (even straightened out a dent in the back of the grill at no charge)…something was telling me this was quality waiting to be heard..  Looking inside, I saw some of the changes, and saw nothing but clean soldering, perfect lead dress, and a lot of personal TLC.  Off to a great start!

Wasting no more time, I immediately went to work.  I must admit that even with the quality components and lead dress, I went into this with a somewhat lowered sense of expectation, as I remembered there was a reason the Oktava was not in use…Anyway, the 1^st test tracks were the modded 319 through both an ADesigns P1 and OSA MP1C, tracking an Martin D1936 and a Martin 000-16.  With both guitars and both preamps, the results were jaw dropping…I heard details I had not previously heard from either guitar, regardless of hard strumming or delicate picking.  The mic is very sensitive to position (more so than I would have imagined from any mic in the less than $2K mark, lest one I had a grand total of $150 invested into)…Moving the mic just a ¼” produced dramatic changes in the tracked result. With either pre, the results were slap amazing.  I compared the modded 319 to several other tracks I had done in the past using anything from AT4033 to a Peluso 2247…and I chose the modded 319 over the others 85-90% of the time.  At this point, I decided the mod was well worth the effort, and a real bargain….but I needed more.

We then tested the mic on vocals.  We cut several tracks of various male and female voices, in various musical styles.  Again, I was stunned at the clarity and sheer yet controlled power of the modded 319.  This mic is much more suited for smooth jazz or country crooning than for a screaming rock project.  Sounded great on most singers, but sounded superlative on alto females and baritone/low tenor voices…Again, we A/B’d the modded 319 against some other tracks using some pretty heavy hitter mics, and the 319 stood its ground, never failed to give great results, and was actually the preferred mic for smooth, almost old style “too smooth” vocals.  Its time to note that if you are looking for the ultra modern sounds, I haven’t been able to find them in this mic…this wonderful tool just seems to ooze vintage.  We even went as far as to run the 319 about 5 ft back, and recorded a mono track of guitar, male, and female voices…with absolutely no eq, no treatments of any kind, the mic shined, and  reacted to the dynamics of the three sources with superlative clarity for each source…playback revealed a sense of a small intimate living room concert.

Next up, instruments….first we ran the mic just as a test on a major blues project we are working on…running a heavily modded/upgraded Washburn HB30 into a vintage MusicMan head pushing a 15” JBL D130, we set the mic up about 18” back and slightly off axis…The results we got were keeper tracks, giving up that elusive smoky, old school blues sound that can only be obtained with the most vintage (and expensive) Neumanns, Sennheisers,  EV dynamics, and RCA ribbons…in a word, this thing competed on a level playing field and often times killed every other mic we’ve tried.  Clean guitars, dirty guitars, it didn’t matter; the 319 held its own in every capacity.  Next, we tried it on a Rhodes 73 amplified by the same MusicMan head and JBL cabinet.  Not to gush too much, but this combination produced some of the finest Rhodes sounds we have EVER recorded, or heard from any released material since Ray Charles….it is that good in this application.  (Can you tell I am a huge fan of this mic yet?)

Now, you might be asking if this compares to a U47FET…I did, and the answer is a resounding YES!  I’ve used a couple of U47FETs in the past, and drug out the basic tracks…the overall response and timbre are not identical, but very very close…the sounds are not identical, but very very close.  Can the modded 319 and the U47FET be interchanged with no loss of clarity, warmth, and quality? Yes; the lowly Oktava319 with Michael Joly’s modification put them into the same level.    We have used the modded 319 on a 9ft grand piano opened to the 1/4 stick position during a remote session...once again, superlative results.

I did find the modded 319 to be very sensitive to the different preamps as well…each of the pres used have a somewhat unique character, and these differences were not only apparent, they were clearly heard.  What this means to you is that the modded 319 will accentuate any differences in mic pres, thus opening up your pallet of sound makers even more.

III. Support:  When the mic arrived the first time, I opened the well packed box, and was dismayed to find the mic did not work at all…the only noise it made was mechanical handling noise…I called Michael, and explained the situation.  He told me to send it back that day (which I did) and the moment it arrived, he would investigate.  Turns out that a wire had worked its way loose from handling…Michael footed the bill for shipping each way, and got me up and running in almost no time at all.  This, to me, should be THE standard model for ALL equipment manufacturers…No voice mail, no pushing buttons, no waiting.  My issue was resolved immediately, and I got the chance to visit with Michael on the phone…try THAT with any other mic mod service, and see what you get…

As it turns out, Michael was likes to think of himself as “an empirical engineer.” and has worked with some well known designers and manufacturers in the past, influencing a lot of the high end gear available today.  I believe it…he has taken the lowly 319 and turned it into one of the premier mics around here…

IV. Conclusion:  If you have a 219 or 319, get this mic mod done right NOW…your music and your clients deserve it.  Starting at $99.00 and moving upwards, there is no reason on earth not have these modes done.  You will not be disappointed. Contact Michael at www.oktavamod.com for more details, and tell them Ken at Wireline Studio sent you.

(A special thanks to Patti Spurgeon Irvin for providing her extraordinary vocal talents in these tests…she’s a real gem, and will cutting her own CD in the not too distant future…and has insisted the modded 319 be used…)

---

 

AudioPile C61 Matched Small Diaphragm Mics

Synopsis:  The C61 Matched Pair SDC mics are a tremendous value, offering versitility and quality sound at a very reasonable cost.

When I considered ordering a pair of the C61 mics from Audiopile.net, I really didn’t know what to expect.  How could $139.00 for a PAIR of mics be useful?  We tested them on a number of sources, and found that in this case, the price is no indication of the quality.

When the package arrived from Audiopile.net, we were greeted with a well built wooden case.  Inside were the two mics, clips, and stand thread adapters.  The mics look very much like a pair of AKG 451s, and felt suprisingly sturdy.  Each mic features a three position rolloff switch and a pad. We discovered after the review process that the mics are actually assembled at Audiopile from hand selected and tested components...Very cool service - one that is GREATLY appreciated.

We ran the C61 pair through OSA, ADesigns, and Focusrite preamps, first with an acoustic guitar.  The sounds we heard were way better than what we anticipated, with clear highs, clean lows, and enough mids to allow any acoustic guitar to shine.  The mics sounded crisper and clearer than any other budget SDC we have tried to date, and although not as pristine as our Audio Technica 4041, still sounded very good.

Next up, we used the mics as suggested by the distributor, as overheads for drums.  The c61 mics really came through in this application, providing powerful overhead sounds without being overbearing.  Very cool!  We then tried the C61 mics on a snare and hihat.  This application proved to be the winner for our test purposes, as the hat came through clear and pristine, with the snare coming through with a robust power and mid/hi clarity unattainable with the standard SM57 or any condensor in the sub $500 category.  We liked the sounds so much that we used them on an actual session later in the day.

There are a couple of things that can be improved, though.  The rolloff and pad switches seemed to be difficult to move, and took a couple of attempts for the desired change to actually occur. (this may be to the newness of the mics – once the switches were broken in a bit, they performed properly).  Our biggest complaint is the included mic holders.  They were a hair too big for the mics, causing vertically mounted positioning to fall a bit.  We ended up placing a piece of tape on the mic and clip to hold them  in place.  Also, the positioning screws on the clips seemed loose and flimsy, and took repeated tightenings to get them to hold their positions.  Minor issues, easily corrected, but issues nonetheless.

Conclusion:  Audiopile.net has rapidly become one of our favorite retail outlets, and the c61 mics just reinforce what we already knew about the store’s quality and ‘bang for the buck’ status.  The C61 pair is well worth the extremely low pricetag, and would be a bargain at twice the price.  We recommend these mics not just for budget studios, but for anyone with a need for a versitile all around decent sounding mic pair.  We are buying this pair because they offer a slightly different sonic twist in most things, make GREAT highhat and snare mics, and because at $139.00 a pair, it would be stupid not to own them.  For mid/high end studios, recommended…for the home recordist/budget studio, we strongly recommend them.  This is a pair of mics you will probably want to use for a long time, and to get anything noticably better will cost you more than triple the price. 

Overall: Good to Very Good to borderline GREAT sounding pair of SDCs...versitile yet reliable...expect to upgrade to better mic mounts at some point.  Recommended to Highly recommended!

ADDENDUM:  I have never met Liz or Mark at Audiopile.net, yet they seem to continue to crank out wonderfully useful products at extremely low prices, and seem to have re-established my belief that small shops that do most of their work in house can still be a viable and competetive source for gear in a working class yet high end oriented studio.  Liz and Mark are living examples that you DO have an alternative to the mega stores for cable needs, racks, do-dads, etc...and we at Wireline Studio give them the tip of the ten gallon hat...