Hi,
I had the chance to play with a Palette (the big one, with the safe like clicking rotaries) a few times. I then for a long time used a heavily modded digital EQ (from the pro-audio regions) for room EQ and as a poor mans palette.
In all digital systems with VST Hosting I like Waves Renaissance 6-Channel EQ Plugin... ;-) What I am missing is a way to integrate the EQ into the main program shell so we can store EQ settings against the track playing and easily bring the EQ on the (touch) screen to adjust...
I have been thinking about a tubed, mostly LC filter take on the Palette though...
Actually, I am a bit nonplussed by all that bellyaching about making transparent tone controls (just making adjustable EQ Phono's).
It is perfectly possible to design systems that are "untouched purist" for the signal if the Tone controls are defeated.
If we really need major correction, then we already have an issue, so a small amount of loss of transparency should be a small price to pay for fixing major problems with tonal balance.
Even then tone controls can be very minimal and high quality sonics. One could use a passive Baxandall in the feedback loop of a non-inverting Op-Amp (needs switches as controls or "C" Law potentiometers) or the old japanese trick to connect the tone control to a tap on the volume control can be used for zero looped feedback designs.
Sure, each of these have some potential drawbacks, but only in terms of the available range of the tone control (generally +/-20dB are not available, but IMNSHO also not needed) and load impedances and only if the tone controls are used. This may be worth a separate thread elsewhere, also for Pgraphic and Paragraphic EQ's.
My next preamp for my place at home will have both Loudness AND tone controls. I do find missing both (a correctly implemented Loudness function for late night listening levels and tone controls for fixing up overcooked bass on modern recordings or giving a bit of boost or indeed correcting for EQ differences on LP's (a passive Baxandal can do this surprisingly well).
Ciao T
I had the chance to play with a Palette (the big one, with the safe like clicking rotaries) a few times. I then for a long time used a heavily modded digital EQ (from the pro-audio regions) for room EQ and as a poor mans palette.
In all digital systems with VST Hosting I like Waves Renaissance 6-Channel EQ Plugin... ;-) What I am missing is a way to integrate the EQ into the main program shell so we can store EQ settings against the track playing and easily bring the EQ on the (touch) screen to adjust...
I have been thinking about a tubed, mostly LC filter take on the Palette though...
Actually, I am a bit nonplussed by all that bellyaching about making transparent tone controls (just making adjustable EQ Phono's).
It is perfectly possible to design systems that are "untouched purist" for the signal if the Tone controls are defeated.
If we really need major correction, then we already have an issue, so a small amount of loss of transparency should be a small price to pay for fixing major problems with tonal balance.
Even then tone controls can be very minimal and high quality sonics. One could use a passive Baxandall in the feedback loop of a non-inverting Op-Amp (needs switches as controls or "C" Law potentiometers) or the old japanese trick to connect the tone control to a tap on the volume control can be used for zero looped feedback designs.
Sure, each of these have some potential drawbacks, but only in terms of the available range of the tone control (generally +/-20dB are not available, but IMNSHO also not needed) and load impedances and only if the tone controls are used. This may be worth a separate thread elsewhere, also for Pgraphic and Paragraphic EQ's.
My next preamp for my place at home will have both Loudness AND tone controls. I do find missing both (a correctly implemented Loudness function for late night listening levels and tone controls for fixing up overcooked bass on modern recordings or giving a bit of boost or indeed correcting for EQ differences on LP's (a passive Baxandal can do this surprisingly well).
Ciao T
Hi,
In East Germany we used this kind. The the state owned "Vermona" factory made a 10-Channel version, all LC circuits and a handfull of NPN Transistors. These where pretty good, but not enough bands for serious Pro-Use.
I did however (in the 80's) make a few e-Bass rigs using a cut of halve of this EQ, a 100W Vermona Circlotron Poweramp and a Fet Input Pre of my design, all combined into a new housing and combined with an Electrovoice EVM 15B or EVM 15L (depending on the tone the player wanted) in the standard EV Box. This made a very nice and potent but compact bass rig.
These EQ's are still available 2nd hand. The slider controls however are likely shot by now and non-replacable (the original factory is long closed)...
Ciao T
In East Germany we used this kind. The the state owned "Vermona" factory made a 10-Channel version, all LC circuits and a handfull of NPN Transistors. These where pretty good, but not enough bands for serious Pro-Use.
I did however (in the 80's) make a few e-Bass rigs using a cut of halve of this EQ, a 100W Vermona Circlotron Poweramp and a Fet Input Pre of my design, all combined into a new housing and combined with an Electrovoice EVM 15B or EVM 15L (depending on the tone the player wanted) in the standard EV Box. This made a very nice and potent but compact bass rig.
These EQ's are still available 2nd hand. The slider controls however are likely shot by now and non-replacable (the original factory is long closed)...
Ciao T
My Palette has discrete class A modules. A lot of them. Maybe there was a version with monolithic Opamps i do not know.
Here i found something interesting although again not precisely on topic.Caltech Engineers Develop One-way Transmission System for Sound Waves - Caltech Media Relations
Here i found something interesting although again not precisely on topic.Caltech Engineers Develop One-way Transmission System for Sound Waves - Caltech Media Relations
Dick Burwen designed the Pallette many years ago. He has replaced it now with his software. It can store the settings for each track even different settings for different systems. HE has exapanded the functionality of the original Pallette. There are 2 versions, 1 is $469 the other version will be ~1,200.
burwenaudio.com HOME
This one has a good reputation. It is with tubes and the EQ is passive.
http://www.gyraf.dk/g14/g14-manual.pdf
http://www.gyraf.dk/g14/g14-manual.pdf
Hi,
John, sorry for taking this little off-topic excursion...
The controls are switches/stepped, or pot's? The cheaper unit used pots and Op-Amp's and was Stereophile reviewed, the Studio version has stepped attenuators and needs normally a audiosuite to run...
Of course, there may be another version I don't know...
Here the insides of the cheap one:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/104528-cello-preamp-pictures.html
And more insides:
Picasa Web Albums - Lica Vintage - cello Palette...
Here the Stereophile review:
Cello Palette Preamplifier | Stereophile.com
This contains measurements of the actions of the EQ, which can be interesting to wannabe Palette cloners...
Here an inside picture of the expensive one:
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk71/zzxzzy/File%20from%20Oct%2026%202010/fd1718b4-1.jpg
It is a rather different beasty and I suspect will sound rather different from the little guy.
Finally, for wannabe Palette Makers, here some links on how to make a nice EQ, using discrete Op-Amp's, real or virtual inductors.
I suspect Fred Forssell's discrete Op-Amp will sound quite nice and all else should be possible, using nice 48 Pole Switches may break the bank, but 24-pole should be manageable...
forsselltech.com
Specifically these ones:
http://www.forsselltech.com/media/attachments/JFET_Opamp.PDF
Here the virtual inductor EQ Filter...
http://www.forsselltech.com/media/attachments/Gyrator1.pdf
This kind of gyrator can also be made using single J-Fet/bipolar "FetSziklai" for simpler circuitry than a full discrete Op-Amp, I personally would only use them for the two LF frequencies (if at all) and real inductors above.
The rest of a suitable EQ is here:
http://www.forsselltech.com/media/attachments/Evolution_of_an_EQ_Design2.pdf
Ciao T
John, sorry for taking this little off-topic excursion...
The controls are switches/stepped, or pot's? The cheaper unit used pots and Op-Amp's and was Stereophile reviewed, the Studio version has stepped attenuators and needs normally a audiosuite to run...
Of course, there may be another version I don't know...
Here the insides of the cheap one:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/104528-cello-preamp-pictures.html
And more insides:
Picasa Web Albums - Lica Vintage - cello Palette...
Here the Stereophile review:
Cello Palette Preamplifier | Stereophile.com
This contains measurements of the actions of the EQ, which can be interesting to wannabe Palette cloners...
Here an inside picture of the expensive one:
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk71/zzxzzy/File%20from%20Oct%2026%202010/fd1718b4-1.jpg
It is a rather different beasty and I suspect will sound rather different from the little guy.
Finally, for wannabe Palette Makers, here some links on how to make a nice EQ, using discrete Op-Amp's, real or virtual inductors.
I suspect Fred Forssell's discrete Op-Amp will sound quite nice and all else should be possible, using nice 48 Pole Switches may break the bank, but 24-pole should be manageable...
forsselltech.com
Specifically these ones:
http://www.forsselltech.com/media/attachments/JFET_Opamp.PDF
Here the virtual inductor EQ Filter...
http://www.forsselltech.com/media/attachments/Gyrator1.pdf
This kind of gyrator can also be made using single J-Fet/bipolar "FetSziklai" for simpler circuitry than a full discrete Op-Amp, I personally would only use them for the two LF frequencies (if at all) and real inductors above.
The rest of a suitable EQ is here:
http://www.forsselltech.com/media/attachments/Evolution_of_an_EQ_Design2.pdf
Ciao T
Last edited:
Are the lead formers on all the discretes asthetic or functional? I can't picture myself having something like this around, though I threw away a huge pile of silver kelvin contacting 24 position switch wafers.
Besides typical tube tone controls that I both owned and used for the first 10 years of my serious involvement in audio, my first equalizer experience was with Altec passive equalizers with the Grateful Dead in 1970. We used these, BEFORE the Wall of Sound, to remove room resonances. As I remember, they were 1/3 octave. We also tried out a B&K 1/10 octave unit for a few performances. Of course, for WORKING with sound, you need these devices. However, for listening, I found that they were mostly unnecessary.
The passive units were my favorite.
The passive units were my favorite.
Love it. It's my idea of the perfect tone control. It doesn't try to be an equalizer, it just corrects overall balance. Quad equipment from that era was sneered at by the fashionable high enders, but it was made for people who care about music rather than equipment.
I've got an article about it in preparation.
I've got an article about it in preparation.
It's all we have anyway.
jan didden
We have ears Jan.
Measurements wouldn't mean much without ears.
I'm about to implement a tone control in our system. I'm glad you're okay without them, but a good portion of my music library is unlistenable to me, mostly rock music. Many classical recordings are also too bright sounding and could use some help.
Our system isn't at all bright either. Sounds wonderful with well recorded music and even some not so good recordings. There are some that could really use help though.
I hope many here are getting a better understanding of adjustable equalization.
It is really a CHOICE, not a requirement, and for many of us, relatively unnecessary.
There is good reason to avoid added equalization. It makes the circuit path much more complex, it usually requires IC's or the equivalent to make it, it adds extra cost, sometimes serious extra cost, for a really usable EQ, such as the Audio Palette.
I, too, have TRIED to add an equalizer to my hi fi, about 20 years ago. I got a pretty good solid state equalizer with fet input op amps and installed it into my system. Even in the so called BYPASS mode, I could hear its effects, but I could not measure much harmonic or IM distortion when testing it. I found it essentially useless for ME. Your needs may differ. I have a professional equalizer here in my lab, but I don't use it for anything, either.
It is really a CHOICE, not a requirement, and for many of us, relatively unnecessary.
There is good reason to avoid added equalization. It makes the circuit path much more complex, it usually requires IC's or the equivalent to make it, it adds extra cost, sometimes serious extra cost, for a really usable EQ, such as the Audio Palette.
I, too, have TRIED to add an equalizer to my hi fi, about 20 years ago. I got a pretty good solid state equalizer with fet input op amps and installed it into my system. Even in the so called BYPASS mode, I could hear its effects, but I could not measure much harmonic or IM distortion when testing it. I found it essentially useless for ME. Your needs may differ. I have a professional equalizer here in my lab, but I don't use it for anything, either.
The 12AX7's I'm referring to are the cathode followers driving the class B output tubes. Their plates hang on the OPT windings and their cathodes drive 6L6 grids directly. Strange but true. Yikes! Thanks, Chris
ps: McIntosh relented for the model 275 and gave them their own plate windings - still with a pretty hefty joltage.
ps: McIntosh relented for the model 275 and gave them their own plate windings - still with a pretty hefty joltage.
Back in the early days before international eq. conventions were adopted by most record companies many preamps at the then high-end had variable eq. feature to compensate for the then differences in recorded eq. [I once had an original Harmon Kardan Citation 1+ 11 set which had various eq settings as well as bass and treble tone-controls].
Provided that the [unadjustable] eq is correctly designed to match the front-end equipment to the amplification system variable eq or tone controls should not now be necessary. I went through many systems and amplifiers but never quite found the listening experience I yearned for. At this time I first met Be Yamamura who let me listen to some very exotic and non-commercial amplifiers and kindly lent me various prototype amps, including a VT4c SET, transformer coupled MOSFETs, current-amplification etc. The point being that as I progressed in amplifier experience the more I began to realize that some amps and preamps have an inherent "rightness" of sound and that although criticism could be levelled at some aspect/s of sound representation, they still worked in a very convincing fashion. I should add that such amps are very rare indeed. parametric adjustment can do little to save a poor amp but can help a good amp to interface more satisfactorily with a room, whereas tone controls have far too broad a brush-stroke to be of any real use.
Hi,
So it does. I had tilts in 1dB increments programmed into my digital EQ for a while. Sadly I never found any recording that needed correcting where the "Tilt" was usable.
So I would consider it an answer in search of a question. Technically interesting but of questionable practical value.
I dropped it out eventually and used for several year what you may call "pseudo palette" operation of the EQ which I found extremely capable to fix up recording problems.
I should add that I am ex. sound engineer, so perhaps what I find limiting and of questionable use may be just fine for those who have less experiencing with (re) equalising a Mix, just as I find the iPad beloved by so many borderline useless crippleware.
Ciao T
So it does. I had tilts in 1dB increments programmed into my digital EQ for a while. Sadly I never found any recording that needed correcting where the "Tilt" was usable.
So I would consider it an answer in search of a question. Technically interesting but of questionable practical value.
I dropped it out eventually and used for several year what you may call "pseudo palette" operation of the EQ which I found extremely capable to fix up recording problems.
I should add that I am ex. sound engineer, so perhaps what I find limiting and of questionable use may be just fine for those who have less experiencing with (re) equalising a Mix, just as I find the iPad beloved by so many borderline useless crippleware.
Ciao T
- Status
- Not open for further replies.