Good choice of speakers!
I have done this thing some years ago. You will get a more fixed sound screen and more action in the drivers. Also the sound bubble will be smaller. (probably).
You can calibrate to infinity by sliding the cutting points to get perfection.
Check this out for some active x-over-p*rn:
Lenard Audio Application Standards
I have done this thing some years ago. You will get a more fixed sound screen and more action in the drivers. Also the sound bubble will be smaller. (probably).
You can calibrate to infinity by sliding the cutting points to get perfection.
Check this out for some active x-over-p*rn:
Lenard Audio Application Standards
I used to be very good at editing 1/4" tape. Editing 48 track I have never tried and probably would not want to try. My physics teacher used to edit on wire video recorders where you used iron filings to find the frame intervals!
So they are an 'instrument' rather than a 'tool'? Fairy nuff. Must be some great flame wars on pro sites when a protools user trolls up
Sorry ! Whilst researching around this I noticed
The Studios - AIR Studios
Would be interesting to see how the clients vary between studios 1, 2 and 3. (cover your ears, studio 1 is A4792 )
These one is called 'Montserrat'. Gained a mythic reputation as one of the greatest consoles ever made by Rupert Neve.
'Montserrat' because it was originally commisioned on montserrat island where G.Martin had a big facility. Moved back to Air studio after the volcano destroyed half the island some years back.
Air is a very very nice studio! In fact one of the best place on earth for a mixer. The whole thing is crazy: the studios are so heavy, the whole build had to use water pump to drain out the water from underside because once finished the church had moved down and where flood started inside the studio... Crazy!
I've been lucky to encounter the one of the first 'big' Neve Console ever made. Originaly owned by Barclay's studio it's now at 'Studio de la Frette' around PARIS. Oh it bring me a tear!
Was a nightmare to operate and for maintenance, but sound quite good!No in my point of view stiil a tool! But as you say 'when only tool you have is a hammer every problem looks like a nail' in fact these tools are quite the opposite: if i have a hip hop track to make i would prefer to mix on a SSL. Same for Metal. If i have a Reggae or Dub track i would prefer an AMS/Neve. Whatever for rec i prefer a Neve...
Never been on Gearslutz? You could have page and page of never ending debates...
For what i know, things have changed (a little) as really nice things have been done fully itb. But it's more related to better understanding of technology and limits.
Last edited:
According to wiki G.Martin bought all 3 originally made!
well (and sorry again for drifting so far from crossovers, but it may have a point) my point was that protools or other DAW should be completely neutral unless told otherwise. A 40 year old analog console will have a 'sound'. So it the choice of desk for its sound or for the way it enables the workflow? If 'sound' its an instrument.
If you can mix in a day on a neve, 2 days on an SSL, give up on the 500 channel AMS and maybe a week in protools for the same result its a 'tools' choice.
maybe passive vs line level passive, vs active vs DSP crossovers have the same 2-forked trade off?
Basically the workflow should not be influenced by the desk. They are all more or less capable of the same thing (given you compare inlines to inlines, split to split, etc,etc).
In reality, you've the choice your budget allow the room to rent!
If budget is not a problem yes you can see them as 'instrument'. But at the end of the day the sound is given by first the musician,second theyr own instrument, third the skills of the producer/arranger,fourth the skills of technicians, fifth gear used during recording.
For coherence reasons what you describe about using different gear everyday is not convenient. Better use different for rec and mix. Usually thats enough.
These last few posts have had me transfixed
I have not mixed on desks as you describe, nor ever seen one. The most I have used is 16 tracks, straight into a line in recording primarily with Cool edit.
So I have only had the pleasure of using a cheap mixer and a computer to master. Tried Cubase once and hated it. Everyone I know uses Pro tools.
If I may contribute something?
Well in my small amateur experience I have come to the belief that it is ok, even better, to have a mixer with its own character, that is capable of interesting colours, or expressing and adding to the sound (after all the mastering engineer is also credited as a contributor to the work).
At home, louspeakers are not instruments of composition, but recreation.
I believe analogue active is most surely a huge improvement over passive filters.
Line level passive is somewhere between the two.
DSP should be the way to go. For complex systems, multiple notch filters, more than 4th order HP/LP/BP.... well it's the only easy way.
My active speakers use a small op amp based 4th order LR and BSC filter. The passive implementation was 2nd order with notch. Similar but not identical XO points. Also I tried passive line level XO, but second order becomes a pain. Even with extra gain I wasn't satisfied with your sound. (Probably the lack of a notch).
The opamp filter blew them all away.
Can DSP do as well? Perhaps, probably at least, very hard to tell the difference.
But I wouldn't really be using the main advantages of DSP (PEQ all manner of steeper filters and quick changes of settings)
But all I would use is delay. So for now I am more than happy (phase is good, albeit wrapped one cycle).
I have not mixed on desks as you describe, nor ever seen one. The most I have used is 16 tracks, straight into a line in recording primarily with Cool edit.
So I have only had the pleasure of using a cheap mixer and a computer to master. Tried Cubase once and hated it. Everyone I know uses Pro tools.
If I may contribute something?
Well in my small amateur experience I have come to the belief that it is ok, even better, to have a mixer with its own character, that is capable of interesting colours, or expressing and adding to the sound (after all the mastering engineer is also credited as a contributor to the work).
At home, louspeakers are not instruments of composition, but recreation.
I believe analogue active is most surely a huge improvement over passive filters.
Line level passive is somewhere between the two.
DSP should be the way to go. For complex systems, multiple notch filters, more than 4th order HP/LP/BP.... well it's the only easy way.
My active speakers use a small op amp based 4th order LR and BSC filter. The passive implementation was 2nd order with notch. Similar but not identical XO points. Also I tried passive line level XO, but second order becomes a pain. Even with extra gain I wasn't satisfied with your sound. (Probably the lack of a notch).
The opamp filter blew them all away.
Can DSP do as well? Perhaps, probably at least, very hard to tell the difference.
But I wouldn't really be using the main advantages of DSP (PEQ all manner of steeper filters and quick changes of settings)
But all I would use is delay. So for now I am more than happy (phase is good, albeit wrapped one cycle).
Last edited:
This is not limited to famous dub producer: in EDM and EM this is the same (Plastikman -aka Ritchie Hawtin- "consumed" is a great example: reverbs are instruments on their own and the whole album is improvisation in the studio...and many Techno producer use studio as instrument), in industrial music too (Einsturzende Neubauten, Sielwolf,Ministry,Skinny Puppy are all good example...). And in metal too...
I don't know much about techno or its producers and how they work.
Funny you should mention Neubauten, Ministry and Skinny Puppy though.
Early on in their careers they were all mixed and/or produced by Adrian Sherwood. Before hooking up with Sherwood for the first album Ministry/Al Jourgensen were/was a new wavy synthpop outfit sounding like Howard Jones.
I was a wee bit surprised when I unwittingly bought one of his early 12s!
These last few posts have had me transfixed
I have not mixed on desks as you describe, nor ever seen one. The most I have used is 16 tracks, straight into a line in recording primarily with Cool edit.
So I have only had the pleasure of using a cheap mixer and a computer to master. Tried Cubase once and hated it. Everyone I know uses Pro tools.
If I may contribute something?
Well in my small amateur experience I have come to the belief that it is ok, even better, to have a mixer with its own character, that is capable of interesting colours, or expressing and adding to the sound (after all the mastering engineer is also credited as a contributor to the work).
At home, louspeakers are not instruments of composition, but recreation.
I believe analogue active is most surely a huge improvement over passive filters.
Line level passive is somewhere between the two.
DSP should be the way to go. For complex systems, multiple notch filters, more than 4th order HP/LP/BP.... well it's the only easy way.
My active speakers use a small op amp based 4th order LR and BSC filter. The passive implementation was 2nd order with notch. Similar but not identical XO points. Also I tried passive line level XO, but second order becomes a pain. Even with extra gain I wasn't satisfied with your sound. (Probably the lack of a notch).
The opamp filter blew them all away.
Can DSP do as well? Perhaps, probably at least, very hard to tell the difference.
But I wouldn't really be using the main advantages of DSP (PEQ all manner of steeper filters and quick changes of settings)
But all I would use is delay. So for now I am more than happy (phase is good, albeit wrapped one cycle).
I can see where you're coming from re home recording.
When you're recording live instruments or voices you will have to get rid of pretty much all room sound but in doing so they lose a lot of 'interest'.
In my opinion a lot of that interest is dirt ie little imperfections like a bit of room sound, a little distortion sporadically, very slight tempo variations etc.
It is a difficult balancing act knowing which f**k ups to keep and which to edit out but I am convinced that music needs some funk (in the original and the musical sense) to catch our imagination.
The only problem I see is that a mixer with a distinct character (which are inevitably deviations from the theoretical ideal) it forces that character on everything you regardless if it is appropriate or not.
With that in mind I think the ideal home recording mixer is a s/h Soundcraft Delta DLX. Cheap enough these days (although they are getting more expensive), sounds very acceptable, built like a tank and more than anything it is fully modular. This makes it dead easy to modify single channels from super clean to what ever dirt you might like to subtly(!) add.
I pretty much agree with your views on crossovers.
If you don't need any or only little eq an analogue, opamp-based job would always be my choice.
DSP offers enormous flexibility and if your sources are digital they don't have to add another round of conversion. However DSP really comes into it's own if you want or need delays because if you don't do it there you will need a delay and that will be either digital or not very good.
I am yet to convinced of the necessity or advantages of 48dB slopes.
Somehow I think that 24dB is pretty much the sweet spot (read: best compromise) but I'd be wary of creating them passively.
Guess I've got too many ringing filters in my modular synth to feel safe having them in my speakers. ;-)
Yes. Sherwood was famous in industrial scene before OnUSound. I think he was in touch with the ones on Mute records which if memory serve is the link between all of them.
Not absolutely sure about that though. It may be that Cabaret Voltaire was the link.
Twitch is not the first album, as you noticed Alien did some psychedelic's tracks before starting to get angry! First album is 'with sympathy'. And yes this is some new wavy pop synth funny stuff! Difficult to imagine that 9 years latter he would do Psalm69.
Nevertheless Paul Barker (the bassist) is almost as responsible for the aggressivness that Al Jourgensen. It was obvious when he leaved Ministry. Now it's 60years old ex junky doing speed metal!
Most of the bands cited are pure studio work. It's obvious when earing them live. Without the studio as an instrument this music could not exist.
Hell please stop teasing me! We drift enough from the OP for introducing discussions about Buchla, Serge and al...
Charles:you should listen to Plastikman "Consumed" NOW! SERGE+TB303+Lexicon 480l improvisations porn! Really great modular music.
Last edited:
Hahaha brilliant.
My home mixer is an 8 track Alesis, which is pretty good for the 100 quid. On occasion I have deliberately recorded a track using one of the 99 effects on board.
I have some beringer rack gear, 31 band EQ, FX, DSP surround (?), processor. I should probably use them more and loop back into software.
To be fair, I have recorded a demo in band a little in both ways (reducing or instead using the room sound).
once recorded a guitar solo in a water pool (4ft cube shape sunk in earth, concrete)
During the following recordings we buried another amp in a pergola type structure of noticeboards and mattresses....
So both close mic and open mic, kind of
Oh and the modular synth would be something I'd try, one day...
I'm still hung up on playing with Roland MC303 and Korg ER sequencers...and still yet to get around to buying a midi keyboard to drive it!
My home mixer is an 8 track Alesis, which is pretty good for the 100 quid. On occasion I have deliberately recorded a track using one of the 99 effects on board
.I have some beringer rack gear, 31 band EQ, FX, DSP surround (?), processor. I should probably use them more and loop back into software.
To be fair, I have recorded a demo in band a little in both ways (reducing or instead using the room sound).
once recorded a guitar solo in a water pool (4ft cube shape sunk in earth, concrete)
During the following recordings we buried another amp in a pergola type structure of noticeboards and mattresses....
So both close mic and open mic, kind of
Oh and the modular synth would be something I'd try, one day...
I'm still hung up on playing with Roland MC303 and Korg ER sequencers...and still yet to get around to buying a midi keyboard to drive it!
Last edited:
Why the wait Mondogenerator: apparently you've got a soldering iron, probably a handfull of tl074, caps and al, some protoboard... so :
CGS - Ken Stone's Modular Synthesizer
electro-music.com :: View Forum - DIY Hardware and Software
Welcome to asylum!
No need of keyboard when you have a Klee sequencer!
Don't!
Once you try one it will eat up most of your spare time and all of your disposable income.
No, active mean you use active stage (which need power supply to perform a task).
In the original subject this is passive filter (conventional filter between drivers) versus active filtering, either line level analog or DSP (which is what you describe in your post inducing at least DAC stage (when used with digital source as i do), usually 2 ADC software treatment then DAC).
You can do passive line level too, it'll have an advantage over conventionnal in the fact this is not subject to big amount of current (being line level) and so the fc choosen don't change under demanding operation (when you push up volume: on conventional filter you have big amount of current which mean thermal increase for parts used which mean value change...).
Last edited:
Adrian started OnU Sound when in 1981. I think he ran a jamaican stylee sound system before that. He was an established dubster before doing any industrial stuff but the industrial stuff he did includes some of my favourite albums like 'Twitch' or most of NINs first 'Pretty Hate Machine'.
Sorry didn't know. I though it was the inverse actually. Didn't know he worked on 'My pretty hate machine', just rediscovered NIN early works since 3/4 years now (pre Downward Spiral). I used to think (when i was a teenager/ in my 20's) he was not as important than Ministry or Skinny for the movement, but i revised my mind since then. He did some pretty nice things.
Hmm, now I've got to read up on how the active crossovers work. Now I'm wondering about the crossover in my Crown XLS 1002. I'm not using it but I assumed it was converting A to D then back D to A once it split the frequencies.
So is an active crossover without a DSP phase neutral, or phase coherent, or whatever the correct term is for not causing additional phase shift?
Thanks for putting up with so many questions from me.
-Chris
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.