Re: Gatley mixer kits from the late 60's early 70's

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, January 28, 2004 12:12:54 AM UTC-6, David wrote:
> I am trying to find out about the input transformers assocaited with
> the Gatley Pro Kit series 6 channel mixers that were sold as DIY kits.
> The transformer says "DS Made in Demark" and has a +/- freq response
> of 20 - 20k...
>
> Any info on this transformer would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks!
>
> David

The transformer were made by Beyer, and were pretty decent transformers. I also used them in a custom mic preamp design; I may still have one or two lying around. As I remember, they had about 15 dB of gain. I believe the secondary was 10K and the primary was 250 Ohms.

Jim G. Nashville

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

wrote:

> On Wednesday, January 28, 2004 12:12:54 AM UTC-6, David wrote:
>> I am trying to find out about the input transformers assocaited with
>> the Gatley Pro Kit series 6 channel mixers that were sold as DIY
>> kits. The transformer says "DS Made in Demark" and has a +/- freq
>> response of 20 - 20k...

>> Any info on this transformer would be appreciated.

>> Thanks!

>> David

> The transformer were made by Beyer, and were pretty decent
> transformers. I also used them in a custom mic preamp design; I may
> still have one or two lying around. As I remember, they had about 15
> dB of gain. I believe the secondary was 10K and the primary was 250
> Ohms.

If they are made in denmark as per their label, then they are more likely to
be Joergen Schou. Beyer is in Germany.

> Jim G. Nashville

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[[email protected]]

the thread is 10 years old

Mark

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 1/6/2014 1:02 PM, wrote:
> the thread is 10 years old

But not as old as the mixer. I almost bought one of those kits when
they were new.


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >, Mike Rivers > wrote:
>On 1/6/2014 1:02 PM, wrote:
>> the thread is 10 years old
>
>But not as old as the mixer. I almost bought one of those kits when
>they were new.

I only bought the EQ module kits! I put two channels of them in a Sescom
case and I still have it! It doesn't sound half bad (although I also
replaced the 301s with something newer back around 1985 or so).
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[John Hardy]

On 1/6/2014 2:32 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article >, Mike Rivers > wrote:
>> On 1/6/2014 1:02 PM, wrote:
>>> the thread is 10 years old
>>
>> But not as old as the mixer. I almost bought one of those kits when
>> they were new.
>
> I only bought the EQ module kits! I put two channels of them in a Sescom
> case and I still have it! It doesn't sound half bad (although I also
> replaced the 301s with something newer back around 1985 or so).
> --scott
>
I built a Gately Mixer for someone in 1973/1974 or so (Bill Wilson,
Wilson Music, Carbondale, IL). I called Ed Gately at the time. I don't
recall why. But I recall his comment that he regretted using 100k volume
controls. He wished he had used 10k instead.

John Hardy

[Scott Dorsey]

John Hardy > wrote:
>>
>I built a Gately Mixer for someone in 1973/1974 or so (Bill Wilson,
>Wilson Music, Carbondale, IL). I called Ed Gately at the time. I don't
>recall why. But I recall his comment that he regretted using 100k volume
>controls. He wished he had used 10k instead.

What, 100k pots going into 220k summing resistors into the mix buss? That
sounds... noisy....
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[PStamler]

On Tuesday, January 7, 2014 7:38:40 AM UTC-6, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> John Hardy > wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >I built a Gately Mixer for someone in 1973/1974 or so (Bill Wilson,
>
> >Wilson Music, Carbondale, IL). I called Ed Gately at the time. I don't
>
> >recall why. But I recall his comment that he regretted using 100k volume
>
> >controls. He wished he had used 10k instead.
>
>
>
> What, 100k pots going into 220k summing resistors into the mix buss? That
>
> sounds... noisy....


But the Gately would have had a noisy summing bus anyway, a victim of the LM301 chips used for summing amplifiers. There's been a lot of progress since then.

Peace,
Paul

[John Hardy]

On 1/7/2014 7:38 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> John Hardy > wrote:
>>>
>> I built a Gately Mixer for someone in 1973/1974 or so (Bill Wilson,
>> Wilson Music, Carbondale, IL). I called Ed Gately at the time. I don't
>> recall why. But I recall his comment that he regretted using 100k volume
>> controls. He wished he had used 10k instead.
>
> What, 100k pots going into 220k summing resistors into the mix buss? That
> sounds... noisy....
> --scott
>
I believe that was Ed Gately's point.

John

[Scott Dorsey]

PStamler > wrote:
>kludge wrote:
>>
>> What, 100k pots going into 220k summing resistors into the mix buss? That
>>
>> sounds... noisy....
>
>
>But the Gately would have had a noisy summing bus anyway, a victim of the LM301 chips used for summing amplifiers. There's been a lot of progress since then.

AARGH! With that high an impedance buss I'd hope they at least put a fet
follower in front of the LM301? Please tell me they did!

The Studer consoles were brimming over with LM301s but managed to sound
remarkably good by careful gain structuring.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[PStamler]

On Tuesday, January 7, 2014 5:03:56 PM UTC-6, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> PStamler > wrote:
>
> >kludge wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> What, 100k pots going into 220k summing resistors into the mix buss? That
>
> >>
>
> >> sounds... noisy....
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >But the Gately would have had a noisy summing bus anyway, a victim of the LM301 chips used for summing amplifiers. There's been a lot of progress since then.
>
>
>
> AARGH! With that high an impedance buss I'd hope they at least put a fet
>
> follower in front of the LM301? Please tell me they did!

Nope. The summing amps were unbuffered LM301s, used in feedforward mode for improved GBW product and slew rate. Actually a clever application, but noisy -- better ICs simply didn't exist at the time.

Peace,
Paul