identify this device

[[email protected]]

https://www.facebook.com/JamesTaylor/photos/a.121906447832172.13685.112984765391007/1234830146539791/?type=3


What is the device in upper right on top of the meter bridge?


thanks

Mark

[Scott Dorsey]

> wrote:
>https://www.facebook.com/JamesTaylor/photos/a.121906447832172.13685.112984765391007/1234830146539791/?type=3
>
>
>What is the device in upper right on top of the meter bridge?

It's clearly something custom, built into a 1970s consumer cabinet. You
can see there is a knob missing and the controls are hand-labelled.

My first thought was that it started out life as a Pioneer reverb unit,
but I don't think that's the case.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[John Williamson]

On 14/06/2016 14:00, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> > wrote:
>> https://www.facebook.com/JamesTaylor/photos/a.121906447832172.13685.112984765391007/1234830146539791/?type=3
>>
>>
>> What is the device in upper right on top of the meter bridge?
>
> It's clearly something custom, built into a 1970s consumer cabinet. You
> can see there is a knob missing and the controls are hand-labelled.
>
> My first thought was that it started out life as a Pioneer reverb unit,
> but I don't think that's the case.
> --scott
>
Looking at the lights that seem to be on the face, maybe it's a balance
meter?
--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[david gourley[_2_]]

(Scott Dorsey) :

> > wrote:
>>
https://www.facebook.com/JamesTaylor/photos/a.121906447832172.13685.1129847
65391007/1234830146539791/?type=3
>>
>>
>>What is the device in upper right on top of the meter bridge?
>
> It's clearly something custom, built into a 1970s consumer cabinet. You
> can see there is a knob missing and the controls are hand-labelled.
>
> My first thought was that it started out life as a Pioneer reverb unit,
> but I don't think that's the case.
> --scott

Sansui reverb unit.

david

[Scott Dorsey]

david gourley > wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) :
>> > wrote:
>>>
>https://www.facebook.com/JamesTaylor/photos/a.121906447832172.13685.1129847
>65391007/1234830146539791/?type=3
>>>
>>>
>>>What is the device in upper right on top of the meter bridge?
>>
>> It's clearly something custom, built into a 1970s consumer cabinet. You
>> can see there is a knob missing and the controls are hand-labelled.
>>
>> My first thought was that it started out life as a Pioneer reverb unit,
>> but I don't think that's the case.
>
>Sansui reverb unit.

Bingo! Beautiful call!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[david gourley[_2_]]

(Scott Dorsey) :

> david gourley > wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) said...news:njov4p$l0m$1
@panix2.panix.com:
>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>
https://www.facebook.com/JamesTaylor/photos/a.121906447832172.13685.1129847
>>65391007/1234830146539791/?type=3
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>What is the device in upper right on top of the meter bridge?
>>>
>>> It's clearly something custom, built into a 1970s consumer cabinet.
You
>>> can see there is a knob missing and the controls are hand-labelled.
>>>
>>> My first thought was that it started out life as a Pioneer reverb unit,
>>> but I don't think that's the case.
>>
>>Sansui reverb unit.
>
> Bingo! Beautiful call!
> --scott

Thank you!

Is that the same type of unit that was being used early-on in radio
stations during the 60s, or was it something else?

david

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 11:06:27 AM UTC-4, david gourley wrote:
> (Scott Dorsey) :
>
> > david gourley > wrote:
> (Scott Dorsey) said...news:njov4p$l0m$1
> @panix2.panix.com:
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>
> https://www.facebook.com/JamesTaylor/photos/a.121906447832172.13685.1129847
> >>65391007/1234830146539791/?type=3
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>What is the device in upper right on top of the meter bridge?
> >>>
> >>> It's clearly something custom, built into a 1970s consumer cabinet.
> You
> >>> can see there is a knob missing and the controls are hand-labelled.
> >>>
> >>> My first thought was that it started out life as a Pioneer reverb unit,
> >>> but I don't think that's the case.
> >>
> >>Sansui reverb unit.
> >
> > Bingo! Beautiful call!
> > --scott
>
> Thank you!
>
> Is that the same type of unit that was being used early-on in radio
> stations during the 60s, or was it something else?
>
> david

yeah, good call...

Would they really have been using that "in the mix" or just on the monitors?

If you Google "WABC reverb" there is a bunch of 60's top 40 radio history.

M

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 6/14/2016 12:00 PM, wrote:
> Would they really have been using that "in the mix" or just on the monitors?

Creative people would use anything in a mix if it gave them something
they wanted to hear.

--

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

[JackA]

On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 10:29:04 AM UTC-4, david gourley wrote:
> (Scott Dorsey) :
>
> > > wrote:
> >>
> https://www.facebook.com/JamesTaylor/photos/a.121906447832172.13685.1129847
> 65391007/1234830146539791/?type=3
> >>
> >>
> >>What is the device in upper right on top of the meter bridge?
> >
> > It's clearly something custom, built into a 1970s consumer cabinet. You
> > can see there is a knob missing and the controls are hand-labelled.
> >
> > My first thought was that it started out life as a Pioneer reverb unit,
> > but I don't think that's the case.
> > --scott
>
> Sansui reverb unit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWVGhcuIzww

Jack
>
> david

[david gourley[_2_]]

said...news:0803803e-eb60-47c4-97a0-1b968ce08f18
@googlegroups.com:

> On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 11:06:27 AM UTC-4, david gourley wrote:
>> (Scott Dorsey) said...news:njp4g2$gt1$1
@panix2.panix.com:
>>
>> > david gourley > wrote:
>> (Scott Dorsey) said...news:njov4p$l0m$1
>> @panix2.panix.com:
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>
>>
https://www.facebook.com/JamesTaylor/photos/a.121906447832172.13685.1129847
>> >>65391007/1234830146539791/?type=3
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>What is the device in upper right on top of the meter bridge?
>> >>>
>> >>> It's clearly something custom, built into a 1970s consumer cabinet.
>> You
>> >>> can see there is a knob missing and the controls are hand-labelled.
>> >>>
>> >>> My first thought was that it started out life as a Pioneer reverb
unit,
>> >>> but I don't think that's the case.
>> >>
>> >>Sansui reverb unit.
>> >
>> > Bingo! Beautiful call!
>> > --scott
>>
>> Thank you!
>>
>> Is that the same type of unit that was being used early-on in radio
>> stations during the 60s, or was it something else?
>>
>> david
>
> yeah, good call...
>
> Would they really have been using that "in the mix" or just on the
monitors?
>
> If you Google "WABC reverb" there is a bunch of 60's top 40 radio
history.
>
> M
>

I'm sure it was a great effect somewhere if they wanted it as such.

Clearly the Sansui is a 70s unit, so I wondered what came before that.
Some good refs on that search, thanks. I'd seen Jim Hawkins' page before.
So, the big guys were actually using an EMT plate.


david

[JackA]

On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 12:06:59 PM UTC-4, Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 6/14/2016 12:00 PM, wrote:
> > Would they really have been using that "in the mix" or just on the monitors?
>
> Creative people would use anything in a mix if it gave them something
> they wanted to hear.

I see. So they put something into the "mix" that actually wasn't there, because, otherwise, it would sound bland.


Jack
> --
>
> For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 6/14/2016 12:00 PM, wrote:
>> Would they really have been using that "in the mix" or just on the
>> monitors?
>
> Creative people would use anything in a mix if it gave them something
> they wanted to hear.
>

Yeah, but mixes get better when you start taking stuff out.

--
Les Cargill

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 6/14/2016 1:01 PM, JackA wrote:
> So they put something into the "mix" that actually wasn't there, because, otherwise, it would sound bland.

Did I say "bland?" No, I don't think so.

--

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

[JackA]

On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 4:47:57 PM UTC-4, Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 6/14/2016 1:01 PM, JackA wrote:
> > So they put something into the "mix" that actually wasn't there, because, otherwise, it would sound bland.
>
> Did I say "bland?" No, I don't think so.


"... it gave them something they wanted to hear".

What is this "something" then?

Confused.

Jack


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

[Scott Dorsey]

david gourley > wrote:
>
>Is that the same type of unit that was being used early-on in radio
>stations during the 60s, or was it something else?

Some radio stations did use spring reverbs in their airchain. One of our
local Honolulu stations used a Fisher Spacexpander, but I know some other
units got pressed into service.

AM stations back then did some crazy processing stuff in order to sound
different and to come across well on that 4X6 speaker in the middle of
everyone's car dashboard. That did occasionally mean a little reverb to
thicken things up.

However, the spring reverb is more noted for being one of the fundamental
sounds of the dub reggae movement, rather than its occasional use in
broadcast.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

david gourley > wrote:
>Clearly the Sansui is a 70s unit, so I wondered what came before that.
>Some good refs on that search, thanks. I'd seen Jim Hawkins' page before.
>So, the big guys were actually using an EMT plate.

Back then your choices were a plate or a reverb chamber if you had money,
or a spring if you didn't.

Many classic recording studios were known for their reverb chambers. Not
much plate or chamber was used in the American broadcast world just
because they were so expensive and reverb wasn't that heavily used. But
the classic Radio Moscow sound seemed to come mostly from a peculiarly
configured reverb chamber.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Nil[_2_]]

On 14 Jun 2016, JackA > wrote in
rec.audio.pro:

> Confused.

Every single post you make here is based on profound confusion. You
invent false "facts" to support your lies. You understand nothing. To
try to un-confuse you would be a full-time job.

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 6/14/2016 5:33 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> david gourley > wrote:
>> Clearly the Sansui is a 70s unit, so I wondered what came before that.
>> Some good refs on that search, thanks. I'd seen Jim Hawkins' page before.
>> So, the big guys were actually using an EMT plate.
>
> Back then your choices were a plate or a reverb chamber if you had money,
> or a spring if you didn't.
>
> Many classic recording studios were known for their reverb chambers. Not
> much plate or chamber was used in the American broadcast world just
> because they were so expensive and reverb wasn't that heavily used. But
> the classic Radio Moscow sound seemed to come mostly from a peculiarly
> configured reverb chamber.
> --scott
>

We started with a Fisher and moved up to an Orban 111B. For what it was, the Orban was pretty amazing. I still have it.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 6/14/2016 5:23 PM, JackA wrote:
> "... it gave them something they wanted to hear".
>
> What is this "something" then?

You'll know it when you hear it. And if you never hear it, that's OK,
too. You'll just be ordinary instead of a kooky, kinky recording
engineer who makes a lot of money being quirky.

For example, on a recording session with the Seattle band Thunderpussy,
producer/engineer Sylvia Massy stuck an SM57 into one end of a garden
hose, draped the hose on the floor around the drum kit, and mixed the
sound from the mic in with the other more conventionally placed mics.
Another thing she did on that session was to connect the power cord of a
saber saw up to the speaker output of a guitar amplifier, had the
guitarist play a rhythm part in to the amplifier, recorded the sound of
the saw's motor as it pulsed rhythmically along with the guitar, and
added it to the mix in places where she found it to be effective.

And sometimes she just records and mixes things organically, like I do.

You should read her book "Recording Unhinged." You'd learn what else
people do when making records beyond EQ, compression, and reverb.



--

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

[Frank Stearns]

(Scott Dorsey) writes:

>david gourley > wrote:
>>Clearly the Sansui is a 70s unit, so I wondered what came before that.
>>Some good refs on that search, thanks. I'd seen Jim Hawkins' page before.
>>So, the big guys were actually using an EMT plate.

>Back then your choices were a plate or a reverb chamber if you had money,
>or a spring if you didn't.

>Many classic recording studios were known for their reverb chambers. Not
>much plate or chamber was used in the American broadcast world just
>because they were so expensive and reverb wasn't that heavily used. But
>the classic Radio Moscow sound seemed to come mostly from a peculiarly
>configured reverb chamber.

To my ear, all spring reverbs sound terrible (including the one pictured, as per
the reverb quality demo'd in the Utoob vid).

But there is one exception: the Quad-Eight RV-10. If you set them up right and were
careful how they were driven (I typically put a limiter on the send), they sounded
nearly as good as the EMT plate reverbs.

They really shined with two or three units in a send-to L/R or L/C/R arrangement.
They weren't cheap for a spring (around US$1000 in 1970s money), but then they
didn't sound like springs, unless you tried putting kick drum into them.

Not sure what the magic was, but I vaguely recall a four-parallel spring
arrangement, with some sort of special metalugry in the springs themselves.

Maybe one day the modelling folks will get around to this unit.

Frank
Mobile Audio

--

[geoff]

On 15/06/2016 10:26 a.m., Frank Stearns wrote:
> To my ear, all spring reverbs sound terrible (including the one
> pictured, as per the reverb quality demo'd in the Utoob vid).

Naaa. Thery sound great (grate ?). Add heaps of 3K zing.

geoff

[geoff]

On 15/06/2016 10:21 a.m., Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 6/14/2016 5:23 PM, JackA wrote:
>> "... it gave them something they wanted to hear".
>>
>> What is this "something" then?
>
> You'll know it when you hear it. And if you never hear it, that's OK,
> too. You'll just be ordinary instead of a kooky, kinky recording
> engineer who makes a lot of money being quirky.
>
> For example, on a recording session with the Seattle band
> Thunderpussy, producer/engineer Sylvia Massy stuck an SM57 into one
> end of a garden hose, draped the hose on the floor around the drum
> kit, and mixed the sound from the mic in with the other more
> conventionally placed mics. Another thing she did on that session was
> to connect the power cord of a saber saw up to the speaker output of a
> guitar amplifier, had the guitarist play a rhythm part in to the
> amplifier, recorded the sound of the saw's motor as it pulsed
> rhythmically along with the guitar, and added it to the mix in places
> where she found it to be effective.
>
> And sometimes she just records and mixes things organically, like I do.
>
> You should read her book "Recording Unhinged." You'd learn what else
> people do when making records beyond EQ, compression, and reverb.
>
>
>

Or more conventionally, the voice-box on guitar, as used by Jeff Beck,
Peter Frampton to excellent artistic effect, and others. I guess you
could use that on drums too !

I made one with the driver section from a Toa horn speaker which fitted
perfectly onto a length of neoprene tubing. The ultimate wah-wah, except
it makes your fillings fall out, so they say.

geoff

[JackA]

On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 6:21:36 PM UTC-4, Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 6/14/2016 5:23 PM, JackA wrote:
> > "... it gave them something they wanted to hear".
> >
> > What is this "something" then?
>
> You'll know it when you hear it. And if you never hear it, that's OK,
> too. You'll just be ordinary instead of a kooky, kinky recording
> engineer who makes a lot of money being quirky.
>
> For example, on a recording session with the Seattle band Thunderpussy,
> producer/engineer Sylvia Massy stuck an SM57 into one end of a garden
> hose, draped the hose on the floor around the drum kit, and mixed the
> sound from the mic in with the other more conventionally placed mics.
> Another thing she did on that session was to connect the power cord of a
> saber saw up to the speaker output of a guitar amplifier, had the
> guitarist play a rhythm part in to the amplifier, recorded the sound of
> the saw's motor as it pulsed rhythmically along with the guitar, and
> added it to the mix in places where she found it to be effective.
>
> And sometimes she just records and mixes things organically, like I do.
>
> You should read her book "Recording Unhinged." You'd learn what else
> people do when making records beyond EQ, compression, and reverb.

Dear Lord, didn't mean to bring blond bimbo into the discussion!
Sorry. Thanks for the example.

Would you say, reverb is to lengthen sound, while echo is used to reinforce sound?

Now, that brings up an interesting question, maybe deserves a thread of its own....

Like Capitol Records, or whoever, say, Brubeck's, Take Five.
Believe reading Capitol had a three sided room, no parallel walls, so sound bounced everywhere. Assume some sound was delayed and that sound was pumped back into the room via speakers to create an echo, large hall sound.

Sound correct?

Jack


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

[[email protected]]

geoff wrote: "Naa. Thery sound great (grate ?). Add heaps of 3K zing.

geoff "


Just for kicks - and not as part of a project - I ran some
music through a smiley EQ curve I created centered on
3kHz instead of the traditional 1kHz center. The curve
was below 0dB between 2-5kHz, and rose to 6dB at 50
Hz and 4dB at 15kHz. It's a generalization curve, but
anything I played through it sounded damn good! It was
also tempting to crank it, but its greatest benefit was
when listening at low volume.

[JackA]

On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 7:19:34 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> geoff wrote: "Naa. Thery sound great (grate ?). Add heaps of 3K zing.
>
> geoff "
>
>
> Just for kicks - and not as part of a project - I ran some
> music through a smiley EQ curve I created centered on
> 3kHz instead of the traditional 1kHz center. The curve
> was below 0dB between 2-5kHz, and rose to 6dB at 50
> Hz and 4dB at 15kHz. It's a generalization curve, but
> anything I played through it sounded damn good! It was
> also tempting to crank it, but its greatest benefit was
> when listening at low volume.

Great drummers, like Buddy Rich, didn't need fake sound, but it seems electric guitar fans need it....
http://www.premierguitar.com/ext/resources/legacy_galleries/large/83b475cc-f71c-48b6-bf7c-064c7fc84ba7.JPG?1402522043

Electric Guitar cost $75.00
Pedal board cost $3,000

Jack

[JackA]

On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 7:24:45 PM UTC-4, Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 6/14/2016 6:57 PM, JackA wrote:
> > Would you say, reverb is to lengthen sound, while echo is used to
> > reinforce sound?
>
> You could say that if you wanted to. It could apply sometimes, and not
> other times. And sometimes, just the opposite.

Often echo is used to reinforce singing. I think on out-take of Elvis', "Can't Help Falling In Love", you can hear it in action when he speaks.

>
> > Like Capitol Records, or whoever, say, Brubeck's, Take Five. Believe
> > reading Capitol had a three sided room, no parallel walls, so sound
> > bounced everywhere. Assume some sound was delayed and that sound was
> > pumped back into the room via speakers to create an echo, large hall
> > sound.
>
> I'm sure Capitol's famous echo chambers are well documented somewhere.
> But, yeah, before we had springs and plates and computers, you'd put a
> speaker in a live room, feed it some sound, pick up the reverberated
> sound with a microphone in the room, and add it back into the recording,
> usually delayed a bit to allow a bit of direct sound (simulating near
> field sound) to come through before you heard the sound in the
> environment of the room. Just like in real life, sort of.

Okay, thanks!!

Jack
>
>
>
> --
>
> For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[JackA]

On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 6:04:56 PM UTC-4, Nil wrote:
> On 14 Jun 2016, JackA > wrote in
> rec.audio.pro:
>
> > Confused.
>
> Every single post you make here is based on profound confusion. You
> invent false "facts" to support your lies. You understand nothing. To
> try to un-confuse you would be a full-time job.

Have you found a tape recorder for your tape? I know that is like rocket science for you!! :-)

Be nice Nil!

Jack

[JackA]

On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 6:26:12 PM UTC-4, Frank Stearns wrote:
> (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>
> >david gourley > wrote:
> >>Clearly the Sansui is a 70s unit, so I wondered what came before that.
> >>Some good refs on that search, thanks. I'd seen Jim Hawkins' page before.
> >>So, the big guys were actually using an EMT plate.
>
> >Back then your choices were a plate or a reverb chamber if you had money,
> >or a spring if you didn't.
>
> >Many classic recording studios were known for their reverb chambers. Not
> >much plate or chamber was used in the American broadcast world just
> >because they were so expensive and reverb wasn't that heavily used. But
> >the classic Radio Moscow sound seemed to come mostly from a peculiarly
> >configured reverb chamber.
>
> To my ear, all spring reverbs sound terrible (including the one pictured, as per
> the reverb quality demo'd in the Utoob vid).
>
> But there is one exception: the Quad-Eight RV-10. If you set them up right and were
> careful how they were driven (I typically put a limiter on the send), they sounded
> nearly as good as the EMT plate reverbs.
>
> They really shined with two or three units in a send-to L/R or L/C/R arrangement.
> They weren't cheap for a spring (around US$1000 in 1970s money), but then they
> didn't sound like springs, unless you tried putting kick drum into them.
>
> Not sure what the magic was, but I vaguely recall a four-parallel spring
> arrangement, with some sort of special metalugry in the springs themselves.

I had one, given to me, had (2) springs and (4) transducers, (1) each end.

Jack

>
> Maybe one day the modelling folks will get around to this unit.
>
> Frank
> Mobile Audio
>
> --
> .

[JackA]

On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 6:55:42 PM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
> On 15/06/2016 10:21 a.m., Mike Rivers wrote:
> > On 6/14/2016 5:23 PM, JackA wrote:
> >> "... it gave them something they wanted to hear".
> >>
> >> What is this "something" then?
> >
> > You'll know it when you hear it. And if you never hear it, that's OK,
> > too. You'll just be ordinary instead of a kooky, kinky recording
> > engineer who makes a lot of money being quirky.
> >
> > For example, on a recording session with the Seattle band
> > Thunderpussy, producer/engineer Sylvia Massy stuck an SM57 into one
> > end of a garden hose, draped the hose on the floor around the drum
> > kit, and mixed the sound from the mic in with the other more
> > conventionally placed mics. Another thing she did on that session was
> > to connect the power cord of a saber saw up to the speaker output of a
> > guitar amplifier, had the guitarist play a rhythm part in to the
> > amplifier, recorded the sound of the saw's motor as it pulsed
> > rhythmically along with the guitar, and added it to the mix in places
> > where she found it to be effective.
> >
> > And sometimes she just records and mixes things organically, like I do.
> >
> > You should read her book "Recording Unhinged." You'd learn what else
> > people do when making records beyond EQ, compression, and reverb.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Or more conventionally, the voice-box on guitar, as used by Jeff Beck,
> Peter Frampton to excellent artistic effect, and others. I guess you
> could use that on drums too !

Before the kiddies became interested in Frampton, FM Radio played...
http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abpsp/images/showmwtheway-s.mp3

The kiddies hung out on AM Radio.

Jack



>
> I made one with the driver section from a Toa horn speaker which fitted
> perfectly onto a length of neoprene tubing. The ultimate wah-wah, except
> it makes your fillings fall out, so they say.
>
> geoff

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

geoff wrote:
> On 15/06/2016 10:26 a.m., Frank Stearns wrote:
>> To my ear, all spring reverbs sound terrible (including the one
>> pictured, as per the reverb quality demo'd in the Utoob vid).
>
> Naaa. Thery sound great (grate ?). Add heaps of 3K zing.
>
> geoff


That's why they're on Fender guitar amps. I like it, so far as it goes.
I can't imagine running snare thru it though.

--
Les Cargill

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 6/14/2016 8:48 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
> That's why they're [spring reverb] on Fender guitar amps. I like it, so far as it goes.
> I can't imagine running snare thru it though.

Well, you're just missing out on an opportunity. You've be surprised at
how much stuff that sounds awful on its own makes a little change in a
recording that makes you perk up your ears.

You don't want to be the guy who always uses a spring reverb on a snare,
but some time you might run into a project that you think just needs a
little something else, and a little spring reverb on a snare might be it
- sometimes.


--

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

[david gourley[_2_]]

mcp6453 > said...news:QeqdncBcYqSAHv3KnZ2dnUU7-
:

> On 6/14/2016 5:33 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> david gourley > wrote:
>>> Clearly the Sansui is a 70s unit, so I wondered what came before that.
>>> Some good refs on that search, thanks. I'd seen Jim Hawkins' page
before.
>>> So, the big guys were actually using an EMT plate.
>>
>> Back then your choices were a plate or a reverb chamber if you had
money,
>> or a spring if you didn't.
>>
>> Many classic recording studios were known for their reverb chambers.
Not
>> much plate or chamber was used in the American broadcast world just
>> because they were so expensive and reverb wasn't that heavily used. But
>> the classic Radio Moscow sound seemed to come mostly from a peculiarly
>> configured reverb chamber.
>> --scott
>>
>
> We started with a Fisher and moved up to an Orban 111B. For what it was,
the Orban was pretty amazing. I still have it.
>

I think that 111B was a clever design for its time.

david

[david gourley[_2_]]

(Scott Dorsey) :

> david gourley > wrote:
>>Clearly the Sansui is a 70s unit, so I wondered what came before that.
>>Some good refs on that search, thanks. I'd seen Jim Hawkins' page
before.
>>So, the big guys were actually using an EMT plate.
>
> Back then your choices were a plate or a reverb chamber if you had money,
> or a spring if you didn't.
>
> Many classic recording studios were known for their reverb chambers. Not
> much plate or chamber was used in the American broadcast world just
> because they were so expensive and reverb wasn't that heavily used. But
> the classic Radio Moscow sound seemed to come mostly from a peculiarly
> configured reverb chamber.
> --scott

Yes that's why I was surprised to see a plate listed. Most stations I'd
heard during the 60s in NC were using spring types.

I always think of Capitol, Western, or Abbey Road when I think of classic
reverb chambers.

david

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 6/14/2016 8:48 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> That's why they're [spring reverb] on Fender guitar amps. I like it,
>> so far as it goes.
>> I can't imagine running snare thru it though.
>
> Well, you're just missing out on an opportunity. You've be surprised at
> how much stuff that sounds awful on its own makes a little change in a
> recording that makes you perk up your ears.
>

No, I wouldn't be surprised at all. I just have a certain narrow
conception of how a snare works, and that ain't it.

The snare drum is the Central Artifact of rock recording. Snare
sets the level (snare + 6dB = vocal level;Gtr sub mix = snare - 3dB ) ;
snare sets 2 & 4.

> You don't want to be the guy who always uses a spring reverb on a snare,

s/always/ever/

> but some time you might run into a project that you think just needs a
> little something else, and a little spring reverb on a snare might be it
> - sometimes.
>
>

.... Well, maybe. But I very seriously doubt it. I want you to hear the
tendons on the arm that hits the snare. I want that snare to tell you
how the drummer's great-grandparents came from the Old Country, how his
grandparents built a great empire, how his father squandered it and
this is all (s)he has now.

--
Les Cargill

[John Williamson]

On 15/06/2016 00:56, JackA wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 7:19:34 PM UTC-4, wrote:
>> geoff wrote: "Naa. Thery sound great (grate ?). Add heaps of 3K zing.
>>
>> geoff "
>>
>>
>> Just for kicks - and not as part of a project - I ran some
>> music through a smiley EQ curve I created centered on
>> 3kHz instead of the traditional 1kHz center. The curve
>> was below 0dB between 2-5kHz, and rose to 6dB at 50
>> Hz and 4dB at 15kHz. It's a generalization curve, but
>> anything I played through it sounded damn good! It was
>> also tempting to crank it, but its greatest benefit was
>> when listening at low volume.
>
> Great drummers, like Buddy Rich, didn't need fake sound, but it seems electric guitar fans need it....
> http://www.premierguitar.com/ext/resources/legacy_galleries/large/83b475cc-f71c-48b6-bf7c-064c7fc84ba7.JPG?1402522043
>
> Electric Guitar cost $75.00
> Pedal board cost $3,000
>
> Jack
>
A decent electric guitar can cost $3,000 or more.

And I'll bet the guitarist uses every single one of those effects units
in a gig. It's not fake sound, though, it's part of the creative process
that guitarists use. Have you ever heard an electric guitar without it
going through an amplifier and speaker? It's the non-linear stuff that
brings out the beauty in the sound. A well played electric guitar is one
of the most expressive instruments there is. It's up there with a well
played acoustic guitar.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[JackA]

On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 4:13:56 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
> On 15/06/2016 00:56, JackA wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 7:19:34 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> >> geoff wrote: "Naa. Thery sound great (grate ?). Add heaps of 3K zing.
> >>
> >> geoff "
> >>
> >>
> >> Just for kicks - and not as part of a project - I ran some
> >> music through a smiley EQ curve I created centered on
> >> 3kHz instead of the traditional 1kHz center. The curve
> >> was below 0dB between 2-5kHz, and rose to 6dB at 50
> >> Hz and 4dB at 15kHz. It's a generalization curve, but
> >> anything I played through it sounded damn good! It was
> >> also tempting to crank it, but its greatest benefit was
> >> when listening at low volume.
> >
> > Great drummers, like Buddy Rich, didn't need fake sound, but it seems electric guitar fans need it....
> > http://www.premierguitar.com/ext/resources/legacy_galleries/large/83b475cc-f71c-48b6-bf7c-064c7fc84ba7.JPG?1402522043
> >
> > Electric Guitar cost $75.00
> > Pedal board cost $3,000
> >
> > Jack
> >
> A decent electric guitar can cost $3,000 or more.

How, may I ask, call you tell a difference between a decent electric guitar and a bad one? Need amplifier?

>
> And I'll bet the guitarist uses every single one of those effects units
> in a gig. It's not fake sound, though, it's part of the creative process
> that guitarists use. Have you ever heard an electric guitar without it
> going through an amplifier and speaker? It's the non-linear stuff that
> brings out the beauty in the sound. A well played electric guitar is one
> of the most expressive instruments there is. It's up there with a well
> played acoustic guitar.

Come on, it is fake sound. So fake, I hear electric guitars fading from Pop music. But, you know the old story, since people don't actually listen to music, they don't know what is becoming obsolete. Like Big Bands, electric guitars have seen their better days.

Just my own personal observation.

Jack

Jack
>
> --
> Tciao for Now!
>
> John.

[Scott Dorsey]

Frank Stearns > wrote:
>
>To my ear, all spring reverbs sound terrible (including the one pictured, as per
>the reverb quality demo'd in the Utoob vid).

They aren't natural, but a lot of people like them today specifically
because they aren't natural. They are a classic, rather cheesy kind of
sound. But they are a fundamental part of dub reggae and some dub artists
will even play the reverb unit as a percussion instrument.

Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8iG0gTS4gk

>But there is one exception: the Quad-Eight RV-10. If you set them up right and were
>careful how they were driven (I typically put a limiter on the send), they sounded
>nearly as good as the EMT plate reverbs.

A lot of people in the seventies tried to do this sort of thing because
spring mechanisms were so cheap and plates were so expensive. I was an
intern for LT Electronics which made a "Microplate Reverb" that was actually
two spring tanks wired out of phase to cancel distortion products.

The AKG springs were also an attempt to sound as clean as possible, but they
were mechanically very different than the Quad-Eight, Orban, etc. units which
used the Accutronics tank design.

>Maybe one day the modelling folks will get around to this unit.

It's a thing that's supposed to sound like a plate... so why not just model
the plate and cut out the middleman?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Frank Stearns]

(Scott Dorsey) writes:

>Frank Stearns > wrote:

-snips-

>The AKG springs were also an attempt to sound as clean as possible, but they
>were mechanically very different than the Quad-Eight, Orban, etc. units which
>used the Accutronics tank design.

>>Maybe one day the modelling folks will get around to this unit.

>It's a thing that's supposed to sound like a plate... so why not just model
>the plate and cut out the middleman?

Why, nostalgia, of course! Just like so much of this stuff! :)

But seriously... Actually, the RV10 sound could be nearly as clean as a plate, but
had a sound all its own. I'd be curious to try it again, just for fun.

But because I do mostly acoustic and classical msuic, I can get nearly all the
reverb colors I need from the widely-configurable Waves IR-1 and delightlfully
cheesy (at times) Protools reverb. (I even built an acoustic chamber back at the old
place, but I couldn't get more than 2 seconds out of it. Worked well for drums, and
2 seconds was amazing for its size, but that was about it. Wasn't worth rebuilding
at the new place. Space, of course, was the issue.)

Frank
Mobile Audio

--

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Frank Stearns > wrote:
>>
>> To my ear, all spring reverbs sound terrible (including the one pictured, as per
>> the reverb quality demo'd in the Utoob vid).
>
> They aren't natural, but a lot of people like them today specifically
> because they aren't natural. They are a classic, rather cheesy kind of
> sound. But they are a fundamental part of dub reggae and some dub artists
> will even play the reverb unit as a percussion instrument.
>
> Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8iG0gTS4gk
>
>> But there is one exception: the Quad-Eight RV-10. If you set them up right and were
>> careful how they were driven (I typically put a limiter on the send), they sounded
>> nearly as good as the EMT plate reverbs.
>
> A lot of people in the seventies tried to do this sort of thing because
> spring mechanisms were so cheap and plates were so expensive. I was an
> intern for LT Electronics which made a "Microplate Reverb" that was actually
> two spring tanks wired out of phase to cancel distortion products.
>
> The AKG springs were also an attempt to sound as clean as possible, but they
> were mechanically very different than the Quad-Eight, Orban, etc. units which
> used the Accutronics tank design.
>
>> Maybe one day the modelling folks will get around to this unit.
>
> It's a thing that's supposed to sound like a plate... so why not just model
> the plate and cut out the middleman?
> --scott
>


Why model it when you can get impulses from real EMTs and the like?

--
Les Cargill

[Scott Dorsey]

Les Cargill > wrote:
>
>Why model it when you can get impulses from real EMTs and the like?

Because you can't bang on the side of it as a percussion instrument!
--scott

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

[Gray_Wolf]

On 6/14/2016 8:01 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 6/14/2016 8:48 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> That's why they're [spring reverb] on Fender guitar amps. I like it, so far as
>> it goes.
>> I can't imagine running snare thru it though.
>
> Well, you're just missing out on an opportunity. You've be surprised at how much
> stuff that sounds awful on its own makes a little change in a recording that
> makes you perk up your ears.
>
> You don't want to be the guy who always uses a spring reverb on a snare, but
> some time you might run into a project that you think just needs a little
> something else, and a little spring reverb on a snare might be it - sometimes.
>

Reverb does add some spice. It was a must have in the 60 and 70s when I was
playing guitar and steel. I'm surprised how my taste has changed in my old age.
I no prefer almost/no reverb at all. It kills the definition. I like the sound
right in my ear rather that from the other end of a cathedral. In fact I wish I
could remove it from some of the stuff I have. I can't recall anything I have
that sounds better with more reverb. There are some very poor recordings that it
does seem to help sometimes. What I really like is hearing a small acoustic
group where I can hear each instrument clearly, in their own space, as opposed
to being at the bottom of a well.

[Trevor]

On 15/06/2016 3:05 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
> Mike Rivers wrote:
>> On 6/14/2016 12:00 PM, wrote:
>>> Would they really have been using that "in the mix" or just on the
>>> monitors?
>>
>> Creative people would use anything in a mix if it gave them something
>> they wanted to hear.
>>
>
> Yeah, but mixes get better when you start taking stuff out.


So your ultimate mix is total silence? John Cage fan perhaps?

Trevor.

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Trevor wrote:
> On 15/06/2016 3:05 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> Mike Rivers wrote:
>>> On 6/14/2016 12:00 PM, wrote:
>>>> Would they really have been using that "in the mix" or just on the
>>>> monitors?
>>>
>>> Creative people would use anything in a mix if it gave them something
>>> they wanted to hear.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, but mixes get better when you start taking stuff out.
>
>
> So your ultimate mix is total silence? John Cage fan perhaps?
>
> Trevor.
>
>


Nah. You Madman Muntz it. Take stuff out til it stops working,
then put that last piece back in.

--
Les Cargill

[Trevor]

On 16/06/2016 4:50 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
> Trevor wrote:
>> On 15/06/2016 3:05 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>> Mike Rivers wrote:
>>>> On 6/14/2016 12:00 PM, wrote:
>>>>> Would they really have been using that "in the mix" or just on the
>>>>> monitors?
>>>>
>>>> Creative people would use anything in a mix if it gave them something
>>>> they wanted to hear.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, but mixes get better when you start taking stuff out.
>>
>>
>> So your ultimate mix is total silence? John Cage fan perhaps?
>
> Nah. You Madman Muntz it. Take stuff out til it stops working,
> then put that last piece back in.


Wouldn't it be FAR easier to simply stop after recording the first
track? Save a lot of time putting stuff in and taking it out again!

Trevor.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >, Trevor > wrote:
>
>So your ultimate mix is total silence? John Cage fan perhaps?

"Music is the space between the notes."
-- Franz Liszt

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

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >, Trevor > wrote:
>
>Wouldn't it be FAR easier to simply stop after recording the first
>track? Save a lot of time putting stuff in and taking it out again!

Sometimes that is indeed the best thing to do. The early Joan Baez recordings
were made this way. Sadly, the later ones were not.
--scott


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

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Trevor wrote:
> On 16/06/2016 4:50 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> Trevor wrote:
>>> On 15/06/2016 3:05 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>> Mike Rivers wrote:
>>>>> On 6/14/2016 12:00 PM, wrote:
>>>>>> Would they really have been using that "in the mix" or just on the
>>>>>> monitors?
>>>>>
>>>>> Creative people would use anything in a mix if it gave them something
>>>>> they wanted to hear.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, but mixes get better when you start taking stuff out.
>>>
>>>
>>> So your ultimate mix is total silence? John Cage fan perhaps?
>>
>> Nah. You Madman Muntz it. Take stuff out til it stops working,
>> then put that last piece back in.
>
>
> Wouldn't it be FAR easier to simply stop after recording the first
> track? Save a lot of time putting stuff in and taking it out again!
>
> Trevor.
>
>

Have you ever been part of a musical ensemble? This approximates
the part of that... experience where final arrangement decisions are
made in rehearsal.

--
Les Cargill

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 09:46:25 -0500, Les Cargill
> wrote:

>Trevor wrote:
>> On 16/06/2016 4:50 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>> Trevor wrote:
>>>> On 15/06/2016 3:05 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>>> Mike Rivers wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/14/2016 12:00 PM, wrote:
>>>>>>> Would they really have been using that "in the mix" or just on the
>>>>>>> monitors?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Creative people would use anything in a mix if it gave them something
>>>>>> they wanted to hear.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, but mixes get better when you start taking stuff out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So your ultimate mix is total silence? John Cage fan perhaps?
>>>
>>> Nah. You Madman Muntz it. Take stuff out til it stops working,
>>> then put that last piece back in.
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't it be FAR easier to simply stop after recording the first
>> track? Save a lot of time putting stuff in and taking it out again!
>>
>> Trevor.
>>
>>
>
>Have you ever been part of a musical ensemble? This approximates
>the part of that... experience where final arrangement decisions are
>made in rehearsal.

unless it is a blues band that has been together a long time. Then
those decisions are made in performance.

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Don Pearce wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 09:46:25 -0500, Les Cargill
> > wrote:
>
>> Trevor wrote:
>>> On 16/06/2016 4:50 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>> Trevor wrote:
>>>>> On 15/06/2016 3:05 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>>>> Mike Rivers wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/14/2016 12:00 PM, wrote:
>>>>>>>> Would they really have been using that "in the mix" or just on the
>>>>>>>> monitors?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Creative people would use anything in a mix if it gave them something
>>>>>>> they wanted to hear.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, but mixes get better when you start taking stuff out.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So your ultimate mix is total silence? John Cage fan perhaps?
>>>>
>>>> Nah. You Madman Muntz it. Take stuff out til it stops working,
>>>> then put that last piece back in.
>>>
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be FAR easier to simply stop after recording the first
>>> track? Save a lot of time putting stuff in and taking it out again!
>>>
>>> Trevor.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Have you ever been part of a musical ensemble? This approximates
>> the part of that... experience where final arrangement decisions are
>> made in rehearsal.
>
> unless it is a blues band that has been together a long time. Then
> those decisions are made in performance.
>
> d
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>


Not just blues bands. And that too.

--
Les Cargill

[Trevor]

On 17/06/2016 12:46 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>>> Yeah, but mixes get better when you start taking stuff out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So your ultimate mix is total silence? John Cage fan perhaps?
>>>
>>> Nah. You Madman Muntz it. Take stuff out til it stops working,
>>> then put that last piece back in.
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't it be FAR easier to simply stop after recording the first
>> track? Save a lot of time putting stuff in and taking it out again!
>>
>
> Have you ever been part of a musical ensemble? This approximates
> the part of that... experience where final arrangement decisions are
> made in rehearsal.


But who gets to decide which members of the ensemble are taken out?

Trevor.

[geoff]

On 17/06/2016 5:56 PM, Trevor wrote:

>>>
>>
>> Have you ever been part of a musical ensemble? This approximates
>> the part of that... experience where final arrangement decisions are
>> made in rehearsal.
>
>
> But who gets to decide which members of the ensemble are taken out?

The 'members' aren't necessarily taken out. Elements of the arrangement
are taken out.

..... by any of; the band-leader, the producer, the artistic director,
the majority, or the person with the best persuasion skills.

geoff

[Tom McCreadie]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

>"Music is the space between the notes."
> -- Franz Liszt

"Music is the greatest silent force in the world." - Lionel Richie

[Frank Stearns]

geoff > writes:

>On 17/06/2016 5:56 PM, Trevor wrote:

>>>>
>>>
>>> Have you ever been part of a musical ensemble? This approximates
>>> the part of that... experience where final arrangement decisions are
>>> made in rehearsal.
>>
>>
>> But who gets to decide which members of the ensemble are taken out?

>The 'members' aren't necessarily taken out. Elements of the arrangement
>are taken out.

>.... by any of; the band-leader, the producer, the artistic director,
>the majority, or the person with the best persuasion skills.

Or -- for better or worse -- the exec producer (or whoever has the gold and is
making the rules).

Frank
Mobile Audio
--

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >, Trevor > wrote:
>On 17/06/2016 12:46 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>>>> Yeah, but mixes get better when you start taking stuff out.
>>>>>
>>>>> So your ultimate mix is total silence? John Cage fan perhaps?
>>>>
>>>> Nah. You Madman Muntz it. Take stuff out til it stops working,
>>>> then put that last piece back in.
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be FAR easier to simply stop after recording the first
>>> track? Save a lot of time putting stuff in and taking it out again!
>>
>> Have you ever been part of a musical ensemble? This approximates
>> the part of that... experience where final arrangement decisions are
>> made in rehearsal.
>
>But who gets to decide which members of the ensemble are taken out?

Either the producer or the arranger, depending on who wins the wrestling
match.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Trevor]

On 17/06/2016 6:44 PM, geoff wrote:
> On 17/06/2016 5:56 PM, Trevor wrote:
>>> Have you ever been part of a musical ensemble? This approximates
>>> the part of that... experience where final arrangement decisions are
>>> made in rehearsal.
>>
>>
>> But who gets to decide which members of the ensemble are taken out?
>
> The 'members' aren't necessarily taken out. Elements of the arrangement
> are taken out.
>
> .... by any of; the band-leader, the producer, the artistic director,
> the majority, or the person with the best persuasion skills.

Oops, forgot the sarcasm emoji.

Trevor.