|
Howdy,
Since we are doing equipment reviews, I will throw my two cents
worth in as well.
I have been, for roughly the past year, been working on setting
up a decent synth studio in my apartment. The following is some of the
object lessons I have learned in the process of collecting the
equipment, as well as a review of the equipment itself.
I presently have a Moog 12 synthesizer, a pair of Tascam model
10 mixers, a Tascam model 1 mixdown unit, and an Orban 111B stereo
reverb.
The Moog is living up to the reputation of the Moog name. The
model 12 is a small studio system which has basically the same module
compliment as a Mini-moog, except that it is completely patchable and
features a 907 fixed filter bank. I have had the synth for about 11
months now, and I am still coming up with new sounds. The sound quality
is excellent, and the synth has never given me any trouble, with the
exception of a solder break in the power supply, and some weak contacts
inside the keyboard controller. So, as regards the Moog stuff, I
heartily recommend any of their studio equipment.
My mixer is a pair of Tascam model 10s. My plan is to merge the
two of them into a single 26x8x2 mixer by spring. It includes some of
the optional stuff like the talkback/slate module, and the 8-channel
monitor mixdown. When I am done, it will also have a "home-brew" input
mixdown for all input channels, and a stereo monitor before the echo
sends on the submasters. It will be functionally near-equivalent to the
Tascam model 16.
The Orban 111B was a unit which had been recommended to me in
the past. It is a stereo reverb, and has pseudo-parametric equalization
on both channels. It is one of the nicer analog reverbs, since it uses
six springs to generate a more natural reverb.
As for tape recorders, I am sucking in my breath and bracing to
buy on the new, instead of used, market place. The reason being is that
unless you know what to look for, it is really easy to buy a lemon for
almost-new prices. For people interested in h*e*a*v*y synth work, you
have to be extremely careful so that you buy a machine with a transport
designed to handle "mass quantities" of tape moving. The best tape
machine that I have seen for serious synth work is the Tascam 50-series.
If you are interested in 16 track work, a good machine is the Tascam
85-16B. I have not seen enough of the new Fostex to have an educated
opinion on their 16-track 1/2-inch machine.
The following are the lessons I have learned during this
process:
The first lesson was one which I learned from a friend over in
Field Service. The first lesson is this: "Don't be afraid to buy in
the used market place." I discovered that one can save considerable
sums of money by buying used, and watching like a hawk when stuff comes
onto the market place. My favorite weapon is the latest copy of
"Tradin' Times" (a swap-and-sell magazine over here in Detroit). Plus
some patience to wait for equipment to become available.
The second lesson is to not trust myself. If I don't know
anything about the kind of equipment I want to get, I stop and get
information first before spending money.
Finally, if I am going to buy something brand-new, I will plan
on buying the best, top-of-the-line that I can afford, so that I won't
have to re-buy the equipment a second time in the future.
Let's hear from somebody else on their experiences, and
recommendations.
Bill Laut
|
|
Ibenez.....
I've had a few digital gizmos made by Ibenez
namely..
HD1000 pitch transposer
DM500 256ms delay
DM1100 3.6sec delay
and here are my views...
HD1000 - for a low end pitch transposer ($500 range) you could
say it wasn't worth the investment.
Sound - I'ts effect signal has a lot of process glitch
(for those of you who don't know glitch..it is
a form of transient discontiuety caused by
the editing that the thing does in order to have
a continueouly fresh signal source to speed up
or down). Plus there is an objectional amount
of pre-delay caused by processing, about ~11ms
to ~65ms depending on the transposition.
Disadvantages - The dry singal path through the HD1000
has some level compression on it, why
I don't know! But if you don't want it
you have to patch externally.
Also it doesn't do micro-pitch shifts.
On the road - "gee wouldn't it be great to play on stage
with a pitch transposer for this song or
that song", I never had ONE application
for it that I didn't find something better
to without it.
DM500 - I like it! It's about 15KHz bandwidth makes it nice
for slap-backs and pseudo-sustain effects, but the
delay range limits it to those effects, additionally
It's a great digital chorus adn negative flange effect.
Disadvantages - Somehow there is one strange thing about it
it may be only with mine and it is hard
to describe (sorry if I loose you) here goes..
the echo signal has a noise envelope on it
it's not hiss, it's more like a quite 'thock'
type noise. Anyway it bugs me sometimes.
On the road - I've used it all the time and have it on most
of the time too. So try it you'll like it for
the price, I got mine second hand for $200.
DM1100 - It's nice...bandwidth @8KHz 3.6secs, good low end
long delay effect. Has some nice touches, tone control
on input to delay line, good for simulating analog delay.
Pull-invert singal regeneration for negative flange, though
flange starts at 7ms, pretty low flange. Low price ~$200.
Disadvantages - Rather noise prone, with increasing high frequency
emphasis with tone control the hiss becomes VERY
noticable. A quirk here (again may only be mine)
but the unit has input level LED's, when the lowest
dB LED fires, as on the tail end of an echo, you can
here a little crackle. took a long time to notice it
but there you have it, a source of disatisfaction.
On the road - I've got a lot of use out of it, I mainly write
songs that have guitar echos in them so naturally
this is the one I used for them. Something good here,
the ablity to adjust the delay time control acuratly
was suprizingly good, just turn the knob and that
delay time was the same as it always was, however
you have to expect inaccuracies when you just get
the thing out of the van and let it warm up a bit
before sound checks. A DOD delay that I like to
use (not for above types of delays though) has a
nonlinear delaytime knob that makes certain delay
ranges in it's travel impossible to adjust quickly.
Well I hope I didn't spoil anyones hopes.
John
|
| As some of you may have noticed I havn't gotten
either the Drum machine or the recorder yet.
Well the drum machine has been put off in favor of
a better recorder (money, money, money). I'm going
for the Fostex A-8 (Dolby C) because I've worked with
one before, and found that it was a good machine for
the price. If anyone out there has any complaints
about this recorder I would LOVE of hear them (I crave
criticism). The restrictions imposed by 4 input modules
isn't important for the projects I've got in mind.
Keep those cards and letter coming!
(0 \ /
fOf
(BJohn(0 yyy zzz(B
|
| I've been using the Fostex A-8 for a while. The only problem I've had with
it was last weekend. I recorded a clock track on channel 1 so I could
synchronize the sequencer to it for later tracks. After recording the
other tracks several times I noticed that the clock track was audible on
the other tracks! I had recorded the clock track very loud (0 on the VU
meter) so that the sequencer could "hear". I erased the tape rerecorded
the clock track at 10, followed by the other tracks. The sequencer had no
trouble "hearing" the clock track, and there was no crosstalk.
The specs claim that crosstalk is 55db down from the main signal, but my
experience is that if you re-record a lot a very loud signal will
eventually make it to the other tracks. It isn't necessarily the recorder
of course: the crosstalk could be in the cables or even the mixer.
Nevertheless, be careful. In your application it may be harder to erase
the tape and rerecord everything than it was in mine.
John Sauter
|
| Thanks, high frequency saturation at 15ips is lower than
at 7 1/2 ips, but good recording techinques dictate that you
should put those tracks that contain high-high freq's (like
FSK timing tracks and high hat) on the edge tracks, or if not
possible (due to many of that type of signal) to place them
so adjectent tracks mask any 'splash'. Inadequate erasure,
tape skew and head height alignment are the common suspects
of 'splash', well shielded cables should be proof against crosstalk
but a poor mixer is a bad investment.
Again thanks for the feedback, I lack a full set of spec's
for this recorder, and I can easily benifit from ANY information.
John Walton
|