Console Daydreaming

[RRuskin]

Right. That's also part of the daydream

Actually all of my machines at the moment have balanced I/O except my 34b.

Really what I'm trying to figure out here is what the logical upgrade from my M520 would be, all brands and makes considered, if I were to invest in a new round of equipment.

I'm in a similar situation but have decided not to buy anything until I can afford a "dream" board: at least 36 X 8 with sound quality equal or better than the Sony 3036. That's much more than an incremental move from my current TASCAM 2600-32.

 

[sweetbeats]

Jeff, just keep in mind too that while all but the 34 have balanced I/O, the 48 at least is a -10 machine (common) with an internal balancing bump box to handle the +4 I/O. Think of it like an LA-80 and 81 internal and hard wired without any flexibility.

Just keep in mind that in a small project studio (and I may be called out on this), the ONLY reason to go balanced is for noise abatement, and if you are having noise issues on unbalanced cable runs under 25' then running balanced won't necessarily cure that...there is a dangerous perception that balanced audio is a silver bullet for noise interference issues and because there is *STILL* no widely accepted standard solution to the "pin 1 problem" and because we are using gear manufactured over decades, it just doesn't make sense to make changes in order to be "balanced".

NOW...that being said, if the underlying reason has to do with mojo that may or may not be present on a more vintage setup that happens to have balanced I/O, that's different. I guess what I'm really talking about is if you are looking for character in a balanced system and if that is the case its not so much the feature of balanced audio, but the colorization that can come (in varying degrees of satisfaction...or DISsaitsfaction) from a transformer-based balanced system.

Case in point: my MM-1000 is fully transformer balanced, though internally it is unbalanced of course and I believe the electronics operate at about -3dBu nominal (when strapped for +4 operation...+1dBu if strapped for broadcast standard +8dBu). Here's are my notes that will have some bearing on my final setup once I get the beast operating, as I'm not certain that I'm going to run it balanced yet:

• The input transformers are a plug-in type, so they are optional, and my understanding is they are pretty transparent, IOW they don't add anything desirable to the sound but they also don't add anything UNdesirable either. Without them the inputs are unbalanced +4dBu or +8dBu depending on where some internal leads are soldered.
• My Soundtracs MX desk's outputs are all unbalanced +4dBu on XLR's (I'm talking about the master, group, aux and matrix outs). The master and group outs have a transformer balance option...that means I go buy the trannnies of my choice and wire them up. Word has it I will love the sound of the mixer...maybe some nice-ish trannies would add something nice to the sound, I don't know, but there's no reason to rush in and balance it until I know how it sounds and my guess is that any mojo will come from the Ampex electronics and the tape anyway.
• SO...I will be running the Ampex inputs unbalanced for now and maybe always UNLESS there is a noise issue (there is a small radio station down the street so lots of RF hash in the air...new sound room has isolated dedicated star-grounded power source for audio equipment...if I'm having trouble my prime suspect will NOT be the power source wiring and I'm taking care to pay attention to potential "pin 1 problems" as the setup comes together...balancing will be a logical solution at this point)
• Ampex outputs are balanced unless you connect an unbalanced load...then they are unbalanced but the audio still goes through the output trannies, which I'm told are nothing to write home about. In fact, there is some indication that bypassing the output tranny altogether may provide a better sound (this can be done by modding the electronics internally, or by using the "PHONES" jacks on the front of the electronics which pick up upstream from the tranny...again the nominal signal at that point is about -7dB from the nominal setting of the module...+4 or +8).
• The line inputs on the Soundtracs are all balanced transformerless capable of accomodating -10dBv or +4dBu, so I'm good there.
• SO...I'll be running my tape machine outputs balanced to start (because its all internally wired up that way in the Ampex and because the snake I'm going to use is balanced XLR to TRS), but I will experiment going unbalanced through the Ampex output tranny, as well as using the PHONES jacks and bypassing the tranny altogether. If the sound through the PHONES jacks sounds best and I don't need to run the line balanced due to environmental "noise", then I'll mod the electronics modules to have the XLR output jacks be switcheable to output pre tranny or post tranny (there is a LINE TERMINATION switch on the back for switching in a 600ohm load when doing certain calibration procedures, but its silly because that load should be switched in ALL the time...so I'd mod the switch to control the source of the XLR pin 3 pre or post tranny and permanently wire in the 600ohm load)
• If going through the tranny sounds better then I'll leave it there and/or look into tranny upgrades.

In summary, when I move and settle the gear into the new sound room, my tape machine inputs will be unbalanced, and the outputs will be balanced, and I'll take the time at some point to explore the options OR make changes necessary to run all balanced if the environment demands I do so.

What I know from personal experience thus far: running audio into the Ampex unbalanced and monitoring via the PHONES jacks sounds...incredible. And to restate, that would be all unbalanced, no transformers.

More than you wanted to know but I'm just prodding you to get to the bottom of your quest for balanced gear...is it a "noise" issue or a "sound" issue?

 

[lo.fi.love]

More than you wanted to know but I'm just prodding you to get to the bottom of your quest for balanced gear...is it a "noise" issue or a "sound" issue?

Really what it is is that I'm eyeing some potential equipment upgrades for the coming years if I can make the financial, technical, and creative justifications to do so. That is to say, I want nicer stuff like a 1" 8-track or a 2" 16-track recorder, a board with better EQ, and maybe some nicer compressors, but really that's just a pipe dream for now.

I'm set with what I've got right now, and it will continue to meet my needs for years to come. What I have right now is perfect for what I'm doing and it will be quite some time before my needs surpass what I have in terms of equipment. I also have access to a couple local independent studios in case I need something that I don't already own (I inhaled a LOT of solder fumes for this privilege!).

While you point out that balanced interconnects isn't a silver bullet for noise issues, it's important to also point out that pro-level gear isn't a silver bullet for great music. Carlos Santana could kick serious butt on a pawn shop Strat copy if he really had to

 

[sweetbeats]

While you point out that balanced interconnects isn't a silver bullet for noise issues, it's important to also point out that pro-level gear isn't a silver bullet for great music. Carlos Santana could kick serious butt on a pawn shop Strat copy if he really had to

A_B_S_O_P_O_S_I_T_I_L_U_T_E_L_Y!!

Excellent point and thank you.

I will say that, and I'm purposely avoiding the dangerous terms "pro", "semi-pro", "consumer-grade", etc., the design of the Ampex is such that I just love how it sounds. May not be for everybody but there's no question that it is right for me, and it will cause me to let go of a number of pieces of gear I thought necessary...they were all just place-holders in a travel to find a sound in my head and the Ampex does "that sound" beyond what I had imagined even when it is buck-naked (just passive instrument in and out off the repro head, unbalanced, no trannies). So my point there is that there is importance to having a good central machine, and that goes for the mixer too...that mixer is the hub...everything goes through it, as it does through the tape machine if that's how you are operating. If anybody for one second thinks I'm saying that you have to go get some big old thing to get a good sound just stop it. I will hunt you down and drop a 440 electronics module on your head...it will hurt. I'm just sharing my story. My ears are amatuer, and it has been a nearly 15 year journey to get to where I could hear and feel what it is that I appreciate about the Ampex. It isn't transparent...it sounds..."like an Ampex" to quote a friend. I think the most important thing is to find a partner in your gear that inspires you...that encourages you to create! And that could be a Tascam MF-P01! I'm serious! Not taking a dump on the MF-P01...I'm lifting it up. Its a tool just like ANY of this stuff...They're all just tools and they should be enablers of creating sound projects. The moment you get hung up in something better because somebody said it was "better" you've stepped off the trail (*this is not addressed to those who like to tinker...that's a whole different camp...I'm talking to artists who are better creators than tinkerers...I'm more tinkerer I think). I've stepped off the trail more than I've stayed on it. But I HAVE gone through a process of feeling like I was hitting a wall...limited by what I had at the time...sometimes it was an excuse to get something "new", many times it was a real limitiation, but again remember this was been a 15 year process...actually goes back earlier than that...more like 20 years.

Jeff, I bet you've had a bit of exposure locally there to some different veins of gear. I never was too tickled by the EQ on the M-520 either. Overall the mixer has a warm sound, tremendous flexibility, good build quality and just plain looks great. I think its a great product, particularly when you factor in what they can be had for these days. I prefer the M-300 sound. I'm told I will like the Soundtracs sound better, and will experience an EQ section that is a pleasure to use. But you've got great stuff there, and I know you know that. I *think* I get where you are coming from and my comments are as much (or more) for general readers than pointed at you. And I'm saying what I'm saying as a means to confirm what I suspect is driving you.

I think its great that you have potential access to other bits of kit. THAT is the BEST way to sort through what you want/need long term. For somebody like me who is anything but a professional musician or audio technician and everything defining a moonlighter, and living in a small town, the best way for me has been to buy stuff. Not the best thing to do. But I have. A lot of buying/selling/fixing/using/selling...but it has taught me a bunch.

So (and not that you need my encouragement or advice), keep doing what you are doing. You've got a thing going on with the music you create, you are constantly becoming more and more familiar with what is in your midst, (sounds like) you have access to different venues and gear so soak it up, enjoy the process and evaluate every now and then. I betcha there will be something to lumber across your path and you'll be ready when it does. In the meantime don't stop asking questions here too because we all learn from the input that comes along.

Oh, and one last comment regarding your last sentence...I KNOW most could do more with the gear that has come and gone...I just think it is so important what you said..."better" gear won't make somebody perform "better". I believe it can inspire one to work harder because the process becomes more enjoyable, but it in and of itself won't make one "better". Case in point my 12-year-old son began practicing piano more after we had it tuned up. Before we brought that piano home (70's vintage Yamaha upright) it hadn't been tuned for maybe 15 years? We had it tuned shortly after getting it home and we fully expected it would need 2~3 more tunings in the following 12 months. After about 6 months it was definitely time...it sounded so refreshingly great after that second tuning he was so excited to play, play and play because it sounded so good to his ears...that's what I'm talking about...and that inspiration gave him a boost that naturally resulted in some more rapid advancement because he was physically practicing more. But the improvement was STILL the result of more work being done. That's why I'm lifting up even the humble MF-P01...there are most assuredly folks out there that love their very convenient and easy to use MF-P01's.