JoeMeek channel strips

  • Thread starter Thread starter Phosphene
  • Start date Start date
Phosphene

Phosphene

Horse Diaper
Already owning a 737, a Me-1NV, Sytek, and RNC, I was wanting to expand my palate. Can someone eleborate on The JoeMeek channel strips (1Q, 6Q, etc) and also the UA6176 as far as getting some different sounds.

What interests me on the 6176 is the preamp and EQ. I already know what the compressor can do, but how about the rest of the channel?

Was wanting a good compressor (which then everyone will say 6176), but affordibility is nice, and the Meeks are less expensive, so are they alright? Are the compression, EQ, and preamps worth a go? Which Meek or UA compressors work best with bass guitar?

yep.
 
I've had some compliments on my bass. I don't know, I love the JM but don't have the comparisons you do.

+ There's not many repair posts or QC issues on the green units.

- VC1Q channel strip isn't really cheap ( i guess thats relevant).
I forget what I paid $300-400 used? I wouldn't sell it.

+ the channel strip appealed to me as I'll never be buying a full blown mixer of this quality, so yeah, the channel strip concept is pretty cool, imo.

+ One thing the JM has is a huge range of sounds. The JM VC1Q is very analog like, manual controls; it requires more effort than selecting PRESET# 35=ACDC.

I played several boutique amps the other night, and noticed this same phenomena on the Mesa Boogie....barely tweek on it and you've got a different sound; there's definately a wide range of tones on the Meek like the Boogie.

In short - very versatile....
and yes, you can get clean too on the JM if needed its called Bypass.
:D
 
What does the cs mean in the name? Is that early or recent model nomenclature? I've actually been looking at this model. How does it compare to the oneQ? I guess this is brand new, but I wonder if they deliver like the one you have?
 
Phosphene said:
What does the cs mean in the name? Is that early or recent model nomenclature? I've actually been looking at this model. How does it compare to the oneQ? I guess this is brand new, but I wonder if they deliver like the one you have?
Click to expand...
Old V.S. New.....Yeah that will start a war. The old ones were made in england. The new ones are made in ........I am not even going to start. I will say this thou I have the VC1Qcs and i love it. I can tweak out alot of different sounds out of it manually.
check out this site for info
http://www.joemeek.com/downloads.html

Its kind of like an old car V.S. a new one.....

The old car is easy to work on, well built, It can withstand a crash
But it is a gas hog..... and sometime you put alot of money into them

The new car is great on gas, has new options, and its reliable
But that mean more to go wrong........ and look out for that semi

Both will get you to work and back.....the rest is just a matter of taste. ;)
 
I love the Recall Sheets on that site.....what a good idea for any peice of gear :)
 
Phosphene said:
Already owning a 737, a Me-1NV, Sytek, and RNC, I was wanting to expand my palate. Can someone eleborate on The JoeMeek channel strips (1Q, 6Q, etc) and also the UA6176 as far as getting some different sounds.

What interests me on the 6176 is the preamp and EQ. I already know what the compressor can do, but how about the rest of the channel?

Was wanting a good compressor (which then everyone will say 6176), but affordibility is nice, and the Meeks are less expensive, so are they alright? Are the compression, EQ, and preamps worth a go? Which Meek or UA compressors work best with bass guitar?

yep.
Click to expand...

I have an old VC1 made by fletcher and it is great. I use it alot for digital recording because it is transformer coupled and has a great opto-compressor which shapes the sound better in the digital domain. Very "analog" style of sound. When I use tape, I might stray to Avalons or Focusrites etc. They are generally cleaner for tape.
 
I have a UA m610, which is the same preamp and a stripped down version of the 2-610 eq (I believe the the 6176 uses the 2-610 version of the eq; the m610 has high pass filter at 70 and 140 and a mid range boost and high range boost). I love this pre with certain mics-- especially for vocals. It definitely takes the edge of mics with some high edge shrill to them (works great with my BLUE Blueberry). The boost is very useful with certain mics-- I have a couple of Karma Ribbons that are too rolled off in the high end for vocals, but the high boost helps them out nicely.
There are a lot of opinions on the m610, 2-610 and 610/solo, which are all at least the same pre. Again, though the 2-610 probably has the closest eq section to the one on the 6176
 
well i think with that line up of preamps i'd go for the 6176 if you don't have the 1176 already.you can pick up a meek compressor for another flavor.I would think you would have some luck on bass with the 1176
 
I've got a Twin Q in amongst my preamps. It is an interesting and useful tool.
I like the OC in it and the "iron" switch is kind of fun.
 
Yo PHosphene! The "cs" stands for "current sense", and represented a change in the electronics that I don't claim to understand. The oldest ones are designated VC1Q and twinQ, the later models VC1Qcs and twinQcs. All of these were made in England. Then business "issues" occurred. Studio Projects ended its relationship with the British manufacturing firm and began marketing redesigned units designed in the US and built in China. They are designated 3Q and twinQ. I owned a twinQcs, which was a very useful unit with a lot of character that never gave me any trouble, except for the add-on digital output card, which did not impress me.
I took a chance and traded it in on the new twinQ, and in general, I have not regretted it. The new twinQ doesn't do what the old one did, but it does a lot of other things better. I consider the old twinQ a one trick pony, mostly useful as a vox box. The new one has a little less character, if you will, but is a hell of alot more versatile. The EQ on the new unit is *much* better, and the iron switch allows it to be 2 very different preamps. This switch changes it from a transformerless to a transformer based solid state preamp at the touch of a switch. How cool is that? With iron off, it's a typical Burr-Brown type pre, not unlike a Grace 101. Very clean, no color, just the facts, Ma'am.
With iron on, it reminds me a little of my Avalon AD2022, another solid state pre with big mucking transformers. The compressor is very usable, but is the area where the pre is most different from the old twinQ. The older optical compressors have tons of character that you can't get rid of. When it's the right thing, it's perfect. When it's not, you're stuck with it. The new compressor simply doesn't produce that old agressive Joemeek sound, but for a broad variety of purposes, it's a better compressor. Overall, the new amp is cleaner and quieter.
How does it work on bass? No real clue. I only play bass a little, and when I record bass, I usually play it safe and plug it right into that Avalon, which is simply one of the best all-around bass DI's in the world. Mostly I use the Joemeek for vocals and percussion. That's just how my equipment options work out. And frankly, most of the time, I use it with the iron switch off. When I want that big-ass transformer sound, the Avalon is my best available option. Hope that helps.-Richie
 
Richard Monroe said:
The oldest ones are designated VC1Q and twinQ, the later models VC1Qcs and twinQcs.
Click to expand...

There was also the VC-1 and I think there were 3 "generations" of that unit.



Then business "issues" occurred. Studio Projects ended its relationship with the British manufacturing firm and began marketing redesigned units designed in the US and built in China.
Click to expand...

A another version of the "history" is that for reasons best left alone, JM UK went into liquidation, their US distributor, PMI, ultimately purchased the JM business from the liquidators and have set about trying to re-establish JM.




I owned a twinQcs, which was a very useful unit with a lot of character that never gave me any trouble, except for the add-on digital output card, which did not impress me. I took a chance and traded it in on the new twinQ, and in general, I have not regretted it. The new twinQ doesn't do what the old one did, but it does a lot of other things better. I consider the old twinQ a one trick pony, mostly useful as a vox box. The new one has a little less character, if you will, but is a hell of alot more versatile. The EQ on the new unit is *much* better, and the iron switch allows it to be 2 very different preamps. This switch changes it from a transformerless to a transformer based solid state preamp at the touch of a switch. How cool is that? With iron off, it's a typical Burr-Brown type pre, not unlike a Grace 101. Very clean, no color, just the facts, Ma'am.
With iron on, it reminds me a little of my Avalon AD2022, another solid state pre with big mucking transformers. The compressor is very usable, but is the area where the pre is most different from the old twinQ. The older optical compressors have tons of character that you can't get rid of. When it's the right thing, it's perfect. When it's not, you're stuck with it. The new compressor simply doesn't produce that old agressive Joemeek sound, but for a broad variety of purposes, it's a better compressor. Overall, the new amp is cleaner and quieter.
How does it work on bass? No real clue. I only play bass a little, and when I record bass, I usually play it safe and plug it right into that Avalon, which is simply one of the best all-around bass DI's in the world. Mostly I use the Joemeek for vocals and percussion. That's just how my equipment options work out. And frankly, most of the time, I use it with the iron switch off. When I want that big-ass transformer sound, the Avalon is my best available option. Hope that helps.-Richie
Click to expand...


There is also a noticable preference for early JM products as in the past, there has been the belief that the later UK made gear was not of the same level as the early models.

Like MCI, I have a VC-1 which is a bloody useful bit of gear.

:cool:
 
I've been using a a JoeMeek JM37DP LDC into a 3Q to do some vocal tracks this week, and love the results. IMHO, I think the preamp is quiet, clean, has plenty of gain, a ton of headroom, with a great "vintage sounding" optical compressor, and very musical EQ section. Great bang for the buck.
 
undergroundtoon said:
Old V.S. New.....Yeah that will start a war. The old ones were made in england. The new ones are made in ........I am not even going to start. I will say this thou I have the VC1Qcs and i love it. I can tweak out alot of different sounds out of it manually.
check out this site for info
http://www.joemeek.com/downloads.html

Its kind of like an old car V.S. a new one.....

The old car is easy to work on, well built, It can withstand a crash
But it is a gas hog..... and sometime you put alot of money into them

The new car is great on gas, has new options, and its reliable
But that mean more to go wrong........ and look out for that semi

Both will get you to work and back.....the rest is just a matter of taste. ;)
Click to expand...

I have and prefer the Ted Fletcher VC1 as it uses better transformers and components. The new ones cut corners and use lower quality components. Of coarse, they are cheaper, but I love my VC1.
 
Richard Monroe said:
Yo PHosphene! The "cs" stands for "current sense", and represented a change in the electronics that I don't claim to understand. The oldest ones are designated VC1Q and twinQ, the later models VC1Qcs and twinQcs. All of these were made in England. Then business "issues" occurred. Studio Projects ended its relationship with the British manufacturing firm and began marketing redesigned units designed in the US and built in China. They are designated 3Q and twinQ. I owned a twinQcs, which was a very useful unit with a lot of character that never gave me any trouble, except for the add-on digital output card, which did not impress me.
I took a chance and traded it in on the new twinQ, and in general, I have not regretted it. The new twinQ doesn't do what the old one did, but it does a lot of other things better. I consider the old twinQ a one trick pony, mostly useful as a vox box. The new one has a little less character, if you will, but is a hell of alot more versatile. The EQ on the new unit is *much* better, and the iron switch allows it to be 2 very different preamps. This switch changes it from a transformerless to a transformer based solid state preamp at the touch of a switch. How cool is that? With iron off, it's a typical Burr-Brown type pre, not unlike a Grace 101. Very clean, no color, just the facts, Ma'am.
With iron on, it reminds me a little of my Avalon AD2022, another solid state pre with big mucking transformers. The compressor is very usable, but is the area where the pre is most different from the old twinQ. The older optical compressors have tons of character that you can't get rid of. When it's the right thing, it's perfect. When it's not, you're stuck with it. The new compressor simply doesn't produce that old agressive Joemeek sound, but for a broad variety of purposes, it's a better compressor. Overall, the new amp is cleaner and quieter.
How does it work on bass? No real clue. I only play bass a little, and when I record bass, I usually play it safe and plug it right into that Avalon, which is simply one of the best all-around bass DI's in the world. Mostly I use the Joemeek for vocals and percussion. That's just how my equipment options work out. And frankly, most of the time, I use it with the iron switch off. When I want that big-ass transformer sound, the Avalon is my best available option. Hope that helps.-Richie
Click to expand...

For the record, I used to use an Avalon U5 all the time for bass on my 2" 24 track analog recorder. Works great. I am now recording to 24 track HD recorder and found out that the VC1 with the opto-compressor is just right for digital recording. The old fletcher compressor gives an unreal "round" full bass sound. I have tracked 2 songs and everyone I play them for loves the bass sound. It is the first comment so far by everyone.
 
MCI2424 said:
I have and prefer the Ted Fletcher VC1 as it uses better transformers and components.
Click to expand...


Have a look at the back of your VC-1 and tell me if there's another number following on from where it should say "JOEMEEK Studio Channel VC1 v***".

Cheers :cool:
 
With all this Joe Meek talk, I dug into some of my old stuff, stuff that I thought was worthless and could not sell, and pulled out my old Joe Meek VC3, with its ugly little green face and made in England by Fletcher ElectroAcoustics Ltd. Maybe I should plug this thing back in and give it a listen. Can't hurt anything.
 
I just traded an old Fletcher-era compressor for the updated model.... can't wait to try it out. It's the low-end MC2 model. I plan on using it specifically for bass and for pronounced color on vocals. I have a RNC for more transparent uses.
 
MCI2424 said:
The new ones cut corners and use lower quality components..
Click to expand...

That's exactly what a lot of people believe was happening prior to JM UK going down the gurgler.

If on the other hand, you're refering to the PMI JM gear, I presume you've had your hands on some units, opened them up and fully evaluated the circuit designs etc., to make such a call.

BTW, I'm currently tracking bass through my VC1 to tape.........yummy ;) .

:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top