Joemeek twinQ Part II

  • Thread starter Thread starter Richard Monroe
  • Start date Start date
R

Richard Monroe

Well-known member
Well, with the holidays from hell (and a dose of Homerec.com cold turkey) behind me, I've begun further evaluation of the twinQ. In my previous post I listed my disclaimors, but I'll repeat them: 1. I am not a badass pro engineer. I am an amateur who has spent too much money on gear. 2. I do not have golden ears. More like moderately hearing disabled. 3. I have no professional relationship with PMI audio or its subsidiaries, and I don't give a damn whether they like my review or not.
Given the above, I won't be wowing you with artistic technobabble about whether it lives up to its specs when measured with boxes with blinking lights. All that I can do is tell you what I hear, what I think it's good for, and compare it to the pres I am most familiar with, particularly the old twinQcs, and Avalon AD2022.
I have plugged the following into this thing: a Taylor 710CE with a Fishman stereo blender, AKG C414B-ULS, B.L.U.E. Kiwi, Shure SM7B, Neumann KM184, AKG D320B, Rode NTK, Sennheiser e609 (on a cab). I have done male vocals (think Jonathon Edwards meets Neil Young), female voiceovers, acoustic guitar, and a cranked up cab. It's what I had.
There are multiple possible configurations, "metal" on or off, compressor on or off. The old twinQ's compressor was very agressive, like an effect, and it acted as a filter even when it was set so that it never kicked in. The new one is similar, but a bit less agressive. Yep, you can make it sound like the old one, but you need to increase the slope (ratio) a little to do it. It's also not as slow on attack as the old unit, which I pretty much left on minimum attack at all times. This one gives you more leeway. In the compressor section, advantage: new twin Q. Especially with the Kiwi and the C414, it gave me that in-your-face vocal quality that's so essential for vocal based music. A little helps with voiceovers, and at lower ratios, you can use it just for dynamic control, which the old unit wasn't good at. With the old unit, I often used an RNC as an insert when I wanted cleaner compression. The new unit won't require that. Manual makeup gain has been added, which is a big help. It also can now link the compressors on the two channels for stereo recording, which I like a lot.
Well, what about the pres? This puppy is wicked quiet, almost like my Avalon. The old one wasn't, and came with a manageble but ever-present noise floor. With the metal switch off, it's the cleanest pre I've ever used, cleaner than my Avalon. Transparent, accurate, detailed, honest. Some people think that's boring. My 2 Neumanns and my Taylor disagree. I find that when pushed hard, clipping is more abrupt than the old unit, with the clip point more clearly defined. I assume that that is a function of it's Burr Brown chip. The old unit was more gradual, which had protective value, but also could get you into trouble, because you could miss minor clipping. When you hit the clip point on the new one, you'll know it! There is, however, more than adequate headroom, and plenty of gain.
Then, there's this "metal" switch, which inserts the input transformer into the signal chain. I've been waiting 2 1/2 years to find out if this is a revolutionary design innovation or a cheesy gimmick, like a hybrid tewb amp.
Well, when engaged, it creates that "edgy", slightly ragged sound, and it really does remind me of my Avalon. This does exactly what it is intended to do, and many users will find it very useful. I think the output becomes a little darker, and a 2 db boost about 2K compensates well for that. Well, I have to say my AD2022 does that trick better, but it's the only trick it knows. My conclusion is that if you have an Avalon, you'll probably rarely turn that switch on. If you don't, you'll find many uses for it. Advantage- the new twinQ for versatility. Sorry it's not an Avalon, but there are some days I wish my Avalon had a "metal" switch so I could *turn it off*.
Here's an easy one- The EQ section rocks! Bass and mid are fully sweepable, and highs selects 6K or 12K only. This is frighteningly better than any EQ section currently available to me, either in hardware, software, or firmware. As Fletcher said about the ATC-2, that alone is worth the price of admission. It trashes the old Meequalizer, which was fairly useless, in every way. Advantage- new twinQ, big time.
The new AD convertor is integral, rather than an optional add-on as the old one. It offers S/PDIF, AES/EBU, and optical outs, selectable for 44.1kHz or 48 kHz. My rig uses S/PDIF, generally. Impressions- it's better than my TC Electronics M300, which is better than most people suppose. It is better than my Roland VS1824CD, which is middle-of-the-road. It's maybe just shy of my Digi002, which is fair, and not as good as the Lucid. In other words, A-D conversion is not *great*, but is *good*, entirely usable. This is *much* better than the old optional unit, which was a noisy pain in the ass, and prone to hum especially on warm days. Note that the new twinQ has a street price compareable to the old unit, *before* you added the $180 A-D convertor. Advantage: the new twinQ.
For jollies, I plugged my Taylor into this thing, splitting the onboard mic and piezo for separate processing, into channels 1 and 2. The old twinQ, although not so hot on bass, was the best acoustic DI box I've ever used, excepting my Avalon, which is a little better. Problem is, the Avalon doesn't have the EQ to dial up good sound, so it has to be created in post production, or by daisy chain, as the Avalon has no insert points. For this reason, the twinQ is my acoustic DI of choice. The new one is much better, due to cleaner pres, cleaner compression, and much better EQ. I haven't had a chance to try it on bass, but knowing how good a bass DI the Avalon is, I'm betting the new twinQ will rock with the metal switch engaged.
In conclusion, this is a very good channel strip. It is far more versatile and a lot cleaner and quieter than it's daddy. My only complaint is that the darker green used with white lettering makes the front panel a little difficult to read in low light situations, and with a front panel that busy, it'll be a while before I know where every control lives. The new VU meters are more accurate, respond more rapidly to transients, and in spite of being a little smaller than the old ones, are easier to read. Trust me, when you are a hearing disabled tracking engineer, you care about that. I'm almost deaf in one ear, so stereo is a visual concept for me. The worst things I can find to say about it is that it's transformer based front end isn't quite as good as an Avalon, and its A-D conversion isn't as good as a Lucid AD2496! In other words, it's a very nice preamp that can produce a huge spectrum of different sounds, and an asset to almost any studio.
Pretty soon, I'll give you part III, where I intend to do what I do to check my mixes. Yes, I know the limitations of my hearing, and I have a *big* compensator. I intend to bring in a friend of mine, who is a Pro Tools whiz with golden ears. I always have to have my mixes checked because of my hearing, and I'm proud to say that I usually do OK. Aidas, on the other hand, can hear the ticking of my watch at 10 feet, and it annoys him. Aidas will be listening to this box, and I'll let you know what he has to say. I bet he likes it, though, because he's a sucker for a clean pre. That's what works about this box. It has the color of the old twinQ, but you can dial that color right out, and still get very usable results. The old twinQ without it's compressor
was not particularly useful. Here's hoping y'all find these impressions useful.-Richie
 
Last edited:
thank you for that detailed review!!! - nice work Richie
 
You have me convinced! Thank you for the 2nd part, post the 3rd asap!
 
Excellent review, Richie. Thanks for taking the time. How does it sound with the SM7B on vox with the "Iron" in? Something tells me that will be a sweet combo.
 
Yo tdukex! Oddly enough, the SM7B is mostly my live vocal mic, and I find it a little too flat until I engage the presence boost on the back of the mic. I would use the iron switch on when recording percussion, which I use the SM7 into the Avalon for routinely. especially Doumbek and snare. (if I trust the drummer, and can fit the big honkin' thing in) For voiceovers, I prefer it with iron off. Just the facts. Ma'am. It might be good on a screamer, but for clean vocals (what the hell, I'm a folk singer, basically) I usually prefer iron off. I tend to use metal on guitar and percussion. Bass hasn't been tested yet.-Richie
 
Cool, Richie. Keep the review comments coming. I'm still deciding if I'm going to sell/trade my VC1Qcs for a newer Meek or go a different direction (Davisound, Sytek, Speck). I have a Seb for color and need something clean and versatile. The eq and compresser would be a bonus. Also, I would want it to sound fab on acoustic guitar.
 
thanx alot,

i was looking out for a dualchannel preamp, and since i like my joemeek vc8 i was thinking of an upgrade to something like the twinq,
you're getting me convinced to sell my vc8 and get that other one...

and am i correct, the twinq is the old one, and the twinqS is the new one?
 
Nice post. Is there anyways you could post some real life pics of the unit? I think the pics on the joemeek site look so unnatural, I wanna know what shade of green we're talking about.
 
Yo, earworm! No, there are actually 3 incarnations: twinQ, twinQcs, and once again twinQ. I'm sure some technogeeks can shed some light on the "cs" designation, but it stands for "current sense", and represents a change in circuitry that was an alledged improvement over the original. As near as I can tell, it was a marketing gimmick, and there are many who preferred the original unit. Mine is a "cs" version. I have used it almost excluseively as an acoustic guitar and vox box. Most of the vocals on my album "Reunion" were tracked through it. They were tracked flat, however, as Littledog, the mixing engineer, has better ears and better EQ than me. I did, however, use the compressor a good deal, mostly for light compression on vocals, leaving serious post production processing in Littledog's hands, and those of Sjoko, the mastering engineer.
It's hard to talk about mics or pres without going into "Reunion", as for the first 2 years, that's basically what we tracked. It was the home ground of my learning curve. I was assisted by 3 lady singers, no more than 2 at a time, but I certainly had lots of opportunity to track vox, male and female, with the twinQcs. As I stated above, the clip curve in the old unit is dangerous, as it clips gradually, and if you miss a peak or two because you were tracking too hot and the slope was too low, you can't get it back. It's definitely my impression that the new twinQ is either clipping, or *not* clipping, and there ain't a lot of middle ground. I like that, because you know where you stand. It has a generous 21dBu of nominal headroom. OK, like I said, it's not quite the Avalon (nominal 32dBu of headroom), but the new green monster only clips when you really miscalculated. The Avalon clips when it is blown up. If you want to know how I know this, do a search on the board for "Shure SM82".
As far as pics. Yeah, that should be do-able, but I'm not going to un-rack it right now, so the back panel may be a little difficult. Well, next plan is to use it for a session, because frankly, I need the 2 channels. It's a four piece retro/psychedelic/rockabilly band with a singer/acoustic guy who refuses to use guitar mics, lead, bass, and drums. The singer's a bit rough, but otherwise, the band rocks. Bass will go into the Avalon, and lead also, mic'd up in an isolation box in another room. I've had my best luck sending the speaker extension from his amp to one cab from a Fender PD250 Passport, in the box, mic'd up with a C414. I've tried all kinds of dynamics, and also a Marshall cab, but this is the hardware that works for me.
The real dilemma is whether to use the twinQ for the drum overheads, or for the acoustic. I'm leaning toward the Taylor. He's using my axe because my pickup system is better. I'm torn between the cool compressor for those overheads, with the KM184's, or the cool EQ for the Taylor. I'm thinking the Taylor into Joemeek, and the overheads will go into the pres of the Digi002, with the RNC as a send and return. Kick and snare into the DMP-3, using AKG D112 and AKG D320B. Vocals will be a scratch track, and will probably be overdubbed with Rode NTK and the twinQ. No way am I putting the Kiwi in front of this singer- I'm not a masochist. I don't think he'd like the C414 much either. I need something a little more dishonest, and I'll compress the crap out of him in post production. I just put that out there to give you a better idea of where I'm at, and what I'm doing with this box. My studio was built to record an album one piece at a time, and is well suited to small acoustic acts and chamber music. I've recently done some isolation upgrades to make a semi-live recording of a band possible. This will demand every stand, cable, set of cans, and every channel I have. I'll be running 10 tracks simultaneously, including talkback, and the finished raw demo will be 12 tracks. To the big time boys with the humungous consoles, I'm sure it is no big deal, but my studio was built on the less is more concept. I can do quality, but quantity requires me to use every available resource.-Richie
 
very very interesting,
if i do buy me that new twinq i'll be using it for vocals and drum overheads

i love the combination of my C414 and my joemeek vc8 on accoustic guitars and vocals,
but would like to go a step up... and i think the joemeek sound isn't TOO bright, and since i don't like bright cymbals (i mean, harsh, with too much presence), i think this twinQ can do a nice job for me

sorry to ask, maybe you already said it, but do you have a Phase reverse button on your unit?
in the manual of my VC8 its stated that i got one, BUT NO, its not there,
and this would be great, cause i love to put Two mics on a snare,
but i don't havbe that phase inverse button anywhere..

cheers
 
Yes Earworm, you get phase reversal on both channels. Thanks for asking. I believe I neglected to mention that. My bad. I think the box will do everything you want and more. It will be bright if your mics are bright, and dark if your mics are dark. Then, with the EQ in this unit, you can dial up the frequency response you want.-Richie
 
Well tdukex, just for jollies I plugged in the SM7-B and laid down a few tracks.
I used Johnny B. Goode for some classic rock/boogie, 'cause I wanted to growl a little. The guitar track was laid down using an Epiphone Les Paul with classic 57 humbuckers into POD Pro. The POD goes to a Carver PM125 power amp, then to a Marshall 1X12 cab with a Celestion Vintage 30. The cab was mic'd with an AKG C2000B into the Avalon. The first vocal was laid down into the Avalon for a reference track, with the presence boost on the SM7 engaged. I boosted 3db at 1.7kHz, which is standard EQ for me. Then I tracked the same vocal using the same EQ boost on the Joemeek. First with iron on, then iron off, then iron off with the compressor engaged at 4:1, which required about 4db of makeup gain.
The results? With iron on and the compressor off, 5 people couldn't tell it from the Avalon. The similarity is scary. With iron off, everyone could hear the difference, and we universally preferred iron on. Note that this is exactly the reverse of results with condensers, particularly the B.L.U.E. Kiwi, where I generally prefer iron off on vocals.
The compressor is much less agressive than the old twinQ, where tiny changes in settings produce dramatic results. The new twinQ's compression hits more gradually, and is a lot easier to dial in. In order to approach the squash of the old unit, I had to turn the threshold down to -4 and the slope up to about 5:1. I never used the old unit at more than about 3:1, as it became muddy at higher compression ratios, and wasn't really all that musical when hit too hard.
Gain was adequate, but I had to crank input and output gain close to max to get a hot signal. The SM7 demands that from most pres, even the Avalon.
There was simply no sign of breakup or any audible or visual noise floor. At least to that extent, it performed less like the old twinQ, and a lot more like my Avalon. With the metal off, it sounds like a Grace 101 or a DMP-3 on steroids. Well, I said above that I preferred metal off on vocals, but if you track vox a lot with dynamics, you may find the reverse true. I'll follow with more as new discoveries are made.-Richie
 
Thanks again, Richie. The TwinQ sounds even more versatile than the old unit. The fact that the SM7B thru the NewQ (iron in) was almost indiscernable (to five people) to the Avalon is a very good sign to me--and I hope by that statement you meant it sounded very good for the type of blues/rock track you were recording.
 
You got that right, tdukex. To say that *any* preamp sounds like my Avalon is high praise indeed. Get this, though. What I'm really saying is that the new twinQ doesn't really do what the old one did. It compensates for that by doing *a bunch* of stuff better than the old one. Up 'til now, the twinQ filled the role of the colored pre in my studio. I'm not sure the new one does that. In exchange for that, it loses almost all the faults of the old unit and becomes a really good clean dual channel strip with a very good EQ and a user friendly optocompressor. I remember when I bought the Avalon, I needed a good clean pre bad. As much as I like the old twinQ, there was no way I could see tracking most of an album through it. It was a kind of quirky vox box with it's own unique character. The new twinQ is an all purpose channel strip, and I *could* track a whole album through it, fairly easily. As I've said before, color is like makeup. The new twinQ does Heidi Fleiss, the old one, Alice Cooper. More versatile? If there's anything the old twinQ was not, it is versatile. It did one trick pretty well. The new twinQ doesn't really do that trick. It does, however, do at least 4 tricks the old unit never even thought of. If you crank up the compressor enough, it does sound a little like the old twinQ, but you have to ask, "Where's the distortion? What happened to my 46db noise floor? Somebody switched out my twinQ for an AD2022 with sweepable EQ, optical compression, A-D conversion, and insert points!" Trust me, I'll get over it- very quickly.-Richie
 
That was a great review from Richard.

This unit sounds very promising for what I need.

Here's a naive question, and you gearheads can all feel free to laugh as loud as you want, but would the AD converters on the TwinQ be a significant step up from the ones in my Echo Mia soundcard?
 
Well, Hognogger, I've never heard the Echo Mia, but just guessing it would be a sideways step. As near as I can tell using ears as opposed to high tech testing, the A-D conversion in the new twinQ is a little better than adequate. Serviceable, but not stunning. By comparison, that beats the hell out of the old modular add-on which was, IMO, a liability for any critical recording. I can tell you I removed the digital upgrade from my old one, and never put it back in, because it caused hum and raised my noise floor even when the analog outs were being used instead of digital. The new unit, at least, doesn't appear to do anything like that.-Richie
 
Yeah, thanks Richie for the detail. Have you checked the results of running a track recorded on the AD2022 thru the TwinQ opto-compressor? I'm thinking vox here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top