| Author |
Topic: A-B-C-D-E comparison |
Larry Beck
From:
Pierre, SD
|
Posted 1 Feb 2005 6:26 pm |
|
here are 5 mp3 clips each 9 seconds long. They are of a steel recorded with the following signal chain differences:
Joe Meek VC6, straight into the board, ART V3 tube preamp, AT 4033 condenser mike off axis, Shure SM57 off axis.
The clips are not in that order, I welcome any guesses. All controls were set at 12:00 and each track normalized for equal loudness.
Which sounds best? (comments on the crappy playing can be made off channel)
[url=http:\\pie.midco.net\lbeck27\t1.mp3]t1 mp3[/url]
[url=http:\\pie.midco.net\lbeck27\t2.mp3]t2 mp3[/url]
[url=http:\\pie.midco.net\lbeck27\t3.mp3]t3 mp3[/url]
[url=http:\\pie.midco.net\lbeck27\t4.mp3]t4 mp3[/url]
[url=http:\\pie.midco.net\lbeck27\t5.mp3]t5 mp3[/url]
|
|
|
 |
Lee Baucum
From:
McAllen, Texas (Extreme South) The Final Frontier
|
Posted 1 Feb 2005 7:08 pm
|
|
| I liked track 2 the best. |
|
|
|
David Doggett
From:
Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
|
Posted 1 Feb 2005 7:30 pm
|
|
| Hmmm..., well it's a toss up between track 2 (probably the tube preamp) and track 5 (the SM57) - all depends on whether you like a brighter or darker sound. Track 1 sounds like you are playing an acoustic guitar with a raised nut. That is actually an amazing feat for a steel guitar with magnetic pickups. I'm guessing that is the VC6 straight into the board. Track 4 sounds like the condenser mike (muddy, poor clarity). I'm guessing 2 and 5 could be made to sound very similar with a little EQ tweaking. I'm listening through cheap computer headphones. I'm guessing 5 might sound a little more full spectrum through some good studio monitors (on the other hand, with a little bass boost, 2 might sound pretty good too). What was the amp and speaker for the two mikes? [This message was edited by David Doggett on 01 February 2005 at 07:32 PM.] |
|
|
|
Bill Hatcher
From:
Atlanta Ga. USA
|
Posted 1 Feb 2005 7:47 pm
|
|
No.1-Sounded direct, too sterile.
No.2 Sounded like a close mic on an amp. Best sound of all of these to me. SM57?
No.3 Sounded too much like No.1,direct.
No.4 Did not care for it at all.
No.5 Sounded like too much room ambience to me. AT4033?
No.2 was my fav sound. |
|
|
|
Bill Findlay
From:
Baytown, Texas, USA
|
Posted 1 Feb 2005 8:02 pm
|
|
I would have to go with #2...
Altho #3 sounded very close....
What are the order of the clips?
|
|
|
|
Tommy Young
From:
Ethelsville Alabama
|
Posted 1 Feb 2005 8:28 pm
|
|
| i liked the #2 the best overall just would like to know wich it was |
|
|
|
David L. Donald
From:
Koh Samui Island, Thailand
|
Posted 2 Feb 2005 4:40 am
|
|
| Your tracks have disapeared... hmmm. |
|
|
|
Larry Beck
From:
Pierre, SD
|
Posted 2 Feb 2005 4:43 am
|
|
The amp was an early 70's silver Princeton Reverb set 5 bass 5 treble. Steel was a willy D-10 - no volume pedal. Mike placement was 3" from grill. Probably had some proximity effect on both Mikes.
1. Board
2. Joe Meek
3. V3 ART pre
4. AT4033
5. SM 57
Thanks for the loan of your ears. Mine sometimes lie to me.
------------------
Williams D-10, 72 Emmons S-10 and a wall full of 6 strings -
|
|
|
|
David L. Donald
From:
Koh Samui Island, Thailand
|
Posted 2 Feb 2005 9:33 am
|
|
You sent me some files left to right and under ; 1-5
1 dry and lacking body some close room sound
But nicely balanced I suspect the AT 4033
But would have been much better closer and more on axis
(T5)
2 pre amp clamped sounding with extra highs
Likely the Joe Meek
(T1) hmmm
3 no room sound typical direct console sound
(T2)
4 like 2 but little or no compression weak bass
not a lot of life, basic tube direct, so ART V3 likely
(T3)
5 not too mic'd in small room weak bottom
a bit un natural upper mids Sm57 I suspect
(T4)
One problem I don't know the sound of the steel dry to use as a reference...
Nor the amp in use.
But these are my best guesses.
Can't always be right.
*********
I opened each attachment and noted the name after wards and inserted in parenthasies after posting.[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 02 February 2005 at 02:57 PM.] |
|
|
|
Donny Hinson
From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
|
Posted 2 Feb 2005 4:41 pm
|
|
They all sound different. None of them is inherently "bad", certain tones just fit certain songs/music. The differences are all in the EQ.
Yes, EQ makes that much difference! |
|
|
|
Herman Visser
From:
Rohnert Park, California, USA
|
Posted 2 Feb 2005 7:02 pm
|
|
| Hi! I like #2 |
|
|
|
David L. Donald
From:
Koh Samui Island, Thailand
|
Posted 3 Feb 2005 6:54 am
|
|
Larry your URL's are funky...
[url=http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum11/HTML/\\pie.midco.net\lbeck27\t1.mp3]http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum11/HTML/\\pie.midco.net\lbeck27\t1.mp3[/url]
The forum serverwouldn't be your host.. |
|
|
|
