|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 22, 2022 0:31:13 GMT
The unanswered question now is what caused the variable levels mainly from heads 2 and 3 on the Meazzi F?
Was it intentional intervention to get a desired sound, or was it simply a mechanical defect (such as binding head mounting arm pivot posts, weak tension springs, floppy tension posts, head misalignment)?
Given that the effect of these two heads at low levels is very subtle, I tend to think that it might have been just mechanical defects. But who knows, maybe someone just fiddled with them to reduce their levels? I guess that we will never know for sure.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 21, 2022 1:27:19 GMT
Bernard,
I have sent you a Private Message on this site.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 21, 2022 1:25:20 GMT
Patrice, Bernard,
The High and Mighty was recorded on 18th Feb 1964 and is clearly Echomatic 2 with a dominant echo at 360 mSec and feedback from that head. Zambesi was recorded later on 28th Feb and was the only tune recorded at that session.
I want to offer you a huge vote of thanks for producing your document and your speculations that inspired me to go back and have a systematic look at all the echoes from the Meazzi F. As a result I think that we now have a much better understanding of how that machine was used. Will you be producing an updated version?
Best Regards and Merry Christmas,
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 20, 2022 1:19:50 GMT
Hi Bernard, Patrice,
The question of which head in the Meazzi F was used for the feedback in setting F has been niggling at me and the answer has been staring in my face! I imagine that Patrice might have also had had this realization.
I mentioned above that the echo analysis for The Stranger indicated that the feedback could have come from either head 2 or head 5. The other two tunes that I think used this same setting are Frightened City and Blue Star, but in these the echo tails resulting from the feedback are largely hidden behind the following notes. What then if they could also have had feedback from head 5? So I recorded some sections of these three tunes with my TVS3 using either head 2 or head 5 for the feedback and indeed I could hardly tell the difference, particularly when immersed in a mix!
So I now think that my initial preference for feedback from head 2 was premature and it could equally be attributed to head 5.
This means that all of the Meazzi F echo settings used by Hank in the studio could be obtained as follows:
A: heads 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5; feedback from head 4. B: heads 1, 4 and 5; feedback from head 2 (variable and off in some cases). F: heads 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5; feedback from head 5.
This is now exactly the same as the switch settings given in purple on pages 24 and 27 and attributed to Nigel Taylor's reading of the original SEP "F" schematic is that in position F and I do not think that Hank's Meazzi F was modified. The varying amplitudes of the various heads and amount of feedback could all be explained by head issues and use of the internal trim pots.
With regard to the effect of changing from the coated drum to a tape-wound drum, it is likely that the different magnetic coating formulations would have had different optimum bias levels and so the sound of the echoes could be different, particularly in the high frequencies. The magnetic saturation and distortion characteristics might also differ. Also, as you mentioned, there might be differences due to head alignment. It is impossible to say how large all these effects might be without more information, but at least I would expect some change (small or large) in the high frequency extension of the echoes.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 19, 2022 13:40:35 GMT
I have been going over all the echo measurements for the tunes that used the model F Meazzi and found that they can all be covered by the A, B and F settings of the mode switch as follows:
A: heads 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5; feedback from head 4. B: heads 1, 4 and 5; feedback from head 2 (variable and off in some cases). F: heads 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5; feedback from head 2.
For tunes using settings A and F the levels of heads 2 and/or 3 are quite variable and in some cases are almost off.
Note that the only difference between this and the switch settings given in purple on pages 24 and 27 and attributed to Nigel Taylor's reading of the original SEP "F" schematic is that in position F the feedback is from head 2 rather than head 5. Could he have gotten it wrong or was it possibly a modification?
The changes from my earlier comments above are as follows: I had originally thought that QMS had a very low level echo from head 2, but I could not confirm that and now think that it was probably just the straight Apache echo, which would make sense since they were both recorded at the same time. With regard to The Stranger, the echo repeats can be indexed equally well with the feedback taken from either head 2 or head 5. If it is head 2 then it fits the pattern for settings B or F noted above. Gonzales and Mustang both have very low feedback and it is difficult to be sure if head 2, 4 or 5 was used. If 2 or 4 then they also fit the pattern.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 16, 2022 5:09:41 GMT
Hi Patrice, Thanks for that explanation about the operation of Ben's Echomatic 2, it makes sense. I wonder if Hank's was the same or just a single speed model? Paul. See page 14. Regards. Thanks AdP, I thought that I might have seen that comment somewhere else and forgot that it was here! Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 16, 2022 5:06:12 GMT
Patrice, are you considering a revised version of your document?
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 16, 2022 4:59:17 GMT
When I first analyzed the echoes on Zambesi, it appeared that they could have been from an Echomatic 2 running at a slower speed than was normal for Wonderful Land etc. This seemed possible since the Echomatic 2 was being used at the time on other tunes. However, Ben has stated that his Echomatic 2 gives the Wonderful Land timings when already set on its lowest speed, so a further reduction in speed seems unrealistic. So I went back to look at the echoes again and found that, apart from the low level echoes and dominant one at about 420 mSec, there was indeed another one at about 600 mSec. I could then get a good index of all the echo timings according to a Model F with feedback from head 4. The amplitudes of the echoes were -14dB at at 280 mSec, -20 dB at 330 mSec, 0 dB at 425 mSec, and -20 dB at 603 mSec, The echo at 120 mSec is buried in the tail of the staccato note itself and so its exact timing and amplitude is not certain. For some reason, either intentional adjustment or wear, the machine was only giving a clear echo on head 4. While the addition of the echo at 603 mSec makes little difference to the sound, its presence and correct indexing of all the other echo timings (except the one buried 120 mSec) clearly indicates that the Model F on mode setting A was used for this tune.
So it seems that Hank had dusted off the Model F to use one more time on the recording of Zambesi on 28th Feb, 1964, probably to get the longer delay time of around 420 mSec for the main echo and repeats than were available from the Echomatic 2, and that better suited the tempo of that tune.
I think that it is great when open discussions such as these can lead to a better understanding of how these machines were used!
Incidentally, while Flingel Bunt was recorded just a few days earlier on 25th Feb 1964, the Model F echo timings do not seem to match the recording at all, though curiously the Vox Long Tom does very well.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 16, 2022 4:11:12 GMT
Hank never used a Stereomatic Meazzi.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 15, 2022 13:54:42 GMT
Hi Patrice,
Thanks for that explanation about the operation of Ben's Echomatic 2, it makes sense. I wonder if Hank's was the same or just a single speed model?
Regards,
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 15, 2022 3:35:17 GMT
Hi Gary,
I tried RIPX a while ago. It seemed to work quite well on tracks where there was a marked difference in the frequency range of the various components (e.g. voice, piano, drums, bass etc.) but not when there were overlapping frequencies as with rhythm and lead guitars. So I went back to Riffstation (now at version 1.6.3), though there are other programs that provide a similar function. Human intelligence still seems to trump artificial intelligence!
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 14, 2022 7:22:16 GMT
Hi Gary,
There is some useful pre-processing that can be done using the spatial information of the lead guitar: e.g. if it is in the center channel and the backing split between the L and R channels then a program like Riffstation can be used to remove much of the backing. Similarly programs like Spectralayers can be used to isolate the lead as much as possible. This is what we have done to produce backings minus Hank, just the reverse. I had toyed with some cross correlation ideas but it got too complicated!
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 14, 2022 4:18:28 GMT
I just noticed that the tables on page 28 also need updating as per my note above regarding page 25 and the selector switch settings.
Also, a note on measuring echo timings and amplitudes. Some tunes with damped sections like Wonderful Land, Peace Pipe, Atlantis and The Miracle allow good estimates directly from the wave files since the echoes are well-defined and reasonable separate from the rest of the backing. However, in other cases these conditions do not apply and the echoes can be buried behind other content. Here a more detailed approach is then required. This usually involves using a spectral analysis program to separate the notes and echoes into discrete frequency channels, so that they can then be extracted from the rest of the waveform, converted back to a waveform and the analysis then performed. However, here care is still required since the various heads will most probably have different frequency responses due to wear and alignment (assuming that there are no other differences in their associated electronics). In such cases measuring the amplitudes at one frequency (say, around 1kHz) will give a different answer if they are measured at a higher frequency (say 2.5 kHz). So what is the actual meaning of head amplitude? My approach is to do as many measurements as possible and take an average.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 13, 2022 15:16:52 GMT
I have had another read of the article and noticed a couple of probable typos.
On page 25 there is a table that I assume was copied from the TVS web site summarizing some of my echo measurements, but the feedback for Man of Mystery etc should be from head 4, while the heads for Frightened City etc. should be 1 + 2(low level) + 4 + 5 (i.e. head 4 instead of head 3).
Also, a note on another tune that used the model F: Giant seems to have echoes from all 5 heads but the levels of heads 2 and 3 are much lower.
So it seems to me that there are basically 3 different Model F configurations that were probably used by Hank: 1 + 4 + 5 (no feedback: Apache); 1 + 4 + 5 (feedback from head 5" The Stranger); and a bunch of tunes that used 1 + 4 + 5 with low and variable amounts from heads 2 and/or 3 and low levels of feedback possibly from heads 2 or 4 or 5). All of these would be covered by the modes A, B or F of the selector switch and either adjusting the levels of heads 2 and 3 by trim pots or simply from the misalignment of heads 2 and 3 and, in the case of Apache, simply reducing the feedback in setting B to zero. There is no evidence of any significant changes in the timing of the echoes however.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 13, 2022 2:46:37 GMT
Finally! Even though Hank may have used his "J" model when recording some of the songs he sang with Cliff in Studio 2 (which I don't deny!) I still think that his first "F" model after customization was the one used to record ALL the Shadows instrumental tracks between Apache and Frightened City /Blue Star.
Agreed!
I had thought that Midnight might have been recorded with the model J, but analysis of the pseudo-stereo CD version showed that the echo at around 235 mSec in the mono recording (which would indicate model J) was in fact only in the right channel and probably due to the weird reverb. The guitar in the left channel only showed model F echo timings.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 12, 2022 7:01:30 GMT
Just a thought, it might be a good idea to re-post this discussion under a different heading i.e. something like History of the Drum Meazzi's, but not "ESE issues" that has no bearing on the topic.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 12, 2022 6:55:56 GMT
Hi Bernard and Patrice,
Wow, congratulations, that is a monumental piece of work that provides much to think about!
After first reading a few small points come to mind:
While generally true, I am not sure that the statement that the model F was only used in the studio while the model J was used in concert is absolutely correct, since the echo timings suggest that the Model F was used on FBI on the Cliff Richard Show on 2nd March 1961, while the model J was used on some Cliff recordings. Some photos to back this up would be nice!
As indicated on the two circuit diagrams, the mic. input impedance of those machines was about 0.5 MOhm (not 1M as you indicate in the text)
You suggest that the last use of the Echomatic 2 was on The Miracle recorded in July 1964. However, I think that there is evidence of its use on some tracks of The Sound of The Shadows recorded in the first half of 1965, although these echoes are not quite so clear so maybe the machine was wearing out a bit!
One anomaly that I don't understand with Ben's Echomatic 2: I got the impression that the variable speed (via the tapered cone) is coupled directly to the pot that controls the volume of heads 1-3. However, analysis of the echoes indicates the while the levels of heads 1-3 can vary from about 8dB below head 4 (e.g. Sleepwalk) to about 1 dB below head 4 (the Miracle), there is no evidence of the echo timings (i.e. drum speed) varying in any consistent manner. Clearly Hank's machine was a single speed or did not have any such coupling (or it was disconnected). Maybe I got this wrong or Ben could clarify?
Finally, with regard to the head levels that seem to vary from what would be indicated by the schematic, in addition to the possible tweaking of internal trim pots or even circuit modifications, it should be noted that with the very small contact area between the heads and the drum (unlike tape units where the tape wraps around the head to some degree), head alignment (or mis-alignment) can also have a significant effect on echo level.
These are only small points and in no way detract from your impressive work. I'll go back and read it again to let a bit more sink in!
Best Regards,
paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Nov 22, 2022 11:08:07 GMT
Hi Gary,
I think that Charlie's early analysis of the echoes and implementation on some of the available digital delay platforms showed that there was a real difference between just an echo and one that replicated the original drum Meazzi's. A real turning point.
Regards,
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Oct 9, 2022 10:29:35 GMT
It was certainly a great concert: 4 virtuosos (Hank, Nunzio, Gary and the acoustic bass player) playing tight arrangements and having a ball in front of a very appreciative audience. Also, a lot of the arrangements veered a bit more towards swing rather than a strict Gypsy style.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on May 31, 2022 3:02:30 GMT
I am probably not alone in having been slightly disappointed that, for many tunes, Hank’s sound in live performances such as the Final Tour and the Reunited tour did not replicate more closely those of the original recordings. Where was the percussive sound of the early tunes like Apache and FBI, where was the edginess of Frightened City and Man of Mystery, the warmth of Kon Tiki and Dance On, the bell-like sounds of Sleepwalk and Blue Star. Instead, by and large, we got a sort of generic Strat-Vox sound and mainly use of just the bridge pickup, albeit at least with the correct echo timings. How is it that other iconic bands like Queen, Pink Floyd, The Eagles and many others manage to reproduce on stage more closely the sounds of the records that made them famous? I think that the answer lies in their attention to the detail of their rigs and playing styles. It is fascinating to Google the Rig Rundowns of artists like Joe Bonamassa, Richie Blackmore, Angus Young, The Edge, Slash, Brian May, Eric Johnson, Larry Carlton, Steve Lukather, Peter Frampton and Carlos Santana, to name just a few. In many cases, whether heavy rock or clean, they generally use either the same, or vintage equivalents, of the gear that made them famous. So here is my list of what I consider to be the ideal rig rundown for Hank. First the guitars. The three Custom Strats that he used for these tours all had the same pickups and hence same overall sound. The different gauge strings had a slight impact on tone, but I suspect were mainly used for playability concerns. The only real tone variation came from occasional use of the Burns 6 and 12 strings. Instead, I would propose the following: 1. For early tunes up to Frightened City (May 1961): The original 34346, with an Oasis Strat as backup, both fitted with either 12’s or 13’s. Careful attention to string selection to get the percussive attack and restrained sustain, possibly even half round to get the effect of well-used strings. 2. For later tunes from mid 1961 to 1964: an early 1960’s Strat with a Rosewood board, and for backup a rosewood custom shop Strat fitted with CS54, 57/62, Kinman Magnum Opus 59 or Impersonator MV pickups, both fitted with 12’s. Maybe another custom shop Strat with the same pickups but fitted with 11’s, again for playability. 3. For the Burns period from 1964 to 1971: a 1964 or 1965 Marvin, with a Legend as backup. Also a 12-string and double 6, depending upon the set list. 4. For the more modern tunes, a couple of custom shop Strats fitted with Kinman AvN 59/62 (or Impersonator 54) and DiMarzio/Seymour Duncan pickups. Probably 11’s and/or 10’s. 5. A couple of acoustics, again depending upon the set list. I have suggested modern instruments as backups to keep a lid on costs, but they would need to be selected for tone and playability. Guitar leads would be preferable, although a Shure radio link could be used if it employed the right capacitive loading and/or followed by some basic equalisation to maintain the tone. Echo unit: It would be too risky to rely upon vintage drum or tape units for major concerts, and furthermore many would be required to cover the range of echoes used. So no surprises here: a programmable echo unit with true vintage tones and echoes like a TVS3 (here I am showing my obvious bias!). Also a second unit as backup in case a tube or something else should fail, since it would be used for just about all tunes. Midi control for both. Amplifiers: The amplifiers used for these and most other Shadows concerts were just set and left unchanged throughout the concert, again limiting the tonal variety evident on the recordings of the various tunes. My choices are: 1. Early tunes (Apache to FBI): A 1960 vintage AC15 with EF86 and Goodmans Audiom 60 speaker. 2. Early 1961 tunes (Frightened City, Kon Tiki era): A 1960 TV front AC30/4 with a Goodmans Audiom 60 and a Celestion B024, separately miked up. 3. Early-mid 1961 tunes onwards (Peace Pipe, Wonderful Land etc.) A 1963/4 AC 30/6 top boost with Celestion T530 Blues and bass set at around ¼ and treble at ¾ , top cut to suit Inputs switched by midi controller either to Top Boost or Normal channels. 4. Another 1963/4 AC30/6 top boost but with bass and treble set near max and top cut to suit (Atlantis, South of the Border etc.). All amps miked up just off axis to suit most tunes and signals fed to high quality mic preamps, thence to a midi switcher to select the appropriate amp/mic. Maybe amp 3 could have two mics: one near axis and a second further off-axis. No backup amplifiers since, at a pinch, others could be switched in should there be a failure in one. Effects units, (either vintage or a programmable multi effect unit) depending upon the set list: 1. Volume/wah pedal (s) on stage (Argentina, Rodrigo, Janine, Lost City). Possibly both Morley and De Armond 2. Overdrive (Sasha, The Warlord) 3. Tremolo (Voice in the Wilderness) 4. Compression (Atlantis and many others to a varying degree) 5. Equalisation (to nail the recorded sounds) 6. Chorus/rotary (Janine) 7. Auto double tracking (Foot Tapper, Theme for Young Lovers) 8. Reverb The effects units could be switched in either before or after the echo unit, though the ADT, compression, equalisation and reverb would likely follow the amplifier/mic midi switcher, and each selected by the midi switching unit. The compressor, equaliser and reverb would need to be particularly high quality (probably rack mount) units with the ability to have their parameters controlled by midi to suit each particular tune. Maybe even an original Altec RS124 just for Atlantis and the like. The midi switching to suit the various tunes would be operated by a skilled audio technician who would also continuously monitor the final feeds to the main desk, on-stage or in-ear monitors and front of house sound to ensure authentic reproduction of the original sounds. Finally, a comment on Hank’s playing style. As I demonstrated in the video www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXp9gMU0pLc Hank’s playing style has changed over the years from the raw energy of Apache and the early tunes to a more melodic, singing style. In order to faithfully reproduce that early sound he would need to revert to a style appropriate to the various tunes. Obviously, now just a pipe dream but what are dreams for? Paul.
|
|
|
KEMPER
Apr 22, 2022 2:02:24 GMT
Post by fenderplucker on Apr 22, 2022 2:02:24 GMT
Just to follow on from comments by Steph and Charlie above, I am currently building a small lot of TVS3's for some special requests, however sourcing parts is becoming increasingly difficult and costs are also increasing. As Charlie commented, redesigning to accommodate the shortages is not a viable commercial option given the specialist nature of the products.
Also, just a small correction, the echoes are generated in the TVS3 using analog processes and not digital as Steph suggested.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Mar 10, 2022 2:46:53 GMT
It is strange that it doesn't work very well on Theme for Young Lovers since either of the stereo versions have Hank entirely in one channel and the backing in the other. Just delete the channel with Hank in it and voila! RipX obviously does not make full use of any spatial separation.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Mar 10, 2022 2:09:58 GMT
Unless the program has enough "artificial intelligence" to know what the melody line is to follow the notes of the lead guitar (for example), there are only two sources of information available to allow separation. They are spatial separation and spectral (i.e. frequency) separation.
An example of the former is lead guitar in the left channel and the rest in the right channel or, at worst, lead guitar in the center channel and the rest in either the left or right channels. An example of spectral separation might be a tune involving only lead, bass and drums, where the frequencies of the lead have little overlap with those of the other instruments.
However, on typical Shadows tracks comprising lead, rhythm, bass and drums, there are invariably sections of the tune where the notes or harmonics of the lead overlap with those of the rhythm (they are both just guitars with the same tuning) and also possibly any strings in the backing, and so spectral separation is absent. Furthermore, there are many Shadows tunes where the lead is in the same channel as the rhythm or other sections (e.g. strings, drums) and so spatial separation is absent. On such tunes it is very difficult to get separation of the lead without affecting the other instruments.
I have not yet found any programs that use all of the information available, and RipX seems to be no exception. I usually use a program like RiffStation (now available for free) to make use of any spatial separation and then clean it up with a spectral analysis program SpetraLayers to make use of any spectral information. But it can be a very time-intensive process, particularly if you have to edit the tune note by note in which case I am also using knowledge of the actual tune to follow the lead line! Natural intelligence??
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Feb 17, 2022 9:46:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Dec 24, 2021 8:26:34 GMT
I think that it is simply a misprint, the EF86 is the preamp tube under consideration, not the EL86 (which is an output tube).
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Apr 11, 2021 2:09:28 GMT
I am very saddened to heard of Rob’s passing, he was one of the great true enthusiasts and will be missed by many.
R.I.P Rob.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Apr 8, 2021 1:22:09 GMT
Regarding the Pultec equalisation, adding another low frequency pole from the Meazzi and another high frequency pole from the Vox cut control (assuming the normal channel)can lead to a sharper overall response peak. Conversely, having the bass and treble controls on the Pultec on full boost produces a dip of around 10deB at around 1kHz -2kHz, so just about anything is possible! it is a pity that there were no engineer's notes from those early recordings to indicate what, if anything, might have been used.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Apr 7, 2021 14:36:13 GMT
Hi Bernard, Charlie,
I ran a circuit simulation on the Pultec EQP-1A upon which the REDD equalizer was based and it can produce a peak at around 1-2kHz with the bass cut set at 30Hz and the treble cut set at 20kHz. However, being simple single pole R-C filters, the peak is fairly broad with the -3dB points at about 400Hz and 3.6kHz.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Apr 7, 2021 2:31:19 GMT
Another factor in the overall guitar tone of the original recordings was the "pop" equalization used in the Redd.37/51 recording desk that provided a shelving bass boost and cut (max around 8dB at 100Hz) and peaking treble boost and shelving treble cut (max 10dB at 10kHz). Unfortunately it is not known what settings were used but with both the bass and treble equalisation in effect there were a very wide range of tonal possibilities.
Paul.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Apr 4, 2021 3:39:34 GMT
Charlie, Bernard,
Just to clarify the low frequency cutoff of the Meazzis, I presume that Charlie has based his figure on the nominal values of the 4n7 interstage coupling capacitor and 500k pot. However, the resistor networks that follow the pot also load the capacitor so that the cutoff can be as high as 200Hz, depending upon the level pot setting. I haven't measured the actual value for an Echomatic 2, but for tube tape Meazzis (that admittedly have different resistor networks) I have measured 3dB cutoff values from 150 to 250 Hz at typical level pot settings. Long Toms have smaller interstage coupling capacitors (typically 2n2) and so the cutoff is even higher and can be up to 300Hz.
|
|