|
Post by davechap on Apr 14, 2013 7:45:17 GMT
hi guys. I just think that for the day and the gear Hank used plus his technique plus Norrie Paramor's skills with the analogue tape gear. probably Ampex?? , just unintentionally created a such a unique sound ,and there would have probably also been a difference between the live and recorded sound. Today we are using alot of digital gear including digital recording and though we are getting our sound close, in some respects it will always be a challenge to duplicate the same as that gear made in the late 50's /early 60's stuff. I , like all you guys right from day one in my teens thrive on the early sound of Hank, and that magic still lives within me and thousands of others. We are now so lucky in this modern age to be able to have such a wonderful site like this and to be able to share opinions, research, and music with others, regards to all, Dave
|
|
|
Post by abstamaria on Apr 14, 2013 9:10:18 GMT
Thank you aIl once more. Very interesting. Paul, l must watch your videos again. l learn something new each time.
Andy
|
|
|
Post by davechap on Apr 15, 2013 9:14:31 GMT
hi again everyone, I JUST FOUND THIS ON YOUTUBE AND I THINK THAT IT SHOULD ANSWER MANY QUESTIONS FOR EVERYONE, antique gear is the key and it actually sent a shiver up my spine! pure magic! check it out cheers Dave www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-8OYlKZqXQ
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 15, 2013 16:21:11 GMT
.......well if antique gear is the key then I may as well give up.....who can find/afford an original meazzi and a 1959 Vox amp I wonder?
jay
|
|
|
Post by davechap on Apr 16, 2013 0:00:21 GMT
hi Jay, my post was realy in answer to Fenderwins story at the top. perhaps I stated the obvious ,but realy meant to reinforce that if anyone wanted to have that complete authentic sound then that would probably be the only way,but however as we know digital has got very close and much easier. But relating back to the youtube clip,well I'd say thats about the closest that I have ever heard from the original. But Jay never give up. Im sure your sound is good. cheers Dave
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 16, 2013 5:19:21 GMT
Hi Dave.....of course if I ever got the opportunity to try those two items then I would take it (who wouldn't).
But you will have heard the TVS3 sound files............those A/B comparisons are the best I've heard.......but that is not a live sound so I would have to compare one of those with a Meazzi which is even more unlikely.
One thing which puzzled me watching that video was his reason for not using an original Fender Strat in order to encourage others to look no further than his two very unobtainable essentials..... quite amusing that. Perhaps he should have A/B'd his original Strat with the guitar he did use.
jay
|
|
|
Post by davechap on Apr 16, 2013 8:21:05 GMT
yep Yay, Ive heard the TVS3 sound files and they are excellent thanks, but I still think that original gear has some magic but thanks for your feedback , always great to compare others opinions, thats what makes this such a great site regards Dave
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 20, 2013 21:50:13 GMT
.....have to agree with Steve.......after all that sterling work the final result is unconvincing and somewhat inferior to the previous recording. Is it the same person playing in both examples? If this is the recorded sound what must a live sound be like I wonder?
In my opinion the TVS3 A/B demos are currently No.1 and I cannot see (or hear) how they can be bettered.
jay
|
|
|
Post by fenderwim on Apr 23, 2013 12:52:17 GMT
Thanks guys for your comments Paul I like comments very much because often you learn from them. I agree with you that my mix lacks what you call: that typical singing quality and aura around the sound that is unique to the original Meazzi. The TVS 3 demos sound such that it is clear that the TVS 3 includes additional features, resulting in a quite better result in this aspect. Most guitarists are looking just for a good effect unit who does it all. They just want to have a patch and off they go. My interest is more towards sound design. So what is the reason something sounds so good and how was that produced. I am an engineer, but not an electrical engineer and circuits and electronics are not my interest. My interest is what nowadays a producer does in the recording business. Using the various options you have nowadays to create the sound you are after. It is my personal opinion after studying the book Recording the Beatles, which describes all the Abbey Road equipment of the 60´s, that most shadows fans ignore what happened at Abbey Road studios. The technician at Abbey Road where all academics and their knowledge of recording was state of the art in these days. For sure their impact on the sound which ended up on the recording must have been much greater than many of our Shadows fans can imagine. Even now, with the unlimited possibilities, most artists sound different on Cd than live. You mentioned that: The echoes seems to be just ‘added on’ and are not in any way integrated with the dry signal. This type of problem should be easy solved by compression. Compression makes sound merge. Another interesting point is that you mentioned in the video that Hanks’s first strat had a thin sound, so in general had not too much harmonics. During my last test I already started to think that an important clue for the early sound could be this aspect, so this proves it to be true. The only thing to ask now is, did it sound thin due to little low resonance and consequently little harmonics or did the wood overall had a somewhat higher. You would expect that wood which has grown very slow is quite dense resulting in a resonance with a higher frequency. You mentioned: All of this comes from the way the Meazzi adds distortion and compression as well as the very important sonic effect of the wow and flutter in the tape/drum mechanics. I assume that the modelling of the tape/drum mechanics is the biggest contributor that what I call ’the spacious sound’. Your second remark I cannot place. I have never seen that dip at 800Hz. I send a white noise sweep through my Vox AC 30C2X top boost channel via the hi inlet and Bass, Treble and Cut at 0.
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Apr 23, 2013 13:22:16 GMT
Hi Fenderwim, If you have the bass, treble and cut all at zero, then the response of the amplifier is almost flat, as you have shown. However, if the bass control is increased then a dip occurs at about 800 Hz and is greatest when both the bass and treble are on maximum. This can easily be seen using the Duncan amp tools tone stack calculator (available as a free download from www.duncanamps.com/software.html ). It is very interesting to use this simulation to see how the tone controls interact sometimes in an unexpected way! (I tried to include some pictures but couldn't upload them for some reason). This dip is very important for getting the right sound in tunes like Wonderful Land. Keep up the fascinating work, Paul.
|
|
|
Post by shadowkarl on Apr 24, 2013 8:54:19 GMT
Hi Jay (again)
well the only way to see and (hear) if the sound can be "bettered" is to wait until the new Hall / Collins echopedal will be "officially" available. The prototype I had the privilege of to hear two years ago and others at the first years get together organized by tonybiker could not tell the difference between a Meazzi ("Justins baby") and the presented Echo pedal in an A/B comparison. (Even Meazzi "Guru" Amanda attested that!) So we have to wait until this unit is available to us. Regards Shadowkarl
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 24, 2013 12:01:24 GMT
Hi Karl........just talking sound files comparisons.....I cannot imagine any future unit being used in a sound file demo which is going to sound better than the current TVS3 demo when both are compared to the original recording of WL.
As for live performance well I've never heard a TVS3 being used live but neither have I heard any other unit! (How sad).
There are those out there who are trying to re-create the sound of the original recordings in their own recordings....why I don't really know.
I'm interested in a good live sound (even if it is only in my own room!) using the standard combination of guitar, amp and echo unit.
There is no way therefore to replicate the original recording in a live performance no matter what echo unit is used. Even if we had access to Hank's original gear, it still would be impossible.
I imagine that if anyone did a blind test using an original Meazzi, the TVS3 and the upcoming H & C unit the results would be the same as usual...i.e. few would know which was which.
jay
|
|
|
Post by SPIKE on Apr 24, 2013 12:05:44 GMT
Hi Shadowkar and Fenderwim In case you didnt watch the TVS3 videos, I recommend that you check these out at www.tvsspecialtyproducts.com/page7.htmThey are very educational and will also help those that dont have a TVS3. Also check out the jukebox. Cheers Spike
|
|
|
Post by shadowkarl on Apr 24, 2013 13:17:01 GMT
Hi to Jay and Spike,
I was always wondering, why one could recreate all the magnetic wow and flutter and dynamic tape oscillations in patches and in DSP!,when everybody says only the old Meazzi original (which still is a tape system Hank never used in the early days and not a drum Meazzi) will give you the warmth and original sound ( see above Fenderplucker) When you listen to Phil, Justin and Colin at Shadowmania they "live" come very close to that sound, although not the recorded sound, because there was much influence by the than at charge engineer at the REDD console Malcolm Addey, as Wim has elaborated in his research. (This was one point I disagreed with the late Roberto Pistolesi after attending his recording setup in his Nivram room). And even the man himself does not want (or cannot with good reasons) replicate his old recorded sounds. Jay, sure for live sounds you should try to get as close as possible even at home to the outcome of your recordplayer / Hifi system. It is the same motto as in science: you will never be able to find the truth, just get with your conjectures closer and closer. I tink that is part of our hobby in the endless quest for "That Sound". Spike I have seen the informative TVS video tapes, and congratulate to all that in-depth work and results. I do have a good running Alesis Q20 and a Meazzi tube preamp section. I will receive a tuned Meazzi (clone of Colin Pryce Jones) and also the Hall / Collins Echopedal as soon as they are available. Question: why did it took Fenderplucker such a long (and extra) time of one day(your statement for the Hank soundcheck in the Perth concert in your webpage) in setting up and finetuning the TVS3 for the 4 or 5 Standard Tunes played live at that evening. Don`t think that we "Normals" ever would get such a treatment.
regards Shadowkarl
|
|
|
Post by SPIKE on Apr 24, 2013 14:41:28 GMT
Hi Shadowkarl
What happens with a sound check is that you need to be there early to make sure everything is ready. When you are doing a sound check with Gary and Cliff Richard, certain things have to be in check. All went well and the sound check didnt take that long but Paul(Fenderplucker) will explain later. When Hank arrived everything was ready and all went down smoothly. The time is taken up by being there more so than doing work on the TVS3. Its a standard procedure followed by professionals. BTW: The sound on the night was outstanding and Hank was awesome!
Cheers Spike
|
|
|
Post by SPIKE on Apr 24, 2013 14:47:00 GMT
PS: The TVS3 didnt need tuning, its the sound coming back from the desk, I assume stating if they wanted it louder or softer. That doesnt take up a lot of time but people involved need to be there...including Cliff and the band...its a team thing.
Cheers Spike
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on Apr 25, 2013 1:55:16 GMT
Hi Shadowcarl,
In answer to your question, much of setting up for a soundcheck is waiting around! For those interested it went like this:
Pick up Hank's amp, guitar and TVS3's (also Nunzio and Gary, Hank's Gypsy jazz bandmembers). Drive 45 mins to venue. Unload gear to stage and wait until the all the other gear has been set up for Cliff's band. Set up the amp (head) and TVS3's offstage, and speaker box onstage and cable it all together. Find sound man to set up the microphone on the speakers and wireless link to the TVS3. Preliminary check with Gary playing to make sure it is all operating properly, and get amp settings roughly right. Also check TVS3 settings (same patches as used for the Reunited tour, just tweak the echo level to suit the venue), and set the wireless link output to suit the TVS3 input. Wait around while Cliff and the band go through a dozen or so numbers and the sound men do their thing. Finally run through the three numbers that Hank will do with Cliff, Gary playing and Cliff singing with the rest of the band. Turn down the amp slightly and bring up the echo level just a small amount. Find the VIP area, free wine, champagne, food etc to wait a few hours for the start of the concert. Hank arrives backstage backstage, guitar tech gives him the guitar. He runs through the three numbers with the band backstage but nothing plugged in to keep it quiet. Wait for the warm-up act to do their thing. Take up our seats front and center and enjoy the concert. Cliff is amazing but there is not as much interaction with the band as with The Shadows, loosing a bit of the dynamic Hank comes on and the concert comes alive. He clowns around as usual, plays flawlessly and sounds great! Audience goes wild. At interval we take down his gear, pack car and look for Nunzio who has turned into a groupie and vanished somewhere with Ben Marvin. Keep looking for Nunzio, give up and watch rest of concert from backstage. Finally track down Nunzio in the "Green Room" after the concert. Have a few drinks with Hank, Cliff and the band. Finally leave and get home about 1.00 am.
Total time on TVS3: less than 10 seconds!
Regards,
Paul.
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 25, 2013 4:59:38 GMT
........I think 10 secs is a bit of an understatement......bet it was at least a minute
|
|
|
Post by shadowkarl on Apr 25, 2013 7:38:48 GMT
Hi Spike, fenderplucker and jay
thank you for that elaborated time schedule that day. Just was curious and wanted to be sure that the patches of the TVS3 for Hanks setlist were o.k. and had not to be altered. Was mislead by Spikes statement in his thread "Gary Taylor and Paul Rossiter had a long day at the office backstage where Paul set up Hanks TVS3 and Gary played Hank's numbers with Cliff to get the sound set up right for when Hank arrived later in the evening." So if that was 10 seconds or 1 minute Jay on the TVS3, now we know more precisely. Glad to hear that you had a great time and fun that day with good Australian wine and a supberb show. regards shadowkarl
|
|
|
Post by garystrat on Apr 25, 2013 11:03:08 GMT
Hi Guys
Programmed echo units will vary in terms of the other options available, but I guess with the TVS 3 and others it's just a case of getting output levels right and if this is going into known equipment they are probably OK anyway.
The art is in getting the tricky bit right in setting up the patches, but this already done in a pre-programmed units, although there maybe input and output levels to set.
Gary
|
|
|
Post by SPIKE on Apr 25, 2013 14:05:04 GMT
I remember back in 2004 when Hank was using his Alesis Q20(before the TVS3 was on the market) and I was changing his patches he had asked me at the sound check to turn up his echo for Wonderful Land. During the week of rehearsals prior to the concert I had that echo running a lot quieter due to the room size but when we arrived for the sound check the accoustics were quite different as it was open air at the Supreme Court Gardens. A lot of TVS3 users ask us what level to use the patches and amp. but the levels depend on the accoustics of the room. We can also give out starting levels but the rest will depend on the persons ear to decide what level echo, volume, etc... suit that person as each individual is different. Microphone placement also has to be worked out depending on what tune you want to challenge. Its all quite technical but loads of fun. ;D BTW: Being at a gig from 1:30 in the afternoon till 1:00am is a long day at the office. I doubt if anyone would sit back stage for almost 12 hours for just 3 numbers. ;D ;D Cheers Spike
|
|
|
Post by peterbower on Apr 29, 2013 8:18:58 GMT
For what it's worth and keeping a bit of perspective. Myself and a few mates went to see the Shadows in 1961 at a small venue in Greenford Middlesex. On stage were the AC-30's, a Meazzi echo sat on a chair next to Hank's amp and his Gretsch sat on its stand all night and was never used. To cut a long story short, we came out after the show very disappointed as they sounded nothing like their records.
Its Abbey road that gave that sound not what they had on stage although that is one ingredient in the recipe.
Hank always had an argument with Norrie Paramour about not using reverb, Norrie and the Abbey Road sound engineers would slip in some reverb on the final mix behind Hank's back. [note, reverb was not added to all tracks, but most were] When the track was played back to the Shads at a later date they loved the sound, but Norrie never fessed up at the time.
Peter
|
|
|
Post by SPIKE on Apr 29, 2013 10:35:41 GMT
Hi Peter I totally agree that the Shadows on stage never sounded exactly like their records. I think the closet they came was ABC Kingston and the Paris Olympia in 1962. Here is a sample www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfdGV3VWE6k Cheers Spike
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 29, 2013 14:23:37 GMT
Hi Peter.....any chance of sharing the "long story"...sounds interesting.
The bit about Hank v. Norrie arguing over reverb.....how do you know that?
jay
|
|
|
Post by garystrat on Apr 29, 2013 15:38:48 GMT
Hi Peter
I found your revelation fascinating, it does seem to bear out my recent findings where I have been experimenting with PSP's new plug-in called "Springbox".
They have a pre-set called "Smooth and Dark" which I think adds a certain something to "Wonderful Land", you can flavour this quite considerably with the wet and dry knobs.
Gary
|
|
|
Post by peterbower on Apr 29, 2013 17:45:09 GMT
Spike and Steve
Absolutely right on both counts.
I have a live recording from the Kingston gig and it does get pretty close. The Paris Olympia is also pretty close. It just wasn't that good at my gig in 61, not to mention he was playing a white Strat although not being Fiesta red should make no difference LoL.
The reverb story was from an interview with Mr Martin [can't remember his first name], who was chief engineer at Abbey Road during that period and the Beatles period for that matter.
I admire people who research the technology and get close 'live' to 'that' sound. Its a labour of love. I think Hank himself said a few years ago that he would like to recreate some of the old sound which he was struggling to find for some old numbers, but people have to realise that "I have moved on with a more modern approach", you can't blame him for that.
So in effect, Hank's in the same boat as us for that sound, however, not wishing to offend Hank, I think a few of us me not included, have got closer than him to the old sound and credit where credit's due to those who have achieved it.
Pete
|
|
|
Post by abstamaria on Apr 30, 2013 4:23:26 GMT
Our little band's goal is to capture Hank's early sound - live (!!!). And, just to make it more difficult, if Abbey Road overlayed the original band recording with a separately recorded French horns, strings, etc., why, we would have musicians play those, too. And the singers, too! And of course Cliff's Chinese drum for "Apache"! We are ambitious. We're planning another show the end of the year, better prepared than the one shown below, so wish us luck. It gives me comfort to know that Hank didn't do too well himself in the early days, so we have a good excuse for failure (which is almost certain). But it's good to have a grail one can chase. For our new members, here is a video clip from a past show (my apologies to those who have seen this many times over). That's Charlie's EFTP in use there, not done justice by my poor playing. (You can see the Chinese drum we used in front of the lady playing the triangle; it's an authentic drum, and I was just told yesterday that it had a great sound that filled the theater). Andy www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5UnP8mG1sY
|
|
|
Post by allclaphands on Apr 30, 2013 8:10:06 GMT
Hi I read that when The shadows were recording a number they would do quite a number of takes in the session then sit down after and pick the one to be released.This would lead you to believe that each take would be slightly different in some way. How on a live performance this came over depended on a number of factors (location, equipment, ect.) without all the expert equipment, recording studio, sound engineers, ect.what would it sound like. I would think any Two renditions of one tune would not be perfectly identical were ever played. Pete PS: Having watched and listened to some members on here they are very much doing a very good job of The Shadows tunes in there own ways exellent.
|
|
|
Post by fenderwim on May 1, 2013 20:30:50 GMT
Hi Fenderwim, If you have the bass, treble and cut all at zero, then the response of the amplifier is almost flat, as you have shown. However, if the bass control is increased then a dip occurs at about 800 Hz and is greatest when both the bass and treble are on maximum. This can easily be seen using the Duncan amp tools tone stack calculator (available as a free download from www.duncanamps.com/software.html ). It is very interesting to use this simulation to see how the tone controls interact sometimes in an unexpected way! (I tried to include some pictures but couldn't upload them for some reason). This dip is very important for getting the right sound in tunes like Wonderful Land. Keep up the fascinating work, Paul. Hi Paul Thanks for your comments. I use the tone stack calculator already many years, but never paid much attention to this dip. This will create a scooped sound in that area, which will add to the hollowness, which we like. I send a white burst thru my Vox with Bass on 50% (=neutral) and Treble also 50% (=neutral). Of course with a white burst you record the summed frequency response of the tone stack, the cabinet and the alnico blues and the mic. I did two mic distances, one 1m from the centre of the cone of the left speaker and one against the grill at the cone edge, just to show the effect. You can clearly see the compression when the mic is nearly against the grill. (ignore the volumes because I had to cut volume when against the grill to avoid clipping at the incoming channel in cubase) I had hoped to see the 800Hz dip but it looks like it is not there. Probably the cabinet and the speakers cancel it out somehow. This does not mean that it can still contribute to the overall sound so I will use the neutral setting of the tone stack for further test. I am developing a new ‘theory’ why my second mix did not exceed the first on, while I still believe that I approached what happened at Abbey Road even closer. I will make a short posting on this ‘theory’ shortly. Cheers Wim
|
|
|
Post by fenderplucker on May 3, 2013 8:21:16 GMT
Hi Fenderwim, there must be something wrong with either your amplifier or your measurement technique. The measured acoustic response must follow that of the tone stack (give or take the bumps in the loudspeaker response). I have attached the response of my AC15 clone with the bass and treble on max, but had to use a sine wave signal so there are the usual interference dips and peaks. Nevertheless, I think the that dip is rather apparent, exactly as it should be. Regards, Paul. Attachments:
|
|