Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Lunatec V2 HPF  (Read 3595 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ts

  • Trade Count: (81)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3617
  • Gender: Male
Lunatec V2 HPF
« on: February 08, 2010, 02:42:18 PM »
Sometimes when using my AKG CK69 short guns paired with the JWmod 460's>V2, I get too much bass. Which HPF setting would be better, 1 or 2? Thanks.

Offline drewloo

  • Friend of Salsa
  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3060
  • it's recreational
Re: Lunatec V2 HPF
« Reply #1 on: February 08, 2010, 04:30:19 PM »
2 is the lower roll-off, I'd try that first. 

http://www.taperssection.com/reference/pdf/Manual_Grace_V2.pdf

The manual also has detailed info on the internal jumpers that affect the high-pass filters.

Offline StuStu

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2860
  • Gender: Male
Re: Lunatec V2 HPF
« Reply #2 on: February 08, 2010, 07:48:59 PM »
It seems odd to me that you'd get too much bass from shotguns regardless of the pre used...no? Sorry if I'm being too stereotypical. :P 
MK5, MK8, MK41, KM184D, CK77, B3 ---CMD 2U XT, KC5, KCY, AKI---KCY Tinybox, Ugly BB---AETA 4MinX, PMD661 MKII, R-26, M-10, MR-1

Offline ts

  • Trade Count: (81)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3617
  • Gender: Male
Re: Lunatec V2 HPF
« Reply #3 on: February 09, 2010, 09:34:44 AM »
It seems odd to me that you'd get too much bass from shotguns regardless of the pre used...no? Sorry if I'm being too stereotypical. :P

True. I guess it could be a case of the tube boomies. HPF2 should tame it a little. Pointing at the inside edge of the stacks instead of the outside usually helps to.

Offline Shawn

  • is old and tired
  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3250
  • Gender: Male
Re: Lunatec V2 HPF
« Reply #4 on: February 09, 2010, 10:39:15 AM »
if it were me I'd prefer to do the roll-off in post. Could it also be that there is some phase cancellation. I'm forgetting specifics but isn't it likely that when running 4 mics you can get phase cancellation that will affect the higher frequencies more so than the lower frequencies, which would in effect make the final product tend to sound more bass heavy. I could be totally wrong about that though.

Offline page

  • Trade Count: (25)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 8388
  • Gender: Male
  • #TeamRetired
Re: Lunatec V2 HPF
« Reply #5 on: February 09, 2010, 10:55:58 AM »
if it were me I'd prefer to do the roll-off in post. Could it also be that there is some phase cancellation. I'm forgetting specifics but isn't it likely that when running 4 mics you can get phase cancellation that will affect the higher frequencies more so than the lower frequencies, which would in effect make the final product tend to sound more bass heavy. I could be totally wrong about that though.

I think thats factually accurate; you're more likely to encounter HF phase cancelation then LF phase cancelation when doing mixes.

As for the HPF. The extra bass could be deep bass, or it could be a resonance. I've noticed in a couple of rooms that there is a resonance that compliments/amplifies a certain cycle range (125hz in my most recent example). So in that instance, HPF isn't going to do as much as just EQing it later where you can do surgical cuts; you'll loose the deeper bass which would sound relatively normal prior to the HPF if it's truely a resonance problem. The only resonance I've found worth trying to HPF away during the show is the stuff that's under 40-50hz which is mostly reverb as stuff bounces around the room or trash from the PA system and I'd touch as little above that mark as possible. I've found to really use HPF in the field well, you have to know a series of factors before hand (what does the room sound like, how good are the sound personell who will probably be running it, what does your gear sound like down there, etc).
"This is a common practice we have on the bus; debating facts that we could easily find through printed material. It's like, how far is it today? I think it's four hours, and someone else comes in at 11 hours, and well, then we'll... just... talk about it..." - Jeb Puryear

"Nostalgia ain't what it used to be." - Jim Williams

Offline SmokinJoe

  • Trade Count: (63)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4210
  • Gender: Male
  • "75 and sunny"... life is so much simpler.
    • uploads to archive.org
Re: Lunatec V2 HPF
« Reply #6 on: February 09, 2010, 12:54:41 PM »
When I had Nak guns, sometimes the bass was huge, more so than any other mic I've owned.  Never made sense to me either, but it's real.

And yes, assuming the V2 is like V3, HPF #2 is a little and HPF #1 is more.  I don't know who's idea that was, but it seemed backwards to me.
Mics: Schoeps MK4 & CMC5's / Gefell M200's & M210's / ADK-TL / DPA4061's
Pres: V3 / ST9100
Decks: Oade Concert Mod R4Pro / R09 / R05
Photo: Nikon D700's, 2.8 Zooms, and Zeiss primes
Playback: Raspberry Pi > Modi2 Uber > Magni2 > HD650

Offline KenH

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 777
  • Gender: Male
Re: Lunatec V2 HPF
« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2010, 01:32:24 PM »
And yes, assuming the V2 is like V3, HPF #2 is a little and HPF #1 is more.  I don't know who's idea that was, but it seemed backwards to me.
The way I remember it is that the switch in the 2 position is down (low), while the switch in the 1 position is up (high), which corresponds to the HPF cutoff frequency.  2 is lower, 1 is a higher cutoff freq...
retired

Offline Jhurlbs81

  • Trade Count: (20)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3076
  • Gender: Male
    • My LMA collection
Re: Lunatec V2 HPF
« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2010, 09:26:48 AM »
I agree 100% with Page.  It's important to know if its the room resonance or just crazy bass.
FREE JERRYFREAK!

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.063 seconds with 37 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF