Topic: AKG 460/480 owners: ever use VR61 extension?

[§†∑∫åµÞ≥¥]

In lieu of the hard-to-find active cables or the JKL box, this could work pretty nicely for stealthing if you can figure out a way to mount it on your body/back. This version is 12 inches and they also offer a 36 inch extension. The caps go on one end, the bodies on the other. Not sure if it's flexible but I don't think so.

[heath]

never even knew it existed...

[mgleason007]

In lieu of the hard-to-find active cables or the JKL box, this could work pretty nicely for stealthing if you can figure out a way to mount it on your body/back. This version is 12 inches and they also offer a 36 inch extension. The caps go on one end, the bodies on the other. Not sure if it's flexible but I don't think so.

[nickgregory]

the concern I would have is that it is one in-flexible piece of metal that is sure to set off the wands....

[Lee]

the concern I would have is that it is one in-flexible piece of metal that is sure to set off the wands....

Yeah, but you carefully cut that metal off any you have a 3 foot active set direct from the manufacturer

[Matt Quinn]

Wouldn't you think there would be a way to remove the 'tube' and replace it with regular cable shielding?

[rustoleum]

I agree... if they can do this, why can't they just create a cable that does the same thing... maybe it's not an "active" cable then, but I don't care what they want to call it... just make it and sell me two!

 

[Matt Quinn]

I agree... if they can do this, why can't they just create a cable that does the same thing... maybe it's not an "active" cable then, but I don't care what they want to call it... just make it and sell me two!

 

Agred. I like my actives now, but I wish to high heaven a) I could use the ck 61's instead o the ck1x's, and b) that I could screw the caps onto the actives instead of snapping them in.  

[rustoleum]

Tube -
Did you sell your UA5?  Just happened to notice you've got nothing between the 460 actives and CEP.  Just curious.
Rusty

[Matt Quinn]

Sure did. I believe I'll be running a borrowed 316>modSBM1 in Vegas.  

[rustoleum]

nice.... I'll see ya there.

[§†∑∫åµÞ≥¥]

FWIW:

MSRP on the VR61 (12") = $329 each!
MSRP on the VR62 (40") = $639 each!

I found prices of $175 for the VR61 and $306 for the VR62 online.

[mgleason007]

I found prices of $175 for the VR61

Not much more than a right-angled adapter.

[§†∑∫åµÞ≥¥]

Yes and no. It functions as a "cable" in that it actually separates the capsule from the body. There are some electronics involved on the inside of the extension arm. Again, I wish it were flexible!

[F.O.Bean]

tube, so if you had the jk labs box could you have the 61's instead of the 6x's?

[caymanreview]

can anyone tell em the model #'s for the akg right angle adapters

i saw it somewhere the other day but cant find it.

[JNT]

A 61 for the 460/480
A51 for the 451

http://www.akg.com/products/powerslave,mynodeid,186,id,38,pid,38,_language,EN.html

Joe

[caymanreview]

thanks you, +T

[JNT]

Wouldn't you think there would be a way to remove the 'tube' and replace it with regular cable shielding?

This is something I was considering for my old 451s.  In doing some research I found

this post on the AKG forum.

Based on this it doesn't sound like you would be able to cut out the VR61's  metal tube and connect the 2 end fittings with wire.  At least on the 460/480 Ck61 etc it doesn't look like an option.  

It looks like it would work for the C451+ CK1 though.  I think AKG could have gone this route instead of the CK1x with the lemo connector.

I have a pair of the extension tubes for the 451s but I haven't convinced myself to take the Dremel tool to them yet   :)

Has anyone sucessfully modified the tubes to use with either Ck1 or CK61 capsules ?

Joe

Ok I give up how do I create a link using text instead of showing the entire URL?  I tried typing the correct HTML but that didn't work.  

Link fixed , Thanks Lee!

[Lee]

(url=http://www.youraddress.com)what you want the real text to be(/url)

like that, but substitute [] for ()

[jhirte]

Hrmm.. I wonder if a little deft action with the dremel would work to remove the tube part and then just have a cable running to the other end... hrmmmm
Who wants to gimmie 175 to test it !?! haha

-Jim

[nickgregory]

tube, so if you had the jk labs box could you have the 61's instead of the 6x's?

with the JK labs box you can run the 61, 62, 63 caps...any of them...

[carlbeck]

I looked into this option as actives & could not get a solid answer that it would work. I think Nick told me that Marc Nutter tried to do the same thing & it didn't work out.

[Nick's Picks]

yup.  marc said that he got a lot of noise through his hack job.
if I recall correctly, that is.

[Marc Nutter]

yup.  marc said that he got a lot of noise through his hack job.
if I recall correctly, that is.

It looked cool but hummed like a M()&^F*(&R!!!

I still have a VR 61 around here, and I can probably find the failed attempt too, if anyone with some technical savvy wants to try again.

Marc

[JNT]

Hrmm.. I wonder if a little deft action with the dremel would work to remove the tube part and then just have a cable running to the other end... hrmmmm

Again if you read the post in the AKG forum, (link in my post above) it seams pretty clear that it will NOT work with the CK61 etc.  It might work with the older CK1 capsules.


Link 1

It states that  "Capsules from the ULS Series (CK61, 62, 63, 69) cannot be connected to a cable. These capsules are true passive condenser transducers and need the preamp rigidly connected..."

This post is from someone in AKG service not just a mic owner.

Here is another one that talks about the differance between the electret and condenser capsules.
Link 2

CK61 condenser capsule
CK1 electrict capsule

These posts are where my research into the possibility of modifying the VR61 extension tubes came crashing to an end.

One of these days I will try it with the CK1 capsule.

Joe

[mgleason007]

Yes, but doesn't Ice make his own actives with the JK box?

[caymanreview]

Yes, but doesn't Ice make his own actives with the JK box?

yes

[carlbeck]

But the JK box then acts like the mic body instead of the 480 body, correct?

[caymanreview]

But the JK box then acts like the mic body instead of the 480 body, correct?

yep, it takes the body totally out of the equation

[§†∑∫åµÞ≥¥]

But the JK box then acts like the mic body instead of the 480 body, correct?

yep, it takes the body totally out of the equation

Which sucks if you have the Jim Williams mod on your AKG's because you can't use both cap and body at the same time... the JW mod is only on the body.

[JNT]

Yes, but doesn't Ice make his own actives with the JK box?

yes

He made his own cables for the JK Labs box? That's pretty interesting.  Jon, I'd like to hear more about that.  

However the JK Labs box is designed to work with a capsule on an active cable, the mic bodies are not.

Joe

[JNT]

But the JK box then acts like the mic body instead of the 480 body, correct?

Yep, it takes the body totally out of the equation

Which sucks if you have the Jim Williams mod on your AKG's because you can't use both cap and body at the same time... the JW mod is only on the body.

I don't think you really are loosing anything in terms of sound quality though are you? Your just would't be getting your moneys worth out of the mod.

Doesn't  the Williams mod for the 460 make it sound more like the 480.  The JK Labs box from the few tapes i have heard and from reading other peoples opinions sounds as good if not better than the 480.

Joe

[recordista]

Doesn't  the Williams mod for the 460 make it sound more like the 480.  The JK Labs box from the few tapes i have heard and from reading other peoples opinions sounds as good if not better than the 480.

IMO the Audio Upgrades mod makes a 460 sound better than a 480.

I have hear there were active cables at one time for the 460's, but the extra contact (for power) was left out of the 480 design.

[Matt Quinn]

I have hear there were active cables at one time for the 460's, but the extra contact (for power) was left out of the 480 design.

There were & it was.