Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them  (Read 3557 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline weroflu

  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 330
Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« on: October 27, 2014, 02:07:23 PM »
Listening back to some recordings from last year comparing different preamp sounds.

Someone told me that the Sonosax preamps soften transients - not sure if it's true or not.

One thing struck me now is that the Sonosax can handle peaks very well, it never breaks up compared to some preamps that I don't like and have since sold. The high end is very pleasing, this is the thing that always kills it for me with lesser preamps.

Has anyone compared the sound of their newer preamps to the M2?

Lots of people here like these things and I can see why. I'm just trying to get an understanding of what makes them so good.Possbly they are my favorite preamp so far paired with digital recorders. I think it's the most analog sound to date that I have gotten out of digital.






Offline Chuck

  • Trade Count: (41)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10568
  • Gender: Male
  • time between the notes...
    • My recordings on the LMA
Re: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2014, 04:44:46 PM »
It was a long while ago, but I opened one up. I was very surprised to find very simple circuits with low grade op-amps inside the Sonosax I saw.
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.

Microphones: (2) Microtech Gefell M300, (2) AKG C 480 B comb-ULS/ CK 61/ CK 63, (2) CAD GXL1200 (cardioid and sub-cardioid capsule & electronics mod), (2) Audix M1290-o, (2) Micro capsule active cables w/ Naiant PFA's, (2) Naiant MSH-1O, (2) Naiant AKG Active cables, (2) Church CA-11 (cardioid), (2) CAD C9, (1) Nady SCM-1000 (mod)
Pre-amps: Naiant littlekit v2.0, BM2p+ Edirol UA-5, Church STC-9000
Recorders: Sound Devices MixPre-6, Tascam DR-680, iRiver iHP-120 (Rockboxed & RTC mod)

Recordings on the LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/ChuckM
Recording website & blog: http://www.timebetweenthenotes.com

Offline hi and lo

  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2314
Re: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2014, 04:53:07 PM »
It was a long while ago, but I opened one up. I was very surprised to find very simple circuits with low grade op-amps inside the Sonosax I saw.

That sounds more like the Beyer MV-100 than the Sonosax SX-M2. To my knowledge, the SX-M2 is a discrete transistor design with no op amps. I have not opened mine up yet, but if it becomes a debate I may get curious.

Offline Chuck

  • Trade Count: (41)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10568
  • Gender: Male
  • time between the notes...
    • My recordings on the LMA
Re: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2014, 04:56:00 PM »
Here's a photo I found. http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=23578.0

Someone on that thread said they were TL0-72's or 82's in there.
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.

Microphones: (2) Microtech Gefell M300, (2) AKG C 480 B comb-ULS/ CK 61/ CK 63, (2) CAD GXL1200 (cardioid and sub-cardioid capsule & electronics mod), (2) Audix M1290-o, (2) Micro capsule active cables w/ Naiant PFA's, (2) Naiant MSH-1O, (2) Naiant AKG Active cables, (2) Church CA-11 (cardioid), (2) CAD C9, (1) Nady SCM-1000 (mod)
Pre-amps: Naiant littlekit v2.0, BM2p+ Edirol UA-5, Church STC-9000
Recorders: Sound Devices MixPre-6, Tascam DR-680, iRiver iHP-120 (Rockboxed & RTC mod)

Recordings on the LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/ChuckM
Recording website & blog: http://www.timebetweenthenotes.com

Offline yates7592

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 688
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« Reply #4 on: October 27, 2014, 05:24:57 PM »
I'm running the MiniR82 recorder which has 2 Sonosax preamps.  I don't have first hand experience of using any other high-end pre's but I would agree that, aside from being super-quiet and transparent, the transient response is absolutely incredible. I always find that what goes in is what comes out.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (13)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 12597
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« Reply #5 on: October 27, 2014, 05:26:25 PM »
Don't mean to cause any eye-rolling, but to follow up on aspects related to Jon's first post, and what yates just posted..

I think it's the most analog sound to date that I have gotten out of digital.

I don't know what 'analog sound' or what 'digital sound' sounds like, unless those terms are describing distortions which are more common in one medium rather than the other.  I usually don't want any of that, and want to record without any of those kinds of distortion if possible.  Technically I'm changing gain and also frequency response as a reflection of the response of the microphone I'm using, which are the only 'distortions' I want at that stage.

The more useful dichotomy to my way of thinking is 'clean' non-distorted sound, verses various types of distortions.  And the distortions fall into two useful categories: bad sounding and pleasant sounding.  Both are distortions of the clean signal.  Things like limiting (to avoid hard clipping), compression, mild-transformer saturation introducing low-frequency harmonic distortion, and other things can sound good, but I'd rather record the cleanest signal I can and impose those kind of subjectively pleasant distortions after the recording has been made.  That's not to say that imposing pleasant sounding distortions in the recording chain by using good gear with pleasant sounding distortions is bad practice, just that I have more control over imposing them later on a clean signal if warranted.

Identifying bad-sounding distortions by ear is easier.  It's more difficult deciding if the aspects you identify as 'good-sounding' are due to a clean distortion-free signal chain or some sort of pleasant distortion.

Apologies for no specific input on the subjective qualities of the distortions or lack of them through the saxs.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2014, 05:28:32 PM by Gutbucket »
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

Offline OOK

  • Trade Count: (17)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2711
  • Gender: Male
  • formerly OtherOneK
Re: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« Reply #6 on: November 13, 2014, 05:15:49 PM »
Looks like some interesting updates have come out.   Nothing on the website yet....  But I received an email...ended up on their mailing list somehow.  But they are now making a mv100.  It looks identical to the old beyer preamp that pops up every once and while on the section.  Looks like it is going to be 515$...  They are making  sx-m1 which looks like a single channel mic pre identical to the sxm2 that pop up every once and a while.  Price looks like 485$ US....

Peace OOK
DPA/HEB 4060's > R09HR
MBHO648/KA100Lk/KA200/KA300/KA500 > SD702

Offline OOK

  • Trade Count: (17)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2711
  • Gender: Male
  • formerly OtherOneK
Re: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« Reply #7 on: November 13, 2014, 05:21:18 PM »
Looks like some interesting updates have come out.   Nothing on the website yet....  But I received an email...ended up on their mailing list somehow.  But they are now making a mv100.  It looks identical to the old beyer preamp that pops up every once and while on the section.  Looks like it is going to be 515$...  They are making  sx-m1 which looks like a single channel mic pre identical to the sxm2 that pop up every once and a while.  Price looks like 485$ US....

Peace OOK

In my excitement I neglected to read it all the way through.... this is a destocking sale.... :facepalm:

DESTOCKINGDirect sale from factory:
All products listed below are new from factory, with 1 year warranty
A few number of each are still available, first come first served
Click on product's name or on the picture for a product description on our website or contact us directly for further information.


Sorry to cause anyone to well with excitement.....

ook
DPA/HEB 4060's > R09HR
MBHO648/KA100Lk/KA200/KA300/KA500 > SD702

Offline F.O.Bean

  • Is a 4 channel slut and
  • Trade Count: (125)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 40663
  • Gender: Male
  • Taperus Maximus
Re: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« Reply #8 on: November 14, 2014, 12:42:24 AM »
Listening back to some recordings from last year comparing different preamp sounds.

Someone told me that the Sonosax preamps soften transients - not sure if it's true or not.

One thing struck me now is that the Sonosax can handle peaks very well, it never breaks up compared to some preamps that I don't like and have since sold. The high end is very pleasing, this is the thing that always kills it for me with lesser preamps.

Has anyone compared the sound of their newer preamps to the M2?

Lots of people here like these things and I can see why. I'm just trying to get an understanding of what makes them so good.Possbly they are my favorite preamp so far paired with digital recorders. I think it's the most analog sound to date that I have gotten out of digital.







Really depends on what mics you're running with the Sax IMO!!! I have had a few different Sax's over the years, and I ran it with 481/3's>Sax>SD 722 and then again with my Lemosax with my Schoeps in 2011/2012, when I ran mk41>KCY>Lemosax>M10. No doubt it is an amazing preamp, and can make most any mic sound pretty damn good!!! ;) I liked it with the 481/3's and the SD 722, but it is simply AMAZING with Schoeps mics IMO!!! My favorite Phish recordings usually have a Sonosax in the chain ;) I had my phirst 'Dankseed' Phish recording with my old mk41>KCY>Lemosax>M10 rig from Cincy 6.22.2012. And my 6.23.2012 and 6.24.2012 mk41>KCY>Lemosax>M10 sources were smokin too! In fact, my buddy, Chris King, whom records damn near every Phish show, always has at LEAST 1 of his 2 sources for every Phish show he records as a Sonosax source. Well a Sonosax is ALWAYS in one of his 2 Schoeps setups :) And CK's 10.31.2014 Phish Hallioween mk41v>KCY>AKI>M222>NT222>Sonosax>SD 744t is one of the best Phish recordings I've EVER freakin heard, straight up ;) And his mk21>KCY>VMS02ib>SD 744t from 10.31.2014 isnt too shabby either ;)
« Last Edit: November 14, 2014, 01:00:58 AM by F.O.Bean »
Recording Rigs:
Schoeps MK4's & MK41's ->
Schoeps | NBob 250/0 KCY's ->
Naiant +60v/Low Noise PFA's ->
DarkTrain Right Angle Stubby XLR's ->
Sound Devices MixPre-6 & MixPre-3 ->
SanDisk 128gb Extreme Pro & 2x 64gb Ultra Plus

Portable Playback Rigs:
Campfire Audio Andromeda & Dorado | Westone (2nd Generation) UM Pro 30 IEM's ->
Linum G2 SuperBax & Bax |  2x CA/ALO SPC Litz | Sony MUC-M2BT1 LDAC MMCX Cables ->
Shanling M5s & M0 | Sony NW-A35 DAP's

DAW:
Dell Inspiron 5570-5521 SLV Laptop
(Pentium i5 Processor/8gb RAM/256gb SSD)

http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/diskobean | http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/Bean420 | http://bt.etree.org/mytorrents.php

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2577
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2014, 03:55:18 PM »
I owned an SX-M2 for a while, some years ago, but used it only a few times. Didn't detect any special character to it, but it was a nice, small, lightweight unit with balanced ins and outs. Unfortunately the gain pots were rather noisy.

Even if the output circuit used TL-072s (which I'm not sure of), that wouldn't bother me as long as they're used appropriately; Apt/Holman hifi preamps used TL-072s and sounded excellent. But I seem to recall that the input stage of the SX-M2 was made with discrete components, plus I really doubt that the TL-072 would be anyone's choice for use as an input stage.

--best regards
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline funkoff13

  • wishes leisure suits would come back in style.
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5583
  • Gender: Male
  • strawberry fields central park november 2008
Re: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« Reply #10 on: December 08, 2014, 06:10:44 PM »
I don't like them. They lack musicality

Offline silentmark

  • Shine with or without cherries ?
  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2684
  • Gender: Male
  • Boat, cucumber, wire ...
Re: Sonosax preamps - why do you like them
« Reply #11 on: December 08, 2014, 07:21:33 PM »
I don't like them. They lack musicality

^ Trouble maker ;-)

I've always liked running the SXM2 in my Neumann set up over the years, "warm" sound perhaps ?

Anyhooo I like the overall simplicity of the box, period.

I did find the gain pots do collect alot of 'dirt' and need to be cleaned regularly depending on usage of course. Nasty static gets introduced otherwise.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2014, 07:26:02 PM by silentmark »
Dissent is the highest form of patriotism. - Howard Zinn, not Thomas Jefferson ...

Mics: Neumann AK50/AK40/AK30/AK20(1 for M/S), AKG568eb's (gathering dust)
Decks: R-44 (OCM), Fostex FR2LE (OWM), Microtacker (semi-retired), D8 (retired), D7 (retired)
Pre-amps: Apogee Minime (semi-retired), Sonosax SX-M2 (semi-retired), Oade mod SBM-1 (retired)
Cables: LC3 actives (older lemo style x2), Audio Magic Hyper Conductor interconnects

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3qrWOOposQ

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.148 seconds with 39 queries.
© 2002-2018 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF