Topic: v3- bass roll off?, ansr?, gains?

[svenkid]

my V3 didnt come with a user manual, for whatever reason, Ive had it for about a year and a half and it runs great. About after 7 months of having it, someone saw me taping with it and said "dude, you gottsa run the ansr" I am curious about bass eroll off and the other things on it. Thanks>

svenkid
aka Carl in Arcata

[F.O.Bean]

my V3 didnt come with a user manual, for whatever reason, Ive had it for about a year and a half and it runs great. About after 7 months of having it, someone saw me taping with it and said "dude, you gottsa run the ansr" I am curious about bass eroll off and the other things on it. Thanks>

svenkid
aka Carl in Arcata

ANSR is the dither reduction to go from the 24-bit processing to 16-bit if youre using DAT/JB3, the red ANSR light willcome on when its enabled

the bass roll-off is set at 50Hz(HPF2)/100Hz(HPF1) and if you changed the internal jumpers, you could set the filters for 12db an octave compared to the 6db an octave that comes default out of the box, and also, when switched to 12db/octave, the HPF2 is at 75Hz and the HPF1 is at 125Hz i believe

[Brian Skalinder]

my V3 didnt come with a user manual

The Grace Design website hosts the PDF manual and it's also mirrored here in the User Manual forum.  Check it out, definitely worth reading through!

[fsulloway]

Here's my .02 on the HPF. Yes there are times when it's needed. However if you run it at the show that low end or bass is lost forever. Personally, I've only used it 3 times and I regretted it on two of those occasions. You can always use Wavelab, Soundforge, etc to take it out after the fact.

[jsfrank]

Definitely run with the ANSR on when recording 16 bit. As far as the HPF, I've been running with it set on 2 almost all of the time lately with my AKG 480's. It's been all indoors and has really helped tighten up the sound. I will never have time to dick around with post-processing so this has been kind of a holy grail for me.

[creekfreak]

I only use the roll off when I run omni's and things are a thumping

[jhirte]

my V3 didnt come with a user manual, for whatever reason, Ive had it for about a year and a half and it runs great. About after 7 months of having it, someone saw me taping with it and said "dude, you gottsa run the ansr" I am curious about bass eroll off and the other things on it. Thanks>

svenkid
aka Carl in Arcata

ANSR is the dither reduction to go from the 24-bit processing to 16-bit if youre using DAT/JB3, the red ANSR light willcome on when its enabled

the bass roll-off is set at 50Hz(HPF2)/100Hz(HPF1) and if you changed the internal jumpers, you could set the filters for 12db an octave compared to the 6db an octave that comes default out of the box, and also, when switched to 12db/octave, the HPF2 is at 75Hz and the HPF1 is at 125Hz i believe

there are a few settings:

active/passive (6db or 12db).
HP low: 100hz / 50hz
HP high: 125hz / 75hz

switch up is the higher, down is lower (eg 100/50)

Personally, I run the roll off at 90% shows I do (metal/punk, whatever you want to call it). I run 75hz 6db. w/o it my tapes are a little tooo bassy. I played around with running 100hz 12db for a while, but too much was rolled off.. 75/6 seems to work very good for the stuff I tape.

YMMV

-Jim

[svenkid]

thanks all. 

[wboswell]

Here's my .02 on the HPF. Yes there are times when it's needed. However if you run it at the show that low end or bass is lost forever. Personally, I've only used it 3 times and I regretted it on two of those occasions. You can always use Wavelab, Soundforge, etc to take it out after the fact.

agreed.  I can think of one time where I should have rolled it off and didn't.  The 3 times out of 100 where I ran the rolloff, I now regret it... 

By all means, try it out and experiment, but I'm less than excited about it.

If you plan to listen on an iPod, you will be pleased with the roll off, otherwise, you loose something that you can't get back... 

[BC]

Here's my .02 on the HPF. Yes there are times when it's needed. However if you run it at the show that low end or bass is lost forever. Personally, I've only used it 3 times and I regretted it on two of those occasions. You can always use Wavelab, Soundforge, etc to take it out after the fact.

Agreed, plus depending on your playback system you can just decrease the bass when listening.

[dklein]

One slight advantage of running the rolloff when recording is that a fair bit of the signal 'level' comes from the low frequency energy.  By taking some out, you don't waste all the headroom on low end (that you're gonna remove later).  You'll find that when the filter is engaged, you can raise your levels.  Probably more of a consideration for 16 bit recording than 24.

[Brian]

One slight advantage of running the rolloff when recording is that a fair bit of the signal 'level' comes from the low frequency energy. By taking some out, you don't waste all the headroom on low end (that you're gonna remove later). You'll find that when the filter is engaged, you can raise your levels. Probably more of a consideration for 16 bit recording than 24.

very good point!

not too mention how too much low end can affect the response of the rest of the frequencies.  I always found that -6dB down from 75 or 50 would really help clear up some of my recordings.  If it lacks too much bass, I add it in post.

Of course it's always easier, for me, to critically remove bass from recordings as opposed to adding it but YMMV.

[F.O.Bean]

id rather remove than add in post too YMMV

[stober]

Here's my .02 on the HPF. Yes there are times when it's needed. However if you run it at the show that low end or bass is lost forever. Personally, I've only used it 3 times and I regretted it on two of those occasions. You can always use Wavelab, Soundforge, etc to take it out after the fact.

agreed.  I can think of one time where I should have rolled it off and didn't.  The 3 times out of 100 where I ran the rolloff, I now regret it... 

By all means, try it out and experiment, but I'm less than excited about it.

If you plan to listen on an iPod, you will be pleased with the roll off, otherwise, you loose something that you can't get back... 

ditto for me as well .I didnt care for the roll off either

[marc0789]

even if you're too lazy or tech challenged (me) to do post work, hell anyone can eq the source to make it sound how you want it to. pretty tough to properly eq a thin tinny sounding hpf tape.

[Tim]

the 50hz/6db slope is the only one I would ever use.

[ethan]

For those advocating NO HPF....have you looked at the frequency spectrum of studio albums? You'll find significantly less low end under 75 Hz than any live tape.

-e

[dklein]

or generate some test tones so you get a feel for what goes on at those frequencies

[ethan]

This is what too much bass will do for ya. 

http://news.agendainc.com/movies/Blaupunkt.mpg

[nic]

For those advocating NO HPF....have you looked at the frequency spectrum of studio albums? You'll find significantly less low end under 75 Hz than any live tape.

-e

and do you know why?
its because labels want the producer/master houses to make the "product" as loud as possible, because everyone knows, louder is better. if you reduce the low end, then you can bring up the overall volume.

[OFOTD]

and do you know why?
its because labels want the producer/master houses to make the "product" as loud as possible, because everyone knows, louder is better. if you reduce the low end, then you can bring up the overall volume.

Actually I have a good friend that works for one of the major mastering companies and while b.s.ing with him this morning I saw this post and asked him about it.  He siad the main reason that the bass is cutoff at certain frequencies is NOT due to loudness but more for the fact that the labels fear consumer backlash with discs playing poorly.  My friend explained that 99% of consumers play their cd's in the car or on stereo systems that are less than $50 dollars in total cost.  By trimming the bass it allows the 99% of consumers to hear the music instead of the cracking and popping of crappy speakers.

I have experimented with the HPF on the V3 quite a bit the last week or so using test tones.  While I agree that it let more gain to be used the bass frequencies weres something that could have just as easily been rolled off or trimmed in post production.  The majority of shows that I catch are loud rock shows where the extra gain is not necessarily needed.  If I was taping in a small acoustic or un-amplified setting I think I would use the filters as to increase the total gain of the recording. 

[ethan]

and do you know why?
its because labels want the producer/master houses to make the "product" as loud as possible, because everyone knows, louder is better. if you reduce the low end, then you can bring up the overall volume.

Actually I have a good friend that works for one of the major mastering companies and while b.s.ing with him this morning I saw this post and asked him about it.  He siad the main reason that the bass is cutoff at certain frequencies is NOT due to loudness but more for the fact that the labels fear consumer backlash with discs playing poorly.  My friend explained that 99% of consumers play their cd's in the car or on stereo systems that are less than $50 dollars in total cost.  By trimming the bass it allows the 99% of consumers to hear the music instead of the cracking and popping of crappy speakers.

So it comes down to who's going to listen. So if the consumer is the judge of the recording and you seed it widely then it is in the end in your interest to seed something that sounds good for most of the listeners isn't it?

On another note there's still something to be said about getting better levels across the board. We all hear the difference between a recording recorded too low say at 6dBFS peaks and one that peaks near 0dBFS. I hear a more rich sound and more contrast personally. So why limit your ability to capture 75 Hz - 20 KHz unecessarily especially if a lot of the energy is in the low end. Roling off in post production means you've lost the chance to maximize the resolution at the higher frequencies.

-e

[fsulloway]

>>>>Actually I have a good friend that works for one of the major mastering companies and while b.s.ing with him this morning I saw this post and asked him about it.  He siad the main reason that the bass is cutoff at certain frequencies is NOT due to loudness but more for the fact that the labels fear consumer backlash with discs playing poorly.  My friend explained that 99% of consumers play their cd's in the car or on stereo systems that are less than $50 dollars in total cost.  By trimming the bass it allows the 99% of consumers to hear the music instead of the cracking and popping of crappy speakers.<<<<<<<


I had a similiar conversation last night with a friend of mine who is an audio engineer. He basically said the same thing. He hardly ever uses the HPF on his own tapes but almost always when working for a client. As he put it, clients want a great sounding CD but not necessarily an accurate account of how the room sounded that particular night.

[wboswell]

and do you know why?
its because labels want the producer/master houses to make the "product" as loud as possible, because everyone knows, louder is better. if you reduce the low end, then you can bring up the overall volume.

Actually I have a good friend that works for one of the major mastering companies and while b.s.ing with him this morning I saw this post and asked him about it.  He siad the main reason that the bass is cutoff at certain frequencies is NOT due to loudness but more for the fact that the labels fear consumer backlash with discs playing poorly.  My friend explained that 99% of consumers play their cd's in the car or on stereo systems that are less than $50 dollars in total cost.  By trimming the bass it allows the 99% of consumers to hear the music instead of the cracking and popping of crappy speakers.

So it comes down to who's going to listen. So if the consumer is the judge of the recording and you seed it widely then it is in the end in your interest to seed something that sounds good for most of the listeners isn't it?

On another note there's still something to be said about getting better levels across the board. We all hear the difference between a recording recorded too low say at 6dBFS peaks and one that peaks near 0dBFS. I hear a more rich sound and more contrast personally. So why limit your ability to capture 75 Hz - 20 KHz unecessarily especially if a lot of the energy is in the low end. Roling off in post production means you've lost the chance to maximize the resolution at the higher frequencies.

-e

Personally, I'd rather capture something that I'm happy with.  I like to share, but I'm not going to compromise (imo) my recording so that it sounds better to other people.  Call me selfish, but until I get paid to record, I'm in the game for myself... 

[OFOTD]

So it comes down to who's going to listen. So if the consumer is the judge of the recording and you seed it widely then it is in the end in your interest to seed something that sounds good for most of the listeners isn't it?
-e

Well yes and no.   If you are selling your recording as music labels do then 'yes' it is in your best interest to make it "work" for the most people you can.  In the taping realm things are different so there is your "no" becuse there is not a "mainstream" appeal to live recording as much as we wish there was.

The line

So if the consumer is the judge of the recording

is a little misleading.  The consumer is not the judge of the actual recording per se but they the ones buying the product.  Would you buy a cd if it sounds like shit in your playback devices or would you upgrade your equipment.  I would bet that most folks would not buy a cd again before spending quite a bit more money (compared to a cd price) on a new playback system. 

We as tapers tend to say "if you don't like the way is sounds then fuck off" or better yet "if you don't like the way it sounds then go buy your own taping gear".  Then again we are not selling our tapes and label do.

Catch-22 for sure!

 

[OFOTD]

Personally, I'd rather capture something that I'm happy with.  I like to share, but I'm not going to compromise (imo) my recording so that it sounds better to other people.  Call me selfish, but until I get paid to record, I'm in the game for myself... 

I couldn't agree with you more.  I guess its all just one more side of the record business that you don't think about.

 Just the other day in fact my brother in law came over and gave me a copy of Van Halen's Womern and Children First that came out recently all remastered.  On my home system is sound like complete and utter shit compared to my original copy of the album.  But in my wife's car it sounds a noticable amount better that the original.    Again back to that damn catch-22

[CQBert]

When I ran a V3 I almost always ran a roll off...  Big bands at 75/6 and small clubs 50/6...  eliminated the low end boom and thghtened up the low end.

CQBert

[Kyle]

the 50hz/6db slope is the only one I would ever use.

I agree 100%. When I used to run KM184s, I used it in arenas with great luck, but never in clubs/bars or outside. Ditto for the TLM103s I have used recently. Really tightens the Neumanns up. With my Schoeps, I pretty much never use it except once for an FOB Allmann Bros' show. Probably didn't need it ( although I had a low stand and was near the subs) - took a chance - tape is great. I also remember using it at Phish 7/23/99 during the rainstorm in the second set. Really cut out the wind noise and left plenty of bottom end - that may be the best app for it....

[muj]

the bass cut thing depends on the music and the how loud the show is, and most importantly the mics.

i ran  gefell mk202 >josephson c606b>v3>jb3 last nite with the active filter and 50hz cut.