Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Battery Boxes, Preamps, Mixers, ADCs, and Processors => Topic started by: weroflu 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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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
-
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 ;)
-
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
-
I don't like them. They lack musicality
-
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.