51m0n

[quote name='xgsjx' post='877329' date='Jun 25 2010, 12:55 PM']But then i suppose like any pedals, it's down to what [b]you[/b] like the sound of that counts.[/quote] +1 Absolutely!

Oh mate, what a fantastic oppurtunity, how many of us will ever get to experience a day like that! Glad you had such a superb time!

[quote name='escholl' post='877045' date='Jun 25 2010, 01:41 AM']Right, well, the point is that if it's clipping the built-in limiter, it's going to clip any output stage -- only with the possibility of distortion. In this sense the RComp works perfectly fine. It might not be the conventional way, but really, try it, it works very well. [/quote] I dont think I explained myself very well. That compressor is automatically designed to do what I am suggesting on its own. You wont gain anything by putting a limiter after it, since it already limits at 0dBfs anyway. Except maybe to get the limiter firing up earlier so you have a little more headroom for limiting to occur in. It is in itself an example of comp-> limiter. The point is limiter-> comp changes the envelope of the signal hitting the comp, which wil lchnage the action of the comp. Its not wrong (nothing is) and if it sounds good to you then great, use it. Its just another validation for using a limiter and a compressor together. All I was trying to say is that the typical usage of a comp & limiter is comp first (*just like in the waves R-Compressor*), since the limiter stops overs caused by lifting the make up gain with a long attack time. If you hit a built in limiter you WONT clip the output stage, you will limit the output at the threshold set for the limiter (or very close to it) - that is the point of the limiter. You can mimic this with two seperate devices too, but you can never get the gain after the compressor higher than the clip point, however you can raise the gain after the limiter if you lower its threshold, which effectively achieves the same thing. Does that make more sense?

[quote name='escholl' post='876826' date='Jun 24 2010, 08:41 PM']Ok, so, to satisfy my own curiosity, I had a bit of a play around this afternoon with a previously recorded bass guitar track. Used a Waves L1, Waves RComp, and an Algorithmix TTDR meter for the metering. I then set RComp to 50ms attack, 200 release, ratio 3:1. I found that putting the limiter after the compressor did indeed allow the large spikes through the compressor, boosted by the make up gain, and then limited by the limiter, as expected. However, the largest signal peaks would overload the input and especially the output of the compressor before being limited, not an issue really with the headroom on DSP plugins but would definitely be an issue with physical circuits. I then tried it the other way round, so limiter, then compressor. The limiter threshold now had to be set a bit lower, to prevent the final output from clipping, BUT it did so without clipping the compressor at all either. It could be driven just as hard now, but without any stage clipping at all. To my ears, it also sounded more natural and smoother overall, but that is probably subjective. So, either is effective, but for me I think I will stick to limiter, then compressor.[/quote] Hmmm according to the manual the Wave R-Comp has a built in L1 style limiter built in to the output, so its not the right tool to use to play with this, as its trying to automate this for you. ANy attempt to push it hard enough to emulate what I'm sayiing and you will be distorting the output. Try Reaper's Reacomp compressor instead... Comp then limiter is the norm in most of the dual function compressor limiter rack units I've ever seen, certinaly how its set up on my focusrite compounder, and I can easily get compression to light up, push a bit harder and push the limiter into action with the peak, without any amount of distortion from overloading the circuit. I can cause this to occur without pushing the input hard. It will always be easier the other way around to not get any overs if you think about it, but you wont get the same extreme effect on the front of the note, this is certainly not an example of 'transparent' compression

[quote name='urb' post='876290' date='Jun 24 2010, 12:17 PM']Aye but by potentially missing the match you save yourself all the heart ache and agony... and if they can't win this game then stuff em - I've spent (i.e. wasted) enough time and energy on our team over the years to let this one go - it's the game AFTER this one that will be the killer - if they get that far. My thoughts on the subject anyway - looking forward to meeting you guys - I hope to be there by 12noon ish Cheers Mike[/quote] I meant the Grand Prix mate, football is for overpaimumblemumblerantrant.....

[quote name='cetera' post='876243' date='Jun 24 2010, 11:18 AM']Yep, agreed.....it's all Markbass at the moment..... and before that it was EBS....something else will be along soon.... [/quote] To be fair its been Markbass (wrt lightweight amp heads) for a long time (when did the LMII first start to get noticed, 2 or 3 years ago?), they broke through with the first really brilliantly received model in this format that was a [price point, power level,tone] package that couldn't be argued with. Loads have followed suit (everyone of note?) with GB Shuttle, Orange, TecAmp, SWR etc etc etc and still MB seem to have the most love, they just absolutely got that amp right. I dont think we'll see another step forward from an obscure company into real sustained dominance in a field for a good long while.

[quote name='Fat Rich' post='876166' date='Jun 24 2010, 09:36 AM']Never mind the footy and the cricket, what about the [b]Valencia Grand Prix[/b]?![/quote] Oh S**T!!! Still going to come along, but.....

Thanks yet again M-M, more fuel fo rthe fire, in your ever expanding teaching resource! Brilliant stuff

[quote name='waynepunkdude' post='876161' date='Jun 24 2010, 09:29 AM']Great news.[/quote] +1 Excellent!

If anyone is interested I'd be up for going over compressors vs limiters, what they do, how they work when and why they would normally be used etc etc. I'd prefer to have a few guinea pigs willing to be plugged in to my rig so we can attempt to show what different compression ratios and bits and bobs can do to the sound of different basses and playing styles (its all a bit tricky to do whilst playing all the examples). Maybe if we could have a pick player, a slapper and a fingerstyle person, or one and the same person for all styles if anyone feels like being Captain Limelight If you guys are all clued up on compressors etc then I wont waste anyones time, just a thought after seeing some of the stuff in recent and not so recent threads on compressors and limiters. A white board would really help (assuming there were some dry markers to go with)!

[quote name='escholl' post='876052' date='Jun 24 2010, 12:59 AM']At that stage, could you not lower the limiting threshold to prevent that, if the limiter were first in the chain? I swear that at some point I learned it was better to go limiter, then compressor, but I can't for the life of me remember where or find the info, it was probably in a book somewhere but I'm worried now that I've just made the whole thing up lol...hence my edit above. [/quote] No you cant. Because you've set the attack nice and long to allow the leading edge of the note through, giving you maximum punch. Remember the attack is the time AFTER the threshold is crossed that the compressor engages. So if you set that long enopugh to allow the attack through, crank your ratio and dip you threshold to get a really nice pumping compression, once you wind up the make-up gain then if you' over hit' a note you will get a massive spike just before the compressor kicks in. Thats when you need a limiter, to catch those, nothing else. Even if you dip the compresor threshold more it doesnt make any real difference since the attack is wide enough to mean the that leading edge is nolonger being caught (deliberately) by the compressor.

[quote name='Jean-Luc Pickguard' post='875988' date='Jun 23 2010, 11:08 PM']I'd have thought that a compressor would negate the need for a limiter most of the time. At most settings, while its compressing its also limiting isn't it?. I'd use one or the other. I've tried lots, but my cheapo green behringer limiter pedal does what I need.[/quote] Well no. Typically a compressor has a slower attack, deliberately to allow the front of the waveform through, keeping the bright attack to the sound. This is great, but as you crank the make up gain, you also crank that peak, until it is always clipping you input. At this point you need a very fast limiter to take a couple of dB off that peak to allow you to continue to bring your make up gain up. Its really easy to show this with decent metering on a combined rack comp/limiter (like my compounder).

There is definitely a point to using both, they do very different things.... Set 'correctly' (that is how they are designed to work) the limiter is there to just catch the peaks of the most over enthusiastic moments, and as a speaker saver, just preventing the highest peaks from ruining a performance. The threshold and the ratio are high, the attack and release low. A compressor is a more general dynamic and envelope sculpting tool, more often than not it has a much lower threshold and ratio and a longer release and attack (although the attack and release would still be short by compressor standards when dealing with a bass as input, the attack and release on a limiter are often far far faster than on a compressor). The compressor smooths out more general volume/dynamic differences a bit, and can also thicken up your sound as a result. I'd put the limiter after the compressor (thats the norm), bt exactly where in the entire chain you have you want to put them I couldn't hazard a guess....

BIg +1 on the MB compressore. Had a play on one of these - first compressor pedal I've had any time for at all (yet tohave a crack on the Joe Meek one).

Plux and I will bring our own scran I expect, normally do just to maintaint ballast in the otherwise empty vehicle

Comb filtering occurs when two sources are close to each other. So two drivers, or a driver and a reflection. The particular frequency that the filtering occurs at is a product of the distance apart of the two sources (its more complex than that but you get the idea). If your drivers are arrayed vertically the filtering is supposed to be less obvious to more of your audience.

Do you go through the PA? If so stick with what you are doing, its effectively a really good bass monitor, and not adding anymore bottom end rumble is a very good thing for the sound guy. If not then the vertical stacked 210 is the 'ultimate' solution. Otherwise vertical and tilting back will give you boundary reinforcement from the floor. Or on a table and less than 1' from the rear wall gives the same boundary reinforcement, but gets the cab up where you need it. Keep it vertical if you are one of those who finds comb filtering an issue...

Well as long as its 'proper' speaker cloth, and not some super tight weaved stuff that doesnt allow airflow you should get zero difference in the low end a t all. You will get a tiny diff at the extreme top end, but in a tweeterless cab even that wont be noticeable.

A speakon cable will not short the circuit as it is plugged in or unplugged, a jack will. So you can unplug a speakon with the amp running at no risk of shorting, but if you try the same with a jack you may well find you ahave inadvertantly released the magic smoke. Also the contact area of a speakon is far greater than that on a jack, so the resistance at that point is less. This is a very good thing when talking about high power amps. HAving said that I've run up to 250w amps with jacks and had no problems as yet. But I never unplug the amp from the cab whilst its running.

Turn those two right down and you wont know whats hit you. I'd love to be there to see you face Do tell us what you think of you rig now! Dont worry you are far from alone in thinking that those two were off in the upright position.

[quote name='Jigster' post='873943' date='Jun 21 2010, 10:07 PM']ah right - the vle is usually at 12 o'clock, so like flat - but turn it right back you say?[/quote] Aha there in lies the issue. That is a MASSIVE treble and upper mid cut right there. Where is the VPF? If that is also pointing at 12 O'clock then you are also giving a HUGE bass boost and a lo mid cut at 400Hz Off for those two controls is fully anticlockwise.

[quote name='chris_b' post='873879' date='Jun 21 2010, 09:00 PM']When I ran my LM2 through Bergantino cabs the controls were flat (at 12 o'clock) and the pre shapes were off. The bass was flat as well. The whole rig sounded wonderful.[/quote] I start there and then tweak to the room. In your case just roll the bass knob back a bit (9 O'clock would be quite a lot). Thats supposed to be around 40Hz, that will suck the bottom right out...

[quote name='silddx' post='873894' date='Jun 21 2010, 09:12 PM']I'm sorry to say I won't be able to make this now. Hope it's a great day![/quote] Oh dude, shame. Good things I hope!

Looks like Plux and I will make it Can someone confirm that there's no conjestion charge on a Sunday??