Quote:
Originally Posted by da goose  Thanks!
Right now i have chosen for 1.5db per step because it's a 24 steps switch and i wanted all steps to be equal and so it's from -33 > 0 right now.
|
I think 24 steps will do fine at 1 dB/step. I once made one where the last step was another 10 or 15 dB for a dim position. You could also do a range switch or a dim/mute switch so you don't waste any of those precious 24 1 dB steps.
Quote:
In this way the middle section will be more precise the the rest, do you think this is a good idea or should i maybe just use the first steps in bigger steps and from, let's say step 9 to 24 in 1db steps?
|
Unfortunately, for a modern day mastering studio that might be doing wide dynamic range material today and Snoop Dogg tomorrow, you need at least 16 steps of 1 dB each.
Quote:
Right now the attenuator is set to 10k in total, what do you mean with the last to vary the impendance? The resistance of the output stays at 10k all the time.
I think 10k is ok or do you think i should go for a different value?
|
10K is very dangerous from the point of view of capacitive loss in the cabling to the amplifier.
Quote:
The attenuator is a tricky thing i allready found out, the steps are to big or to small and stuff like that, i'm still searching for the perfect steps.
The thing is that a mastering engineer probably needs more precise steps then a mixing engineer who is switching to different levels (really loud to really soft) more and i'll try to make the box work for both mastering and mixing engineers which makes it extra hard i think.
|
A lot of mixing engineers would disagree with you. While it is true that they may change gains a lot and play loudly and softly a lot, I'm trying to teach mixing engineers that being within 1 dB of a "standard monitor gain" that they can repeat from day to day can really help them in their mixing consistency.
Quote:
Do you think the box should be balanced or will unbalanced do fine as well? I'm still a fan of balanced but what i understand from your book and comments from other people that unbalanced is better/cleaner.
|
Unbal CAN be better/cleaner if the number of active gain stages in the chain is less... But if the sources are extremely well designed balanced sources and the loads are equivalent, then a balanced unit can perform (theoretically) better. I'm not sitting on the fence here, we'd have to see specific schematics. Then there's the ground loop thing but a well-designed single purpose studio should be able to have that part of their act together.
Good luck!
BK