My quantity buy...Bourns or Clarostat-Opinions please

[vin-gear]

I guess my title says it all.

I am still wrenching on my API desk. I have decided to re-switch and re-pot nearly the entire desk. I have done/am doing, a few mods to the input channels and also on the monitor cards.

Basically, I'll need 400-10K log pots and 70-10K center detent pans. I've also decided to replace the 25K reverse log mic gain pots while I'm at it.

I figure it'll be good for another 35-40 years and I'll be taking the big dirt nap by then.

Anyhow, I have priced out the Clarostat 388 series from State and the Bourns 53 series from Mouser/Digi. I will get 500 of the 10K logs...(the last 100 is essentially free from State)

To compare:
From State, 500-10Klog, 70-10K dbl gang center detent pan, and 34-25K rev log is $5976 plus shipping. (With friction washers BTW)

From Digi, 500-10Klog, 250-10K dbl gang center detent pan, and 250-25K rev log is $5347 plus shipping. (Minimum of 250 on the customs)

That’s a huge frickin’ cost difference when you look at the whole thing.

Is Clarostat really that much better of a pot?

I know my desk had mostly Clarostat originally with a couple of AB’s here and there.

My slut side says make it right and use the Clarostats but my damn check book says group buy on the Bourns and save some cash. It’s really a lot of $$ difference. If I sold the pans and mic gains that I don’t need, at cost, I would save $2800 over the Clarostats. Not too mention, the extra 100 10K logs I really don’t need.

Damn. What ta do, what ta do?????

[vin-gear]

No thoughts huh?

Wow.

[owel]

Have you tried doing some work on a single channel? See how difficult it would be to change all the pots, or compare a Clarostat and Bourns outfitted channels?

If you resell your desk, will you be able to recoup your cost? (and the value of your time?)

[vin-gear]

Originally Posted by owel

Have you tried doing some work on a single channel? See how difficult it would be to change all the pots, or compare a Clarostat and Bourns outfitted channels?

Yes, I have done extensive work on an input channel. Changing the pots is not a big deal. I am adding 3 more echo pots besides just "changing" what is there. The concentric level/pan will be changed to just a pan. The level is not needed at all and kind of useless. It was a 1K pot. I replaced it with a jumper and a 1K shunt resistor. The circuit is actually better without the shunt resistor. My "Frankenstein" input channel was all the old style Clarostats. It sounds great, like I expected. I haven't listened with all Bourns but don't expect to "hear" a real difference between the pots.

If you resell your desk, will you be able to recoup your cost? (and the value of your time?)

Hell no. I guess it's more like finishing the basement in your house. It makes for your living there to be more comfortable. It's more what you want, but won't get the investment back when you sell.

It's a labor of love and more functionally what I want to work with. My time has no real value. Just ask my wife.

[ulysses]

I generally consider Bourns to be top-grade pots. But the brand isn't really important. What is important is the rest of the data sheet: Is it the same physical size, does it have the same kind of pins (are these PC mount or solder eyelet?), do they have the same size bushing, shaft diameter, etc? Hopefully you've already considered all this and are comparing interchangeable parts.
After that you get into the operational details. What are the tolerances of the resistance, the taper, and the rotation? What kind of element is it? Conductive plastic will be a lot better than carbon. Cermet is probably better, but I've found it has kind of a funny feel when you turn the pot.
If you really want an opinion on which you should buy, give us the full part number.
Otherwise, I would take the Bourns pots, save the money, sell the leftovers, and be happy.
Though to be honest, I wouldn't be replacing all the pots in my console in the first place.

[vin-gear]

Originally Posted by ulysses

I generally consider Bourns to be top-grade pots. But the brand isn't really important. What is important is the rest of the data sheet: Is it the same physical size, does it have the same kind of pins (are these PC mount or solder eyelet?), do they have the same size bushing, shaft diameter, etc? Hopefully you've already considered all this and are comparing interchangeable parts.
After that you get into the operational details. What are the tolerances of the resistance, the taper, and the rotation? What kind of element is it? Conductive plastic will be a lot better than carbon. Cermet is probably better, but I've found it has kind of a funny feel when you turn the pot.
If you really want an opinion on which you should buy, give us the full part number.

U,
Thanks for the input. I have carefully taken all the above into account. For all intents and purposes, I was really looking for opinions on the Bourns 51/53 series compared to the Clarostat 388 series, in CP. I have decided on the conductive plastic for sure. The other details are nearly the same. I didn't really want anyone to look up part numbers.

Otherwise, I would take the Bourns pots, save the money, sell the leftovers, and be happy.

I am also leaning this way.

Though to be honest, I wouldn't be replacing all the pots in my console in the first place.

Well, without going into too much detail...
I'm not replacing all the pots.

On the input channels, there are currently 5 pots.
1 Echo (for 4 sends)
2 Cues
1 Mic gain
1 Concentric "mix level" and dual-gang panner.

The single echo is being replaced with 4 individual pots, 1 for each echo send. (It’s a mod and yes it works great without loading the opamps anymore than the original circuit, pre or post)

The 2 cues were replaced by a hacky “tech” that has a history of fvcking up vintage API desks like mine. He put in 10k linear Bourns 51 series and hard wired them to be post fader. I figure while am at it, why not put in audio log pots like those should have been. I'll even get the correct shaft length or cut the new ones down so the Cue knobs aren’t a ¼” taller than the rest of the knobs. :-] Also making the Cue’s switchable, pre or post.

Same hacky “tech” replaced the 25K reverse log mic gains with some shitty customs, not Clarostat BTW. A few of them need 2 hands and pliers to turn. The rest feel like the elements are made of sand or small gravel. I hate the pieces of shit. They might as well be replaced while I’m in there.

As far as the concentric, the mix level, I and almost all other owners, find this control absolutely useless. It’s sometimes getting moved when panning and I find myself constantly checking to make sure it’s wide open. Not to mention, the above mention hack, replaced these when he tried to fvck up the rest of the desk. He used the same piece of shit gravely, customs as the mic gain, and either he ordered them wrong, or the factory made them wrong but the controls are reversed. Pan is now on top, useless level on the bottom. So, mix level is being removed and this will be a pan only. (Yes we took care to try a 1K shunt in place of the 1K pot. Things are better without the shunt.)

The monitor cards will be 100% new from scratch, hence the need for 32 more pans and 192 more 10k logs.

I am touching nothing in the center section or the echo returns.
My Clarostat sample just showed up so, I’m off to check it out.

Jeff

[Peter Gruden]

Id' say go for a larger pot wherever you have space and 4mm knobs.

I used series 50 with 6mm shaft for monitor level and replaced it 3 times in just a few months. The linear ones are much better, I use several hundreds of dual and triple section, but they still feel cheap compared to series 90. The same applies to Sfernice 12mm conductive plastic, the white ones like in Neve consoles. I have about 450 dual concentrics. If not used for a certain period of time they are harder to move and they crackle. I beleive Neve uses cermet ones, which are said to be better mechanicaly.

Bourns 90 are good, smooth, and after 20 years I can still pull them from my old console and they work. And they are considerably cheaper than series 50.

Peter

[ulysses]

Although the 91 series is probably a higher quality part than the 51, the 91 has a really loose feel that I don't care for. The 96 series is better because the O-ring for the panel seal stiffens it up a bit. And the 81 series is better because of the metal shaft. But sometimes you don't have a lot of choice. Anyway, these are all perfectly good parts so use whichever you need to use.

[vin-gear]

Thanks for the thoughts guys.

Unfortunatly, I am limited on size and have to stay with a 1/2" pot. My monitor cards have only 3/4" face plates and exactly allow nothing more than 1/2". On the input channels, I have 2 rows of 1/2" pots beside each other. That is a little tight also.

I did get my Clarostat 388 sample with the friction washer. Pretty stiff but not very smooth. I think that the Bourns 51/53's have a much nicer feel to them. I really wanted to be taken by the Clarostat, but was kind of let down. However, due to minimum qty's and lead times, I think I'm gonna order the dual linear pans from State and go with Bourns 51's for the rest. I can find most of the 51's in stock but not many 53's.

A multi-stepped rotary pan switch would be great but I sure as heck don't have the room for that.

Jeff