FATSO / HEDD

[Jax]

Is the FATSO more aggressive with its approach to distortion than the HEDD? I've not used or knowingly heard either unit, so I'm basing my guesses on the design philosophies of EL (in your face, but can be gentle) and Cransesong (far less in your face, more subtle and perhaps more refined [no offense, Dave.. it's what I hear]).

The only Cranesong product I've heard that DOES have a bit of obvious 'tude is my Flamingo when I flip in the FAT and/or IRON amps, and drive them hard. Meanwhile, to exemplify the contrasting approaches, the Trakker is a much more subtle animal to the Distressor's beast.


While I'm at it, I'm wondering if the FATSO is to coloration what the Distressor is to compression. IOW, is there a sort of scaled-down version of Distression in the FATSO, and a scaled-down version of FATSO coloration in the Distressor?

How much better does the distortion get, going from my Distressors to the FATSO? Also, how and in what ways is it different (sounding) than the HEDD?

[Jax]

Hmm... no bites?

No one has anything to say about the character of the FATSO compared to the HEDD?

wow.. ok

[Kris]

Who can afford to own both?!?

[Ted Nightshade]

Jules?

Procedure

Fatso - clip off nasty HF transient "edge" (in plase of tape compression)

Then send to

Hedd - for excelent conversion (with optional fattening with pentode triode & tape simulations)

I have got into the habit of only using the tape & valve emulation at mixdown...(save 'double processing' in my mind)

As for I would say forget that

mic's have "character"
Pre amps have "character"
Consoles have "character"

You are chasing your tail in your hunt for a "character" description..

Fatso = A HF transient clipping / limiting device - with added compressors

Hedd = A converter with Valve & tape simualtion

I dont look for either to add character, merely make the reproduction of my signals more kind to the ears. The character of the signal has been set prior to running signal into either of these devices..

OK?

[Jax]

-- Getting there, but not quite ok yet.

Jules, you don't consider tape and valve simluation to be different forms of 'character'?

While mics, pres, boards, etc. all have character, we're missing a step. It's often the TUBE mic's design that gives it character, and that's gotta be true for tape machines and consoles as well (considering there are both tube and solid state driven types of each).

The FATSO and HEDD share a few 'coloration' features that are relevant to their reason for existing. I think that goes beyond "clipping off the HF transient edge" and over to realm of character (if tubes etc. are considered 'character' enhancing implements). Make sense?

With that in mind, my question is more or less aimed at how these two boxes compare to eachother within those 'colorizing' functions. I expect the FATSO to be more over the top, because that's what EL is known for.

It would be cool to figure out which of the boxes is more useful for adding character to tracks/mixes. If they're both doing basically the same thing and the FATSO just has a few more distortion modes than the HEDD, I would only go for the HEDD if it sounds more 'refined'.

I may well be splitting hairs here, but that's what I'm trying to find out.

[Ted Nightshade]

Anybody really get a lot of use out of the tape simulation on the HEDD? I use 'triode' & 'pentode' a lot, but the 'tape' although vintage and colorful is not what I'm after, although analog tape itself is. So far about the only thing I tracked direct to digital with the HEDD was a piano, and it didn't appreciate the 'tape' simulation.
The 'triode' sounds creamy to me, the 'pentode' sounds shimmery, the tape sounds artery-clogging.

Haven't used the Fatso, but I'm hoping it lives up to it's name, and lets you really dial the kind of fat and amount of fat you want. Some brawn would be welcome.

OK to deal with your question I need to roll my sleeves up and get a little nasty, but bear with me at the end I give you my answer to the question..

"Jules, you don't consider tape and valve simulation to be different forms of 'character'?"

No, I see them as effects, not responsible for generating a sound, but enhancing an 'existing' one.

"While mics, pres, boards, etc. all have character, we're missing a step."

We?

"It's often the TUBE mic's design that gives it character, and that's gotta be true for tape machines and consoles as well (considering there are both tube and solid state driven types of each)."

I define character of a sound differently, I dont always attribute recording equipment as in control of all, or even a major part, of a recorded sounds character...

"The FATSO and HEDD share a few 'coloration' features that are relevant to their reason for existing."

An awkwardly constructed sentence, but I think I understand you as follows, both units are made to give sounds an analog, er... 'character? And both have knobs to vary the amounts of their effects on a signal.

"I think that goes beyond "clipping off the HF transient edge" and over to realm of character (if tubes etc. are considered 'character' enhancing implements). Make sense?"

Well not really, on one hand you ask a question, but on the other you feel you already know the answer.. I think you are making presumptions, or pre judgments.

"With that in mind,"

Your mind only!

"my question is more or less aimed at how these two boxes compare to each other within those 'colorizing' functions"

Very different, perhaps an irritating answer but none the less true IMHO.

"I expect the FATSO to be more over the top, because that's what EL is known for. "

Hmmmmmm, you "expect" eh? Well, you are presuming again. The Fatso IMHO doesn't offer the dynamic 'mangling" the EL8 does, and nor is it advertised as delivering such.

"It would be cool to figure out which of the boxes is more useful for adding character to tracks/mixes. "

I personally find the Fatso's effect best for tracking and the Hedd is best across the whole mix. (although running vocals one more time via the Fatso and perhaps another thing like acc gtr with the other channel is priceless during digital mixdowns)

"If they're both doing basically the same thing"

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

"and the FATSO just has a few more distortion modes than the HEDD"

It doesn't have distortion written anywhere on the box!

"I would only go for the HEDD if it sounds more 'refined'."

OK whatever, you really need to drive / fly somewhere to spend a while tweaking these things.. You will go nuts trying to decide between em via audio forum opinion..

I have to add that I havn't spent much time at all with the Fatso across a mix, so I could be talking total b*llocks!

[Ted Nightshade]

I TOL' you them was fightin' words!

Jules doesn't even soil his spats as he politely tosses a garden party interloper over the hedge...

[Jax]

Originally posted by Jules
I have to add that I havn't spent much time at all with the Fatso across a mix, so I could be talking total b*llocks!

Well now, that's a rather huge block of unrefined salt, now isn't it?!?!

Kind of makes everything above that line lose most of its significance.

Also, I think you mistake questions for presumptions and "pre judgements."

Anyhoo... I agree that I'll have to beg/borrow/steal a listen to each unit. I won't really know anything until I twiddle green and white knobs.

[Bernd G]

DOOOH,

I cannot believe I just read all of that...

I think I need to get a life... (back to evaluating tape machine record/playback EQ)

[thethrillfactor]

Originally posted by Ted Nightshade
Anybody really get a lot of use out of the tape simulation on the HEDD? I use 'triode' & 'pentode' a lot, but the 'tape' although vintage and colorful is not what I'm after, although analog tape itself is. So far about the only thing I tracked direct to digital with the HEDD was a piano, and it didn't appreciate the 'tape' simulation.
The 'triode' sounds creamy to me, the 'pentode' sounds shimmery, the tape sounds artery-clogging.

Haven't used the Fatso, but I'm hoping it lives up to it's name, and lets you really dial the kind of fat and amount of fat you want. Some brawn would be welcome.

That's funny, on my HEDD unit the Triode is practically always at 1 or 0.

The Pentode I always crank up and then close my eyes till it sounds right(usually its around 2 or 3).

Tape just doesn't sound like a tape machine to me(maybe an Otari?). I think it works better when tracking than when mixing.

Come to think of it, I basically prefer no processing really on the final mixdown. I always A/B, close my eyes again and choose what feels right.

And it comes out 99% with no processing.

Hedd - tracking = usually no process just using the fine converters
Mixing

Triode = none
Pentode 5-7
Tape 5-7

Jax man, I appologise, you will have to exccuse me, I am a little tired out with explaining / extoling the Hedd & Fatso.... Belive me, I get just as sick of reading my own posts on them as I am sure many of you are!

It's just that their help to Pro Tools are second to none IMHO..

(keels over dead)

(sleeps for a thousand years)

[GilWave]

"It's just that their help to Pro Tools are second to none IMHO.."

This is the most valuable thing about both products - you get back what you believed you were missing, while retaining all the benefits of using a DAW.

So is the real problem that one can't afford both units? Or is it that one can't hear the Fatso and the HEDD side-by-side?

Perhaps a demo disc is in order to allow people to hear all the aspects of tracking and mixing with the Fatso. Hmmm, looks like I'll have to talk to Dave.....

-g