Klark teknik microphone splitters: Square one versus DN1248

[muziekschuur]

Has anyone tried the K.T. Square one microphone splitters yet. It's the XL8 inspired pre amp versus the Midas Heritage pre amp.

I'd love to hear your experiences.


Muziekschuur

[aussie_techie]

bump

ive seen a few mentions of the square one recently so surely someone has used them

[Jim vanBergen]

The rep brought one by the shop and I played with it, but I did not hear a mic thru it.

But it looked pretty sweet, I'm considering building a splitter system from it!

Anyone used one yet?

JvB

[LX3]

I do wish they hadn't put the transformer-isolated outputs only on the front panel. Makes it a bit of a pain to add multiways. Seems to suit installed use well, but not so cool for people like me that are carrying them around. Is it me or did they use the XTA as a blueprint when they designed it?

But I love the phantom switching system.

[Jim vanBergen]

that's funny, the unit I saw was four-way, with a direct and three iso xformer outputs. Are we talking the same unit?

JvB

[LX3]

I think (and I'll check up in a moment) that the back panel outputs are all electronically buffered, but not isolated. Only the front outputs have transformers.

Similar story on the big expensive KT... they can do transformers for the back outputs but only as an extra-cost option. Don't think there's any such option for the Square One.

Paul

[aussie_techie]

Originally Posted by Jim vanBergen

that's funny, the unit I saw was four-way, with a direct and three iso xformer outputs. Are we talking the same unit?

JvB

i think your talking about the DN1248 as that is a 12ch 4 way split in 3U 2 transformer and 2 electronically balanced outs as standard i believe
the Square one is an 8ch in 3 way split in 2U with a single transformer balanced out
all the square 1 units are purple, so instantly recognisable but not very discrete

a bit OT but can be important to know, most of the DN series gear is wired pin 3 hot while the S1 range in wired pin 2 hot

[Jim vanBergen]

You are both correct.

http://www.ktsquareone.com/splitter.php

I'm shocked, as the square one sounded really good when I was listening to the splitter on a Neutrik A2 test kit. Evidently each input feeds TWO preamps outputs on the back, and a xformer split to the front.

[LX3]

Originally Posted by Jim vanBergen

I'm shocked, as the square one sounded really good when I was listening to the splitter on a Neutrik A2 test kit.

Well, that's good to know at least. Pretty much what I'd expect from KT.

I've certainly thought about the SquareOne (I'm about to start building a new splitter). But for the gigs I'm doing, size can be a bit of an issue... as is power... so I'm sticking with Radial and their passive Jensen splits. Unless anyone wants to persuade me otherwise (do it soon!).

All done, the Radial rack will be 8U instead of the 14 or 16U that it'd be using the SquareOne. A bit cheaper too.

Does anyone run into any prejudice against passive transformer splits from clients? It happened to me once on a festival type gig, and the sound company insisted on putting in an active splitter. Fine by me, but having been there before, I asked them to check it thoroughly beforehand to make sure all channels were working. Predictably, when we rolled up and checked it ourselves, about four channels were down... We patched around those, then another channel went down during the show. Thankfully not the lead vocal!

I'm not a fan of that particular splitter manufacturer! Or their "industry-standard" DI boxes. For an industry standard they seem to break a lot.

[aussie_techie]

Originally Posted by Jim vanBergen

I'm shocked, as the square one sounded really good when I was listening to the splitter on a Neutrik A2 test kit.

Jim, did you save any test data we could see?

[mal]

For what it's worth we've been using many DN1248 KT splitters to record major festivals and concerts and they have been faultless..also great having the choice of transformer or electronic splits.....

[Jim vanBergen]

Originally Posted by aussie_techie

Jim, did you save any test data we could see?

Sorry, I did not. But I can tell you it ran quite flat from 20Hz-20kHz, had good THD specifications for a splitter, and the next big question I'd have is how well it holds up in a shock rack. It's not heavy or built like a tank, but it feels built well. I'd like to open it to see how the PC boards are mounted but the manufacturer's rep was over my shoulder like a hawk and I was trying to get actual work done as well. I thought it was a very good price, personally, and I like having all XLRs instead of d-subs. My $0.02.

JvB

[Jim vanBergen]

Originally Posted by LX3

Does anyone run into any prejudice against passive transformer splits from clients? It happened to me once on a festival type gig, and the sound company insisted on putting in an active splitter.

The passive, Jensen-loaded three-way splitters I have used (made for , or perhaps by Burns Audio) have hasd the finest specifications and lowest noise by far. Lundahl is close and sometimes just as good as the Jensen depending on which XFRMR is under test, and no active split I have found as good for wide bandwidth and wide amplitudes from -24dB to +22dB.

Steve Remote is famous for his quote: "Buy the best transformer splitters you can afford, because you don't know when you'll be using them on the transformer side!"

JvB

[LX3]

Thanks Jim. Your test results make sense to me. Given a top-quality transformer, there's not a lot in a passive transformer split that can foul things up. It always seemed to me that one mic preamp (albeit a unity gain one), then a transformer, then another mic preamp, had less of a chance of sounding as clean as just a transformer and a mic pre.

Of course, the argument about active splits is loading... but with my Lundahls, I've yet to run into a situation where combined loading and cable runs have had any discernable negative effect on anyone. (Though it's a difficult thing to prove). I rarely have more than 100' of cable feeding my rig. Perhaps if the mix position was 300 yards from the stage, and I was asked to set up quarter of a mile away...

What's making you look at active Jim?

[Jim vanBergen]

I don't own one but active splits are more and more common these days.

Steve has a very sexy rack of XTA DS800s, and the modular design and flexibility looked very sexy to me.

So, I use active splits when I need more than 3-ways, or when I need a modular design.

The other bonus is the preamp phantom at the rack.

Reasons to consider a modular split design can include loading each console with its own custom set of inputs (FOH can have all their FX machines, monitors gets what it wants, while the Record split uses input 49-60 for condenser audience mics). Because you end up with a tail set for each desk or set of outputs, you can re-wire the hard patch for each desk so the monitor engineer gets his money channels where he wants them. Each console can also back-feed something back to another, such as if you want to loop copper-to-copper talkback or com lines from FOH to Monitors without hitting the splitter rack- you can.

Having a gain stage at the preamp (KT 1248, XTA DS800) can be really useful for quiet sources, and having the ability to confirm a signal at the preamp via headphone monitoring is great.

And finally, it's a very compact 24-channel split, still looks small at 48, and is an impressive rack at 60 or 96 inputs.

I really love my two-way 19pr Wireworks loaded with Lundahls I use for small gigs, and I miss the 48pr 3-way split I use to have, though I don't miss lugging it around. But Active is a whole 'nother beast, and when you want two record iso's off splits three and four, it's the best way to do it!

Hope this helps!

JvB

Originally Posted by LX3

Thanks Jim. Your test results make sense to me. Given a top-quality transformer, there's not a lot in a passive transformer split that can foul things up. It always seemed to me that one mic preamp (albeit a unity gain one), then a transformer, then another mic preamp, had less of a chance of sounding as clean as just a transformer and a mic pre.

Of course, the argument about active splits is loading... but with my Lundahls, I've yet to run into a situation where combined loading and cable runs have had any discernable negative effect on anyone. (Though it's a difficult thing to prove). I rarely have more than 100' of cable feeding my rig. Perhaps if the mix position was 300 yards from the stage, and I was asked to set up quarter of a mile away...

What's making you look at active Jim?

[Remoteness]

Besides the 104 channels of XTA active splits we also have a 40 channel BSS system among many passive transformer isolated splitters.

Jim, we shall be using your 52 X 3 passive splitter on this NHK video shoot we're doing today in East Harlem. We're done some mods to it to help facilitate additional interfacing. It's been working like a charm. Thanks!

[LX3]

Jim, thanks for your detailed reply. Some good stuff to think about there. I seem to spend an awful lot of my spare time thinking

So far, we've never needed to do anything other than provide an isolated split for ourselves, so I will probably go with the Radial passive system. We're always integrating into an exisiting PA setup, and the PA rig tends to have a Y-split for Mon and FOH in place.

If we re-patch anywhere to change the order of things or skip channels, we normally do it at the input to our pres. At least then if someone on stage decides to move something at the last minute, we know we've got it at our end of the cable (assuming they don't go past about channel 44)

For 48 channels, the Radial will come out nice and small, which keeps people happy on cramped stages. But man it's going to be heavy. Radial seem to love using incredibly thick steel panels.

I'm also going to do a clever (in my opinion ) repatching arrangement so we can choose to put up to 8 non-transformer tie-lines onto channels 41-48 of either the direct or transformer multiways. Meaning when we take the transformer side, we can still connect room mics and send them phantom. Or we can chuck some returns back to stage if necessary.

But oh god, here we go again... I will have 8 x 150-pin Veams, 18 x 25-pin D-subs, 10 Hirose, and about 150 XLRs to wire! How good am I going to feel when it's done? (And how poor? I estimate the total cost will be about £6000, or $12,000)

[Jim vanBergen]

If you can get away with only spending 12,000, IMO you are doing quite well!

JvB

[LX3]

Originally Posted by Jim vanBergen

If you can get away with only spending 12,000, IMO you are doing quite well!

JvB

I'm going to give it a shot :-)

The Radials are about $1300 for 8 channels.
Multiway connectors will cost around $2000
The time I'll have to devote to building it all? Priceless.

At least I'm not building it from the component level up like I did last time... making all the PCBs myself, designing the casework, etc.

The dilemma is that going for the SquareOnes wouldn't make all that big a difference to the final cost. It's more to do with size and convenience. I think I'm doing the right thing. If not, I can always make another one... once I've paid off this one!

I'm starting to understand how Steve has ended up with such an array of kit.

[huub]

It says on the site the xformer outputs are fixed gain.. Do you think that means no gain added, or a fixed gain added? how about the headroom for line level sources on that output? No pad huh?
Has anyone used these square ones for remotes yet?

huub

[Jim vanBergen]

Originally Posted by huub

It says on the site the xformer outputs are fixed gain.. Do you think that means no gain added, or a fixed gain added? how about the headroom for line level sources on that output? No pad huh?
Has anyone used these square ones for remotes yet?

huub

Hey Huub,

Because I experienced different output levels with the various outputs on the XTA DS800s, I was worried about this with the Square One - and I found that what I put in on the Square One was exactly what I got back out, so the "independent mic pre" circuit is doing exactly that. Sending 0dB, +6dB, and -40dB from a generator gave me the same levels back out. I did not have the time to try overloading the input to see the THD "knee" where the signal compromises, but I do recall noting that it had an overload indicator.

I liked the demo unit, and hope to get a chance to try it as a splitter if the rep brings it back. If I do, I promise to write more.

Cheers!
JvB

[aussie_techie]

Originally Posted by huub

It says on the site the xformer outputs are fixed gain.. Do you think that means no gain added, or a fixed gain added? how about the headroom for line level sources on that output? No pad huh?

the specs say the tx outputs are fixed at -6db. so 6 db lower than the input gain.

they quote a max level of +22dbu which is more than most consoles can take anyway (the DN1248 is only rated +21dbu). if your running levels above that you would usually want to pad them at their output anyway. In theory you could feed A/Ds directly from the splitter in situation where it can give enough gain. obviously rated specs can be different from real world use and Jim's tests are the closest thing we have to independent. but the S1 at least looks good on paper and i would trust midas/KT specs to be alot closer to the truth than alot of cheaper brands. I dont think KT would ever put out a product that would devalue their name, which also goes for publishing misleading specs on a product.

all that said the only test that really matters is how they sound and i havnt heard one yet.

[huub]

The square one looks promising, but in our situation, we often record a touring act..
This means getting a passive, non xformered split.. So the preamps would be useless to us as the xformered output does not use these..
I guess we should just build a system with transformers going into high quality pre amps.. Sooo much money though.. Not sure if I can convince management to spend this.. Hmmm... a 80 channel jensen into api or something? Naah.. too expensive.. I wish I could rent such a system here in holland..

[aussie_techie]

a very understandable situation but are you actually going to be able to build a quality passive splitter for any less?
while most of us might think its still worth the cost convincing managers to spend that money is another story.

I didnt even get a response from jensen so they simply arnt an option to me.

anyway good luck with whatever you do find

[huub]

Steve remote,
how are you liking your XTA's? Do you send full line level to the truck?
How are the preamps compared to those of a high quality big console?

[Remoteness]

We like the XTAs, especially in areas with high RF interference
We've been using them for a very long time.

I have used the XTAs sending signals back at full line level with great results.

They sound very good, but I never compared them to high quality racked mic pre or large format console.

Pretty much every project we recorded at the Blue Note Jazz Club in NYC was with our XTA DS800s.

[huub]

Originally Posted by Remoteness

We like the XTAs, especially in areas with high RF interference
We've been using them for a very long time.

I have used the XTAs sending signals back at full line level with great results.

They sound very good, but I never compared them to high quality racked mic pre or large format console.

Pretty much every project we recorded at the Blue Note Jazz Club in NYC was with our XTA DS800s.

Okay.. Those blue note club recordings sound good enough for sure!
I've rented a rack of xta's for mika in paris this friday, will let you know my experiences!

(sorry about the the hijack)

[Remoteness]

Cascading all the solo circuits and monitoring from the top unit is very helpful for the stage A2 that's dealing with the system.

...Now, back to the show...