The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Tell Me About Neve 33115 Other Modular Audio Processors
Old 29th August 2012
  #31
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff_T View Post
Hi

It goes across pin 2 and 3... you could try a 1200 ohm that should also do the trick.

Awesome got it, thanks so much for your help!
Old 9th September 2012
  #32
Here for the gear
 

Hey Geoff, one more quick question, for these 33115's is there any particular potentiometer that would be best for the fader out? if not is there a specific value I need to use?

Thanks
Old 9th September 2012
  #33
Lives for gear
 
Geoff_T's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PicoFarad View Post
Hey Geoff, one more quick question, for these 33115's is there any particular potentiometer that would be best for the fader out? if not is there a specific value I need to use?

Thanks
Hi

The BA438 could drive 1200 ohms, the BA638 could drive 600 ohms.

So a pot of 5 or 10Kohm should work fine, either log/audio taper or a 10K linear law with a 5.1Kohm resistor from wiper to bottom to make the nicer semi-log law (10dB rather than 20dB down at half rotation).

This pot arrangement was used by Neve in many applications but was another clever design by Peter Baxandall, the real Father of British EQ

Posted from my iPhone
Old 9th September 2012
  #34
Here for the gear
 

Awesome, thanks again for your help.
Old 10th September 2012
  #35
Gear Maniac
 
Rascal Audio's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff_T View Post
Hi

Funny thing is the number of posts I have seen saying, to effect... "Pah! Those are broadcast modules... sound like sh*t", etc.

Typical of some of the jaundiced posts you occasionally see here because such and such a module isn't a 1073...

heh
No, it's only the IC-equipped BA6xx amp block version that 'suck' and 'should be avoided at all costs.'

Joel
Old 10th September 2012
  #36
Lives for gear
 
Geoff_T's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rascal Audio View Post
No, it's only the IC-equipped BA6xx amp block version that 'suck' and 'should be avoided at all costs.'

Joel
Hi

That is totally urban legend.... I don't know why folk take this viewpoint.

I have oft repeated that the BBC did not like the basic input stage of either the 438 or the 440 because, once whacked with an overload, it took many milliseconds for the stage to sort itself out long after the peak had passed and been stopped by the program limiter.

A good pal of mine started re-equipping a Neve console full of 638 and 640 with 438 and 440. He stopped in the middle and asked the crew at the studio (who were not aware of which half was modified) and they unanimously chose the unmodified side.

It's the urban legend like this that made the owner think it was necessary.

Odds are that the module that created the legend may be in question was not terminated correctly or some other issue not related to the internal amplifiers.

Even on Dan Alexander's sites story pages you will see he sold a pair of 3115's to a client and a considerable time passed, indeed a point where the modules needed a little maintenance, that it was discovered one was discreet amps and t'other IC's. The client had been using them as a pair and not noticed.

But here we have the usual "They sound B*** awful!" story again...

Sigh....
Old 10th September 2012
  #37
Gear Maniac
 
Rascal Audio's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff_T View Post

But here we have the usual "They sound B*** awful!" story again...

Sigh....
Hi, Geoff,

Just for clarity (in case I misread your post) if by 'here' you mean my previous post, I was being sarcastic (that's why the goofy face and facepalm) -- touching on the scope of the myths that broadcast modules supposedly suck.

Just wanted to clarify.

Okay.... my overly sensitive moment is over. Carry on.

Joel
Old 10th September 2012
  #38
Lives for gear
 
Geoff_T's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rascal Audio View Post
Hi, Geoff,

Just for clarity (in case I misread your post) if by 'here' you mean my previous post, I was being sarcastic (that's why the goofy face and facepalm) -- touching on the scope of the myths that broadcast modules supposedly suck.

Just wanted to clarify.

Okay.... my overly sensitive moment is over. Carry on.

Joel
Hi

I nearly always post from my iPhone as I am very busy designing stuff so just read posts very quickly

Whether the prior post was a joke, tease, or urban legend it's hard to detect

On the iPhone the symbols don't show up so very hard to detect

The problem is, folk speedily reading posts like that just redistribute the urban legend

I was just trying to stomp on it

Onwards and upwards

Posted from my iPhone
Old 11th September 2012
  #39
Here for the gear
 

So far this is where im at with my homemade rack, mine are both ic based, im pretty excited to hear them once I wire them up, might finish it up tomorrow. Thanks again for all your help Geoff.







hmm guess the pics arent showing up )-:
Old 11th September 2012
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Geoff_T's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PicoFarad View Post
So far this is where im at with my homemade rack, mine are both ic based, im pretty excited to hear them once I wire them up, might finish it up tomorrow. Thanks again for all your help Geoff.







hmm guess the pics arent showing up )-:
Hi

Did you check that the size of the files was not above the posting limit?

9.54MB should be enough or maybe its the total in one post

Old 14th September 2012
  #42
Here for the gear
 

Hey Geoff

Thanks again soooo much for your help, Im having one new problem, I hope im not offending anyone by hijacking this thread . So I got my case all wired up, I plugged in a dynamic mic and I seem to only get a really really really weak signal from the output ( with input fully cranked and output fader fully cranked ), and this problem is mirrored on both channels. My only thoughts on this are that the insert / return ( pin 7 and 8 ) need to be normalized, which i did not do. So in a nutshell my question is does pin's 7 and 8 need to be normalized to pass signal? Im positive I hooked up the power up correctly ( +24v on pin 25, 0v on pin 26, fader is pin's 15-16-17, and mic input is pin 1 and 2 ) I left the grounding pins of the line and mic and output unconnected, and just tied pin 1 on the xlr's to the case. Also one other possible issue is that the "case" from my power supply has full continuity ( 0 ohms resistance ) between it's self and 0v power out, could this also cause any problems? I did tie the power supply case to pin 29 on the modules through the power supply cable.

Thanks again sooo much for your help.
Old 14th September 2012
  #43
Lives for gear
 
Geoff_T's Avatar
 

Hi

Yes, of course, you have to join those two pins together. They are in series with the output from the Pre stage.

A quick link and you should be in business.

Make sure you ground the power supply case, the pin 29 and the pin 1's of the XLRs.

Posted from my iPhone 4S 64GB
(no immediate plans to buy the iPhone 5!)
Old 14th September 2012
  #44
Here for the gear
 

Thanks for the quick reply, you are awesome! Do you have an address where I can send you a thanks for your help?

-Cameron
Old 14th September 2012
  #45
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff_T View Post
Hi

Yes, of course, you have to join those two pins together. They are in series with the output from the Pre stage.

A quick link and you should be in business.

Make sure you ground the power supply case, the pin 29 and the pin 1's of the XLRs.

Posted from my iPhone 4S 64GB
(no immediate plans to buy the iPhone 5!)
my grounding chain goes - ground from A/C ( green wire ) to the power supply case, then from case through power supply cable to pin 29 on modules ( which is tied to the modules case through the contact of the modules to the case ). On all xlr's in and out pin 1 is tied to the case. Does this seem ok? Ohh and I shielded all connections from xlr's to modules but cut the shield at the module ( no connection to pins 3 and 4 and 24 ).
Old 14th September 2012
  #46
Lives for gear
 
Geoff_T's Avatar
 

Hi

No need

Just get the module working like the factory intended

Your grounding is fine

Posted from my iPhone
Old 14th September 2012
  #47
Here for the gear
 

Ok thanks - good to know about the grounding
Old 14th September 2012
  #48
Lives for gear
 
uncle muscles's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff_T View Post
Hi

"Sounds like" is a very subjective path to walk along... even if the mic pre stage bears a close relationship to a 1081, the output stages differ with the 1081 having a house brick sized LO2567 transformer while the 33115 will have the skinny TO129 with the tertiary feedback. How close will they sound? Who knows? They are both nice sounding pres!

The 1081 has a class AB output stage so neither it nor the 33115 will sound close to a 1066/73/84 so it's really better to say that they are nice sounding pres rather than try to compare them with another unit.

I wouldn't worry in the slightest about discrete versus IC as I suspect that, with modules in identical condition, you would not be able to tell the difference and the IC versions have advantages over the discrete if one ignores the hype, urban legends, and audiophile snobbery.

I'm typing this at home so am not near my files to confirm the HF figure. A more important issue is how the module is terminated because I've seen plenty of these modules that are not terminated correctly and the users formed their opinion of the sound based on that.... rather than how they sounded at the Neve factory.

A 600 ohm termination is essential!

I had no idea the 1081 were class AB
Old 14th September 2012
  #49
Lives for gear
 
Geoff_T's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by uncle muscles View Post
I had no idea the 1081 were class AB
Hi

Indeed they are despite what anyone less informed might tell you. Anything with a 240/340/440/640 output stage is class AB.

I have, years ago, transformed the sound of the 1081 (and a bunch of other Neve modules) by fitting our class A output stage and transformer in them. The difference was night and day.. huge.

Before anyone asks, no I don't do that anymore. I don't have time for Neve related work and just try to be helpful to owners of Neve gear with the Ask Geoff forum, tech tips and FAQ pages of my web site.

Old 18th November 2012
  #50
Here for the gear
 
RAYgunRecordings's Avatar
EQ in signal chain

We are working on a 1080 series Neve console, and my question is this:
So, my mentor and I are running down the signal chain during a session right now, and I'm trying to take accurate notes; I've been tasked to find out if the EQ portion on the channel comes before the send or after the return in the signal chain. Seems like a pretty basic inquiry, I know.
The reason I ask is that my assumption would be that the with the EQ switched in, it affects the signal coming out of the send to outboard gear, because that makes the most sense to me--if this is not the case, could someone explain WHY the board would be designed that way?
Any help would be much appreciated.
Old 18th November 2012
  #51
Lives for gear
 
Geoff_T's Avatar
 

Hi

That's an odd question.

In all the Neve consoles I know of that have pre fade insertions, the channel amplifier comes first (be it 1073, 33115, 31105, etc) and its balanced output is the pre fade insertion send.

The pre fade insertion return goes into the input of the channel switching units where the fader path is located.

The EQ is inside the channel amplifier so it is both pre the fader and pre the insertion send.

I hope this helps

Posted from my iPhone using the Gearslutz app
Old 18th November 2012
  #52
Here for the gear
 
RAYgunRecordings's Avatar
"Hi

That's an odd question.

In all the Neve consoles I know of that have pre fade insertions, the channel amplifier comes first (be it 1073, 33115, 31105, etc) and its balanced output is the pre fade insertion send.

The pre fade insertion return goes into the input of the channel switching units where the fader path is located.

The EQ is inside the channel amplifier so it is both pre the fader and pre the insertion send.

I hope this helps"


That does help a lot, thanks! And thanks for the quick response!
We called the guy who put this desk together later on in the evening; he told us that the EQ in the channel comes before the inserts (which was basically my question). My boss/mentor also physically opened up a channel we weren't using and showed me the pins in the back--that was illuminating if not confusing. I'm starting to see why knowing how to read/actually having the schematics really matters when it comes down to answering even simple questions.

On a more personal note, this website rules! And you do, too, Geoff! This was my first question as a member, and I just want to give this whole website a big
Old 20th October 2014
  #53
Lives for gear
 
IkennaFuNkEn's Avatar
 

What does "pillowy" mean ?
Old 13th February 2015
  #54
Lives for gear
 

How would compare them to a 1073 in term of sound ?
Old 13th February 2015
  #55
Lives for gear
 
Geoff_T's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sergioelectro View Post
How would compare them to a 1073 in term of sound ?
Hi

These types of question are rather like, how long is a piece of string.

There are factors that make truly accurate answers almost intangible

All these modules are 30 or more years old. There is no saying what issue they were when they were made, how good the maintenance was in that period, and whether the guys racking the 33115 remembered to load the output correctly.

Neve consoles of different types never sounded the same because of the different circuitry.

Generally, they all sound great, but one module won't make the sound of a console, just as one mic wont recreate the sound of a studio in a bedroom studio.

I think it unlikely two random 1073's will sound the same nor two any module unless consecutive serial numbers and having the same maintenance, etc.

So bottom line, the 33115 won't sound like a 1073 but it will sound good... both modules are tested to be within 1dB 20Hz to 20KHz.... what they might do with those frequencies separates them.

The only way you can judge for sure is to have two well maintained modules and compare them in your room.

Not a lot of help I know, but the string analogy is not far off...

heh

Last edited by Geoff_T; 14th February 2015 at 12:05 AM..
Old 13th February 2015
  #56
Gear Maniac
 
EBGB's Avatar
 

I have a 33115

1073 is maybe thicker, more bass?
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
jaded / Geekslutz Forum
16
nlc201 / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
6
[email protected] / Geekslutz Forum
2

Forum Jump
Forum Jump