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
Brian Gardner and widening? Equalisers (HW)
Old 19th November 2009
  #61
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by turtlerock View Post
where in the chain ..?
we have two , one is wired up in a rather convoluted ridulous way with more gear attached to it then i care to talk about and parralled into a pultec mixer , i nearly never turn that one on
the other is just straight , sometimes i patch a pultec meq5 or a heavily modified for mastering japanese dbx 120x on its center channel
usually after the first eq and comp set but before any real limiting applies .
and before our m/s matrix eq & ellipitical system
for some reason
if you apply an m/s shuffle before the bedini - it sounds wierd and doesnt spread very well

the mods ..? i have been working on these things for a very long time trying to get them just right but in the end we re did the input stages so they are truly balanced and can accept +24db in and the other end the same or maybe a bit more on the output . ( even though we only run it at 0vu )
the center insert was reworked so it is also balanced and with the same kind or grunt
imo - this is where the real improvements were made - i like these boxes so the mods were just an evolution of trying to make it perfect

the bypass switch is reworked to use gas filled gold elma relays so it really bypasses and we added buffered vu meters to the thing .
oh yeah we had to trick up the power supply a bit to run the higher rails

i tried just using jenson step down step up transformers for a few years as bedini suggested at one time , but it was never really on the money tone wise .

so in the wash up it is just a level interfacing mod , so his circuit can do what it wants to do with out suffering from loads .

if you ever get one call me and we can talk through it in detail

but all that said and rereading what i have posted - i only use it once or twice a month
- it can really mess up you world if your not using it like a slice of truffle
Thanks a lot mate!

I am definitely on the lookout for one!
Old 23rd November 2009
  #62
Gear Addict
 
cemski's Avatar
Problem with the bedini is its gain/headroom limits. so i use it balanced and adjust the input in the same time. for that price it was sold back in the days it was not the best quality and handcraft. but indeed it does magics if you use it sparingly. different to all other "widening boxes". it makes "more" not "wider". can't explain better and it is definitely a complex process. not only m/s balancing.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #63
Lives for gear
 
Jesse Graffam's Avatar
 

It can't be too complicated, according to this...
http://johnbedini.net/john34/test.html
if he emulated the whole thing with multiply, divide, and add. Just sayin'.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #64
Gear Addict
 
mastertone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by uncajesse View Post
It can't be too complicated, according to this...
This is my test audio page for Synthmaker
if he emulated the whole thing with multiply, divide, and add. Just sayin'.
Nice!
Now if someone could just make me that plug for a few dollars.
Old 24th November 2009
  #65
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
OK, here's one for Edward!

Just listen to "No one knows" Queen Of The Stoneage, on a good pair of cans.

That's what I'm talking about!

Bass Gtr, Kick, etc have a special dimension to em.

The track gets pretty wide sounding in places, but never looses punch and focus!
Old 24th November 2009
  #66
Lives for gear
 
dcollins's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
OK, here's one for Edward!

Just listen to "No one knows" Queen Of The Stoneage, on a good pair of cans.

That's what I'm talking about!

Bass Gtr, Kick, etc have a special dimension to em.

The track gets pretty wide sounding in places, but never looses punch and focus!
How can you tell that it's the mastering and not the mix that did that?


DC
Old 24th November 2009
  #67
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcollins View Post
How can you tell that it's the mastering and not the mix that did that?


DC
You can't!
But I have a sneaking suspision it is the mastering.

The point I'm trying to make is that, that's the kind of widening I'm taking about.
I like the way that sounds!

It's almost like the mono elements have been made very slightly stereo but without messing with the stereo elements and without the usual mono listening phase issues and most importantly, without loosing bottom end, punch and focus!

Outkast, Speakerboxx/The Love Below has the same dimension.
Same period.
Bernie did Speakerboxx
Brian did The Love Below
Old 25th November 2009
  #68
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

i've got the unmastered version of "Songs for the Deaf". It's pretty much nearly all the mix.
Old 25th November 2009
  #69
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
The mix came in as a 44.1/24 Wave so I don't think the unique widening was from using tape.

Andy's master didn't seem like it had been widened at all.

Mine was widened just a little on my DAC.

Brian's was the widest but didn't suffer from the usual widening artifacts in any way!

It was a very cool thing to have those tracks to compare, after they were cut!

Volume was pretty close between mine and Brian's.
Andy's was a little lower, around a 1db.
maybe its not any special box but he just has a better analogue chain to run thru then you have. his source DAC thru console to A/D could just give him that, so thats why you are not hearing any widening artifacts like you would from an effects box.

it would be like having to mix some drums and you run them thru a mackie 1608, now you take the same drum tracks and run them thru a neve 8078, without any eq just pushing up the faders the tracks are bigger,wider, deeper, have more punch.... kinda like that.

then again it could be just a plugin from audio cube...hahaha..that would be too funny.. i gotta think its the other thou.

louie
Old 25th November 2009
  #70
Lives for gear
 
Ben F's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlouie View Post
maybe its not any special box but he just has a better analogue chain to run thru then you have. his source DAC thru console to A/D could just give him that, so thats why you are not hearing any widening artifacts like you would from an effects box.

louie
I was thinking this also. A really lovely compressor and converter combo tends to give a bit more 'spread' to a mix without losing focus.
Old 25th November 2009
  #71
Gear Addict
 
turtlerock's Avatar
 

Verified Member
dont let them spook you
track down the magic bedini box , pay a fortune for it , get it modded , use it on a bunch of records find out how easily it can ruin a great mix , learn to be really subtle with it , leave it turned off most of the time , look for a new holy grail

thats what the rest of us do
Old 25th November 2009
  #72
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
i've got the unmastered version of "Songs for the Deaf". It's pretty much nearly all the mix.
Do you have the half inch tape?
Or did you make a digital copy from the half inch tape?
Old 25th November 2009
  #73
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlouie View Post
maybe its not any special box but he just has a better analogue chain to run thru then you have. his source DAC thru console to A/D could just give him that, so thats why you are not hearing any widening artifacts like you would from an effects box.

it would be like having to mix some drums and you run them thru a mackie 1608, now you take the same drum tracks and run them thru a neve 8078, without any eq just pushing up the faders the tracks are bigger,wider, deeper, have more punch.... kinda like that.

then again it could be just a plugin from audio cube...hahaha..that would be too funny.. i gotta think its the other thou.

louie
I use the same converters (Lavry Golds) as Brian but my outboard is a little different.
It's all discrete though.
Whatever wasn't originally, is now!

What I'm saying for the most part is that I can hear a record for the first time and recognize Brian's work.

I'll then checkout the credits and I've never been wrong!

I was checking out "Them Crooked Vultures" on the website, before it came out, so I couldn't check the credits.
I could hear him a mile off!

I contacted Brian and asked him if he had cut that record.
Sure enough!
Yep!

Anyway, I've found a picture of that room, probably from around 2003-2005ish and low N' behold, about 4U below an AD122, sits a Bedini B.A.S.E.

This one has slightly different screen print but there's no mistaking it!
Old 25th November 2009
  #74
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
Do you have the half inch tape?
Or did you make a digital copy from the half inch tape?

no - it's a digital copy in the multitrack archive in PT.
Old 25th November 2009
  #75
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
no - it's a digital copy in the multitrack archive in PT.
What res/format do you have it in?
Old 25th November 2009
  #76
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
The latest on the ABC test is that the producer is happy to go with either my version or Brian's and has said that although Brian's version has the best dimension and width, my version has the most punch and energy and that they are both very close.

I personally prefer Brian's cut to mine!

The producer has now passed the responsibility for the final decision, back over to the client.

I'm happy either way as I have tons of stuff coming in right now, but this ABC test has been an enlightening experience for me, which is more than welcome, as I'm always looking at ways to step up my game!

Cheers to everyone for the info and feedback on this thread
Old 25th November 2009
  #77
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
OK, here's one for Edward!
Just listen to "No one knows" Queen Of The Stoneage, on a good pair of cans.That's what I'm talking about!
Bass Gtr, Kick, etc have a special dimension to em.
The track gets pretty wide sounding in places, but never looses punch and focus!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
You can't!
But I have a sneaking suspision it is the mastering.
The point I'm trying to make is that, that's the kind of widening I'm taking about.
I like the way that sounds!
It's almost like the mono elements have been made very slightly stereo but without messing with the stereo elements and without the usual mono listening phase issues and most importantly, without loosing bottom end, punch and focus!
Table of Tone, like a mathematician offering an unproven math theorem, I can also only offer to you conjectures from a variety of mastering tricks. I listened to that song on the web and what comes to mind is some combinations of mb compression, eq and m/s techniques, maybe a bit of 'spatialization' {similar to the Waves S1 } but its use is dependent on how strong the bass elements are present in the mix, even a silly stereo delay {this is very unusual} or one of those stereo widening units but always with good eq and compression could create a similar effect. Common sense tells me that it's probably the mix itself, but since you told me that this is something of a sonic stamp with these people, then it's probably not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
I contacted Brian and asked him if he had cut that record.
Sure enough!
Why didn't you ask him this since it's the purpose of your thread? This way you wouldn't drive yourself crazy
Old 25th November 2009
  #78
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward_Vinatea View Post
Table of Tone, like a mathematician offering an unproven math theorem, I can also only offer to you conjectures from a variety of mastering tricks. I listened to that song on the web and what comes to mind is some combinations of mb compression, eq and m/s techniques, maybe a bit of 'spatialization' {similar to the Waves S1 } but its use is dependent on how strong the bass elements are present in the mix, even a silly stereo delay {this is very unusual} or one of those stereo widening units but always with good eq and compression could create a similar effect. Common sense tells me that it's probably the mix itself, but since you told me that this is something of a sonic stamp with these people, then it's probably not.
Why didn't you ask him this since it's the purpose of your thread? This way you wouldn't drive yourself crazy
Yep!
It's a good analogy, about the mathematician offering an unproven math theorem.
It's very true!

I did ask him but I haven't heard back yet.

I don't think the thread was that much of a waste of time.

I learned something and I don't think I'm the only one who did!

Cheers
Old 26th November 2009
  #79
Gear Addict
 
turtlerock's Avatar
 

Verified Member
learned something ...?
well my bedinis are worth 10 bucks more then they were last week
Old 26th November 2009
  #80
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
I use the same converters (Lavry Golds) as Brian but my outboard is a little different.
It's all discrete though.
Whatever wasn't originally, is now!

What I'm saying for the most part is that I can hear a record for the first time and recognize Brian's work.

I'll then checkout the credits and I've never been wrong!

I was checking out "Them Crooked Vultures" on the website, before it came out, so I couldn't check the credits.
I could hear him a mile off!

I contacted Brian and asked him if he had cut that record.
Sure enough!
Yep!

Anyway, I've found a picture of that room, probably from around 2003-2005ish and low N' behold, about 4U below an AD122, sits a Bedini B.A.S.E.

This one has slightly different screen print but there's no mistaking it!
You're missing an important part of what i was trying to explain, you may have the same Golds, his may also have been modified, but lets just say they are stock, between your Golds and his there is a BIG difference, his custom built console, which would have an input stage and output stage, plus lets not forget he's got custom built analogue EQs in between there also. His analogue section/console is the place/tool i would bet helps him get that sound you like.

You keep hearing a consistent sound to his records, even with different styles of music, do you think they all go thru that box, every mix? or would it more likely be his console/analogue chain, well plus his skills.

Hey it could be the box , but if it was the box giving him that sound wouldn't all the other guys who had one also get that sound? even if his box had some special magical unicorn mod to it, a stock unit would still be close.

I know he likes to really drive the A/D at times, I dont mean "oh its hitting some overs every now and then" ... I mean... "Light It Up!!", try doing that, it may give you alittle bit of that sound you are hearing.

louie
Old 26th November 2009
  #81
Lives for gear
 
Adam Dempsey's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
I use the same converters (Lavry Golds) as Brian but my outboard is a little different.
It's all discrete though.
Whatever wasn't originally, is now!
Gold ADC MkIII or the Gold DA-924, or both? From experience the latter could do more for preventing any narrowing of the field of the source.

Also of course, low band only compression could, by virtue of a mix, cause gain reduction of the less-stereo elements of a mix relative to the rest.

As Louie suggests, could still be Ockham's Razor at play..
Old 26th November 2009
  #82
Gear Addict
 
Kayo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
Yep!
I don't think the thread was that much of a waste of time.
I learned something and I don't think I'm the only one who did!
Cheers
.

Neither do I..
It’s always interesting, and we’ve been here before, many a threads can attest to this.
But, we’ve never actually concluded our findings and investigations of the BASE affair etc.. Saying that, you came quite close, by actually asking him directly, even though, no reply was rendered..

Thanks for trying. thumbsup
Always an fascinating and attention-grabbing post-mortem of sorts..

KAyo
Old 26th November 2009
  #83
Lives for gear
 
MattGray's Avatar
 

Verified Member
I remember messaging Brian Gardner 2 years ago asking a little about his Bedini BASE... I got the impression from him that he used it regularly as he made a point to say that it was totally mod'd. At the time he also had a Fatso which he said was rarely in use.

I've tried all sorts of widening tools including various plug-ins & I also have the M/S spreader in the Dangerous Master console & I used to be into it until I got Duntechs & I could hear the slight phase smear in the centre. I don't like smeary drums, I like the centre to be solid with snappy drums (genre & mix permitting of course).

Now I haven't tried a Bedini BASE so I can't tell you if it smears things in the centre but anything that messes with the phase too much is pretty much out for me these days including Multi Band & linear phase processing (it's just too dangerous & easy to screw up the good things).

It's interesting to hear WB & RO's stories of mastering back in the days of sidechaining all sorts of things together & altering the image in various ways but also a little surprising to me that this was done regularly. I guess I also started off down a similar path of experimentation but the more I've learned & the more that is revealed to me through my monitoring, I now concur with Willam that less of everything is often more. Even more true when you have a quality analog chain & top shelf convertors. Subtly is definitely the key...

Of course that doesn't mean that you treat all jobs the same, sometimes you have to throw everything at a mix to get results.

Back to smashing this metal album..

Matt
Old 26th November 2009
  #84
Lives for gear
 
William Bowden's Avatar
 

Verified Member
WB & RO

Hey Matt, well I guess you have to put it in perspective too. We were young kids trying to get noticed and also trying to learn about sound, so we both experimented pretty wildly with what little we had. And many times the clients loved it because things weren't as conservative as they are now - also mastering was younger too in many ways, vinyl was tricky, and cds - well no-one bought them. There also wasn't ANY internet, so there was a lot less focus on the gear other people favoured - you didn't have all these pretty pictures of overseas guy's rooms except for a rare photo in a mag. Also there was no chance of recalling any mix, none.

I actually think sometimes that we both experimented a lot and still do to this day (mainly on our own time - which is dwindling by the bloody year it seems) but it's a bit like architecture:

Now we seem to be building simple houses with minimalist lines and yet some of those earlier 'weird' dwellings are kinda cool with a lot of character. Hmmm character.

That's why Rick and I still have far too much gear, both of us, whilst maybe only using a small palette daily, like to be able to delve into stranger colours if need be.

This is what's great about unattended sessions, you can have a go at a few things and sort out what's best. This can take time, maybe even time you can't charge for. When the client's sitting there you're often not able to do anything other than 'the old faithfuls' - and sure you'll produce a good master, but will it be an interesting master?

Despite all the purist stuff I read here (and I like pure when the mixes are good) I do think a great many of my clients want me to 'bring something out in the mixes' as they say and sometimes that's a bit hard to define, and you may need to break a few eggs. One guy the other day said he thought my sound was best described as 'modern vinyl' which was meant as a compliment (even though I'm doing cds!). So I guess I'm a product of what Rick and I went through. It wasn't a case back then about competing with the rest of the world and massive levels (though 301 certainly encouraged as to get our levels up a bit more). It was a case of trying to get the best sound you could for mixes that ranged from great to diabolical with what gear you had, and being creative, since there were no forums to hold anyone's hand, or seemingly any rules...

As for phase, ah, who needs it!

I know now I sinned with the phase, the 741 op-amps in the sp-79, the bsb-74, hell the 1630 converters, mastering on Tannoys (euch) and NS-10's, but hey, people were bringing me mixes recorded on ADAT, RDAT, F1, Super VHS, cassette even.

But did it sound bad for the time? That's the question!

Both Rick and I still seem to have work, and it looks like we may be in danger of becoming quite zen in our forties with our setups. But nothing seems to stay the same too long in this world that's for sure!

The King
Old 26th November 2009
  #85
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattGray View Post
I remember messaging Brian Gardner 2 years ago asking a little about his Bedini BASE... I got the impression from him that he used it regularly as he made a point to say that it was totally mod'd. At the time he also had a Fatso which he said was rarely in use.

I've tried all sorts of widening tools including various plug-ins & I also have the M/S spreader in the Dangerous Master console & I used to be into it until I got Duntechs & I could hear the slight phase smear in the centre. I don't like smeary drums, I like the centre to be solid with snappy drums (genre & mix permitting of course).

Now I haven't tried a Bedini BASE so I can't tell you if it smears things in the centre but anything that messes with the phase too much is pretty much out for me these days including Multi Band & linear phase processing (it's just too dangerous & easy to screw up the good things).

It's interesting to hear WB & RO's stories of mastering back in the days of sidechaining all sorts of things together & altering the image in various ways but also a little surprising to me that this was done regularly. I guess I also started off down a similar path of experimentation but the more I've learned & the more that is revealed to me through my monitoring, I now concur with Willam that less of everything is often more. Even more true when you have a quality analog chain & top shelf convertors. Subtly is definitely the key...

Of course that doesn't mean that you treat all jobs the same, sometimes you have to throw everything at a mix to get results.

Back to smashing this metal album..

Matt
Hello Matt

I'll let you know, with regards to the Bedini.

I've just bought one!
Haven't got it yet but it's been shipped.
Old 26th November 2009
  #86
Gear Addict
 
joemeek's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
Hello Matt

I'll let you know, with regards to the Bedini.

I've just bought one!
Haven't got it yet but it's been shipped.
i´m very interested in your findings!
mucho fun with it!
Old 26th November 2009
  #87
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by joemeek View Post
i´m very interested in your findings!
mucho fun with it!
Well...It's on it's way, but I haven't recieved it yet!

I'll let you know what it does, once I've found out what it does.

I may need to do some mods to get it running right?
I don't know yet?

Once I've got running right, I'll throw a couple AB's up for sure.
(Tunes I've got permission for)!
Old 26th November 2009
  #88
Lives for gear
 
Ben F's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Bowden View Post

Despite all the purist stuff I read here (and I like pure when the mixes are good) I do think a great many of my clients want me to 'bring something out in the mixes' as they say and sometimes that's a bit hard to define, and you may need to break a few eggs. One guy the other day said he thought my sound was best described as 'modern vinyl' which was meant as a compliment (even though I'm doing cds!). So I guess I'm a product of what Rick and I went through. It wasn't a case back then about competing with the rest of the world and massive levels (though 301 certainly encouraged as to get our levels up a bit more). It was a case of trying to get the best sound you could for mixes that ranged from great to diabolical with what gear you had, and being creative, since there were no forums to hold anyone's hand, or seemingly any rules...
That's what I like about you and the great Don...you both experimented and it still sounded great. I agree it's become a bit boring now the 'gear chain' is the focus- I think to be a good engineer you have to learn how to get the most out of what you have. Be a trend setter, not a follower.

I've never really got my head around trying to 'emulate' someone elses sound- I think we both know of some people that are obsessed by it!
Old 26th November 2009
  #89
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben F View Post
That's what I like about you and the great Don...you both experimented and it still sounded great. I agree it's become a bit boring now the 'gear chain' is the focus- I think to be a good engineer you have to learn how to get the most out of what you have. Be a trend setter, not a follower.

I've never really got my head around trying to 'emulate' someone elses sound- I think we both know of some people that are obsessed by it!
I couldn't agree more!

I don't wanna sound exactly like BG, but I do love what he does and I wanna find my own sound, approach etc

There's obviously a hell of a lot more to Brian than just what he widens with.

All I'm saying is that I like what he widens with!

Honing (and modding) tools is a part of trying to get good!

It's all part of the learning curve for me!
Old 26th November 2009
  #90
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

There are lots of "ME's" these days that have another particular sonic stamp: the one that ruins mixes. Work with the best minds in audio mixing and your options for the mastering work are very limited. Sometimes is just a matter of not ruining or tampering with the mix, and sometimes your role is just symbolic.

Regards,
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
Aisle 6 / High end
12
valverec / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
24
WunderBro Flo / Rap + Hip Hop engineering and production
21
PistolP / Mastering forum
37
kraftrourke / Music Computers
8

Forum Jump
Forum Jump