Gearslutz

Gearslutz (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/)
-   So Much Gear, So Little Time (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/)
-   -   Joe Meek VC7. Seeking Alan Hyatt and others' help. (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/4853-joe-meek-vc7-seeking-alan-hyatt-others-help.html)

Mr Funk 10th June 2003 10:46 AM

Joe Meek VC7. Seeking Alan Hyatt and others' help.
 
This is also posted on HR.bbs


I have seen a VC7 for £300 new and want some opinions on it. I already have a VC1Q which I like a lot, are the pre's in the VC7 the same or better?

I have been looking for a clean, transparent(ish) dual mic pre that would be a significant upgrade on the DMP2 pre's in my Omni Studio and was looking at the DMP3, RNP and SPL Goldmike as these were all below £500. The Toft AFC-2 is now in the running, which has EQ as well!

The thing is the Toft, SPL and FMR are all about £200 more than the 'special offer' VC7, are they worth the wait and extra? The DMP3 is only £175, but may not quite be the step up I require?

I would like Alan Hyatt's opinion as he has commented in the past about the Joe Meek pre's being very transparent (with warmth) and that it is the comp and EQ that give it the 'Meek' sound. Do you still think this Alan? Do others agree?

Will the new JoeMeek range or SP offer a dual mic pre in the £300 price range?

I like the switchable impedence matching, which I believe actually works as opposed to the CS method, which although Alan used to praise now says doesn't work at all.

One thing I am concerned about is the headroom, which many have said is not alway high enough in the Meeks? I have never had a problem with my VC1Q, but as anyone got opinions on this issue?

alanhyatt 11th June 2003 02:50 AM

Mr. Funk,

I believe I addressed this on th e Recording.Org site, so rather than repost it. Here is the link..Click Here

Mr Funk 11th June 2003 08:58 AM

Yeah, thanks Alan

I posted here before I registered with RO. Your input has been greatfully received.

I would still like some other opinions from those that know the VC7 and maybe from someone who has used the VC7 and an RNP or Goldmike?

In fact, I believe the VC7's pres are the same as those in the VC1, plus the added features and tweaks, so if anyone has any experience with the VC1, this info will still help my decission.

Thanks

alanhyatt 11th June 2003 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Funk
Yeah, thanks Alan

I posted here before I registered with RO. Your input has been greatfully received.

I would still like some other opinions from those that know the VC7 and maybe from someone who has used the VC7 and an RNP or Goldmike?

In fact, I believe the VC7's pres are the same as those in the VC1, plus the added features and tweaks, so if anyone has any experience with the VC1, this info will still help my decission.

Thanks

Actually, no. The VC1Qcs, VCTwinQcs, MQ3, VC6Qcs all switched to the CS "Current Sense" Mic amp. Not nearly as good as the transformer version of the older units.

That is why on all the new Joemeek models we are designing, the transformer is back!...

Mr Funk 11th June 2003 04:53 PM

I realise that the 'CS' versions use different pre amps to the VC7, but I'm talking about the non 'CS' versions. The original VC1 and early VC1Q. I have the pre CS VC1Q, which I think uses pretty much the same amp as the VC1 and VC7. The VC7 has more headroom I believe?

alanhyatt 11th June 2003 05:00 PM

Sorry, I misunderstood you. Yes, the very early versions of the VC1, VC1Q, and the Tube CHannel used the transformer design. The VC7 was the exact same just added impedance and filtering.

Bobalou 12th June 2003 12:38 AM

Alan, whens the VTB-2 available?

alanhyatt 12th June 2003 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bobalou
Alan, whens the VTB-2 available?
I hope September....

Mr Funk 12th June 2003 01:19 PM

I look forward to hearing about the VTB-2 when it is released, it sounds like it will be a good one!

So, I guess none of you *****slutz' were ever slutty enough to get hold of a VC7? It seems it was only in production for a year, which could mean it was never any good, or simply passed the market by without being noticed? I think the $1300 and even higher £1200 price tag (I think) may have put people off, as there has always been a lot of competition in this price range.

Still at £300, it could still be the bargain of the year, that may also slips by un-noticed, due to lack of exposure of the product originally? I like the idea of having M/S - L/R encoding/decoding and monitoring, as well as the switchable impedence and variable HPF.

I have found a few studios on the net who have them, and will try to contact them for opinions. I am waiting to hear from one.

covert 12th June 2003 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by alanhyatt
Actually, no. The VC1Qcs, VCTwinQcs, MQ3, VC6Qcs all switched to the CS "Current Sense" Mic amp. Not nearly as good as the transformer version of the older units.

That is why on all the new Joemeek models we are designing, the transformer is back!...

How does one determine the later versions from the earlier? Serial numbers? Are they clearly marked?

alanhyatt 12th June 2003 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by covert
How does one determine the later versions from the earlier? Serial numbers? Are they clearly marked?
If I have the Model and Serial Number, I can usually tell you what you had....

Jay Kahrs 13th June 2003 04:11 AM

I always hear the Meek stuff as anything but clean. It's more like midrangy fun. It's a good sound but not for everything. I haven't used the VC7 so my comments may or may not apply.

Mr Funk 13th June 2003 10:40 AM

Thanks Jay.

Have you used the original VC1 without the comp or EQ switched in? The VC7 should sound the same except for having the inpedence switching and HFP to also tune the sound.

Alan says the VC7 is warm, smooth and rounded but still clean and quite transparent (a great pre amp). You say Meeks are midrangy fun and a good sound but not clean or right for everything and Danny Fletcher simply says it is the bees knees and really nice as a purist mic pre, and that I will find the sound hard to beat from anything!

A bit confusing and hard to get a true picture of how this mic pre sounds. I'm wondering if it is transparent in the way Harvey Gerst described the RNP? He said (paraphrasing) it sounded like it had a lot of iron in there, but still remained transparent (how can that be)? It gave a big but natural sound et.

I would love Harvey to give his opinion on the VC7 or VC1 (pre section only).

Thanks guys.

Mr Funk 13th June 2003 10:45 AM

Alan.

My VC1Q is a v1.01

The serial number is (I think): (21) 1001128.

Can you tell me if the pre in this is the same as the VC7 pre?

Thanks

alanhyatt 13th June 2003 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Funk
Alan.

My VC1Q is a v1.01

The serial number is (I think): (21) 1001128.

Can you tell me if the pre in this is the same as the VC7 pre?

Thanks

Well since you bought it in Europe, my guess is its build date is May or June 2000. It had the transformer and was the model before the CS versions.

The VC7 and older 1Q's are very good...Not the best, nor the cats meow, but very good for the money. Certianly very usable, and not as clean as the RNP. I think Danny Fletcher is a bigger Hype than I am....kfhkh

Jay Kahrs 14th June 2003 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Funk
Have you used the original VC1 without the comp or EQ switched in? The VC7 should sound the same except for having the inpedence switching and HFP to also tune the sound.

Alan says the VC7 is warm, smooth and rounded but still clean and quite transparent (a great pre amp). You say Meeks are midrangy fun and a good sound but not clean or right for everything and Danny Fletcher simply says it is the bees knees and really nice as a purist mic pre, and that I will find the sound hard to beat from anything!

I've used the original VC1 a bunch of times for both tracking and mixing. I can't say I've ever used it with the compressor bypassed though. That's half the fun of the box. I have a VC6 that I've used countless times over the last 4 or 5 years, it was the first outboard pre that I bought when I started to freelance. It still sees regular use on guitars, sometimes vocals or o nthe bass DI. When it works for a source it works great. When it's not right it's kind of like angel cake with curry, Not quite right. All the Meek stuff that I've used is pretty damn far from transparent, so I guess Danny Fletcher (whoever he is) better get his ears checked or try some gear that really is transparent.

Mr Funk 14th June 2003 09:48 AM

Well Danny is Ted fletcher's son, so at least I know he has heard a VC7 and in his defence, he said it was great as a 'purist mic pre', which I surpose may have meant simply that it is 'great sounding' and has no dynamics in the chain (making it a purist mic pre), rather than meaning it is transarent?

Thanks for all your help Jay. As this pre was over £1000 4 years ago, I may snap it up at £300, as I know it will pay for itself in the long run! I will still need another dual pre that is transparent though.

covert 14th June 2003 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by alanhyatt
If I have the Model and Serial Number, I can usually tell you what you had....
Model: VC6Q

Case says V 1.01
Circuit board says V 1.05

Sticker on case says: tested 22/5/00 initials L.O.

It's a little hard to determine what number is the serial number but I think it's: (21)100037X where X may be another digit. The sticker is scratched.

There's also a small sticker on the circuit board with the number PK0090097 on it.

I certainly couldn't see any audio transformer.

Gie-Sound 16th June 2003 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by covert
Model: VC6Q

I certainly couldn't see any audio transformer.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but the VC6Q got a chipset. Only the VC1's (all types BEFORE the CS-series) and the VC7 have transformer pre's.

covert 16th June 2003 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gie-Sound
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but the VC6Q got a chipset. Only the VC1's (all types BEFORE the CS-series) and the VC7 have transformer pre's.
From Alan's post:
Quote:

Actually, no. The VC1Qcs, VCTwinQcs, MQ3, VC6Qcs all switched to the CS "Current Sense" Mic amp. Not nearly as good as the transformer version of the older units.
I would take this to imply that older VC6Q's were different.

Gie-Sound 16th June 2003 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by covert
I would take this to imply that older VC6Q's were different.
Yep, different. But no transformers... I'm sorry.hidz

Mr Funk 16th June 2003 12:24 PM

Would you happen to know which transformers are in the 'early' Meeks? I could open up my VC1Q, but I'm lazy!

alanhyatt 16th June 2003 04:57 PM

From Alan's post:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, no. The VC1Qcs, VCTwinQcs, MQ3, VC6Qcs all switched to the CS "Current Sense" Mic amp. Not nearly as good as the transformer version of the older units.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I would take this to imply that older VC6Q's were different.


Perhaps I could have been more clear, but then again I also included the MQ3 as well.

All the 2U units, the VC1, the VC2, and the VC7 had transformers. The VC3, and VC6 all used SSM2017 chips. all the later versions with the Q continued to use the Transformer except the VC3Q and VC6Q, the still used the SMM2017.

Then the CS mic amp came out and was then used on the new VCTwinQ, and everything else. All transformers were yanked, the VC2 and VC7 were discontinued.

The CS circuit still does not work. It is a noisey mic amp with little quality. It does not match impedance, nor does it sense current.

Jay Kahrs 16th June 2003 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by alanhyatt

Then the CS mic amp came out and was then used on the new VCTwinQ, and everything else. All transformers were yanked, the VC2 and VC7 were discontinued.

The CS circuit still does not work. It is a noisey mic amp with little quality. It does not match impedance, nor does it sense current.

Not to pick a fight, but if it doesn't match impedance or sense current why it is called the "Current Sense" and why/how did it come to market?

alanhyatt 16th June 2003 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jay Kahrs
Not to pick a fight, but if it doesn't match impedance or sense current why it is called the "Current Sense" and why/how did it come to market?
Jay, you are not picking a fight at all. The fact is, I was led to believe it was a new circuit designed by Ted, but in fact, this circuit has been arround for some time. Perhaps you should look at this thread to see some of the tech comments CS Mic Amp...Does it Work

This is really a mic amp out of the Sams catalog. It was done to save money by not having to buy the replacement SSM2019 over the 2017, if you can believe that. This CS uses a very cheap Motorola chip. The circuit has been around for years, but when you start to ask questions as I did, the answers did not seem to make sense, so we did some tests.

During the tests, we found no electronic merit what so ever in the claims for it:

* It did not adjust its gain when one leg of the input was grounded as claimed

* it did not match the impedance of the two input legs so consequently its common-mode rejection is very poor

* it did not adjust its gain or impedance to match the source resistance of the microphone

So I can see no way in which it actually "senses current". So my guess is this is all hype. It does not sound horrible, but nothing I would use on a front end.

covert 17th June 2003 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by alanhyatt
Perhaps I could have been more clear, but then again I also included the MQ3 as well.

All the 2U units, the VC1, the VC2, and the VC7 had transformers. The VC3, and VC6 all used SSM2017 chips. all the later versions with the Q continued to use the Transformer except the VC3Q and VC6Q, the still used the SMM2017.

Then the CS mic amp came out and was then used on the new VCTwinQ, and everything else. All transformers were yanked, the VC2 and VC7 were discontinued.

The CS circuit still does not work. It is a noisey mic amp with little quality. It does not match impedance, nor does it sense current.

Okay, let me be sure I understand. At some point the VC6Q changed to the CS design, from some other design? If this is the case, then the question posted above, with my seriel numbers, as to which unit I have is still open.

alanhyatt 17th June 2003 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by covert
Okay, let me be sure I understand. At some point the VC6Q changed to the CS design, from some other design? If this is the case, then the question posted above, with my seriel numbers, as to which unit I have is still open.
As you do not have your last number, I checked all of the 100037-1 to 9 Serial numbers.

Based on the numbers, they were sold to Guitar Center, MARS, Annex Pro and Full Compass. We sold all of them on 6/20/00.

So if you bought it from one of those dealers about that time, you have the 6Q, so it has the SSM2017 chip, which is way better than the CS IMHO.

covert 18th June 2003 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by alanhyatt
As you do not have your last number, I checked all of the 100037-1 to 9 Serial numbers.

Based on the numbers, they were sold to Guitar Center, MARS, Annex Pro and Full Compass. We sold all of them on 6/20/00.

So if you bought it from one of those dealers about that time, you have the 6Q, so it has the SSM2017 chip, which is way better than the CS IMHO.

It came from Mars. Thank you.

preben 26th January 2004 02:02 PM

Just wanted to hear if you ended up buying the Joe Meek VC7 and if you did, then what did you think of it..???

alanhyatt 27th January 2004 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Funk
Would you happen to know which transformers are in the 'early' Meeks? I could open up my VC1Q, but I'm lazy!
The transformer is an OEP, a British made product. You can get them at RS Parts in the UK....