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
NEED EVE ANNA'S ATTENTION ON PULTEC Dynamic Microphones
Old 30th December 2002
  #1
no ssl yet
Guest
NEED EVE ANNA'S ATTENTION ON PULTEC

THE amazing sonic character that made the original pultec eq's so prized is here but Manley updates to the original design make the pultec eq's operation and sound a heck of alot more consistend than it was in the old days. Put a classic of yesterday into your studio today

This is a portion of sweetwater's info on the manley enhanced pultec

Can you honestly say that this would not lead a newbie to think he was gettin a "PULTEC"

Yet on here you say the manley unit is only a pultec in name?

As someone who hadnt the opportunity to hear the original. I bought yours thinking it was the same product and Manley picked up the right to reissue with a few changes

How could I not think that with retailers having adds or catalog info like the sweetwater info above

The EQ is far from terrible but also far from a PULTEC
This deception makes it hard for me to buy other manley products
no matter what the quality


(EVEAnna Manley's Post cut and pasted)

veAnna Manley
Moderator

Registered: Jul 2002
Location: Chino, CA (cowtown)
Posts: 128

Well, we have been building the Manley Enhanced Pultec since 1990 and the Langevin all-discrete version since 1991 or 1992. R&D took place a looooooooooong time ago doncha think?

Those units are what they are by now, they still sell well, and they are their own things which ain't Pultec clones. Not one component used in our stuff was ever used in an old Pultec. the passive EQ sections resemble the old guys in schematic form. The power supplies and make up gain amps are our own designs.

We use the Pultec name because Eugene Shenk of Pulse Techniques gave us his personal blessings, face to face, to do so, and refused to accept any royalties we offered him. I was there.

Is that a good answer?


__________________
Cheers, EveAnna Manley, Manley Laboratories, Inc.
www.manleylabs.com
Old 30th December 2002
  #2
member no 666
 
Fletcher's Avatar
At the risk of a personal political cluster****... maybe it isn't the manufacturer with whom you have an issue... but the pimps that misrepresented an already impressive piece of kit? Just a thought.
Old 30th December 2002
  #3
Registered User
 
malice's Avatar
 

Manley

mmh, at the risk to disagree with you Fletcher (that is not often the case, I must say), that's what you can read at Manley site :


**********************************************************
MANLEY LABORATORIES is the only authorized user of the original Western Electric passive EQ circuitry previously licensed to Pulse Techniques, Inc. found in the well-known (and still sought after in the used market) antique Pultecs. (Yes, we bothered to hunt down Eugene Shenk about ten years ago in New Jersey to ask for his permission and blessings. EveAnna was there.)

People often ask us if our Pultec EQ's sound like the old ones to which we reply, "Yes! But better! The originals had three transformers in the signal path whereas ours can be used completely transformerless. Our Manley Enhanced Pultec has a vastly superior B+ power supply, with regulated and balanced heater supply. Our line amp is known to be killer-sounding. The components we use today just weren't available 20 years ago. So, if you want a project with crackling carbon pots, dirty open frame wafer switches, 5% and 10% tolerance noisy carbon resistors, exposed tubes sticking out the back of the 3U chassis, etc., go pay top dollar for an antique Pultec"

***********************************************************

wich is not very far from the Sweatwater statement.

Might be foolish to buy expensive gear without trying it first, that is another problem...

Nevertheless, I agree that it doesn't sound exactly as the original, still I like manley pultec a lot

malice
Old 30th December 2002
  #4
I always assumed they were meant to emulate the classic Pultec sound so was surprised when this topic came up a few weeks ago. I was also surprised by EveAnna's reply.
I don't doubt for one moment her integrity or that of Manley as a company, but it does seem that some customers are getting confused and it might be a good time to rewrite the Manley Pultec blurb and also inform dealers not to promote it as a clone.
Old 31st December 2002
  #5
Registered User
 
malice's Avatar
 

I'm aware of that bunch of Danes, Slipp ...

I'm please that Manley is out there, they made me look good with my clients, and they eased my job a lot.

Still I agree that they should warn that it is not the same sound at all.

malice
Old 31st December 2002
  #6
Lives for gear
 
subspace's Avatar
Re: Manley

Quote:
Originally posted by malice
mmh, at the risk to disagree with you Fletcher (that is not often the case, I must say), that's what you can read at Manley site :


**********************************************************
MANLEY LABORATORIES is the only authorized user of the original Western Electric passive EQ circuitry previously licensed to Pulse Techniques, Inc. found in the well-known (and still sought after in the used market) antique Pultecs. (Yes, we bothered to hunt down Eugene Shenk about ten years ago in New Jersey to ask for his permission and blessings. EveAnna was there.)

People often ask us if our Pultec EQ's sound like the old ones to which we reply, "Yes! But better! The originals had three transformers in the signal path whereas ours can be used completely transformerless. Our Manley Enhanced Pultec has a vastly superior B+ power supply, with regulated and balanced heater supply. Our line amp is known to be killer-sounding. The components we use today just weren't available 20 years ago. So, if you want a project with crackling carbon pots, dirty open frame wafer switches, 5% and 10% tolerance noisy carbon resistors, exposed tubes sticking out the back of the 3U chassis, etc., go pay top dollar for an antique Pultec"

***********************************************************

wich is not very far from the Sweatwater statement.

malice
I see a paragraph that says they got permission to use the design and a paragraph that details a bunch of stuff that's different in their unit. What confuses you? Is it the part where they tell you that if you want an original Pultec, go buy a used one? Yes, I can see how that might be considered deceptive, they're really trying to pull the wool over your eyes, the old switcheroo...
As for Sweetwater, I'm shocked. So the salesman told you the unit he sells is exactly what you want? He'll surely lose his license over this. He didn't warn you that the Manley uses their own line amp, not the originals? That's an outright violation of the mail order salesman code of ethics for sure...
Old 31st December 2002
  #7
Registered User
 
malice's Avatar
 

Re: Re: Manley

Quote:
Originally posted by subspace
I see a paragraph that says they got permission to use the design and a paragraph that details a bunch of stuff that's different in their unit. What confuses you? Is it the part where they tell you that if you want an original Pultec, go buy a used one? Yes, I can see how that might be considered deceptive, they're really trying to pull the wool over your eyes, the old switcheroo...
As for Sweetwater, I'm shocked. So the salesman told you the unit he sells is exactly what you want? He'll surely lose his license over this. He didn't warn you that the Manley uses their own line amp, not the originals? That's an outright violation of the mail order salesman code of ethics for sure...
"Yes, but better" line is bothering me
What bothers me is that I compared the manley with a vintage pultec, and they were VERY different in character.
Manley is not the Pultec "better" sounding, it is Pultec type "rather different" from the original.
I like both, no discussion about that.
I just found that both Sweatwater and Manley are very confusing on that matter. (Sweatwater seems a lot more to blame, I agree)

I like Manley A LOT

And I'm not making a big issue out of it as I like both, it is only marketing to me.

hope that clarify my point of view

malice
Old 31st December 2002
  #8
Re: Re: Manley

Quote:
Originally posted by subspace
I see a paragraph that says they got permission to use the design and a paragraph that details a bunch of stuff that's different in their unit. What confuses you?

>MANLEY LABORATORIES is the only authorized user of >the original Western Electric passive EQ circuitry >previously licensed to Pulse Techniques, Inc.

>People often ask us if our Pultec EQ's sound like >the old ones to which we reply, "Yes! But better!

Subspace, I think you are pushing the argument a little.
To spell it out 1. They say they used the original Western Electric design. 2. They say 'it sounds like the old ones'
Call me 'confused' or dumb but I would assume it was TRYING to sound like an original Pultec from that information.
Old 31st December 2002
  #9
Gear addict
 
Curious G's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by subspace
...the mail order salesman code of ethics...
I'm dyin' here... really, you gotta stop... yuktyy
Old 31st December 2002
  #10
Lives for gear
 
e-cue's Avatar
 

If they were all called "Pultec enhanced", there wouldn't be a problem. The problem is that if you call something a "Pultec", people expect one. Now, if I'm going to buy gear, I'll probably research it and come across the info provided, in this case, on Manley's website. But there are situations where, for example, the 1st time I used the Manley Pultec, I tried renting a "pultec blue". The studio I was at said "We have a pultec floater". This was great news because at the time it was getting late, and rental companies like to be home be 10pm. So I'm going at my mix an hour or so and turn around and here this black Manley Unit. I see "Pultec" and think, cool- let's do this.

Worthless. Turd in sheeps clothing. That hadn't been washed.

It's bullsh¡t and one of the reasons I do not use Manley crap.
Old 31st December 2002
  #11
Registered User
 
malice's Avatar
 

Chrisso, e cue



Thanx, that is exactly my point !


curious about EveAna opinion ...

malice
Old 31st December 2002
  #12
no ssl yet
Guest
Well fellas,

I can't totally hold it against Sweetwater because I didn't buy my unit there (with there prices are u crazy???)

I bought my unit from Al Priest in Texas (a pretty good sales person and straight forward guy)

The info above is from the very latest Sweetwater catalog. The info from the manley site does make one think that you are gonna receive a pultec on steroids.
If cadillac made an updated version of a vintage bentley. I wouldnt expect it to be a bentley only in name.

When I first got into this I truely knew nothing about gear. However I did poll the pieces that would be needed by engineers to have them work in comfort. When I was instructed to get "pultecs" I assumed that the manley's were
"Pultecs"

Again it's not a terrible eq. But as E-cue stated anyone expecting to do their bass thing with a pultec. won't get the same grit from the Manley unit.

There is a marketing problem here, and surely if Manley can round up the intelligence to build their pieces. They were intelligent enough to know that the play on words would be deceptive to consumers. An informed consumer can only sift through the information that is at his/her disposal. When that information is falsely missleading then he is baited into the situation by way of deceptive practice.
Old 31st December 2002
  #13
no ssl yet
Guest
If the manley unit is not supposed to be like the original then why is there a need for somparison??

What is the point of saying that manley is the only liscensed user of the original design??

Hell If I told you I was the original owner of the Big Mac Special sauce recipe
You sure as hell would'nt expect to get a ham sandwhich instead

True they are both sandwhiches. But mine is an "enhanced big mac"
Old 31st December 2002
  #14
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

What people seem to be missing is that the Western Electric design was for a PASSIVE equalizer. Passive means NO amplifiers, power supplies, NONE of that stuff.

The Pultec took the Western Electric circuit and wrapped a simple tube interface around it. The Manley seems to be the same passive circuit but executed with modern, higher-performance parts and gain stages.

In other words, they made what Pultec would probably have issued as a state-of-the-art equalizer in 1995 rather than a trendy "retro" device.
Old 31st December 2002
  #15
Lives for gear
 
e-cue's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by no ssl yet
But mine is an "enhanced big mac"
LOL!!!grggt
Old 1st January 2003
  #16
Gear addict
 

But, it's this simple. You open a catalog and turn to a page that states:

'The amazing sonic character that made the original pultec eq's so prized is here, but Manley's updates to the original design make the pultec eq's operation and sound a heck of a lot more consistent than it was in the old days. Put a classic of yesterday into your studio today'.

There must be a zillion people who had no clue this exists. They read that statement and think, "Holy ****! I can get a Pultec". I know I did. I am blessed to call a few of our favorite engineers friends. I e-mailed them a few years back asking something like;"Given your penchant for Pultecs, how do you find the Manley version in comparison?" Not one guy replied. I never gave it much thought until now.

Benjy
Old 1st January 2003
  #17
Registered User
 
malice's Avatar
 

Erik

Erik,

Did you emulate an old Pultec or a Manley pultec for Bomb Factory pluggin ?

malice
Old 1st January 2003
  #18
no ssl yet
Guest
Well fellas I guess it was going a bit far to say i wouldnt ever buy another manley piece. The EQ is a quality piece as were all manley products I ever used. It's just not a classic pultec. and after comparing. Some of what I do still needs a classic pultec at times.

It's just a slap in the face to read the ads and then hear Eveanna say

"By now the manley pultec is what it is and it still sells"

That's like saying yeah we fooled you but you liked what we gave you after you were fooled.

(I could throw in an eddie murphy joke but I'll refrain)tut
Old 1st January 2003
  #19
Gear addict
 

Do we want to consider the analogy that an ELAM-251 is an enhanced SM-57? Well, sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. I imagine that in some cases the Manley is indeed quite preferred to the vintage units because of its good manners.

Maybe I'm just jaded having come to recording after playing guitar for years, and my experiences there taught me that vintage reissue gear is not the same thing, so I don't expect this in pro audio. I'm just looking for a useful tool.

(BTW, I think I remember a while back someone on r.a.p. a while back stating a preference for the Langevin Pultec over the Manley Pultec. Isn't that interesting?)

Bear
Old 2nd January 2003
  #20
One with big hooves
 
Jay Kahrs's Avatar
Yeah. What's the difference in tone between the Langevin and Manley?
Mentioned Products
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Pronecobra / So much gear, so little time!
19
TestAccount / So much gear, so little time!
1
Nevelicious / So much gear, so little time!
29

Forum Jump