|
Post by mazmaster on Dec 29, 2009 13:53:45 GMT -7
Got this a few weeks back with my single-channel lower gain amps in mind (including the Maz 18 NR) and really love it! This thing is just totally transparent and works beautifully with the Maz 18 (and my other amps).
I have tried the Ultimate Attenuator, Marshall Powerbrake, THD Hot-Plate, Weber MASS and 'Z' Airbrake and none of them lasted for more than a few sessions due to their tone-sucking properties. The Airbrake sounded especially incompatible with the Maz 18 for some reason. BUT, Aracom finally got it right! Highly recommended!
|
|
|
Post by benttop (Steve) on Dec 29, 2009 15:49:38 GMT -7
I have tried the [deletia...] 'Z' Airbrake and none of them lasted for more than a few sessions due to their horrible tone-sucking properties. The Airbrake sounded especially incompatible with the Maz 18 for some reason. Wow... I have two Airbrakes here, and a Brake Lite. I made a set of recordings at every attenuation level and adjusted the volume using the faders on the recording console, then posted the recordings here and on TGP. To date, not one person has been able to distinguish which recordings were thru and which were attenuated. And I've had hundreds of folks listen to the clips. That doesn't sound very much like "horrible tone-sucking" to me. In fact, I'd be willing to repeat the test any way you would like to hear it, and I'll bet you can't tell the difference. I say that because over on TGP there were multiple folks who were saying the same thing you are, and none of them could pick the attenuated recordings. However, even after that, they STILL claimed the Airbrake was sucking their tone. I don't understand, nor do I think they are being very honest with themselves. In my experience here, the Airbrake, and the Brake Lite are the most transparent attenuators I've ever played. That said, I have not played the one you just bought. I'd love to though - in fact I'd love to record a comparison to see if anyone could hear the difference.
|
|
|
Post by tdarian on Dec 29, 2009 16:32:24 GMT -7
I've found the Airbrake to be subjectively very transparent through the first couple of clicks of attenuation. How is the Aracom in the most attenuated modes?
|
|
|
Post by Pete aka shouldb on Dec 31, 2009 4:15:49 GMT -7
Got this a few weeks back with my single-channel lower gain amps in mind (including the Maz 18 NR) and really love it! This thing is just totally transparent and works beautifully with the Maz 18 (and my other amps). I have tried the Ultimate Attenuator, Marshall Powerbrake, THD Hot-Plate, Weber MASS and 'Z' Airbrake and none of them lasted for more than a few sessions due to their horrible tone-sucking properties. The Airbrake sounded especially incompatible with the Maz 18 for some reason. BUT, Aracom finally got it right! Highly recommended! I'm using the Brake Lite on my Maz18 NR combo and when I use it at max attenuation, it sort of compresses the sound a bit, but on all the other settings it is totally transparent. I haven't noticed any "tone sucking" at all. In fact the other guys in the band couldn't believe I had any attenuation on at all - until I turned it off and blew the windows out with the volume :-)) I'd love to hear the comparison recordings just in case my hearing has gone completely!
|
|
|
Post by benttop (Steve) on Dec 31, 2009 7:01:31 GMT -7
Got this a few weeks back with my single-channel lower gain amps in mind (including the Maz 18 NR) and really love it! This thing is just totally transparent and works beautifully with the Maz 18 (and my other amps). I have tried the Ultimate Attenuator, Marshall Powerbrake, THD Hot-Plate, Weber MASS and 'Z' Airbrake and none of them lasted for more than a few sessions due to their horrible tone-sucking properties. The Airbrake sounded especially incompatible with the Maz 18 for some reason. BUT, Aracom finally got it right! Highly recommended! I'm using the Brake Lite on my Maz18 NR combo and when I use it at max attenuation, it sort of compresses the sound a bit, but on all the other settings it is totally transparent. I haven't noticed any "tone sucking" at all. In fact the other guys in the band couldn't believe I had any attenuation on at all - until I turned it off and blew the windows out with the volume :-)) I'd love to hear the comparison recordings just in case my hearing has gone completely! Here's the one I did in 2007: Finally the attenuator test. Don't cheat now - listen to them all before you read the answers!
|
|
|
Post by mazmaster on Dec 31, 2009 17:52:31 GMT -7
I have tried the [deletia...] 'Z' Airbrake and none of them lasted for more than a few sessions due to their horrible tone-sucking properties. The Airbrake sounded especially incompatible with the Maz 18 for some reason. Wow... I have two Airbrakes here, and a Brake Lite. I made a set of recordings at every attenuation level and adjusted the volume using the faders on the recording console, then posted the recordings here and on TGP. To date, not one person has been able to distinguish which recordings were thru and which were attenuated. And I've had hundreds of folks listen to the clips. That doesn't sound very much like "horrible tone-sucking" to me. In fact, I'd be willing to repeat the test any way you would like to hear it, and I'll bet you can't tell the difference. I say that because over on TGP there were multiple folks who were saying the same thing you are, and none of them could pick the attenuated recordings. However, even after that, they STILL claimed the Airbrake was sucking their tone. I don't understand, nor do I think they are being very honest with themselves. In my experience here, the Airbrake, and the Brake Lite are the most transparent attenuators I've ever played. That said, I have not played the one you just bought. I'd love to though - in fact I'd love to record a comparison to see if anyone could hear the difference. Volume-leveled clips are very helpful, but they're totally dependent on the recording chain and, as a result, can really mask what's going on.....
|
|
|
Post by mazmaster on Dec 31, 2009 17:57:50 GMT -7
I've found the Airbrake to be subjectively very transparent through the first couple of clicks of attenuation. How is the Aracom in the most attenuated modes? Of all the attenuators I've tried and/or owned it's the most transparent, but you're also dealing with FM and speaker effects, so no matter how transparent the attenuator is, it won't be the same as the loud tone. But, the Aracom maintains a great feel and doesn't "add" compression. The bedroom mode on the Aracom is simply the best I've heard...very, very close in quality to the click mode...speaking of which, the click mode goes down to -15dB versus only -8dB on the Airbrake.
|
|
|
Post by mazmaster on Jan 1, 2010 10:48:09 GMT -7
I'm using the Brake Lite on my Maz18 NR combo and when I use it at max attenuation, it sort of compresses the sound a bit, but on all the other settings it is totally transparent. I haven't noticed any "tone sucking" at all. In fact the other guys in the band couldn't believe I had any attenuation on at all - until I turned it off and blew the windows out with the volume :-)) I'd love to hear the comparison recordings just in case my hearing has gone completely! Here's the one I did in 2007: Finally the attenuator test. Don't cheat now - listen to them all before you read the answers! I just listened to the first few and it's tough to tell because you're playing different passages between clips and it's tough to A/B rapidly between two separate clips. It'd be easier to tell if you played the exact same simple passage and clicked very quickly between bypass and -2dB (to minimize speaker effects) and then used your editing software to remove the spaces and level the volume. That said, I thought I could hear a little high end rolloff between unattenuated and attenuated with the Airbrake. That was very confusing because I remember the Airbrake making the highs sound harsh. But, we're going back quite a few years here. So, I just dragged out my Airbrake, dusted it off, and ran some comparisons again. Sure enough, I'm hearing the Airbrake slightly roll off the highs when clicking between 0 and -2dB and actually making them a touch smoother than the unattenuated tone! This seems to alter the mids slightly as well, but it's tough to tell if it's just the highs being rolled off that accentuates mids or if the mids themselves are being altered independently. In any case, with my latest pedals, etc, it is not an unpleasing tone, despite the fact that it's not quite the original tone. Running the same test again with the Aracom and comparing rapidly to the Airbrake, I hear the Aracom doing absolutely nothing to the tone, while the Airbrake rolls off a touch of high end, smooths out the overall tone and seems to make the mids more noticeable and/or "different" in some way. All of these Airbrake effects are slight. I think what originally clouded my memory regarding the Airbrake was that my last round of attenuator tests I did with the Airbrake years ago was in a comparison with the Weber MASS. The MASS version I have is an early version and was widely known to roll off highs quite a bit, but in a pleasing way for most folks. When comparing the Airbrake to the MASS, the Airbrake rolled off less high end and, by comparison, sounded "harsher" than the MASS with the amps/pedals I was testing at the time. So, I stand corrected on my original statements regarding the Airbrake and apologize for my faulty memory!
|
|
|
Post by benttop (Steve) on Jan 1, 2010 11:23:10 GMT -7
This gear quest we are all on is not a destination, but a journey, and sometimes we revisit the same locale and find it to be somewhat different than our original memory of it. I actually have clips here that were done with a re-amping technique. They were not done for me however, so I need to get permission to post them. I haven't listened to them in over a year, so I can't even recall how they sound. I'll see if I can get permission and post a few.
|
|
|
Post by bri237 on Jan 2, 2010 15:02:57 GMT -7
It looks and sounds pretty sweet.I just can't justify the price for one. 650 bucks is a lot of cash....
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Apr 22, 2010 4:33:15 GMT -7
Wow... 650!! That's the price of an amp.
|
|
|
Post by dock66 on Apr 22, 2010 8:40:25 GMT -7
Wow... 650!! That's the price of an amp. That's the only issue that holds me back,the price tag.
|
|
|
Post by Rik on Apr 22, 2010 11:05:05 GMT -7
I am not anywhere near as smart as you guys on this subject (or any for that matter) but one thing I have been doing is adjusting my tone at the super low settings on my AB and B. L. (love both by the way). Seems to make sense to me that if you are moving less air through the speakers you have to tweak things a bit. Works for me. Plus for the tone / dollar ratio, I really can't find anything better than the Brakelite.
|
|
|
Post by bustertheboy on Apr 24, 2010 1:44:10 GMT -7
Many things are compromises, and some of them actually help tone. I've got a BrakeLite and a Minimass. The minimass is great with the Ghia but only at minimal attenuation- I like it because it rolls a bit of the highs off (actually pleasing with the Ghia to my ears). The BrakeLite is fantastic with the Z-28, the only thing I'd change would be less attenuation with the first click. Because I like a fat tone (especially because I find a Univibe works better with pumping mids) I really don't mind the very slight roll off of highs at the lower levels. Brett
|
|
solomnos
Full Member
"Wil traid food4gear."
Posts: 175
|
Post by solomnos on May 1, 2010 17:15:45 GMT -7
The only tonal difference I can hear when I use my Z-brake is the fact that the speakers aren't moving as much...so it seems like less of the tonal characteristics of the speakers are coming through.
|
|
|
Post by GuitarZ on May 9, 2010 9:18:54 GMT -7
I've always thought that once I get into bedroom on the airbrake, it kind of buzzes out the sound. But, long story short, for our headphone rehearsals, I cranked the airbrake on full attenuation, mic'd the cab, and thought the sound was fine through the headphones. I want to take some time to A/B it a bit with different attenuation settings, but I was pleasantly surprised with the first on-the-fly experiment.
|
|
|
Post by benttop (Steve) on May 9, 2010 9:34:36 GMT -7
I've always thought that once I get into bedroom on the airbrake, it kind of buzzes out the sound. But, long story short, for our headphone rehearsals, I cranked the airbrake on full attenuation, mic'd the cab, and thought the sound was fine through the headphones. I want to take some time to A/B it a bit with different attenuation settings, but I was pleasantly surprised with the first on-the-fly experiment. Our perceptions are dramatically colored by volume and environment. Like you, I've found that the Airbrake does a lot better job than our ears give it credit for.
|
|
|
Post by asattwanger on May 21, 2010 19:36:19 GMT -7
Well I'll toss a twig into this fire. I find that different amps react differently to attenuators. Also adding these into the talk The Micro is advertised at 15 watts Ted told me no worries running a Z-28 though it for $70 The other model is 150 watts for $225 if I'm correct According to Ted. The magic of these two units is being able to attenuate the Low-Mids and the Mids-Highs seperately as the majority of volume is generated in the Low-Mids. This design allows your mid-highs intacted. I have not used the 150 but the Micro is great. At home I run mine with the Low-mids crushed 3/4 of the way down and the Mid-highs wide open. Another idea that I don't hear alot of people talking about is not running the amp wide open and crushing it all the way down. Run the amp at 50% the tubes are still working pretty good, attenuate, and then boost your preamp with a great boost pedal. If dirty is what you want this a great way to go about it. You leave room in your power section so it's not compressing as much and with ex-Z-28, ex-RxJr, and both of my Swart's it has produced the best condo friendly tones that sounds exactly like the amp when cranked. The Swarts maybe better because of the nature of a cranked 6v6 more so a single ended 6v6. DAVE
|
|
|
Post by GuitarZ on May 22, 2010 19:08:53 GMT -7
I've got to kick myself a little. I've been playing with speaker emulators and I'm now working with the Palmer PDI-09. Anyway, I needed a speaker load and bought a weber speaker motor which sits inside the micro mass. Duh. For a couple of bucks more I could have just picked up a micro mass and would have had a second attenuator to play with and a speaker motor. Oh well.
|
|
|
Post by benttop (Steve) on May 22, 2010 19:19:12 GMT -7
I've got to kick myself a little. I've been playing with speaker emulators and I'm now working with the Palmer PDI-09. Anyway, I needed a speaker load and bought a weber speaker motor which sits inside the micro mass. Duh. For a couple of bucks more I could have just picked up a micro mass and would have had a second attenuator to play with and a speaker motor. Oh well. Or you could have bought one of these for your load: Dummy Load Resistor
|
|
|
Post by GuitarZ on May 24, 2010 19:06:44 GMT -7
I've already got one of those. I knew that I was being a bit cautious or something by wanting to go with the speaker motor versus straight resistance. But, I have to admit that either way I'm a little nervous running the amp flat out this way for 2-3 hours of rehearsal. Plus, if I have a bad speaker cord or such, I'll never hear that something went bad since neither produce any sound. But, the Ghia is a tough old amp and is handling it well although I think I'm missing the speaker in terms of sound.
|
|