The DIYRE Colour modules are conceptually simple units that isolate the building block components from classic gear. Colour takes these tone-shaping components and lets you access them on their own inside of a DIY 500-series module. The Colour modules can give you more (or less) of a single effect, whether that effect is the saturation of a transformer, the overdrive of a FET gain stage, the clipping of Germanium diodes, or the harmonic distortion created by overdriving a tube.

The idea may be simple, but it has taken years to develop these modules. It has been done not by a large company, but by a small team of enthusiasts led by Peterson Goodwyn, making the outcome even more unbelievably amazing.

Any person who can (or wants to learn how to) solder can build one of these – they aren’t hard. There are two main components – the main module and the sub modules (the “Colours”). The main module has spaces for three Colours, each with it’s own potentiometer. The Colour sub-modules are built on smaller boards and literally pop in to the main unit – you can change them out at will and very quickly.

The build quality of the Mkii units is excellent when completed and the individual components supplied by DIY Recording Equipment are of excellent quality. The knobs are high quality and the feel of the pots is outstanding. The faceplate and design of the entire unit are well thought out and very pleasing to the eye. The LEDs even change color depending on which Colour sub module you have in any given slot. It’s a cool design component of the Colour package and one that affirms the time and thought that have gone into the development of this product.

Colours

The Cinemag transformer Colour module is currently my favorite. It adds an astounding amount of depth and harmonics to anything you run through it. It shines on drums and bass. I recently used it to even out a dynamic kick and snare, coming after a DBX 160 that gave the kit “ thwack,” but no “puff.” The Cinemag module gave me back the “puff.” Not unlike analog tape, this transformer module can help individual tracks feel glued together and fit better into the context of a mix. Another benefit is the upper harmonics generated by the transformer – they help increase intelligibility on all speakers, especially small ones without much bass extension. It can be applied in a subtle way, or a track can be pretty well decimated if desired.

It is a good time to reflect on the intentions of Colour and how it was originally conceived. Peterson wanted to replicate the good things about running signal through great pieces of gear. This doesn’t mean full on guitar pedal distortion. It is about subtle glow, euphonic haze, and fatness. Colour works best when holding yourself back and comparing the effect in and out, and within the context of a mix. You can go nuts and overdo it easily.

Having said that, there are modules that are about going overboard. The Tascam “Distort-a-studio” is one example. I’m not sure of the market size of those looking to recreate the amazing effect of what happens when you simply run a signal through a PortaStudio channel, but it was pretty cool when you blew apart the input stage and got some interesting distortion. This Colour module gets you back to your early days of recording.

15IPS Colour

The 15IPS Colour module is intended to mimic tape compression/distortion. On bass instruments, I haven’t found a ton of success with it yet. On the mid-range and high end, it begins to become an interesting flavor at very subtle levels. I felt that you had to use too much of it on the bass to hear the effect, which then made the effect too obvious for what I wanted. On the top end, you can round off errant transients with it, or get a nice smooth rolloff on cymbals. I am still experimenting with it, but electronic synths with some serious high frequency content also benefitted from the 15IPS module.

Have I used the word “subtle” too much in this review? I think the key to someone appreciating the Colour format is in listening and being subtle. Like poorly over-compressed music, something that sounds cool in a moment loses its appeal quickly. The key to unlocking the potential of the format is through self control.

JFET Colour

The JFET module is really interesting. It recreates the sound of an overdriven FET amplifier stage. It’s not unlike driving a 1176 hard. There are other, similar modules that let you plug any API-footprint-compatible discrete opamp, then overdrive them to your heart’s desire. This gives you an easy way to control the effect, something that is more difficult to varying degrees in traditional gear. The JFET module seems to do really well when you run two or more in series. Vocals, guitars, and drums (everything, really) benefitted from the JFET module and it’s a bit higher quality and more subtle than running a signal through a pure distortion box.

New Colour Modules

New Colour designs have trickled out of third-party manufacturers like Louder Than Liftoff (Pentode, etc), but I wanted to know more about what Peterson had planned for the future of the platform.

So I asked him:

Buy Colour modules and the Mkii at The DIYRE Shop.

• DIYRE Colour – Peterson at DIYRE has been updating his modular platform for the 500 series. These are incredible units and one of the most amazing new ideas that I’ve seen in a long time. They’re also incredibly affordable, since you build them.
• Serpent/Shadow Audio SA3A (LA3A – clone) – not cheap nor especially easy to put together, but it’s only slightly more involved than the Hairball 1176 units.
• Hairball 1176 compressor (Revision A) – the best looking, sounding and most affordable 1176 clone out there (there are MANY).
• Update on the GSSL I built 10 years ago and some new (to me) sources for parts, especially front panel hardware.
• Audioscape GStereo VCA (SSL) Compressor
• MOD Tube Spring Reverb kit

Now I have to find some time to write!

For “great gear” to be born, you need a combination of three things:

1. knowledge of basic electronics theory
2. quality components and the means to work with or install them
3. excellent attention to detail, plus creative problem solving abilities

Below, I’ve listed some companies that supply great kits and components along with great instructions. Be aware that instructions are probably the most important thing to have when you are starting out! More advanced kits may simply contain a a schematic, a PCB, and perhaps a parts list (BOM – bill of materials). It’s better to have someone hold your hand when you start out so you can learn in a more comfortable manner.

I’ve noted the relative skill level you should have before jumping off into one of these projects. Start out with a success or two under your belt, increase your knowledge, then move on to more difficult things.

PREAMPS

• SEVENTH CIRCLE AUDIO A12 (API), N72 (Neve), J99 (Hardy), C84 (Pendulum), or T14 kits (BEGINNER)
• Hairball Audio FET 500 kits (MODERATE)

COMPRESSORS

• Hairball Audio 1176 Rev. A or Rev. D (MODERATE)
• SEVENTH CIRCLE AUDIO B16 kits (BEGINNER)
• Serpent Audio SA-3A (MODERATE-EXPERT)
• DRIP Opto 4 (MODERATE-EXPERT)

Finally, check out DIY Recording Equipment for a comprehensive overview of just about every audio DIY project, from microphones to EQs. This site is an excellent resource!

All of the Drip PCBs are designed to use large, top quality components and are pretty massive things themselves – the Sta-Level PCB for instance fits snugly into a 3U chassis from Collective Cases. The boards are more aerospace than pro audio – you could likely break your hand before you bent one of these things. All together, the PCBs are way over engineered and look outstanding. The attention to detail in things like the curved traces (no corner “ringing” – a concept more likely heard in Hi-Fi circles than pro audio ones) and the short wiring runs make for circuits that are supposed to be quieter and outperform the original designs.

With that cursory background on Drip Electronics, it is now time for mine: it was the Gates Sta-Level that has always haunted my dreams, since my first impression at a large Boston studio in my early 20’s. Having missed out during the time when you could pick one up for $300 on eBay (or pick one out of a radio station dumpster), the acquisition options are fairly limited: build a point-to-point version, buy a used one, or build one using Drip’s PCB, BOM (bill of materials) and the original schematic.

The Drip STA-LEVEL PCB

No questions, this thing was done beautifully. It is the only “hard” asset that Drip sells, so they should be graded on this primarily. Transformers are mounted directly on the PCB, minimizing wiring runs and making hook up a bit easier. Tube sockets are also PCB mounted, further easing final wiring concerns and length of runs. The only thing that need to be hooked up in the end are the front panel items, the grounds, XLR ins and outs, and the power transformer, a massive softball-sized can that gets mounted to the rear of the case. Most hookup locations are clearly marked, making it easier for relative newcomers to understand (but not necessarily first-timers). Grade: A+

The STA-LEVEL BOM (as of 3/10/13)

This was pretty accurate and had great suggestions for different choices of components in some areas (like the capacitors). However, it is incomplete – a note for those too lazy to read the schematic – and you’ll need to add several items to make it whole if you intend to order everything in one feel swoop. Also, it should be noted that there is a love affair between Drip Electronics and Sowter. This makes it great for those in the UK and not so great for those in the US due to the massive shipping costs. There are some usable options from Cinemag and Lundhal I’ve heard, though I used Sowter and grudgingly ate the shipping cost. It would be nice for Drip to offer suggestions for other transformer models from other companies, in keeping with the helpful nature of the BOM. Grade: B

The STA-LEVEL Manual (as of 3/10/13)

What manual? There is no manual for the full Sta-Level board. The best option is to use the previously issued Sta-Level Micro build manual and infer from there. Beginners will have difficulty with this, because even the Micro build manual doesn’t address all of the finer points and assumes previous electronics experience. If you’re considering building this compressor and have never built anything before, take my advice and order some Seventh Circle Audio kits – their entire package is excellent, aimed at the first time DIYer, and the process well-documented and easy to follow. In addition, you don’t have to source any components; this is probably the biggest headache for this build and many others – it can take a month or more for everything to show up. The bottom line is that these kits aren’t designed to be paint by the numbers and assume some basic experience. Still, they are fairly easy to complete in the whole scheme of things. Why some of Drip’s products have excellent manuals and why this one doesn’t makes for a lot of confusion out there, as seen in their own forum. Grade: D

As Built Notes

• You’ll need the input and output pads as shown in the schematic, as you’ve got two 6V6 tubes in there – the same as a Deluxe Reverb. This thing has power  and output for days – enough to severely tweak your A/D (I imagine).
• I ended up using a bunch of RCA NOS tubes, including a nice 6386, Sowter transformers (in & out), a Hammond 270FX for the PT, and large ass capacitors for the rest of it, including some Jupiter Tone caps that I’ve always liked in guitar amps.
• I added the 6-position selectable recovery time switch to allow for a faster release – this modifies the value of R35 (I think), now ranging from about 220K to 4.7M.
• Collective Cases (from Dan D) makes a great 3U case that fits the PCB perfectly and looks great – it also fits the Simpson model 27 dB meter that is recommended for the build. Get this to make life easier.
  • Make sure that you first do this to any case you get from Collective Cases: Grind away the paint down to bare metal for all screw holes that connect to another piece of the chassis. If you don’t you will have a much better chance of finding hum issues when you first turn the unit on. Bare metal to metal contact ensures that the entire thing is grounded and anything that should be grounded on the front panel is at the same potential as the actual star ground on the rear.

The STA-LEVEL Sound (a review)

I have barely had more than a day to use it, but I find myself loving the Sta-Level on vocals, bass, drums, and especially acoustic guitars, often paired with a 1176. This one (as built) has a wonderful tendency to shift some of the lower mid harmonics up a bit, making the low end stand out more clearly in the mix without adding more mud. The unit is distinctly Hi-Fi and clean, but with a lot of body, especially in the low mids. You can compress a signal by 30 db or more and it feels right – you’ll mainly get the onset of distortion that increases predictably as more gain is added to the signal. Finally, it runs pretty cool for the amount of tubes in there – far cooler than a Manley Vari-Mu!

I’m extremely happy with this Drip Sta-Level build and have found that just running signal through it with no compression adds a nice subtle flavor to a signal. It’s very quiet.

I have to give Drip a lot of credit for creating this DIY niche in the pro audio business. With a bit of marketing and especially product marketing help, I do hope that their business flourishes. It seems like they are fixing some of the issues that come with rapid product rollouts in a new company. Highly recommended!

Here’s a list of the main features:

• high quality 2-channel DA
• ability to monitor up to 5 digital sources through the same converter
• seamless integration with the Monitor ST remote
• multiple format converter (RCA S/PDIF to AES/EBU or vice versa)

The quality of the DA is excellent – compared to some of the Apogee Rosetta and PSX converters that were around at the time of this test, the DAC-ST sounds noticeably clearer and better defined. If you are comparing something like a cheaper Avid converter, say a a Digi003 converter to this unit, the difference is night and day – an 003 DA section sounds like it is under a horse blanket. If you simply need to upgrade your DA, then the DAC-ST is one of the best and seemingly most accurate products I’ve heard yet. Others agree and the general interweb consensus seems to be that this is among the top converters you can find with very few exceptions.

The ability to monitor digital sources through the same converter is one of the DAC-ST’s main selling points. Say you have a CD player, DAT machine, or some other source with a digital output. Being able to listen and compare these through the same DA converter allows direct comparison of the source material, excluding each device’s own DA. In addition, the switching is immediate and seamless – perfect for A/B testing similar sources.

One other nice feature is that you don’t need a transformer for the S/PDIF RCA inputs – just connect them the correct way (S/PDIF to AES wiring diagram) and you are set – the DAC-ST can handle the juice without any external equipment. In addition, there’s a front panel S/PDIF input so you don’t have to crawl around the back of the rack to plug a portable source in – pretty cool.

Dangerous has always done a great job of integrating their products with each other and the DAC-ST and Monitor ST are no exception. The remote is exactly what I would want with a beautiful and functional look. The ability to expand the system (like when adding the DAC-ST) keeps all of the information and controllability where I need it.

The overall build quality and feel of this unit is top notch – typical for Dangerous products.

Features aside, the DAC-ST is an awesome addition to the Monitor ST and it sounds awesome, period. It makes life easier and gives the interface more functionality. You can’t ask for much more than that. Check out this review to learn more about the Dangerous Monitor ST.

Some Extra Resources

• An excellent learning center on the Dangerous website that talks about the history of mastering audio and how the industry grew up
• Another great resource is this one pager on the DAC-ST, also found on the newly redesigned Dangerous site
• Or, listen to Chris Muth (designer of the gear) talking about his background before Dangerous
• A background on Dangerous Music as a whole

I have never felt embarrassed about the gear I work with, until recently. I was looking for options to get a higher quality signal to my main monitors from the interface I still use for remote recording – a Digidesign Digi002 Rack interface. Aside from that old issue they had with the PS/converter board cabling, the 002 has been pretty solid for the past 10 years now (has it been that long?). It has lasted so long because I never use the built in preamps or converters, except for D/A monitoring in remote gigs. Every signal travels into or from the optical or coaxial section digitally. As long as you don’t expect to be tracking 8-piece funk bands, it works quite well and you can get 10 tracks in at once nicely. Sometimes, I make better decisions when I have limited options. At least, that is how I explain this problem to friends. The main goal was to expand the I/O options at a higher quality sample rate.

One thing leads to another…
I decided to add a Dangerous DAC ST to the rig primarily because of the the digital thru capability and the excellent converter. That topic will form its own article in the next month. Then I got thinking, “While I’m at it, the Digi002 can’t record in 96KHz. Am I really that behind the times now?” (Yes, it technically can, but you have to use the converters in the interface and it is limited to 4 channels at a time.) I immediately started looking at options for new interfaces. I figured that it couldn’t be that hard now that Avid has allowed you to use any interface with the arrival of ProTools 9 (now on version 10). What I initially found was interesting – the gap is narrowing between “HD” systems (not just Avid’s ProTools) and the prosumer stuff like the old Digi002. There are a lot of options out there.

The Search: Find a Replacement for the Digi002 in 96KHz!
This article is going to examine project studio-oriented interfaces that can connect to a MacBook Pro running ProTools 9 or above. I’ll save other computer types for a future article, because options expand (and prices go up) when you can use a Mac Pro and PCIe slots. I was more interested in using outboard gear for the conversion part and I just wanted these features in an interface:

• the ability to record at 96Khz concurrently on at least 16-18 tracks
• a preference for the interface being just that – an interface that simply connects other A/D and D/A converters to the computer without mic preamps, internal converters, or even headphone monitoring
• reasonable cost vs. features, since this interface should only have to pass digital signals between the computer and outboard gear – unless the internal converters are high enough quality and the piece can function as an independent converter

The Digi002 has worked well over several computer upgrades because there has been a Firewire port on each laptop at the core of this small studio. What happens when the next Mac has a Thunderbolt port only? Some quick research revealed that Thunderbolt supports Firewire and USB through adapters. It seems like a very innovative piece of technology that will change many things that users have taken for granted in the recording world, like the need to run ProTools HD in a tower. So for now, I’ll look at Firewire interfaces, but soon enough, there is going to be a huge spread of new products incorporating this technology.

ed note: As usually happens, I start writing about a topic with one intent and by the time the article is through, I’ve uncovered six other issues that I hadn’t been aware of. This article is one of those situations. It is abundantly clear that the new Thunderbolt port on Macbooks will change how computers interface with other gear. The days of needing a tower to hold PCIe cards is going to be gone soon and “HD” system prices are going to come down again. The way in which your gear connects to a computer will no longer segment which realm you are in or how many channels you can deal with, rather it will be the quality of gear that you use.

Because we are currently right on the tip of this changeover – most companies are releasing Thunderbolt products sometime in 2012, like Apogee for their Symphony system – these reviews of Firewire gear below already feel a bit dated before I write them. Nevermind that each of these products has already been around for 5 years or more! We’ll see what products utilizing Thunderbolt come out in 2012, then run through some reviews again. Many of the current products listed at the bottom will probably add a Thunderbolt port to their existing range, bump the price a bit and be done with it. Then there will be others that create new products that do everything an HD3 system used to do, but a heck of a lot cheaper. This is going to be a cool year for DAW interfaces!

Mitigating Gear Obsolescence
One option is to go the “HD” route, a route fraught with “obsolete” gear from 3 years ago, now worth 1/5 of the new purchase price. Somehow, I’ve made it through nearly a decade with that Digi002 rig because Firewire was prominent enough in industries other than recording to have some staying power, Avid had several products in different tiers that relied on Firewire, and the Digi002 allows at least some ability to get a signal into and out of the computer without using its own converters. So, if I am to plan the next decade and try to stay ahead of the curve, you can bet that I will stay with outboard gear as much as possible and will rely on the interface only for getting digital into and out of the computer. I’ll also attempt go with a company known for supporting older products for longer periods of time. It is not just Avid, and even Apogee is not exempt here – I remember trying to get a D/A board for a PSX-100 five years ago and being told that I was lucky, because I got the last refurbished one they had in the factory.

However, perhaps I am expecting too much from the manufacturers. Is it their fault? It is no secret that they don’t control the manufacturing of the digital components that make up any of their products – they are simply the designers and assemblers of these components that are often made overseas and tied to other industries’ needs. Certainly, digital gear involves different manufacturing techniques and it is not as easy to repair as a piece of gear that doesn’t utilize surface mount technology. Typically, entire boards are replaced – not individual components. In addition, the converters go out of style quickly and are constantly replaced by bigger and better converters. With the converter components being the cornerstone piece of this type of gear, the manufacturers have a difficult time balancing new product development with stocking outdated components. So, I don’t really blame them as much as I originally thought, but I still have to find a way forward that mitigates my exposure to gear obsolescence.

Do we even need high sampling rates?
What have we learned from the past decade? 96KHz is becoming the quality standard, up from 48KHz from long ago. Dan Lavry wrote a good article on sampling that you should read. It explains why 96Khz is already more information than we need and 192KHz is way overkill and can actually reduce accuracy in digital audio, not increase it. If you were to take a practical turn from this conversation and say, “Why do I need 96KHz anyway when 48KHz has served me well for many years?”  You might come to the conclusion that the increased cost in interfaces and outboard gear seriously diminishes whatever benefit you were looking to find in the first place. On top of that, 48KHz did not limit my enjoyment of music during the 90’s.

As Bob Clearmountain said in this month’s TapeOp (I paraphrase here): “You need good musicians, a good performance, good tracking, then a good mix, in that order. And you don’t even need the last two if the first two are outstanding.” Very true, right? No amount of dicking around with a mix has ever made a crappy performance that much more enjoyable to me. At the same time, the job of a engineer/mixer is to make the best possible product out of whatever they are handed. Thus ensues the continual drive to take gear limitations out of the equation by upgrading everything, until we arrive at the end of the road and many years of experience only to be left with one option: upgrade our own ears.

And now for a complete change of topic…
It’s nice enough at 48KHz. There are many things I could do better to make my mixes sound good. Instead of spending $5K to upgrade converters, I’ve instead focused on some great DIY projects – compressors and microphones. Check out DIY Recording Equipment run by Peterson Goodwyn – it’s a great catalogue of DIY recording projects of all types. Couldn’t have done it better myself!

A cautionary note: Gene and Gayle are very helpful and have no problems mounting someone else’s capsule in their own microphones, if that is what the customer wants. Tim is incredibly helpful too. It’s rewarding and fun to work with such great companies! This customer-centric approach is very cool and it’s not something that you’d typically encounter in this industry, especially from a manufacturer. Having said that, you will not save any money over buying a Lawson 251 head assembly and you’ll be the general contractor for several processes that must happen in order to make this work. It is about 4 months or so of wait time from your first contact with Tim, to having Lawson install the capsule in their headbasket at their shop, to  plugging it in. For cost estimates, you’re looking at the cost of Tim’s capsule, plus the cost of a new Lawson headbasket, plus the labor charges to mount the capsule within one (if you don’t get a custom mount from Tim off the bat). Essentially, the total cost is roughly the same as getting a new Lawson capsule head assembly with Gene’s 251 capsule in it.

First impressions and a disclaimer
This post will be developed as the days go on, but my first impressions are that both capsules are remarkable. They are in the same family, but quite different from each other. You have to remember that I’m listening to each one on the same Lawson L251 body, a body designed for Gene’s capsule (obviously), not Tim’s. So, my comments are focused on relative attributes, not some baseline set in stone, “this is the sound and only sound” of Tim’s capsule. You must remember that the amplifier has its way with the signal, too.

If I could say the same thing three times, the third time would go like this: this is how Tim’s capsule sounds on a Lawson L251 body. It can and probably will sound different on a C12, ELAM 251, 414, Gyraf DIY mic, etc. This test is really only useful for those who wondered whether they could ever get a different capsule in a Lawson headbasket and if so, what it would sound like.

The Lawson Microphones L251 capsule

Comparative listening: The Lawson L251 capsule
Gene’s L251 capsule is really well balanced in the high and low end and it works beautifully on just about every vocalist I have used it on. I might slightly prefer one mic or another at times, but I’ve never heard a “bad” sound come out of this capsule/mic combo on vocals. It has a very nice high end breathiness that is smooth, not harsh. The low end can be modified by the “L47/L251” switch on the power supply – this switches a bass roll off circuit on, as the original 251 had. As I’ve seen from Tim’s capsule especially, there is a LOT of bass in these CK12-influenced designs! When you use the 47-style capsule with the body, the switch removes the low cut circuit.

Some other places where this mic shines is on acoustic guitar (man!) and room micing a drum kit. Not having used C-12s a lot for drum kit work, I was really surprised at how nicely the high end made the kit pop, but didn’t over exaggerate the cymbals. There was no harshness at all and when I compared the L251 to a 414eb in the same position, the L251 was far more real, had more balls, and also had more “reach” or depth. Maybe that isn’t surprising, or maybe it is. Either way, choices here should be made in the context of an entire mix. I was happy to find that the comparison held up later on as I still found myself going for the Lawson track over the 414eb in this song.

Gene originally had used a MBHO capsule in his earlier versions of the L251, but he makes this capsule by hand now, just like his 47 capsule which has always been made at his shop. There are some design differences in materials at least – this is most easily seen by comparing photos (coming soon).

Tim Campbell’s CT-12 capsule

Comparative listening: The Campbell CT-12 capsule
Tim’s capsule is different, in a very complementary way. It’s really fun to have these different flavors available and the easiest way to describe these capsules might be this: both are in the CK-12 family (as much as my interpretation of this holds true). One is a balanced version of everything good about this capsule, and the other exaggerates (or simply exhibits?) a few of the best known parts of this design. I’ve been quite surprised at how well each one performs in different scenarios.

Tim’s capsule on the L251 body has the very high end bump (commonly known in the CK-12 family of capsules) centered around 10kHz, while Gene’s starts around the 7K range and extends upwards a bit. Tim’s capsule definitely produces more “air” up there. The result is that you get super breathy vocals with Tim’s capsule, perfect for R&B and singer/songwriter applications, among others. Remember Blue Microphones’ Blueberry? When it came out, it was hyped as being perfect for modern vocals that are squashed. In the same way, if you roll off the low end of this capsule, you’ll find the same sort of effect that works very well with R&B vocals. The low end also seems to extend a bit deeper than Gene’s capsule, almost as if I had switched on the “L47” setting on his power supply (I had to double check to make sure). On close up vocals, the Lawson is controlled in this manner; on the CT-12 capsule, you can get more bottom end out of it, as there is a pronounced proximity effect.

Put into a mix, both capsules “fit” and sound great. It often depended on the style of music more than anything. The exaggerations of Tim’s capsule on this microphone gave it the edge when looking for those attributes (super proximity effect and super high-end breath). If those attributes weren’t welcome, then it seemed to be a little bit too much “out there” compared to Gene’s capsule.

I know that Gene used to use MBHO capsules for his L251 and I think that he may have designed this version to balance out the response for some of the same reasons that I am noting here. However, I once owned one of those L251s and I loved it, though I found it useful for a smaller range of duties, but the things it did well, it really did well. I am happy to report that as far as I can remember, Tim’s capsule has all of those qualities that I liked in the previous incarnation of the L251.

Again, it’s down to choice of application rather than one capsule being the best at everything.

When recording acoustic guitar it really depended on the guitar itself and what the song required. If a scooped characteristic and a lot of compression was needed, Tim’s capsule seemed to do a bit better, as long as the low end was rolled off. Gene’s capsule seemed to do a bit better in providing a balanced picture of the guitar. These were fairly minor differences, though. In addition, the pattern control added more differences to each capsule, making it harder to nail down the “best” in each test because each one sounded great and offered something a bit different.

On drums, the cymbals presented the biggest differentiator as whether I liked the CT-12 or Lawson capsule. If the cymbals were well-balanced, both capsules sounded great, but Tim’s gave them a nice extra airiness that worked well. If the cymbals were harsher, the Lawson capsule tended to balance everything out and if the cymbals were really harsh, sometimes the CT-12 provided a nice brightness that lessened the harshness. Other times, it simply accentuated them. The body of the drums (if the mic was used as a room mic) sounded very nice with both capsules. The Lawson provided a great picture of the kit; the CT-12 produced something an 1176 would love and did love – the extra low end and high end gave this combo a bit of extra bite that was very cool in some some rock mixes.

And as the tests rolled on, I found that the capsules had more similarities than differences. They are each excellent capsules and the major differences are the low, low end and the high, high end found in Tim’s capsule and the sheer balanced character of Gene’s capsule. Before anyone jumps to conclusions based on this “test” about one capsule or the other, you don’t know what Gene is doing in the amplifier. It may well be that Tim’s capsule isn’t as exagerated at the bottom and top, but instead Gene’s capsule is shy in these areas and he has manipulated the amp to compensate. Choosing the right output coupling capacitor and biasing the tube can easily change these areas. Bottom line, this test is not about capsules more than it is about capsule/amplifier combos (specifically, the L251 amplifier). Since the amp isn’t necessarily linear, it doesn’t allow you to hear the real response of the capsules.

So, what will I have? I’d rather have both and let the source and song decide. It makes the mic even more versatile!

Gene Lawson can be contacted at lawsonmicrophones.com and Tim Campbell can be contacted at Campbell Transmitter. Tim is always happy to adjust the sound of his capsules to a customer’s taste. His work is top notch and I’ve obviously been very impressed with the CT-12.

Pictures coming soon.

Part 2: The Royer 121 Microphone
The Royer 121 (or R-121 as it is technically known) is by now a famous microphone and recognizable to almost any recording studio engineer. It was released around 1999 and immediately garnered praise from almost all corners, including a glowing review from Steve Albini in 2000. He favorably compared the sound of the R-121 to the Coles 4038, a very cool ribbon microphone in its own right. Even today, the microphone continues to find praise, including this excellent writeup by Justin Colletti on his top ribbon mic choices.

I’ll share my experience with the R-121 here on a few different sources:

R-121 on electric guitar
The R-121, when compared to most condensers, sounds dark. There is not the high end sparkle here and there is a ton of energy focused in the lower mids. What this does is make most guitar amps sound incredibly beefy, fat, rump roasty…you name the meat adjective here and it is that. On clean guitars, the Royer makes them sound like pianos and has amazing depth in all of the right places. On distorted guitar, this mic gives you enough information and takes eq so well that you can cut whatever you need to out of the bottom frequencies to make the tracks sit well with the bass and drums without taking much away from the feeling of depth in the track.

The 121 is an excellent mic to use in a M/S configuration, even if one side of the figure 8 pattern is not perfectly matched with the other (the back of the mic is brighter). A simple 57 acting as the mid microphone completes the setup and gives the typical 3D depth that you’d expect from this technique, but with an outstanding low end.

R-121 pair on drums
Aside from electric guitar, recording drums with the R-121 is a very cool experience. While I’ve used them with great results as overheads on a kit, they really shine when used as a mid-room pair. Placed about belly high and pointed at the kick/snare area, they lend an amazing fatness to the recording. If compressed just a bit (or squashed with an 1176), the track begins to pump and grind with everything else beautifully. Another user on a forum reported good results with a 121 midway between the snare and kick too, though I have not tried this technique.

R-121 on vocals
Depending on the needs of the song, you may find that this is not the ideal mic for most voices, unless they are seriously lacking in low end, or have an abundance of energy in the high end. I find myself using this Royer on vocals that are double tracked, or I end up using the 121 along with a condenser to add a different texture to the low end of the track. Backing vocals can benefit from a 121 too – you can cut a lot of the low end out and have a very smooth supporting track that adds body to song, but doesn’t take away too much attention from the lead vocal.

R-121 on hand percussion
The Royer 121 shines on hand percussion, adding depth and fatness to conga and djembe tracks. There is a cool low end “breathiness” that results at times depending on the drum and technique. A stereo pair of these mics is awesome in this application.

While there are many other uses for the Royer R-121 microphone, these are some of the most common ones. It is an excellent mic with characteristics that cannot be found in lower end ribbon mics that I have used. The build quality is excellent (it is built like a tank), the components are excellent, and you have the employees at Royer who stand behind their products and can customize them (like matching two non-matched microphones). On top of that, repair time can be reduced to a few days if you ever need the mic back quickly. Finally, there is always the “first re-ribbon is free to the original owner” policy, should you ever need it.

These claims are not accurate in my experience – no Oktava MC-012 I’ve ever heard sounds close to a KM-84, modded or not, and the mics don’t share the same circuit topologies. However, if you had instead asked, “Do I get a performance enhancement that is comparable to the mod price?” Well then, yes, you do in many cases. Here’s where a mod can help:

• your Oktava MC-012 is not working
• your mic has intermittent problems
• your mic sounds seriously crappy compared to other examples you have tried

If your Oktava MC-012 doesn’t fit those categories, then congratulations, you have an average to above average MC-012! These mics had absolutely junky quality control during a long middle period and the range of quality can be fairly extreme. Before you go and get your mic packed up to send away, note that there’s a twist that no one seems to ever mention on the interweb – it’s not the bodies that have the widest range of quality spread; it’s the capsules. They can be quite nice, or (nearly) useless crap. It’s not unreasonable to think that you could mod (or get your MC-012 modded) and have it come back as a slightly better version of something you’d rather not use. None of the guys that mod these things ever deal with the capsule, because I don’t believe that there is not much you can do with it. The variation in capsules alone will almost guarantee that your modded MC-012 won’t sound like whatever else you’ve heard in internet clips.

Discrete version of Oktava MC-012 (courtesy of Saturn Sound)

I’ve done before and after testing (same capsule both times) of a later model MC-012-01 using Bill Sitler’s standard mod kit and while it did improve the high end a slight amount and the low end was a bit tighter, it was not a night and day difference. It did not change the character, or make the mic sound like a KM-84…not even close. It simply made the mic sound like a good example of a MC-012 when before, it sounded like a below average example. A much larger difference in sound was found by swapping capsules. Before you write that option off, the $25 to not have to source the components is a small price to pay for laziness/convenience and the benefit very much does outweigh the cost in this case. But, you have to do the work yourself. Even in the best of cases, you can only polish a design so far before you are limited by component size and other factors outside of your control, like the capsule. If you want a quick rundown of what is usually involved in modding one of these, see this GroupDIY article.

Another version of the MC-012 (courtesy of Saturn Sound)

It should be noted that Michael Joly has been vocal in the past about the fact that he doesn’t just replace components – he dials the FET and other components in to their ideal operating voltages. This is fair – it is likely that whatever components you replace probably bring with them different voltage and current needs than the stock pieces.

Then there are the older MC-012 mics with the very thin font and no “-01” designation, early in the days of the ASM distribution. For a comparison, see the featured image for this post – there are four different MC- designated mics that share two major circuit layouts and two sets of similar components, and all were made by the Oktava factory. There are even older examples that have different capsule designs and even earlier circuits, too. The ones I am thinking of still used the wet slug tantalum electrolytic capacitors in the more “modern” circuit configuration and some of these sound really, really good. In fact, these bodies can sound as good or better than any modded body I’ve ever come across, including two OktavaMod examples that had come through the studio in the past. However, you have to buy a lot of MC-012s to find a good example, and there’s a good chance you’ll have to send it to off to the mod shop once one of those wet slug caps fails, something that is not uncommon. Many thanks to Ashley at Saturn Sound for his permission to use these photos of the Oktava MC-012 internals!

Two older model Oktava MC-012 Microphones (courtesy of Saturn Sound)

Why does this niche market even exist? Couple with rich media and popular message boards on the web, the pro audio press, some smart techs, and crappy quality control from Oktava in the past, these mod companies serve as the good quality control department that Oktava never had. If you asked me if the $120 invested in Michael Joly’s shop plus the cost of the mic is worth it, I’d probably say go for it if you think your mic isn’t up to speed with other examples you’ve heard. Or, if you really like the mic and want the most out of it, then $250 as a total investment isn’t unreasonable at all. The good examples of these mics (modded or not) have a place in any mic locker and they work very well on some sources.

For a second opinion of how good the OktavaMod MC-012s are, I asked Anthony D’Erasmo, owner of Digital Doctorz – a busy New York City studio & music business – if he wouldn’t mind offering his take on the OktavaMod MC-012 mods. Anthony has a lot of experience in this industry and has been around many types and classes of microphones. I have much respect for his opinion:

From what they originally sounded like to what they sound like now, it is amazing! I have U47’s, Gefell UM70s, 92’s, U67s, and U87’s… The Joly-modded MC-012s are quite different from all the high-end stuff, but they have a formidable character unto themselves. They have their own place on certain things I do and they work very well with acoustic strings, upright bass, cello, and violins. And, they are really good room mics.

With that said, know that one of the biggest potential limitations in these microphones is the capsule* (and possibly, your propensity for being swayed with advertising claims that you really, really want to believe). If you have a good capsule, you’re going to have a very different opinion than someone who may have the same modded body, but a poor quality capsule.

So for $600ish, you aren’t doing bad with the modded MC-012 mics by any stretch of the imagination. It’s certainly easier than betting on 10 pairs of ebay purchases and $3,000 to find two diamonds in the rough!

*One other note – new capsules have a rounded edge to them, where the old ones have a sharper 45 degree angle cut on the edge. I have heard great older examples, but not very many good newer examples of this capsule. Maybe I got some duds? The very old capsules do not expand outward from the body to the edge and keep roughly the same diameter as the body – these are fairly rare in my experience.

Capsule variations in the Oktava MC-012 (courtesy of Saturn Sound)

Also, the only easy way to tell the Chinese “fake” MC-012s is to look at the body retaining screws at the end of the mic – they shouldn’t have a black phillips head on them.

There isn’t a whole lot of historical information on the L47c that exists online. Examples I have seen use a 6072 tube exclusively – this was way before the mkII (the L47c mics I have seen were built around 1991). Gene went through a revision of the L47 where he used an EF-86 tube as well. The circuit is quite a bit simpler than the current mkII mics and the build feels more “custom” than the current generation mics. There is no serial number on the bodies that I have seen (though it may exist); the only obvious serial of sorts lives on the bottom of the headbasket. This “serial” is Gene’s signature and the date of manufacture. This was presumably prior to the time when he started writing the serials of the head assemblies in addition to his signature. The headbasket is also of a different design than the current bodies today and the whole microphone comes apart in a different manner than the mkII versions.

The power supply lacks the pattern and pad switches and the cable and connectors are 5 pin rather than 7 pin as used today. I’m not quite sure of the cable manufacturer –  today Gotham is used, but the case is still a Pelican, albeit a different design.

The sound of a L47c mic is outstanding – it is a very nice complement to the current Lawson mkII mics and easily holds its own with them, sometimes giving something more on some voices, and sometimes something else. The mic retains the L47’s high end reach and detail, but has a nice throaty low end. It is consistent with what I’d call the “signature” of Lawson’s microphones – clear, deep, exceptionally detailed, and super-real. Within this signature, there are several variations that I have come to know. The L47c mics that have come through my studio have had that lower-mid beefiness that I don’t remember the L47 mkII having quite so much of, but Gene can personally tweak his capsules to give users what they want – it’s something that he has always done because he makes everything by hand at his shop in Nashville. The different circuit, different tube, and capsule variations all contribute to what I’ve heard here.

Which brings us to another story: The “Experimental” Lawson Mics
With all of the aftermarket capsules being made today (Tim Campbell, Dale Uhen, etc.), there is a renewed interest in the quality of the smaller manufacturers’ capsules. One interesting story that I’d like to cover here in the future is the Lawson experimental capsules because there is almost no information on the web about these. If you have any info on these, please leave a comment. There is the aborted-from-production L67 capsule from years ago, and Gene has made many other capsule variations over the years, constantly experimenting with the designs. Some of these have made it out into the world, but most haven’t and their mere existence is relegated to dusty message board posts from years ago.

Interest in the Lawson microphone line has been strong for more than 20 years, but it is only going to increase in the coming years and as it does, some of the oddities and lesser known mics, like the L47c, will begin to come out of the woodwork. I’ll be reviewing more of them in the coming months.