Re: Which tube expert can do custom works?

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:xp-dnfU55oJO_BbanZ2dnUVZ_t-nnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx:

"Tynan AgviÐr" <melee20160@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns9A2523786B632melee20160mypacksnet@xxxxxxxxxxxx

I am intriqued by just why during the course of any
discussion about *analog* recording/audio ;;digital
acolytes have to chime in with *"man, why dont you just
go digital"* it never ever fails. there should be an
equivalent to Godwin's law for the phenomenon.

Obvious truth has this nasty habit of creeping into discussions.

*I dont want to go digital/solid state etc because I dont
fucking like the way it sounds for fucks
sake!!!!!!

I suggest then that you do the practical thing, and assemble a good
clean digital signal chain, and add some EFX boxes to get the sound
you want. For example, by randomly shifting the sliders on a 1/3
octave equalizer, you could simulate the effect of attaching a speaker
to an amplifier with a high source impedance.




But why do that when I can have the real thing? All that stuff is too
difficult. When I record, I like to set up the mics(the most involved part
of the recording process, and the most important) hit record, tear down,
and go home to my wife and daughter afterwards. I dont intend on getting a
doctorate in Nuclear Astrophysics just to use an imitation of the real
thing.

Take crane song, for example..the guy uses emulator circuits to mimic the
sound of tube compression/tape saturation, etc.. total effing joke. (and
has a "dither CD".that one is a riot)

I never was fond of pocket vaginas either although I reckon if you are
broke and dont know how to use your pecker, you take what you can get.





.

Loading