So, thinking about getting a UA LA-610...

[TheWoodShed]

...to take the place of my Demeter HBP-1 and dBX 160X. Now I am very happy with these two units but since switching to a filter based pre-amp on my bass it has seem to reawaken sonic possibilities and I am wondering if the LA-610 might expand those or if would just be a wash.

Opinions?

[bongomania]

While I wouldn't expect the UA to sound the same as the Demeter and dbx pair, I wouldn't expect it to be different enough to "expand sonic possibilities".

It's clear how a resonant sweepable filter could expand your palette, but in this pre/comp swap you'd have the same basic functions and qualities either way.

The UA would sure look a lot cooler.

[TheWoodShed]

Originally Posted by bongomania

While I wouldn't expect the UA to sound the same as the Demeter and dbx pair, I wouldn't expect it to be different enough to "expand sonic possibilities".

It's clear how a resonant sweepable filter could expand your palette, but in this pre/comp swap you'd have the same basic functions and qualities either way.

The UA would sure look a lot cooler.

Always good to see you chime in Bongo!

How similar is the T4 circuit in the UA to that in the 160X?

I dunno...maybe I'll just try to swap out the dBX with a Distressor for a bit different tone...

[bongomania]

The T4 has a dual release law, which means it has a short or fast release time depending on your signal peaks. The 160X has fixed release time, but the "overeasy" function automatically changes the ratio depending on your signal peaks. That would be the main difference "on paper" between them. But of course they have different-sounding gain stages, and different "feel" (timing/slope) to the compression response, so those are things one may subjectively prefer about one or the other.

The Distressor would definitely expand the palette. It's not "better" than the others, but it is sure more versatile.

If you're headed that direction, check out EL's "Mike-E" preamp.

[TheWoodShed]

Wow...color me interested!.

Frankly the lack of EQ is of no concern to me. I have bypassed the two band parametric

Originally Posted by bongomania

The T4 has a dual release law, which means it has a short or fast release time depending on your signal peaks. The 160X has fixed release time, but the "overeasy" function automatically changes the ratio depending on your signal peaks. That would be the main difference "on paper" between them. But of course they have different-sounding gain stages, and different "feel" (timing/slope) to the compression response, so those are things one may subjectively prefer about one or the other.

The Distressor would definitely expand the palette. It's not "better" than the others, but it is sure more versatile.

If you're headed that direction, check out EL's "Mike-E" preamp.

[pgk]

Originally Posted by TheWoodShed

...to take the place of my Demeter HBP-1 and dBX 160X. Now I am very happy with these two units but since switching to a filter based pre-amp on my bass it has seem to reawaken sonic possibilities and I am wondering if the LA-610 might expand those or if would just be a wash.

Opinions?

well i know that the 610pre by itself is a universally loved studio bass pre. for other apps it's a "love it/hate it" kinda thing, but i've never heard of any engineer not absolutely loving that preamp for bass duty. i'm using one in the studio right now in fact (Mono 610). chain is an early ri '62 Pbass/labella flats, '69svt/flatback cab, shure SM7 about 8-10 inches away, UA mono 610, vintage UA1176 and straight to a studer 1" 8track machine. simply ridiculous tone, as you could imagine. one handy tip is switching out the first preamp tube for a 5751 for a smidge more headroom, it definitely works great

[NOVAX]

I have the HBP1/160A combo and a silver faced LA610 Mk.I and they are both incredible. You
are talking about a red Testarossa and a yellow Countach- both are great driving experiences
and perform extremely well. The UA allows the G-G-G-Garth Richardson Canadian setting. The
Demeter stays cleaner and imparts less color.

[johnk_10]

i had a demeter hpp1-J and a 160x (but i ran it with my EL8 most of the time) and the UA LA610MKII and kept the UA 6176 for my bass preamp. IMO the LA610MKII and their 6176 is as good as it gets. slightly prefer the 6176's 1176LN comp over the LA 610's LA2A comp, but the 610 MKII is in the same league.

i found the demeter to be a great preamp, but a little too clean and sterile for my tastes. IME, the LA610 sounds ALOT bigger, fuller, fatter and with better response to my playing.

[I Forget]

None of the sex appeal but good tone and a ship load of gig friendly, nicely voiced features including some you didn't know you wanted until you tried them - swr marcus miller pre. I also have a U5 and a 6176 if that gives my opinion more cred.

[GrooveWarrior]

Does anyone have a sound clip of a bass being played through this thing? I'd love to hear it.

[Jeff Scott]

Originally Posted by GrooveWarrior

Does anyone have a sound clip of a bass being played through this thing? I'd love to hear it.

There are some recently recorded demo songs on my band's website that have a couple different Rickenbacker basses (March '73 4001, April '98 4001V63 with early '60s horseshoe pickup) going through my LA-610 Mk II.

Karma Demos

[uhdinator]

first trial of bass with TI light flats plugged direct into LA610 solo, playing with fingers, treble half way on on bass. Had a comp plugin on track too.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6319946/Sr8t%20on.mp3

[mattwear]

Check out this clip for a sound demo...

youtube.com/watch?v=FJ9t_-BmhGM