New Mike Adler TWELVE STRING BASS????

[adlerguitars]

Yep, Brazilian it is. I have a 40lb board of it and it looks nice!

Regarding the difference in output due to pickup placement... the height of the pickup can be greater on the treble side to enhance response. Garry's EQ and stereo setup pretty much negate the need to do that though.

Mike

 

[Garry Goodman]

From adlerguitars

Is that true?

As for the Novax thing, the angle of the bridge implies that the pickup is not sensing the same part of the string for each one of them. In theory, the lower strings should be mellower then the higher ones. According to M. Dingwall, the main difference is in the output though. Since the pickup is closer to the bridge for the smaller strings, they should have a lower output then compared to the lower ones. To eliviate this problem, the pickup would probably have to be much on the bass side then usual. Would you say any of this is true?

thanks
PL

The Villex pick up is a very high quality pick up . This is a stereo instrument and the higher strings have their own 2 band, 20db +/- circut ,sweepable EQ with a pre amp from 20 hz to 20khz. The trim pot on each circut board can boost as high as 26 db.I can turn off the bass and turn up the high strings and the cross talk is minimal.I can do the opposite and you won't hear the high strings.There is a real sense of discreet stereo.

It is difficult to relate these electronics to any active circut on any bass or guitar because it is really at the audiophile level.No noise, distortion, hiss-just breathtaking clarity.You can hear the Bb000 string because I can dial in 14 hz and boost it. Think about that.Right now, at this point in time, there isn't any on board electronics(or very very few)that can come close to this. It was critical to have these electronics to make a 12/92 guitar functional across a span of 10 octaves.

 

[Geoff St. Germaine]

The Villex pick up is a very high quality pick up . This is a stereo instrument and the higher strings have their own 2 band, 20db +/- circut ,sweepable EQ from 2 hz to 200khz.

I'm just curious as to why the eq is sweepable to 200kHz.

 

[adlerguitars]

I'm just curious as to why the eq is sweepable to 200kHz.

Since the EQ goes well above and well below the hearing threshold Garry can dial in any frequency he wants to hear. If it stopped at 15 kHz and he wanted to hear 18 kHz there would be a problem. This way Garry can also dial in the “air” of the bass to give the notes a little more openness. He would probably do a better job explaining why he has it.

Mike

 

[munkyboy]

That sounds pretty wild. who makes this eq?

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Since the EQ goes well above and well below the hearing threshold...

Mike

Sorry, that's just a hilarious start to a sentance

 

[ixlramp]

I can turn off the bass and turn up the high strings and the cross talk is minimal.I can do the opposite and you won't hear the high strings.There is a real sense of discreet stereo.

Garry/Mike, how is the stereo pickup divided?: 6 high strings and 6 low strings?

i recently thought that a divided pickup, if divided where wound strings end and plain begin, could even up the sound between the two types of string. i have always found plains to be a little bright and loud compared to wounds

matt/ixlramp

 

[Geoff St. Germaine]

Since the EQ goes well above and well below the hearing threshold Garry can dial in any frequency he wants to hear. If it stopped at 15 kHz and he wanted to hear 18 kHz there would be a problem. This way Garry can also dial in the “air” of the bass to give the notes a little more openness. He would probably do a better job explaining why he has it.

Mike

Yes, I suppose I can see the point so far as if he wanted to dial in some 18kHz. However, I can't see listening to a bass and thinking... "wow, that's missing some 124kHz in the tone". Hopefully Garry will give his input. I'm genuinely curious as to the reason. I guess I'm just wondering why 200kHz was chosen in particular. I believe that most audio gear only responds well to about 20kHz anyway.

 

[Garry Goodman]

Garry/Mike, how is the stereo pickup divided?: 6 high strings and 6 low strings?

i recently thought that a divided pickup, if divided where wound strings end and plain begin, could even up the sound between the two types of string. i have always found plains to be a little bright and loud compared to wounds

matt/ixlramp

With several basses I've played (8+ strings),I found the higher strings got buried when played with the lower strings.
This current configuration has 5 bass and 7 high strings. This works for most two hand independent playing situations in stereo.A separate preamp for each side with it's own vol/eq.I can match eq/volume or have two settings for vol/eq.
Where this really makes a difference is when i sum the outputs to mono.Then the higher strings can be louder than the bass, and have a different Eq setting( or just the opposite). Either way,I can sound like two separate instruments or one mono instrument completely even in volume and tone across 92 notes.
I am working towards making a stereo demo so everyone interested can hear this bass.

Having2hz-200khz pre-amp makes the bass sound very "3D" when I record at 96k or higher.As Mike mentioned, there is "air" that way.The way the bass sounds through a pair of Sony Digital headphones is amazing. It almost sounds like it's compressed.When I play touch style,it doesn't sound like the typical"tapping".

The reason I approached Mike on this project is because his fretboards are the easiest ,most even and consistent in sound from fret to fret I've tried for my style of touch playing.So this combined with unlimited EQ possibilities and a great pick up make for an instrument without limitations in range,feel, sound quality etc. When i just play the bass as I would a Fender P bass,it feels and sounds great.I believe that just by listening that you would not realize I had moved from a wound to a plain string except by realizing that we are on octave 5,6 or 7.

 

[Garry Goodman]

Yes, I suppose I can see the point so far as if he wanted to dial in some 18kHz. However, I can't see listening to a bass and thinking... "wow, that's missing some 124kHz in the tone". Hopefully Garry will give his input. I'm genuinely curious as to the reason. I guess I'm just wondering why 200kHz was chosen in particular. I believe that most audio gear only responds well to about 20kHz anyway.

An important point, Geoff. Hearing Jauqo's low C# string on my 11-string after it was recorded and mastered on high end gear made me realize not everyone has an $8000 pair of monitors that handle 17 hz.We heard both our CD's on the $33,000 a pair Klein & Hummel monitors at NAMM. What about the rest of us? You can hear the string on most good systems, but the low notes really come alive with a system that has 17 hz frequency response.

On my CD,we recorded at 96k. Why? So by the time it was reduced to the CD,44.1k standard, the instruments would still have great detail and clarity.When you dither a 96 or 88k recording down to 44.1k for CD, you lose the "air" or openess of the recording. The pre amp's designer is an Audiophile. The state of the art for electric guitars and basses just went up. This puts a demand on stereo system manufacturers. They will need to start thinking about affordable systems to handle Sub Contra Bass and full frequency instruments.This is like HD TV compared to analog TV.
200khz capability translate to "it's more than you'll ever need".The same with the opposite end-2 Hz." High res mo' bettah"
IMO,playing a bass that has a neck less than 3/4" thick that you can literally stand on without affecting it, that has a greater range than any electro- acoustic instrument in existence with electronics/ EQ to match
is a pretty good place to start.Now it's up to me to play it.

 

[john turner]

Yes, I suppose I can see the point so far as if he wanted to dial in some 18kHz. However, I can't see listening to a bass and thinking... "wow, that's missing some 124kHz in the tone". Hopefully Garry will give his input. I'm genuinely curious as to the reason. I guess I'm just wondering why 200kHz was chosen in particular. I believe that most audio gear only responds well to about 20kHz anyway.

actually, protools HD uses a sampling rate of 192kHz. some folks would say this is so beyond the threshold of hearing that why bother, must be just a gimmick, but then again, the pro engineers who have been using it and upgrading their protools mix systems don't seem to think so.

 

[Geoff St. Germaine]

Yes agreed, but there is more involved in a sampling rate than there is in an EQ. For instance, you need to sample at twice the frequency in order to properly sample a frequency, however this doesn't say how well it was sampled and what the resultant digital waveform looks like in relation to the original analog signal.

More than you'll ever need was fine. I was just curious if there was a specific reason for the choice of 200kHz.

Thanks.

 

[john turner]

Yes agreed, but there is more involved in a sampling rate than there is in an EQ. For instance, you need to sample at twice the frequency in order to properly sample a frequency, however this doesn't say how well it was sampled and what the resultant digital waveform looks like in relation to the original analog signal.

that's true. i could imagine the use of a very high freq eq like the one on the bass for noise attenuating purposes.

as far as signal integrity, i know some audiophile engineers might prefer some of the other systems as far as a/d converters go, but i've never heard any specific complaints against the hd system.

 

[Garry Goodman]

actually, protools HD uses a sampling rate of 192kHz. some folks would say this is so beyond the threshold of hearing that why bother, must be just a gimmick, but then again, the pro engineers who have been using it and upgrading their protools mix systems don't seem to think so.

Exactly John,
We recorded "Tap Dance On A Cloud" at 96k (pro Tools HD v6.3).Most of the recordings were of nylon string classical guitar and drums and percussion.With those instruments ,the clarity and detail were remarkable when recorded at 96k. My 7 string bass has an earlier version of the 12-string's pre-amp and has a 20hz-20khs frequency range.The 96k captured sounds( desireable or not) that i didn't know were produced when the bass was recorded at a lower sampling rate.The transparency and detail are amazing.
With this 12-string circuit, an engineer is not having to deal with limitations, hiss, buzz,humm, noise,low output etc.

 

[Garry Goodman]

Yes agreed, but there is more involved in a sampling rate than there is in an EQ. For instance, you need to sample at twice the frequency in order to properly sample a frequency, however this doesn't say how well it was sampled and what the resultant digital waveform looks like in relation to the original analog signal.

More than you'll ever need was fine. I was just curious if there was a specific reason for the choice of 200kHz.

Thanks.

Ok,ok, I'll fess up!

Well here's the real reason for having 2hz-200khz:

This eliminates all phase shift in the audio band from 20hz-20khz, which are the main frequencies we are concerned with. Phase shift kicks in a "decade" below the actual frequencies that we want to preserve.By having this extreme frequency range, we are preserving the harmonic integrity.This prevents harmonic realignment, which makes the bass sound different.(sort of what the pattern buffers do on the transporters on Star Trek. When they are out of alignment, you materialize with your hand coming out of your....).

This circuit has a 200 volt per millisecond slew rate (faster than most high end mixing boards and mic pre amps ,if not all).This prevents "slew distortion".It can pass a 10k square wave without changing the shape of the wave form. This translate to "the best sound available out of a bass".

This is accomplished with millitary spec parts, silver solder and a few other items. The Hi Fi Villex pick- up picks up the quality of sound resonating from the strings and captures the dense qualities of the Mahogany,Maple fretboard etc. You are hearing the craftsmanship Mike put into the bass.This solves every and all problems I have ever experienced with bass guitar sound quality.

 

[Geoff St. Germaine]

Ok,ok, I'll fess up!

Well here's the real reason for having 2hz-200khz:

This eliminates all phase shift in the audio band from 20hz-20khz, which is the main frequencies we are concerned about. Phase shift kicks in a "decade" below the actual frequencies that we want to preserve.By having this extreme frequency range, we are preserving the harmonic integrity.This prevents harmonic realignment, which makes the bass sound different.(sort of what the pattern buffers do on the transporters on Star Trek. When they are out of alignment, you materialize with your hand coming out of your....).

This circut has a 200 volt per microsecond slew rate (faster than most high end mixing boards and mic pre amps ,if not all).This prevents "slew distortion".It can pass a 10k square wave without changing the shape of the wave form. This translate to "the best sound available out of a bass".

This is accomplished with millitary spec parts, silver solder and a few other items. The Hi Fi Villex pick up picks up the quality of sound resonating from the strings and captures the density qualities of the Mahogany,Maple fretboard etc. You are hearing the craftsmanship Mike put into the bass.This solves every and all problems I have ever experienced with bass guitar sound quality.

Doesn't this have more to do with the usable frequency band of the circuit itself and not so much to do with having the EQ sweepable from 2Hz to 200kHz. I suppose you have this lined up in that the onboard circuitry matches with what the EQ can sweep giving you maximum control of the entire frequency range of the circuit, even if you might not need it.

Am I getting it or am I off?

By the way, thanks for humoring my curiosity.

 

[pilotjones]

Ok,ok, I'll fess up!

Well here's the real reason for having 2hz-200khz:

This eliminates all phase shift in the audio band from 20hz-20khz, which is the main frequencies we are concerned about. Phase shift kicks in a "decade" below the actual frequencies that we want to preserve.By having this extreme frequency range, we are preserving the harmonic integrity.This prevents harmonic realignment, which makes the bass sound different.

...

While I wouldn't begin to argue the potential merits of mega-oversampling and its possible beneficial residual effect on audio quality after dithering down to 44.1 kHz for conventional mastering, there is one point presented that I believe to be faulty reasoning.

Agreed, that your circuit may have a phase shift interval that extends one octave on either side of the center frequency. Agreed, that you can sweep the center frequency from 2 Hz to 200 kHz. And agreed, that if you sweep the center frequency far beyond the audio range, e.g. 100 kHz, that you would then also be moving the phase shift zone beyond the audible range.

However, whenever you sweep the center frequency to near or within the audible spectrum, you do in fact have phase shift within the audible range, contrary to what you have stated.

IOW, if you can hear the EQ, you are getting an audible phase shift.


Which, in fact, is not necessarily a bad thing. It is possible, using digital processing (but not with analog circuits), to do an EQ that has no phase shift. I read once where a blind test was done, with testers EQing a signal two ways-- with an analog EQ with its inherent phase shift, and with a non-phase-shifting digital EQ. The testers were instructed to set both versions so that they both sounded like they had the same amount of boost. The result was that it took twice the gain increase on the digital non-shifting EQ to equal the apparent boost of the analog, shifting EQ. The interpretation is that the phase shift in some way increases the perceived effect, without actual additional gain. A more conjectural possible explanation of why this is may be, is that the frequency-dependent phase shift may be similar to what happens in sound conduction through actual materials (wood, air, etc.), and hence is a natural effect that our ears and brain are attuned to, as opposed to the "unnatural" non-shifting digital EQ.

[ slight tangent ]When I was an audio engineer, we were always sure to listen to every mix through NS-10s, and then through Auratones, in mono. Some things can sound good on nice monitors, but for a commercial production, it has to sound good through lower-fidelity speakers-- which can be more of a challenge than making it sound good through the hi-end stuff.
[ end tangent ]

 

[Garry Goodman]

Doesn't this have more to do with the usable frequency band of the circuit itself and not so much to do with having the EQ sweepable from 2Hz to 200kHz. I suppose you have this lined up in that the onboard circuitry matches with what the EQ can sweep giving you maximum control of the entire frequency range of the circuit, even if you might not need it.

Am I getting it or am I off?

By the way, thanks for humoring my curiosity.

i think you have valid questions. The circuit has a high slew rate.This was mainly done to make sure there wasn't any phase shift in the 20hz-20khz audio band. With a Bb000 at around 14hz and a high F#7 note around 3k (and all the harmonics played) we still don't get close to 20khz. Having the 2hz-200khz range preserves harmonic integrity.Clarification edit: we are talking onboard pre-amp,not knob settings.

 

[Garry Goodman]

While I wouldn't begin to argue the potential merits of mega-oversampling and its possible beneficial residual effect on audio quality after dithering down to 44.1 kHz for conventional mastering, there is one point presented that I believe to be faulty reasoning.

Agreed, that your circuit may have a phase shift interval that extends one octave on either side of the center frequency. Agreed, that you can sweep the center frequency from 2 Hz to 200 kHz. And agreed, that if you sweep the center frequency far beyond the audio range, e.g. 100 kHz, that you would then also be moving the phase shift zone beyond the audible range.

However, whenever you sweep the center frequency to near or within the audible spectrum, you do in fact have phase shift within the audible range, contrary to what you have stated.

IOW, if you can hear the EQ, you are getting an audible phase shift.


Which, in fact, is not necessarily a bad thing. It is possible, using digital processing (but not with analog circuits), to do an EQ that has no phase shift. I read once where a blind test was done, with testers EQing a signal two ways-- with an analog EQ with its inherent phase shift, and with a non-phase-shifting digital EQ. The testers were instructed to set both versions so that they both sounded like they had the same amount of boost. The result was that it took twice the gain increase on the digital non-shifting EQ to equal the apparent boost of the analog, shifting EQ. The interpretation is that the phase shift in some way increases the perceived effect, without actual additional gain. A more conjectural possible explanation of why this is may be, is that the frequency-dependent phase shift may be similar to what happens in sound conduction through actual materials (wood, air, etc.), and hence is a natural effect that our ears and brain are attuned to, as opposed to the "unnatural" non-shifting digital EQ.

[ slight tangent ]When I was an audio engineer, we were always sure to listen to every mix through NS-10s, and then through Auratones, in mono. Some things can sound good on nice monitors, but for a commercial production, it has to sound good through lower-fidelity speakers-- which can be more of a challenge than making it sound good through the hi-end stuff.
[ end tangent ]

Yes,there's always phase shift when you twist the knobs.I am not talking about EQ phase shift.
We are talking about that when the eq is set flat , there's no out of band phase shift/distortion. We are talking audio amps where there is no deviation from linear phase. The circuit is 0 degrees phase shift from 20hz-20khz.The pot may only twist up to 20khz, but the circuit and what comes out is the point. You just have not heard anything like this.It sounds great when you plug the headphones into the bass.

 

[pilotjones]

Yes,there's always phase shift when you twist the knobs.I am not talking about EQ phase shift.
We are talking about that when the eq is set flat , there's no out of band phase shift/distortion. We are talking audio amps where there is no deviation from linear phase. The circut is 0 degrees phase shift from 20hz-20khz.The pot may only twist up to 20khz, but the circut and what comes out is the point. You just have not heard anything like this.It sounds great when you plug in headphone into the bass.

I see - so the intent is not to have a no-phase-shift EQ, but rather to have no phase shift induced by the rest of the circuit, apart from the EQ.