Re: long analog delay

["James Winger" <jdwinger@hotmail.com>]

I'm honestly not sure HOW BAD the loss would be.  it might be pretty bad.

Have you considered just running 2 delays in series? At least as a test

You'd have to run them 100% and use another channel for accurate 
"emulatin" 
of a long delay, but on the bonus side you'd get a delay tap and a second 
feedback route

either way, I wouldn't expect to get your same sound..just longer







From: "mr.monk" <monk@fuse.net>
Reply-To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
Subject: Re: long analog delay
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 16:54:44 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v543)
Received: from mc7-f40.law1.hotmail.com ([65.54.253.47]) by 
mc7-s12.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 22 
Jan 
2003 13:55:15 -0800
Received: from hemlock.violacea.com ([207.228.238.9]) by 
mc7-f40.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 22 
Jan 
2003 13:55:15 -0800
Received: (from looper@localhost)by hemlock.violacea.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id 
QAA08047;Wed, 22 Jan 2003 16:54:39 -0500
Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 16:54:39 -0500
Old-Return-Path: <monk@fuse.net>
In-Reply-To: <F165RhQdOgl4rhYQYx300009cca@hotmail.com>
Message-Id: <1E047D91-2E54-11D7-AC4B-000393073870@fuse.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.543)
Resent-Message-ID: <YLw_6B.A.q9B.fMxL-@hemlock.violacea.com>
Resent-From: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
X-Mailing-List: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> archive/latest/29018
X-Loop: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: Loopers-Delight-request@loopers-delight.com
Return-Path: Loopers-Delight-request@loopers-delight.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jan 2003 21:55:15.0320 (UTC) 
FILETIME=[F20A3780:01C2C260]

can you add another bucket brigade to a memory man? is there a tech who 
will 
do this?


On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 04:45 PM, James Winger wrote:

>DOD had one (FX96) at about 500ms.  It used a single 3005.
>
>Funny thing, I had one and would run it on this really poorly regulated 
>supply...it must have altered the clock as it would pump out delays of 
>well 
>over a second
>Note : what came out was very weird, it was an echo -- but it was very 
>distorted (not overdrive / clipping distorted or simply low-frequency 
>from 
>the slow clock)
>
>you've got a couple of options I guess - chain 2 BBD's together (you'll 
>get 
>some loss from twice the buckets)
>
>lower the clock speed (changes sampling rate and will restrict the 
>frequency response, it might also start sounding "grainy")
>
>
>
>
>
>From: "mr.monk" <monk@fuse.net>
>Reply-To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
>To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
>Subject: long analog delay
>Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:43:59 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v543)
>Received: from mc7-f10.law1.hotmail.com ([65.54.253.17]) by 
>mc7-s14.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 22 
>Jan 
>2003 12:44:30 -0800
>Received: from hemlock.violacea.com ([207.228.238.9]) by 
>mc7-f10.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 22 
>Jan 
>2003 12:44:29 -0800
>Received: (from looper@localhost)by hemlock.violacea.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id 
>PAA31711;Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:43:59 -0500
>Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:43:59 -0500
>Old-Return-Path: <monk@fuse.net>
>In-Reply-To: <00b301c2c257$f50f5040$69894682@lance>
>Message-Id: <3BB51D2C-2E4A-11D7-AC4B-000393073870@fuse.net>
>X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.543)
>Resent-Message-ID: <88HQbC.A.ZvH.PKwL-@hemlock.violacea.com>
>Resent-From: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
>X-Mailing-List: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> archive/latest/29008
>X-Loop: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
>Precedence: list
>Resent-Sender: Loopers-Delight-request@loopers-delight.com
>Return-Path: Loopers-Delight-request@loopers-delight.com
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jan 2003 20:44:29.0984 (UTC) 
>FILETIME=[0F9F5A00:01C2C257]
>
>does anyone know of a longish (850 ms +) analog delay?  i'm thinking 
>about 
>trying to have the memory modified to go twice as long.. just curious. 
>i'm 
>of course leaving out the highly regarded but insanely priced EH 16sec 
>delay. 1 second would be enough for me. i have the ubiquitous DL4 and 
>although i do like it, the memory man is the least realistic of all the 
>delays IMHO...
>
>
>thanks
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
>


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus