APACHE eTap2hw - HEAVY STRINGS

[Spike]

Finally managed to download and listen to the last sample Dave... Wow that is it best I have heard yet for Apache... and therefore proves the etap2HW without question. I did a/b it against the TVS Apache on their site and on this occassion this version wins for me. Not that Gary Taylors version is lacking in anyway but the sound is nearer on this soundfile to my ears. Piet must be happy if he has heard this.

To answer Alan McKillop's comments about this being an eTap thread and not a TVS3 thread, then why do people not have the right to defend the TVS3 when it is challenged by comments as quoted above.

If people want to compare the etap to the TVS3 then we are happy to compromise as Paul has done in a previous and now blocked thread.

If you guys want to keep it as an Etap thread then dont include us in your discussion and just compare the etap to The Shadows.
Do we not have the right to defend ourselves if you are suggesting to people that the Etap is better or equal to the TVS3?
We will not interfere in an Etap discussion unless we are challenged so please keep it strictly Etap.

My Perth site(home of the TVS) has a section on the Etap where people are promoting it and we are happy to see Piets product get some exposure as it is a great product for the price.
See here http://shadowsperth.proboards.com/index ... hread=4140

and the DIY section: http://shadowsperth.proboards.com/index ... 140&page=2


Cheers
Spike

OK Spike did not mean to undermine the TVS unit at all , but your version of Apache by GT was probably the best version to date and it seemed natural to me to reference it in the effort to justify the eTap2HW version produced by DR in this thread . I remain convinced of the eTap2HW capabilities and also the TVS3 both being top units albeit at different pricing levels and build. Perhaps the internet sometimes makes comments appear worse than they are intended but I do not mean to devalue the TVS in any way and recognise PR's work and dedication in achieving what he has. We all know though that neither unit out of the box will give the final sound as on the records and some other studio settings are altered to achieve the final result. I did make reference to Robby Janusaras version of Wonderful Land in a later comment which proves the point that the sound can be achieved by other means as well. Sorry to drag TVS into the thread though but I thought Paul had done that by producing the 4 bytes soundfiles comparing the two units with the original. In any case an opinion is held and a right to express with respect is perfectly reasonable as no intention to offend is intended. It is inevitable on a site like this that people will compare the equipment available as they do with the various EFTP units and The Atlantis etc.
Please do not take offence at other peoples valid opinion as none was intended !

Hi Roger

Firstly you and others have on current and previous Etap threads, brought in the TVS3 and suggesting that the eTap was as good or better than the TVS3. Perhaps you to a lesser extent.
Its for that reason we have brought in comparisons and responded appropriately.
In regard to neither unit giving you the exact sound out of the box, that also goes for The Shadows back in the early sixties because their sound would have started like ours(aka Meazzi) and then modified at the desk by Malcolm Addey. Now to get an early sound like the records you need to add EQ, compression or some reverb...but not necessarily all. There is no overprocessing by us like some members have suggested...its just a basic EQ plug in or compression plug in which everyone has access to on their PC's. So all we do is record it with the correct echoes and post mix just like they did at Abbey Road.
Now we have submitted our sound files and other people theirs. The difference is that no one can get as close to The Shadows early sound as we can. If they have then show us, and if they produce results and tell us that they are as good or better than us, then we will be drawn into the game with a comparison...as was done on recent threads here.

Finally I have no problems with yourself or anyone but please respect our right to defend our product when people try and make a comparison to it.

Cheers
Spike

[Gary Allen]

A rough idea of how it probably sounded back in the day without the Abbey Rd tools would be this (Radio Lux) http://www.4shared.com/mp3/dVsRHUc6/15_The_Savage.html or http://www.4shared.com/mp3/Wyc7sIv2/01_Apache.html gary

[dave robinson]

A rough idea of how it probably sounded back in the day without the Abbey Rd tools would be this (Radio Lux) http://www.4shared.com/mp3/dVsRHUc6/15_The_Savage.html or http://www.4shared.com/mp3/Wyc7sIv2/01_Apache.html gary

That's a good point Gary, I have a CD that a friend put together with 23 tracks form Radio Luxemburg, 4 tracks from Saturday Club and 8 from Denmark in 1961. All very interesting and not like the recordings as we know them.

[David Martin]

Hi Roger

Firstly you and others have on current and previous Etap threads, brought in the TVS3 and suggesting that the eTap was as good or better than the TVS3. Perhaps you to a lesser extent.
Its for that reason we have brought in comparisons and responded appropriately.
In regard to neither unit giving you the exact sound out of the box, that also goes for The Shadows back in the early sixties because their sound would have started like ours(aka Meazzi) and then modified at the desk by Malcolm Addey. Now to get an early sound like the records you need to add EQ, compression or some reverb...but not necessarily all. There is no overprocessing by us like some members have suggested...its just a basic EQ plug in or compression plug in which everyone has access to on their PC's. So all we do is record it with the correct echoes and post mix just like they did at Abbey Road.
Now we have submitted our sound files and other people theirs. The difference is that no one can get as close to The Shadows early sound as we can. If they have then show us, and if they produce results and tell us that they are as good or better than us, then we will be drawn into the game with a comparison...as was done on recent threads here.

Finally I have no problems with yourself or anyone but please respect our right to defend our product when people try and make a comparison to it.

Cheers
Spike

Spike, a comparison is just a comparison... Not an attack... E.g. The Shadows always sounded better than the Fentones... (But I think The Fentones were great. )

Now this Is a criticism... The Shadows sound on the Live at Liverpool cd is lifeless.

And this is an attack... The Bumslingers are crap...

You have a great product, and no-one gain says that... By staying aloof you let people use their own ears and wallets - aggressive and strident "defence" against non-existent "attack" makes you appear insecure... No need when you have such a great piece of kit...

Warm regards

D

[dave robinson]

Spike wrote
'In regard to neither unit giving you the exact sound out of the box, that also goes for The Shadows back in the early sixties because their sound would have started like ours(aka Meazzi) and then modified at the desk by Malcolm Addey. Now to get an early sound like the records you need to add EQ, compression or some reverb...but not necessarily all'.


I'm so pleased you said that Spike - I have nothing more to add, it's what I have been trying to get across. Maybe the key to my own efforts will be to record the demo through a Vox amp through the EF86 channel, something that I have purposely avoided because I wanted to show that there was enough of a 'core' sound coming from the eTap2hw without it.

[Spike]

Hi Dave

Keeping in mind that the TVS3 responds like a Meazzi as it has that special singing quality and also wow/flutter.
Also with TVS3's/Meazzis/ Vox Long Toms....they respond differently to other echo units as you drive them harder.

Digital units get louder and have unwanted distortion whilst the Meazzi family give off a natural compression and distortion depending on the amount you want to drive them

Cheers
Spike

[David Martin]

Must admit that I'm baffled by references to the quality of the sound of Meazzi units... I had one; you can see it in Roberto's book. It's the same model as Justin and Phil Kelly's unit. It was a really nice tape echo unit with very flexible - if clunky - head switching. But recorded sound of The Shadows just wasn't hidden in it... Folks who use them in UK seem to have had them modified in order to behave differently... Roger A knows the secret...

Do you think this thread has meandered off topic?

[Spike]

Hi David

Roberto had two Meazzi's supposedly identical but each sounded vastly different.
Yours may be a Meazzi but it may not have that core sound....for some reason

Cheers
Spike

[AlanMcKillop]

Spike wrote
'In regard to neither unit giving you the exact sound out of the box, that also goes for The Shadows back in the early sixties because their sound would have started like ours(aka Meazzi) and then modified at the desk by Malcolm Addey. Now to get an early sound like the records you need to add EQ, compression or some reverb...but not necessarily all'.

At long last, It's what I've been saying all the time.

[Spike]

Yep Alan....and to go further you're not going to get the early recorded sound at any live concert as some people expect.

The closest you might get is sounds such as from the ABC KIngston Concert and perhaps the the one at the Paris Olympia around 1962 but if you did an AB test there would still be significant differences from the Malcolm Addey post mixes.

Spike