So, which echo is the best ?

[ecca]

But the drum didn't do Wonderful Land.........

Really ?

Wasn't it the tape that did it ?

No, it was the next model in the wheel ones. Hank didn't have a tape one at that time.

[phil kelly]

As we know Wonderful land being the model 2 but happy birthday is strange as the melody sounds like a model F or J type trip with very little feedback but the resounding decay you hear at the end sounds like the model 2, as i understand it i know the the TVS emulates other classic machines but i think Paul has based the echomatic settings on the wheel echomatics ? perhaps he can enlighten us, also now having this machine i believe Hank used either the F or J on shane, its always been deemed as just reverb but i feel sure its one or the other,
Phil.

[rogera]

I find that this thread is one of the most interesting for some time now.

I've worked on many echo units over the years with the exception of any Meazzi wheel/drum units, but there is one aspect of the discussion that is puzzling me. Many of us will remember the story of Dick Denny being needed frequently to put new tape on the wheel of Hank's echo and in view of the fact that tape was being used rather than any original ferrous coating, you would tend to think that the two types would sound very similar. I can accept that there may be some slight differences in the wow & flutter characteristics but I don't think that would be significant.

My opinion is that when Meazzi moved on from the wheel units and introduced the tape models such as the Echomatic and Factotum, they also changed various aspects of the circuitry. In addition to that with not having any direct experience of the wheel type I cannot be sure, but from photos that I've seen it looks as though different heads were used and that could also go a long way to explaining things.

There is one more thing that I'd like to throw into the equation and that is what type of recording tape is used. From way back when most of us had tape recorders you will be aware that changing the the type of tape used can have a big impact on the recorded sound mostly due to different bias requirements. It's just another area of uncertainty.

[phil kelly]

I agree with with Roger has said, you can hear the difference between Hanks earliest F and J sounds ( apache , mustang and cliff recordings etc ) and the later model 2 sound, the latter of the two having less bass giving a middly barky, bell like tonality, the F and J machines giving a much more warmer tone, with the eq giving more lower mids and slightly more bottom,
It would appear that perhaps the trend with Sep was to go for a more toppy cut through kind of tone, i remember Dick Denny saying this regards amps and echo units of that time and changes were made to the circuits to obtain this with the later valve tape machines,
Also as Roger has stated different head types were also used with different characteristics, inductance, materials used etc, all these playing a factor in the final tone shaping.
I have experimented with a couple of different tape types but have found the differences hardly notieable, only very subtle.
Phil.

[roger bayliss]

I always thought that the head volumes on the F and J were different to the Meazzi Echomatic 2 ?

On the Meazzi Echomatic 2, I think the last head (longest delay) is loudest whilst the F and the J had the first head the loudest producing a kind of slap echo at the start of the repeats. The F and J would produce this first echo then the remaining heads would halo on after it, where as the EM2 would produce the loudest echo last and the halo would come before it. Two different types of sound and operation. Wonderful Land clearly has EM2 delay sound. The very early stuff had the slap echo type of sound (with halo) .

Regarding the echo on the records prior to Hank getting his first echo units I believe that is reel to reel slap tape echo done by studio engineers by using two tape reels and setting up a delay between the two. This was a popular way to obtain slap echo in the early days.

Might be wrong but that is what I believe a present.

[Didier]

there is one aspect of the discussion that is puzzling me. Many of us will remember the story of Dick Denny being needed frequently to put new tape on the wheel of Hank's echo and in view of the fact that tape was being used rather than any original ferrous coating, you would tend to think that the two types would sound very similar. I can accept that there may be some slight differences in the wow & flutter characteristics but I don't think that would be significant.

On the Meazzi, the drum was made of aluminium alloy covered with ferrous oxyde coating, which was likely to have the same magnetic characteristics as magnetic tape.
But the Meazzi drum units had a design flaw : with head friction, the magnetic coating would wear out, and as a palliative cure, Dick Denny used to wind magnetic tape around the drum to replace the worn coating, but there is no reasons why it sould have sounded differently than the original coating. At this time the only magnetic material used was iron oxide (no chrome yet).
Because of this design flaw, the Meazzi drum units were quickly dropped in favor of tape units. It's easier to replace a worn tape loop than a drum !
Later echo tape units such as Roland and Korg used much longer tape loops to made them last longer.
The Binson drums use steel wire as magnetic material, which is much more resistant to wear.

Didier

[Gary Allen]

[Tigerdaisy]

I tire of hearing that Hank said he didn't used reverb. The fact is that when you made records back then you used your own gear to get the sound you think was required, then the engineer and producer would add what the hell they liked and you would have to accept it. There is reverb on most of the Cliff & Shadows final mixes and it does make a difference. Because he says HE didn't use reverb it doesn't mean it wasn't added when he'd gone home. I agree with what Didier said about the Kingston recording. To add to that, listen to the recordings made before the Meazzi showed up and you can hear a very pleasing sound that could be mistaken for his later to be had echo machine. That was done with studio equipment.

Yes... reverb is definitely used on the recordings. I don't think you can get such a 'large and wide' sound with just plain echo (whatever that is). Obviously reverb units weren't available for stage use in the old days, but definitely on recordings. I'm using a Zoom G3 currently and if you set up a delay as one effect with a reverb effect in the next window you can hear the difference switching the reverb on and off. On many recordings many might say there was too much echo/reverb, but of course that was the 'sound' at that particular time and 'expands and fills the gaps' better of the lead guitar than if you just used echo.

[Didier]

Yes... reverb is definitely used on the recordings. I don't think you can get such a 'large and wide' sound with just plain echo (whatever that is). Obviously reverb units weren't available for stage use in the old days, but definitely on recordings.

As already mentionnned, the famous Abbey Road "echo chamber" (in fact a reverb chamber) was used for recordings, but couldn't be carried for stage use !



Anyhow, some reverb is useful on records, much less for live playing.

More about how recordings were made by Malcolm Addey here : http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/nov03/a ... tracks.htm

Didier

[Hank2k]

Its quite amazing that will all these variables that anyone is able to even come close to the sound.

With guitars, pickups, strings, plectrums, then echo machine circuit, heads, tape, then amp style size, speakers, valves then abbey road itself microphone, reverb, compressor, recording equipment. Couple that with hanks hands, his style, the clothes he was wearing....ok that's too far but you get my point.