Joemeek

SQUEEZE BOXES

Three tube compressors-and one wacky solid-state model flex their muscles to deliver a vintage punch.

Alas, it seems that a cure for this little disorder will be a long time coming because more and more manufacturers are producing tube compressors to exploit the retro-audio craze. I have no beef with that, but do these tubular dynamics processors really deliver warm, fuzzy, vintage-sounding compression?

For a reality check, we did a comparison test of three current models- Aphex's 661 Expressor, Bellari's RP282 Dual Tube compressor/limiter, and TL Audio's C-2021 Valve Compressor- that fell within a project-studio budget ($600 to $1,395). And just to make things interesting, we also tossed in the Fletcher Electro-Acoustics Joemeek SC-2, an expensive ($1,999) solid-state ringer that carries a fine pedigree for vintage crunch. Our main objectives were to evaluate the pros and cons of each of these signal crushers and to determine whether tubes actually enhance sonic performance.

COSTUME CAPERS

As far as fashion concerns go, the field was split into two distinct camps. The Bellari RP282 and the Joemeek SC-2 keep up a vintage appearance, and the Aphex 661 and the TL Audio C-2021 present modern, streamlined profiles. Of the bunch, the Joemeek SC-2 is definitely the stunner. A rich, lustrous green exterior that wouldn't offend a Rolls Royce is accessorized with huge black knobs and a large VU meter, creating a sophisticated yet funky look. The Bellari RP282 maintains an understated, classy air, with its brushed aluminum faceplate and symmetrical arrangement of black knobs, silver buttons, and dual VU meters. Both Units are sturdy and well built-even the knobs and buttons feel tight-although the RP282's VU meters are a tad flighty. The needles tended to bounce around indiscriminately, regardless of the level of input signal or whether Output or Gain Reduction metering was selected .
The Joemeek is kind of an operational iconoclast, so its parameter controls are not labeled as one might expect. You don't get markings for decibels, ratios. or milliseconds, you get numbers. (And, yes, some of them go up to 11!) The RP282 displays conventional parameters, but finding a specific range can be tricky. For example, the Ratio knob shows only four settings-2:1, 4:1, 5:1, and 10:1-and these values are spaced equal distances apart. If you asked me to dial in a 10:1 compression ratio, I could only hazard a guess at where I should set the knob.

On the Aphex and TL Audio mod squad, the TL Audio C-2021 is definitely the ace face. A striking, indigo blue front panel offers up a sleek, uncluttered layout of control knobs, buttons, and LED meters for each of the C-2021's two channels. Unfortunately like the RP282, some parameter values are not clearly marked. The C-2021's Ratio controls are simply identified as "Min" and "Max," and the only Threshold ranges shown are the extremes: -20 dB and +20 dB.

The Aphex 661, On the other hand, has extremely helpful, detailed parameter markings. For example, the 661's Ratio knob is stepped off in the following increments: 1.0, 1.3, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, and 30. No problem finding a 10:1 ratio here.Appearance-wise, the 661 is no slouch, either. The unit wears the blue-gray colors of the company's Tubessence family, and its many control knobs and buttons are sensibly arranged into parameter sections. A way cool feature is the 611's dual LED metering that lets you monitor audio level (input or output) and gain reduction simultaneously.
All of the compressors offer XLR and 1/4-inch inputs and outputs and, excepting the Joemeek SC-2, every model has a sidechain dedicated to each channel. (For more specifications, see the chart" Squeeze Plays" on p. 40.) Something else that all the compressors shared was an annoying pop or crackle that occurred whenever the bypass (or compression in/out) switch was toggled to compare processed and unprocessed signals.

The Joemeek SC-2 is simple, quirky, and absolutely brilliant.

IN THE RING

Thanks to the kindness of the manufacturers, I was able to live with all four compressors for approximately two months. This luxurious timeline allowed me (and my cohorts at Tiki Town studios) to record and mix four album projects, a multimedia score, and various song demos. In addition, we did full tests on both the balanced XLR and unbalanced l/4-inch I/O on every machine.

The studio tests were instructive because engineers started to select certain models for a particular sound or application, and overall allegiances to one unit or another were formed. Obviously, all opinions were culled for this face-off. In addition, I booked four sessions so I could work intimately with each compressor individually. Here's how these signal wrestlers performed against a variety of opponents.

APHEX 661
The 661 packs enough artillery to deal with just about any signal you throw at it. In addition to conventional compression controls, you get a Spectral Phase Refractor that phase-aligns bass frequencies (up to 150Hz), a handy Auto switch for when you want the 661 to decide how to process signals, a soft knee switch to activate a gradual onset of compression (at the selected threshold), a low cut for the sidechain input, and a high frequency expander that puts back the shimmer often lost at high compression settings. This near ultimate level of audio control made the 661 the box of choice when a sonic challenge (such as a lifeless snare track invaded by tons of hi-hat and kick-drum bleed) jumped into the fray.

Vocals.
The 661 delivers such pristine, detailed compression that the ambiance of the space where the vocals were recorded always became a prominent element of the source sound. Such dimensional articulation and transparency made the 661 a "given" for producing clear, shimmering vocals. In addition, the high-frequency expander allowed me to crush vocals at a 15:1 ratio and a -20 dB threshold without surrendering intelligibility. The 661 may be one of the hippest balms for the human voice since tea and honey.

Electric bass.
The Spectral Phase Refractor (SPR) earned my respect after it erased the muddy lows from a sloppily finger-picked performance. Otherwise, the 661 treated basses with a smooth, tight compression that added "whomp" without losing snap.

Guitars.
The 661 produced a clear, tight sound on both electric's and acoustics, but the timbre was a little too polite for my taste. Here's an embarrassing admission: when processing guitars, the 661's Auto function always produced a cleaner, sharper tone than my manual tweaking.
Mono drum submix.

When mixing, I often fade a monaural drum submix under the level of the main channel mix to add more of a slammin' impact to the tracks. For this application, the 661 was brilliant, producing a crystal-clear sonic picture with snap and bite. The marvelous SPR clarified kick-drum and tom resonance's until they roared. My only complaint was that cymbal crashes leapt uncomfortably out of the mix.

BELLARI RP282
The RP282 is a meat-and-potatoes type of processor that will not bind you to a learning curve or interfere with rapid adjustments. It is what it is, as my former production partner, Neal Brighton, would say.

Vocals.
Remember those old Otis Redding records on which he'd let loose and you'd hear the compression trying valiantly to rein him in? That's the sound of the RP282 when it's processing vocals. The insistent pumping and breathing mar an otherwise warm and harmonically rich timbre.

Electric bass.
What a boom! The RP282 delivers a warm, swooping low end that was pretty darn close to Paul McCartney's bass tone on Rubber Soul. Midrange frequencies were somewhat muted, and some pumping remained audible on hard plucks, but I gladly accepted these compromises in the face of the RP282's big ol' bottom.

Guitars.
Although the pumping and breathing were still audible on electric and acoustic-guitar tracks, the RP282 produced, once again, a nice l965 Beatles timbre. The mids were appropriately sharp and cranky, which made the RP282 a good choice for "vintage" guitar sounds.

Mono drum submix.
This was not a graceful encounter: No matter where the compression parameters were set, the sound flapped, splattered, and popped. As a result, much of the drum kit's articulation was lost. The RP282 may work for intentionally trashy drums such as the ugly percussion favored by producers T-Bone Burnett and Brian Eno-but for more organic applications, it's a washout.

JOEMEEK SC-2
Due to its lack of conventional controls, the Joemeek defies you to get tweaky. For example, there are no Ratio or Threshold parameters, only Slope, Compression, and a series of numerical values. Huh? The cheeky instructional manual says, in effect, that if you want more "effect," turn the knobs to the higher numbers. The cool thing about the Joemeek's unabashed simplicity is that it forces you to mess around and twist dials until you get a happening sound. Of course, the tortured genius himself, Joe Meek often said, "If it sounds right, it is right." I agree.

Vocals.
Can a vocal tone be sensual and savage at the same time? the Joemeek pulls these apparent opposites into a stunning aural collaboration. Vocals sounded warm and smooth while also smashing against the sound stage with awesome ferocity. I loved it.

Electric bass.
We're talking about a mammoth vintage pump here, with outstanding midrange articulation and a fat, chunky low end. Eighth-note pedals had a chugging, relentless quality, and single-note runs were crystal clear.

Guitars.
Heaven. The Joemeek forged the guitar sounds for every project I've produced since it arrived for review. The box delivers kick-butt impact, aggression, and detail. And the sparkle it brought to acoustic-guitar tracks left me breathless

Mono drum submix.
The Joemeek reproduced clean tones with remarkable clarity and punch. In addition, all of the tonal relationships were dead even: crash cymbals did not pop out of the mix, and the hi-hats did not overwhelm the snare.

TL AUDIO C-2021
Like the RP282, the C-2021 invites you to get right to work. There's nothing out of the ordinary to suss out, and you even get a convenient perk: a front panel, l/4-inch instrument input.

Vocals.
For the most part, the C-2021 embraced vocals with a smooth and sensual-sounding compression. However, if the performer belted Ethel Merman style, some honking in the low mids would appear, along with a little high end grit.

Electric bass.
The rear panel, 1/4-inch inputs on the review model did not like bass. The signal was so edgy and distorted that it was rendered unusable When the XLR I/O was employed, the distortion disappeared and the bass sound was warm and robust-becoming especially rich in the 250 Hz range.

Guitars.
I had a hard time dialing in suitably tough compression settings without accentuating low-level buzzes and other dirty doggies. Light compression settings added a sexy sheen to acoustic guitars, but the C-2021 wasn't the box for nasty electric tones.

Mono drum submix.
The C-2021 served up a clear, organic picture of the drum set. Although the snap of the snare was more pronounced, the processed sound wasn't much different from the unprocessed track. Heavier compression settings brought up the low-frequency content somewhat, but the overall tonal spectrum remained balanced and transparent.

TRICK MOVE

Now, does a tube compressor actually sound warmer-or exhibit more sonic personality-than a quality solid-state model? During this comparison test, finding a definitive answer to that question was tough, especially when the solid-state Joemeek sounded more blissfully colored than its tubular counterparts. What's the deal?

To gain more insight, I compared the tube machines to some solid-state models in my processing arsenal: the dbx 166, the PreSonus DCP-8, and the Focusrite Red 3. Although each individual compressor was loaded with personality, I couldn't say that the tube models sounded any warmer, tougher, or funkier than the tubeless processors. In an extremely subjective evaluation, I rated each compressor on its ability to infuse signals with warm, aggressive, "vintage" coloration. Here's the pecking order: Joemeek SC-2, 166A, RP282, C-2021 and DCP-8 (tie), 661, and Focusrite Red 3.

The RP282, in all its overkill glory, was the only tube compressor that evoked the fat, musically fuzzy sound of authentic tape coloration Even so, I could dial in the same vintage punch with more clarity and impact using the Joemeek or the 166A. I'm not slamming the tube compressor tribe here, I'm just stating that you shouldn't purchase one of these devices with the express goal of "heating up" signals If you want a compressor- burn factor on your tracks, record everything with a high-caliber tube mic preamp or lay your sounds down on analog tape.

CHAMPIONSHIP BELTS

This face off proved to be of monumental, Ben Hur-type proportions. Each compressor had its strengths and weaknesses, depending on the job it was assigned, but each was also a bona fide champion. These are truly marvelous processors, and I dug them all. It would be pointless to crown an overall winner, however, as each machine possessed certain qualities that made it perfect for specific applications. Therefore, I'll just rate the champs on their "game faces" and let you decide which sonic personality best fits your needs.

Kubla Khan.
It figures that I'd fall head over heels for the most expensive unit (bye-bye budget!), but I can't stop myself from obsessing over the sonic punch of the Fletcher Electro-Acous tics Joemeek SC-2. It simply made everything sound gosh darn amazing. The Joemeek enhanced the crystalline harmonic structures of electric and acoustic guitars while making them sound loud and proud. I was totally blissed out. In addition, processed vocals were clear and present, drums walloped and raged, and basses thumped with aggressive conviction.

Of course, the Joemeek is best employed when you want to use compression as an effect, because it definitely colors the source sound. In a strange twist, given its distinctive coloration, the Joemeek delivered the cleanest audio of the models tested. Audible hiss was practically nonexistent. Obviously, at $1,999.99, the Joemeek SC-2 will appeal to only the most capitalized, serious recordists amongst the EM readership. But if you can afford the units price tag, the sonic rewards are tremendous. This is a wonder box. Bless you, Joe Meek, where ever you are

Doc Octopus.
The Aphex 661 Expressor is loaded with so many features that it should be filed under "Compressors: The Next Generation." But the 661 is not just a box o' many goodies, it also happens to sound spectacular. This is an extremely transparent compressor that delivers almost clinical audio quality. Processed signals were very clear and present, regardless of how hard the 661 crunched them. Such precision was beneficial when compressing vocals and drums because minute ambient details were audible enough to add dimension to the source sounds. The downside to this clarity is that poorly recorded tracks (or instruments tracked in less-than-ideal acoustic environments) may sound worse when every sonic element is brought front and center. Some audible hiss was apparent when the 661 was doing its thing, but the noise wasn't objectionable. The 661 is a single-channel unit, so you'll need two to do stereo processing. Although twin 661s will cost approximately $1,500.00, that's certainly a fair price for a stereo compressor transparent enough for home-mastering use. After all, now that affordable CD-Rs provide desktop studiophiles the option of making their own CDs (see "Burn, Baby, Burn!" in the June 1996 EM), it makes sense to have some critical mastering tools available. The 661 definitely has the sonic chops to add crystalline punch to a stereo master and smash some ferocious sense into a lone guitar track.

The Peacemaker.
TL Audio's C-2021 Valve Compressor caresses signals in a velvety embrace. Compression remains lush and smooth from a light hug (a 2:1 ratio at a 0 dB threshold) to a spine-cruncher (a 20:1 ratio at a -15 dB threshold). This doesn't mean that the C-2021 sounds like a marshmallow, just that it produces a refined coloration that is less aggressive than the other models .
The mellow mood was only broken during ripping guitar passages and dynamic vocal crescendos. In these instances, the C2021 was prone to exhibit a slight grittiness. I usually considered the C-2021's increased sizzle a "gift," as it fattened up the harmonic content of the source sound (although the buzz proved too obtrusive for subtle applications). Audible hiss was pretty subdued, but the noise floor increased with higher ratio and threshold settings.
Speaking of parameters, specific settings can be difficult to pinpoint because the C-2021's controls do not mark off incremental values. The only other operational bummer was that the -10 dBu, unbalanced I/O on the rear panel produced an ugly, splatting distortion on bass-intensive signals. When the +4 dBu I/O was employed, the distortion magically disappeared.
These quibbles aside, the C-2021 is a sensuous compressor that cradles, rather than pummels, signals. A cappella vocals, solo flute, and other delicate performances were particularly well suited to the C-2021's charms. The C-2021 isn't all peace, love, and understanding, but the other three combatants produced more aggressive tones when processing "impact" instruments such as electric guitars and drums .

The Ruffian.
The Bellari RP282 Dual Tube Compressor/limiter is like a wrestler running amok. It does not surrender, it gives no quarter, and it can not be stopped from smothering signals in a sonic chokehold. This is both good and bad. On the good side, the RP282 delivers gloriously over-the-top tube coloration that is reminiscent of the maximum compression on pre-Tommy Who records. If you lust after the wallop of late-1960s rock and blues recordings, this is the box to get. On the bad side, this is not the box to get if you sometimes prefer a less colored sound.

The RP282 was so rambunctious, in fact, that some pumping and breathing were always present no matter where the Attack and Release controls were set. (Bellari states that the RP282's compression has been "calmed down" on the current models.) Audible hiss was apparent, but not obtrusive, at low compression settings and fairly pronounced at higher settings.

Controlling the RP282's forceful personality took some tweaking-and even at its most well behaved, it never produced what I'd call light compression- so I tended to use it when I wanted to get a certain effect. For example, the RP282 transformed a rather sedate (sampled) Hammond performance into an undulating, sweaty swagger that emulated the sound of Rabbit Bundrick's organ on Free's 1972 classic Heartbreaker album. I wouldn't give the RP282 the sole compressor position in my rack, but as a second or third option, it can always be trusted to add some guts to genteel tracks.

SQUEEZED OUT

Whether you use compression as an invasive sound-sculpting process (as I do) or you simply wish to tame performance dynamics as naturally as possible, these Crush Masters make quite a tag team. So, if you want your tracks to really kick and punch, grab the compressor of your choice, pick a spiffy wrestler's alias ("The Squashmeister," "The Pulverizer," etc.), and start stomping all over those audio signals. It's time to rumble!

Although he's only an impish 5-foot, 7-inches, EM Editor Michael Molenda has squashed the bejabbers out of every audio signal brave enough to cross his path.