Scott Dorsey wrote:
> palli...@gmail.com <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Creedence Clearwater Revival during the Vietnam era.
>> Live on the Ed Sullivan show, of all places.
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RUGJAWIslE
>>
>> Raw and rough, so doubtless a live ( excellent) version.
>
> No monitors, EV dynamic on vocals with a chamber reverb. Seems odd.
> --scott
>

Indeed. I'm not sure if I should trust this "television". It being
so new and all.

But that Perry Mason. Seems eminently trustworthy.

--
Les Cargill

Don Pearce wrote:
> Chamber reverb was an alternative to plate reverb.

Wasn't it used long before? The first EMT was mid 1960s.
And there are all sort of stories from the Nashville crowd about
chambers.

--
Les Cargill

Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
>I wasn't referring to instrument reverbs, as in those built into guitar
>amps. The 1960s EchoPlex couldn't be more unlike any of the other kinds
>of reverb mentioned since they were tube units based on analog tape
>loops. It was, by far, the most popular reverb unit we professionals used.

The Echoplex isn't really a reverb unit but an echo box. Instrument reverbs
like the Echoplex and all the various spring reverbs were often used for PA
effects but you would not use something like that on studio vocals. You
might find them used by the musician himself in the studio on instruments,
though.

>As for being "natural on vocals", even echo chambers had artifacts that
>changed what would otherwise be the natural sound of a performance. How
>the live room and the chamber was mic'd, created different outcomes.

Yes, absolutely, which is what I pointed out in the original recording.
That's either a chamber or a very dulled-down plate. You would not expect
to see such things in a TV studio. This therefore would indicate that was
not a live recording per se, although it may have been tracked specifically
for the show (the way Lawrence Welk tended to work).
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Les Cargill <lcargil99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Indeed. I'm not sure if I should trust this "television". It being
>so new and all.

My mom says it will rot your brains out. You'll be watching Skipper and
The Gilligan and your brain will just fall right out into your lap. Because
it will be rotten. Right in your lap. And then where will you be? You'll
have no brain. That's why we didn't get a TV.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Les Cargill <lcargil99@gmail.com> wrote:
>Don Pearce wrote:
>> Chamber reverb was an alternative to plate reverb.
>
>Wasn't it used long before? The first EMT was mid 1960s.
>And there are all sort of stories from the Nashville crowd about
>chambers.

Not THAT much longer but yes. The EMT was an attempt at simulating the
chamber sound without requiring a huge amount of real estate.

The EMT sound changed a bit over the years as fashion changed and people
started setting them up tighter and tighter. And then predelay came along!
By the time I first used an EMT in the seventies people were cranking the
things until the clips popped in order to get that shimmery thing.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey wrote:
===============
( snip various others)
> >> Chamber reverb was an alternative to plate reverb.
> >
> >Wasn't it used long before? The first EMT was mid 1960s.

** The original EMT140 was released in '57, it was mono while a "stereo" model came along in '61.
Made in Germany.
Apple Studios bought 4 of them.

> The EMT sound changed a bit over the years as fashion changed and people
> started setting them up tighter and tighter. And then predelay came along!
> By the time I first used an EMT in the seventies people were cranking the
> things until the clips popped in order to get that shimmery thing.
> --scott

** The Ecoplate 1 an 2 were later clones of the EMT, but made in USA.

See live demo and tech info:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6eZ_JbmBDw

The term "stereo" is being used loosely, cos there is only one input.

..... Phil

palli...@gmail.com wrote:
==========================
>
> Wasn't it used long before? The first EMT was mid 1960s.
>
> ** The original EMT140 was released in '57, it was mono while a "stereo" model came along in '61.
> Made in Germany.
> Apple Studios bought 4 of them.

** Opps - Abbey Road Studios of course.

.... Phil

On 10/16/2022 8:48 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
>> I wasn't referring to instrument reverbs, as in those built into guitar
>> amps. The 1960s EchoPlex couldn't be more unlike any of the other kinds
>> of reverb mentioned since they were tube units based on analog tape
>> loops. It was, by far, the most popular reverb unit we professionals used.
>
> The Echoplex isn't really a reverb unit but an echo box. Instrument reverbs
> like the Echoplex and all the various spring reverbs were often used for PA
> effects but you would not use something like that on studio vocals. You
> might find them used by the musician himself in the studio on instruments,
> though.
>
I agree that the EchPlex was never a "studio reverb" except for special
effects on some pop songs. My point was only that it is capable of
creating "reverb", although with its own artifacts.

>> As for being "natural on vocals", even echo chambers had artifacts that
>> changed what would otherwise be the natural sound of a performance. How
>> the live room and the chamber was mic'd, created different outcomes.
>
> Yes, absolutely, which is what I pointed out in the original recording.
> That's either a chamber or a very dulled-down plate. You would not expect
> to see such things in a TV studio. This therefore would indicate that was
> not a live recording per se, although it may have been tracked specifically
> for the show (the way Lawrence Welk tended to work).
> --scott
>
>
I had many experiences in that era when the band played "live" on TV
with basically the same setup we used on stage. It was our way or no
way*, and the broadcast stations just wanted to attract attention to
sell ads (as always). That is what the original post sounds like to me.

* Many of the "top pop" bands were managed by record producers, and they
called the shots w/r/t their setup, especially for broadcast.

--
best regards,

Neil

On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 5:49:03 PM UTC-7, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Neil <ne...@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
> >I wasn't referring to instrument reverbs, as in those built into guitar
> >amps. The 1960s EchoPlex couldn't be more unlike any of the other kinds
> >of reverb mentioned since they were tube units based on analog tape
> >loops. It was, by far, the most popular reverb unit we professionals used.
> The Echoplex isn't really a reverb unit but an echo box. Instrument reverbs
> like the Echoplex and all the various spring reverbs were often used for PA
> effects but you would not use something like that on studio vocals. You
> might find them used by the musician himself in the studio on instruments,
> though.
> >As for being "natural on vocals", even echo chambers had artifacts that
> >changed what would otherwise be the natural sound of a performance. How
> >the live room and the chamber was mic'd, created different outcomes.
> Yes, absolutely, which is what I pointed out in the original recording.
> That's either a chamber or a very dulled-down plate. You would not expect
> to see such things in a TV studio. This therefore would indicate that was
> not a live recording per se, although it may have been tracked specifically
> for the show (the way Lawrence Welk tended to work).
> --scott
>
>
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

I mixed the Welk show from '71 through'73. There were many 'pre-records' when I joined the show. Mr. Welk knew his people could work 'live' and liked my mixing. When the show left ABC after '73, pre-records were limited to Norma Zimmer (she couldn't hit the high notes and look sweet) and Arthur Duncan (he would ad lib too much for the planned camera angles) Full-cast production numbers" were pre-recorded for wide-shot convenience. I was told that Welk didn't like reverb. On other shows I'd been using the EMT 140 plate on vocals, strings, etc. I continued that practice and Mr. Welk never said a word.

B.T.W. - ABC-TV

On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 10:13:23 AM UTC-7, Roy W. Rising wrote:
> On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 5:49:03 PM UTC-7, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> > Neil <ne...@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
> > >I wasn't referring to instrument reverbs, as in those built into guitar
> > >amps. The 1960s EchoPlex couldn't be more unlike any of the other kinds
> > >of reverb mentioned since they were tube units based on analog tape
> > >loops. It was, by far, the most popular reverb unit we professionals used.
> > The Echoplex isn't really a reverb unit but an echo box. Instrument reverbs
> > like the Echoplex and all the various spring reverbs were often used for PA
> > effects but you would not use something like that on studio vocals. You
> > might find them used by the musician himself in the studio on instruments,
> > though.
> > >As for being "natural on vocals", even echo chambers had artifacts that
> > >changed what would otherwise be the natural sound of a performance. How
> > >the live room and the chamber was mic'd, created different outcomes.
> > Yes, absolutely, which is what I pointed out in the original recording.
> > That's either a chamber or a very dulled-down plate. You would not expect
> > to see such things in a TV studio. This therefore would indicate that was
> > not a live recording per se, although it may have been tracked specifically
> > for the show (the way Lawrence Welk tended to work).
> > --scott
> >
> >
> > --
> > "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
>
I mixed the Welk show from '71 through'73. There were many 'pre-records' when I joined the show. Mr. Welk knew his people could work 'live' and liked my mixing. When the show left ABC after '73, pre-records were limited to Norma Zimmer (she couldn't hit the high notes and look sweet) and Arthur Duncan (he would ad lib too much for the planned camera angles) Full-cast production numbers" were pre-recorded for wide-shot convenience. I was told that Welk didn't like reverb. On other shows I'd been using the EMT 140 plate on vocals, strings, etc. I continued that practice and Mr. Welk never said a word.
>
> B.T.W. - ABC-TV
[somehow this got posted before finished. Here's the rest.]

ABC-TV Hollywood had one 'live' chamber at the Hollywood Palace Theater, across the street from Capitol Records. It wasn't very good and we used 5 KHz telco lines to/from the main lot a few miles away to access the EMT.

"If you notice the sound, it's wrong." Roy W. Rising

Roy W. Rising <rwrising@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> I was told=
> that Welk didn't like reverb. On other shows I'd been using the EMT 140 p=
>late on vocals, strings, etc. I continued that practice and Mr. Welk never=
> said a word.

There was a lot of cheesy reverb use out there and it certainly gave
artificial reverb a bad name. No, wait... that never stopped either...
---scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 10:31:28 PM UTC-4, Les Cargill wrote:
> Don Pearce wrote:
> > Chamber reverb was an alternative to plate reverb.
> Wasn't it used long before? The first EMT was mid 1960s.
> And there are all sort of stories from the Nashville crowd about
> chambers.
>
> --
> Les Cargill

I recall reading about the different chambers (reverb rooms) at Capitol Records in LA. They were in that tall columnar building. I think there were others. Best we had was Spring Reverb, like the Fisher Space Expander.
https://soundgas.com/product/fisher-dynamic-space-expander-k-10/
On October, 19, 1969, I put my First Class FCC License to work at WLMD AM Laurel, Maryland.