Heads-up: SpaceStation keyboard amp is apparently back

[Aspen]

...and for a greatly reduced price and risk for you; just 771 euros including VAT...so about the same than our US players are paying (or even less considering VAT (tax) and shipping!)

 

Sorry, no.

 

EUR 799,- is end user price and equivalent to USD 894.23 today.

 

Nothing against Thomann, I buy there often,- but gear in germany is much more expensive than in the US and Thomann won´t change that.

 

A.C.

 

Sorry AC, I was comparing Apples to Apples; VAT in Europe is average 19% and we don't have VAT in USA (thank God). So Thomann's 799 Euro price includes VAT. Therefore your price before VAT is equivalent to about $700 USD. That's $50 LESS than buying it here.

 

Then again, if Euro guys were to buy from Sweetwater or me, you would still add 19% VAT PLUS another $150 (average) USPS.

 

Therefore by using a direct dealer in Europe and arranging direct importation from our factory plus giving them a very low "partner" price, I have been able to keep SS3 price in Europe as low as, or even lower than USA.

 

The reason gear is much more expensive in Europe is 19% VAT

 

(and even I can not change that ;>)

[Aspen]

[The quest for better low end reinforcement for jazz organ w/LH bass gigs continues...

 

Guys, please don't egg me for chiming in cheaply here, but for the last 8+ years from the MK2 to the SS3 I used a cheap Sony HIFi sub bought at Best Buy for $99 (on sale). It's about 100 watts and has a 10" down firing woofer. It worked fine, never overshadowed SS and added "just enough LF" to balance w/ the previous MK2 and the later SS3. I did demos out everywhere, NAMM show most recently and also at APR studios for our visitors...you will see it in my videos (and in some of those it is actually turned off!).

 

As I started equipping local pals with MK2 rigs, I needed more of these and found them used at local swaps for $25-50. I just bought a nice Yamaha last Saturday for $30...it works fine.

 

Sometimes "Less is More", in the case of subs...that is just my personal opinion.

 

I bought the B1200 because so many here had success with it and I was curious...and many asking my opinion about which sub to buy...and it was CHEAP @ $299. I can't see paying more for an "under 100Hz" amp than what you'd pay for a SS3...which does so much more where it REALLY counts; ABOVE 100Hz! The B1200 certainly it is more "pro", meant to travel and it had the 100Hz filtered Hi Pass output which I wanted to try.

 

That said, I have tried it PRE and POST SS3 (also w/ and w/o the HI Pass) and I have to say in most cases I prefer using the B1200 POST...for several reasons.

 

1) I am demoing the SS3 ALWAYS with a mixer as I need several types of sound sources handy including KB, guitar, voice...but mostly with specially recorded "wide" tracks and videos. And I am not playing with a loud drummer, so I do not need MAX SPL all the time. So that said, I also need to quickly demo the SS3 "with and without" the sub. So running it POST allows me to quickly disconnect and reconnect the sub...showing what the SS3 does by itself. I do not use a lot of sub volume, just enough to be "noticed". In fact w/ this quick A/B, many folks realize they probably will not need a Sub for most applications.

 

2) Not sure why, but using the B1200 PRE SS3 seems to suck a bit of gain from the chain...I'd guess around 10dB. This is not critical because I have enough gain left in the SS3 input stage to make that up...but I do not like anything that sucks gain in my chain.

 

3) IMHO, a 500 watt class D sub w/ 12" woofer is overkill for the SS3, about twice the sub that is really need to balance w/ the SS3. Of course you can always "turn it down", but because mixing a sub happens 3-4 feet from the box most players do not realize they are running it too hot, and/or also are setting it's ceiling too "high".

 

One fellow here recently recommended a max HF ceiling setting at 80Hz, and I am probably in that camp, even though I have suggested 100-125Hz before (albeit with a lower volume setting).

 

Again, Less is More when adding Subs....they should be "Felt", but not "Heard" IMHO...it can alter the clarity of the SS3 image if played too loud.

 

I'd like to recommend to Al Quinn one idea before he returns that B1200; try it "post" SS3 on one gig first. Set the SS3 to the level you need w/o the sub connected. Then plug it in and set it for a low Hi pass, say 80Hz, then turn it up ONLY until you notice it...not too much, just enough to feel it. I'd be curious in your observations when used like that.

[HammondDave]

This is NOT a political opinion nor am I insinuating that one system is better than the other, but before everyone starts complaining about VAT, most of Europe has free pre-natal care, paid maternity and paternity leave, incredible train and public transportation systems, low cost or free tuition at universities, and universal free healthcare. They pay for much of these services through VAT.

 

So it's not an Apples to Oranges argument.

[Brettymike]

... And so it should be , and we have (mostly)free health care here. You guy's are shafted - BAD.

Brett

[Tombsalley]

I have a couple of Bag End up for bid on Ebay. They just don't push air

Because they are sealed subs. Sold em'

[J. Dan]

I didn't mean to take things OT....the point I wanted to make apparent is that while direct outs can be convenient, whether from the Space Station or a sub, I think you're better off using DI's. You may not always need the DI, but there are a whole host of potential problems that a DI will fix. Rather than have to deal with troubleshooting issues when they come up on the fly and try to figure out if you need to hook everything up different and try a DI, I just believe it's a best practice to be consistent and use the DI all the time, then you just avoid all of that hassle.

 

So to me, it would seem there are 2 possible best practice scenarios:

 

1) Stereo FOH: Run L/R through a stereo DI, run stereo to FOH, and loop out stereo into the SS3. If using a sub, use the SS3 sub out to the sub unless you really want to filter the lows, then loop stereo through the sub into the SS3

 

2) Mono FOH: run direct L/R to the SS3, sub out to DI, mono to FOH, if using a sub, loop out DI to sub. In this scenario, depending on the sub, I don't know that there's a good way to filter lows from the SS3 without running into other potential issues that could require troubleshooting at a gig.

[Al Quinn]

Aspen, thanks for chiming in -- no eggs from me . Interestingly, earlier today I did a pretty thorough evaluation of the SS / B1200 combo and reached the same conclusion: putting the B1200 POST SS sounds better.

 

Here's some detail on what I did this morning using my Nord Electro 4D's B3 sound in split mode. For the lower drawbars I used my typical registration which is 868000000. First I listened to the lower register of each of the first three drawbars separately on my A100/Leslie 145 to calibrate my expectations.

1) NE4 -> B1200 -> SS:

- with SS volume at zero and B1200 volume non-zero: as expected, bass notes sound/feel like a lot of low end, clarity of pitch is missing

- with SS volume at noon and B1200 volume non-zero: as I heard on the gig, bass notes are felt but lack definition of pitch. Not acceptable.

- with B1200 volume at zero and SS volume at noon: to my surprise the upper harmonic content of the bass notes was almost inaudible. No wonder the bass notes lack definition of pitch! I expected that the crossover would pass more of the higher frequency content of the bass notes as there's quite a bit that's over 100 Hz but that's not what I heard.

2) NE4 left output to SS, right output to B1200; I connected this way to have independent control of the SS and B1200 for testing purposes. The CPS electronics couldn't work their magic but it didn't matter to me for the test.

- SS only: now I could hear the upper frequencies of the LH bass (because the B1200 crossover was no longer in the signal chain). However, as expected I couldn't feel the bass (note: this is just an observation, not a complaint).

- SS and BD1200 volumes non-zero: now I could feel the bass and hear the pitch. I got on the phone with my SW rep and asked for an extension on the 30-day return period so I could try it again on Friday night's gig. I expect it will go well and I'll keep the B1200 but SW is so customer friendly I figured why not ask for the extension, which of course they were agreeable to.

3) NE4 -> SS -> B1200, regular stereo configuration: Ahh, sounds and feels good!

 

There are other knobs that I adjusted on the SS and B1200 but I left this info out because I think they need to be tuned to the room, are a matter of personal preference, and didn't seem overly relevant to this particular test.

[Jazzmammal]

Great post Al. This sort of illustrates my point earlier about comparing that cheap sub to the Infinity sub. It's not just the drivers themselves, the electronics make a huge difference and this stuff isn't easy to figure out. If electronics didn't matter then a $100 mixer would sound just as good as a $1,000 one. For me I have an old Crate bass amp with an Altec 15 that I put in and a built-in 12 band EQ. I might take that to my next gig to hear how it sounds. It sounds great at home but that doesn't mean much.

 

Bob

[hardware]

I guess I got lucky as all I have ever done since day 1 is plug the outputs of my XITE-1 into the Spacestation and just play.

 

Same thing when we demo'd a QSC KW Series PA.

 

Everyone else was tweaking around with this and that, adjusting EQ's and I waited for 45 minutes patiently to make sure everyone was happy.

 

I plugged a stereo out into the PA, no EQ's, no extra phase correction or scientific studies necessary.

 

Analog synths blew the faces off of the salesmen, then Solaris snapped his head back.

Next all of the fake stuff like PLAY, Kontakt, VB3, PianoTeq 5 Pro and u-He Zebra2 HZ going through Satin 1.2.

 

My only problem was using the IEMs with or without Vents.

 

I actually never use the B1200 as I noticed a little more low end, but I guess my Mono Maker DSP plug in that turns stereo signals of a selected frequency (usually 160) and below into Mono.

Gives me a better focused low end.

 

I'll check back on page 300 at Christmas time and see how hanging a pair of Spacestations pointing in as sidefills from the bottom of an array sounds.

Or maybe check a pair of acoustic pillows specifically designed to absorb frequencies between 80.666 and 168.444 turn out.

[Danny Linguini]

2) Not sure why, but using the B1200 PRE SS3 seems to suck a bit of gain from the chain...I'd guess around 10dB. This is not critical because I have enough gain left in the SS3 input stage to make that up...but I do not like anything that sucks gain in my chain.

 

I'm gonna take this as my new catch phrase -- "Dude, you're suckin' the gain outta my chain."

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x116/hurterbe/smileys/ROTFL110x85.gif

[Alan Steinberger]

...there are a whole host of potential problems that a DI will fix. Rather than have to deal with troubleshooting issues when they come up on the fly and try to figure out if you need to hook everything up different and try a DI, I just believe it's a best practice to be consistent and use the DI all the time, then you just avoid all of that hassle.

 

So to me, it would seem there are 2 possible best practice scenarios:

 

1) Stereo FOH: Run L/R through a stereo DI, run stereo to FOH, and loop out stereo into the SS3. If using a sub, use the SS3 sub out to the sub unless you really want to filter the lows, then loop stereo through the sub into the SS3

 

2) Mono FOH: run direct L/R to the SS3, sub out to DI, mono to FOH, if using a sub, loop out DI to sub. In this scenario, depending on the sub, I don't know that there's a good way to filter lows from the SS3 without running into other potential issues that could require troubleshooting at a gig.

 

Really wonderful advice, J. Dan, and that's exactly what I do: direct boxes always first in line for the big stages, sub out for the jazz clubs.

 

The only thing I might add is to always use passive DIs on keyboards, not active, for an extra layer of ground isolation. I always carry a Radial JDI Duplex in my problem solving bag.

[MathOfInsects]

Where is mixer in that signal chain--pre- or post-DI?

[Alan Steinberger]

Where is mixer in that signal chain--pre- or post-DI?

 

If the question was directed towards me, for big stages my rig would usually include soft synths, so the audio interface main outs would go straight to direct boxes, and then out the DI pass-throughs to my monitor du jour. (If no soft synths, then substitute a small mixer pre-DI for the audio interface.)

 

I'm going to start utilizing more of the options in my interface, though, so I may drive the SSv3 with a pair of alt outs for this summer's concerts.

 

Scratch that - I just remembered that a big benefit of using the parallel outs on the DIs is speed in tracking down cable issues or a bum direct box. I would lose that benefit if I use the alt outs.

[MathOfInsects]

Thanks. Why run monitor post-DI though? Don't you lose independent volume control for it out of (say) CR outs?

[Doerfler]

2) Not sure why, but using the B1200 PRE SS3 seems to suck a bit of gain from the chain...I'd guess around 10dB. This is not critical because I have enough gain left in the SS3 input stage to make that up...but I do not like anything that sucks gain in my chain.

 

stolen.

Aspen, you now have joined wmp in my sig line. Might fine company you have there.

[Alan Steinberger]

Thanks. Why run monitor post-DI though? Don't you lose independent volume control for it out of (say) CR outs?

 

Yes, I'm then reliant on the monitor's volume control unless I add another piece of gear post-DI. But when someone from the sound crew comes up and says "we're only getting one side of the keys", by monitoring off the DIs I know instantly if it's a problem on their end, not mine.

 

But as you can tell by the scratched out bit in my previous post, I am considering changing things around. The MOTU UltraLite AVB has some awfully nice features, like being able to run the mixer from my iPhone or having a built-in high pass filter, and I want to incorporate more of them this summer.

[endlessummerkeys]

Radial JDI Duplex!!! do you use the standard or the stereo version? I run a mixer pre DI so I would think I could just use the standard unit? Thanks in advance

[Alan Steinberger]

Yes, it's stereo, hence "duplex". Radial makes several with Jensen transformers, but only one JDI Duplex.

 

[Actually, upon looking at their site more closely they may be using duplex to refer to multiple inputs with summing, since they also have a JDI Stereo.]

 

Always smart to use passive DIs even if your mixer has XLR outs and switchable output level...

[Aussie_Chicago]

Quick question ? Has anybody here used the SSV3 with a Rhodes, as in a real Rhodes? I have a newly acquired 72' stage73 , and just ordered the supatrem2 stereo tremolo pedal. Wondering if the 8" speaker will hold up ?

[Doerfler]

Quick question ? Has anybody here used the SSV3 with a Rhodes, as in a real Rhodes?

I have to say, AC, that I didn't like my 81 Rhodes MK II much through my SS3. Of course, I'm used to hearing it through a Fender Twin Reverb.

 

However, the Rhodes sounds in my CP4, Scarbee Rhodes, and Lounge Lizard all sound great through my SS3, most likely due to the effects on those patches

Wondering if the 8" speaker will hold up ?

in my case it flubs out on the bottom end. YMMV? probably not.

 

BTW, I really dig the Fulltone stuff but haven't heard that pedal. Please let me know how you like it. Thx

[Al Coda]

2) Not sure why, but using the B1200 PRE SS3 seems to suck a bit of gain from the chain...I'd guess around 10dB.

 

Aspen,- using the B1200 pre SSv3,- you go w/ the fullrange/full level stereo-signal into the sub and out to the SSv3 inputs w/ the HP-FILTERED signal,- so everything below 100Hz is cut and consequently subtracted from the original gain level before arriving at SSv3´s inputs,- isn´t it ?

 

It MUST be different compared to use the sub "post" SSv3.

In that case you go w/ the full stereo signal directly into the SSv3´s inputs and deliver a fullrange mono signal to the sub.

 

I´ve never seen a subwoofer doing "makeup gain" like a compressor and at it´s HP-filtered outputs to the satellite speakers.

Maybe I´m wrong, but if I am, please point me on the sub doing that.

 

Up to know, I think any sub designed for pre-satellite speaker usage coming w/ HP-filtered outputs would behave the same.

 

A.C.

[Aspen]

Aspen,- using the B1200 pre SSv3,- you go w/ the fullrange/full level stereo-signal into the sub and out to the SSv3 inputs w/ the HP-FILTERED signal,- so everything below 100Hz is cut and consequently subtracted from the original gain level before arriving at SSv3´s inputs,- isn´t it ?

 

It MUST be different compared to use the sub "post" SSv3.

In that case you go w/ the full stereo signal directly into the SSv3´s inputs and deliver a fullrange mono signal to the sub.

 

I´ve never seen a subwoofer doing "makeup gain" like a compressor and at it´s HP-filtered outputs to the satellite speakers.

Maybe I´m wrong, but if I am, please point me on the sub doing that.

 

Up to know, I think any sub designed for pre-satellite speaker usage coming w/ HP-filtered outputs would behave the same.

 

A.C.

 

Basically AC, an "active" "Hi Pass" filter should not reduce gain...by definition, it lets FR above 100HZ "pass" (w/ no change!).

 

But in use, I found the B1200 pads back ALL signal (full range...albeit far more so below 100Hz as is the stated design goal) That it cut the full range signal levels that much was a surprise to me...and not a happy one.

 

You are right, a sub should not be expected to add make up gain...because it should not CUT any! In theory, it should be "unity gain", or no change in signal levels, on the "pass thru" signal.

 

I am not sure why the B1200 behaves this way...but because it does cut signal gain I am not sure the 100Hz filter is worth the loss of gain in the chain.

 

Frankly, IMHO, this should NOT be happening, and I need to do a bit of research on this (in all my spare time....not!).

 

Should it sound different; yes. But should it "pass" higher than 100HZ signals that are down 10dB (or more)...absolutely not!

 

But I am happy with the performance when used POST SS3, no issues there, and also it gives me an easy demo to show the "with, or without" benefit of a sub.

 

 

[Al Coda]

Basically AC, an "active" "Hi Pass" filter should not reduce gain...by definition, it lets FR above 100HZ "pass" (w/ no change!).

 

But in use, I found the B1200 pads back ALL signal (full range...albeit far more so below 100Hz as is the stated design goal) That it cut the full range signal levels that much was a surprise to me...and not a happy one.

 

Oh well, that´s bad news !

At 1st glance, it seemed to be ideal for "pre SSv3" usage w/ it´s HP filtered outputs @100Hz.

 

In fact, I didn´t find any other small sub coming w/ pre-filtered outputs.

 

In theory, it should be "unity gain", or no change in signal levels, on the "pass thru" signal.

 

Ooops, bummer ...

You say it pads gain by ~10dB also at it´s "Thru"-Outputs A & B ? Yes ?

 

I am not sure why the B1200 behaves this way...but because it does cut signal gain I am not sure the 100Hz filter is worth the loss of gain in the chain.

 

To me, all this sounds like a, possible non-fixable design flaw.

Did you find out if there´s a DSP inside or is it all passive?

 

A.C.

 

 

 

[niven8]

Hi,

I'm thinking of getting the EV ZXA1sub..could someone help me by pointing out the disadvantages of buying this instead of the Behringer? I already have two sx300s..they sound great to my ears but I love the idea of piling the SS on top of a sub because of the small stage foot print. And I think the quality of the EV speaker should be superior...don't quite understand the crossover bit....won't the EV 100hz crossover do the job? Perhaps it does'nt chop as many frequencies from above the crossover point as the less expensive Behringer.

Regards

Niven

[niven8]

Sorry I meant does steal as much gain from above the 100hz crossover point!

Niven.

[Aspen]

Sorry I meant does (the Electro voice ZXA1 sub) steal as much gain from above the (Berhunger B1200 sub) 100hz crossover point!

Niven.

 

+1; Good question and one I also would like to have answered.

 

Perhaps one of our fellow SS3 owners here w/ this EV sub could try it PRE and POST SS3 and let us all know if the gain level to the SS3 is attenuated in the POST routing.

[Al Coda]

 

Hi,...don't quite understand the crossover bit....won't the EV 100hz crossover do the job? Perhaps it does'nt chop as many frequencies from above the crossover point as the less expensive Behringer.

Regards Niven

 

It´s probably worth a sticky because it´s asked so often:

 

a)

The Behringer B1200D-Pro offers a ALREADY highpass-filtered stereo-output in ADDITION to it´s stereo signal pass-thru output.

Means,- you feed the Behringer B1200D-Pro w/ a fullrange stereo signal which goes "pass-thru" to elsewhere (PA p.ex.) and stereo lowpass-filtered to MID/HI satellite speakers or the SSv3 p.ex..

There´s no need to have any frequency deviding network in the MID/HI speaker cab that way.

 

b)

Most other subs I came across, offer LOWpass filter network for their INTERNAL speaker(s) as well as bass boost, phase alignment electronics and such, especially if there´s a DSP inside.

Some come w/ fixed LP crossover point, others offer a variable one.

But there´s NO way to send a HIpass filtered signal to the satellite speakers (or the SSv3),- so adding such subwoofer might sound very good, but DOESN´T take any low frequency load from p.ex. the SSv3.

The SSv3 has to do all the hard work any speaker has to do when driven by the full range signal and even you connected such subwoofer to EXTEND the LF range of the SSv3 and rise the SPL in the LF range.

 

c)

 

Example a) protects the SSv3 better

Example b) gives you a more professional, more reliable, more expensive and sometimes better sounding sub.

 

d)

 

When you want to use one of the "better" subs and protect the SSv3 well, you should consider a separate stereo crossover and go from there to SSve and sub.

 

e)

You can go stereo in to SSv3 and mono fullrange out from SSv3 to any sub.

 

f)

Going pre-SSv3 into the a Behringer B1200D Pro sub or using a separate crossover to feed the SSv3 and a different sub w/ dedicated signals is all about protection, reliability.

 

What is prefered soundwise is another story.

 

A.C.

[cphollis]

I've been running keys > small mixer > B1200 > SSv3 for a while now, maybe six bar-band electric gigs at reasonable (but loud) volume.

 

Any gain attenuation caused by the B1200 hasn't been a pragmatic issue -- plenty of volume coming from both the B1200 as well as the SSv3. Zero concerns.

 

I think this is because (a) I can feed a very hot signal to the B1200 from the mixer, and (b) there's plenty of gain on the SSv3.

 

If I needed considerably more volume for a bigger, louder gig, I've got other choices in the toybox. Hasn't happened yet, though.

[DanL]

I feel like I've let down my SS3 love this week. I have a big show with my Floyd tribute, and I decided I'm using my other band's EV ELX15P's in stereo vs the SS3. The SS3 can't handle the low end of some of the sound effects I'm using (explosions, plane crashes, along with synth bass stuff). Not that I need it to reproduce all that bottom end, we have a big PA for that, but the SS3 sounds like it's breaking up bad at moderate to loud volume with those sounds.

 

I was going to pair up the SS3 with one of my Mackie subs, but they are 18's and pretty big. I'd need to do a bunch of cable gyrations to get it to work since the Mackie has only XLR in and out and the rest of my gear is 1/4".

 

I've been using the SS3 at rehearsals for this show, it sounds great aside from the missing low end. When I hooked up those EV's, they took it to another level. I'm not going to spread them too far apart on stage, I'll probably set them right next to each other, behind me and aiming across the stage, sitting on crates or whatever I can scare up from the sound company.

[roygBiv]

DanL - why not use the SS3 and use the out from that into one of the ELX15P's?

 

I'm thinking of doing something similar with my SS3, except into my one newer Mackie 12" Thumps (with "1000 Watts" of digital power).

 

Haven't needed to yet, but wondering if it will work. Been meaning to try something like that.

 

I suppose you'd lose some of the M/S sound quality of the SS3 with another speaker running mono, but you could certainly get back some low end "whoompf".

 

Maybe it doesn't work, just wondered if you or anyone else has tried this approach -