|
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 83
Location: Columbus, OH | Gigged with my new Elite T LX tonight. My first one came with the OP30 and this one has the OP Pro. I plugged the OP Pro into my rig (some pedals and a Bose L1) and immediately noticed that the output level of the OP Pro is much lower than the OP30. I had to turn the OP Pro all the way up to get volume similar to my OP30 at half way up. Is this normal?
I didn't check the battery on the OP Pro as the light wasn't flashing, the tuner display was bright and the guitar worked fine throughout the night.
As for tone, it seemed to me that there was less travel of the tone controls and I actually needed to tweak more from flat than I do with the OP 30. Frankly, I don't think it sounded any better than the OP30 but it's supposed to be better. It could be that I've been gigging with the OP30 for 11 months and that's what I'm used to.
Any thoughts on the differences between these two preamps? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2004
Posts: 1634
Location: Warren,Pa. | I remember at the tour there was some talk about how the Studio and the VIP addressed the drop-in-volume experienced with the OpPro, so I guess it's a widely known thing.
IMHO, the OpPro is sort-of a re-packaged and tweaked Op30. I've had an Op30 and I have an OpPro. Somehow...w/o a notch filter...I never get feedback with the Pro. I also like the layout of the Pro, and the black rather than silver. I also added XLR to my Pro which you can't do with the Op30.
I think a lot of the changes have to do with making things easier on the manufacturing end. Using the same preamp and can for XLR v. non-XLR applications is a good thing for them.
If anyone thinks anything I've said is stupid, I'm willing to change my mind. John <>{ |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10583
Location: NJ | vol loss was corrected in the op pro studio.
just crank up those bose and you will be fine dave. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 83
Location: Columbus, OH | Ah, but I don't want to change settings on the Bose since I could be using both guitars on one gig. Seems to me that the volume levels shouldn't be so drastically different for practical purposes.
I just adjusted the gain control on my Boss AD3 that I run through. It's important that I send a loud enough signal to my AD3, my looping pedal and my DD5 delay.
I do like the tuner display on the OP Pro. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 51
Location: Arizona | Spec-wise, the Op-30 is a much better unit than an Op-Pro.
Op-Pro vs Op-30 (from Ovation's website):
SNR: >86dB vs >92dB
-3dB response width: 10Hz-7.5kHz, vs 50Hz-100kHz
I'd argue that neither of those response widths make much sense.
Op-Pro EQ:
Preshape EQ:
+3.3dB@70Hz
-7.44dB@500Hz
+0dB@7.15kHz
Op-30 EQ:
+3dB@60Hz
-6dB@390Hz
+3dB@10kHz
The high-frequency responses listed for the Op-Pro are pretty low, almost like they were thinking it's going to be transmitted over a cell phone or something.
I'm not sure how the thing really behaves, but just looking at the specs it seems like one would really want an Op-30 more than an Op-Pro. My Elite T has an Op-Pro but I've not used an Op-30 before. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Originally posted by Slartibartfast:
The high-frequency responses listed for the Op-Pro are pretty low.
You're quoting the pre-shape frequencies there, but either way it's not that simple. They are just the frequency centres, bandwidths are not quoted in the spec.
The actual spec for the HF control on the OpPro is 3.6KHz versus 15Khz for the OP30. Personally I've always found the Op30 over bright. 3.6KHz with a wide-ish Q makes sense and is going to sound warmer |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2006
Posts: 659
Location: Hiram, Georgia | I run my op pro thru my l1 with the volume all the way up. I consider this normal now, although at first it was annoying. You should try the Yamaha MagicStomp Acoustic on your rig, I think you'll like it! I also us a little behringer mixer with effects to add reverb for vocals and more channels.
Like you, I was so accustomed to my old stuff, and my old sound, that it was frustrating trying to duplicate that sound. I had to experiment a couple mos to find out what my new stuff could do. New stuff, new sound! Newer is Better!!! :D |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 51
Location: Arizona | Originally posted by Paul Templeman:
Originally posted by Slartibartfast:
The high-frequency responses listed for the Op-Pro are pretty low.
You're quoting the pre-shape frequencies there, but either way it's not that simple. They are just the frequency centres, bandwidths are not quoted in the spec.
And 86dB SNR for the Op-Pro vs 92dB for the Op-30 is pretty glaring. As far as I can tell from the various specs on the Ovation site the Op-Pro is technically the worst pre-amp that they make, and noise in the pre-amp gets amplified throughout the subsequent stages of the system.
That being said, mine is functionally fine and I don't have any complaints about it in practice. I don't have another Op-x with which to compare it, though. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 56
Location: the Netherlands | To me it's not clear: Is the Op Studio already available (in Europe) or not??! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Originally posted by Slartibartfast:
The overall flatness spec for the Op-Pro has a 3dB rolloff at 7.5kHz compared to 100kHz for the Op-30. Neither makes much sense, but at least the Op-30 is flat throughout the audible spectrum. The low EQ center frequencies for the Op-Pro high-band (as you point out) means it's tough to recover that HF rolloff with the EQ.
And 86dB SNR for the Op-Pro vs 92dB for the Op-30 is pretty glaring. As far as I can tell from the various specs on the Ovation site the Op-Pro is technically the worst pre-amp that they make, and noise in the pre-amp gets amplified throughout the subsequent stages of the system.
[/QB]
I don't wish to appear smartass or churlish, but I used to teach this stuff to post-grad level and I'm struggling a little with your terminology.
I respectfully suggest that it is absolutely impossible to arrive at your conclusions purely from the specs published on the Ovation website. Can you qualify your statements any further? Why do neither frequencies make sense? What do you mean, in this context by the term "high band"? What do you mean by "recover the HF rolloff"? Please define "Flatness spec" in terms that an acoustician could relate to. Please explain the "glaring" signal to noise ratio problem with the OPpro in terms that the non-technical members of the OFC may grasp.
All current Ovation preamps work perfectly. They all sound a little different, but so do the guitars. As do the players, the sound systems they are played through and everything else in the signal path. In the grand scheme of things a few Db or couple of Khz variance between the various Op preamp models amounts to not much. The end users seem to make'em work and I don't expect the factory have had many returns because the OpPro is "technically the worst" preamp they make. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2004
Posts: 1116
Location: Keller, TX | Originally posted by Paul Templeman:
I respectfully suggest that it is absolutely impossible to arrive at your conclusions purely from the specs published on the Ovation website. Can you qualify your statements any further? Why do neither frequencies make sense? What do you mean, in this context by the term "high band"? What do you mean by "recover the HF rolloff"? Please define "Flatness spec" in terms that an acoustician could relate to. Please explain the "glaring" signal to noise ratio problem with the OPpro in terms that the non-technical members of the OFC may grasp. So I can CLEARLY not choose the wine in front of you! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 14842
Location: NJ | Churls 'R Us |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 83
Location: Columbus, OH | Originally posted by philmax:
I run my op pro thru my l1 with the volume all the way up. I consider this normal now, although at first it was annoying. You should try the Yamaha MagicStomp Acoustic on your rig, I think you'll like it! I also us a little behringer mixer with effects to add reverb for vocals and more channels.
Like you, I was so accustomed to my old stuff, and my old sound, that it was frustrating trying to duplicate that sound. I had to experiment a couple mos to find out what my new stuff could do. New stuff, new sound! Newer is Better!!! :D I actually have the big Yamaha acoustic pedal, but I like what I have on my board. The idea was to be able to use the two guitars at a gig (one being a backup) without there being a drastic volume difference between the two. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2004
Posts: 1634
Location: Warren,Pa. | Any time Temp gets into it I can't tear myself away from the conversation (even though I can't follow it after a while).
The only thing better is tten briliently quoting one of my favorite movies! Thanks for the great entertainment guys!
John <>{ |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 15669
Location: SoCal | I read thru all of the above and arrived at the decision that I want to go make fun of Clifford instead.... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 11840
Location: closely held secret | Originally posted by Paul Templeman:
I don't wish to appear smartass or churlish, but I used to teach this stuff to post-grad level and I'm struggling a little with your terminology.
Can you qualify your statements any further? Why do neither frequencies make sense? What do you mean, in this context by the term "high band"? What do you mean by "recover the HF rolloff"? Please define "Flatness spec" in terms that an acoustician could relate to. Please explain the "glaring" signal to noise ratio problem with the OPpro in terms that the non-technical members of the OFC may grasp. Screw all those questions. We'd like you to tell us what 'churlish' means, and if it has anything to do with 'folk' festivals. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Wabbit, it means discourteous, kinda. Now go folk yourself. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2003
Posts: 9301
Location: south east Michigan | Mr. Templeman...IMO your knowlege and willingness to share it is a great asset to this board.
Please continue.
Sometimes I can get lost in the science of it but if I keep reading, eventually I catch on...a little... sometimes. :) |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | No problem. The correct way to go folk yourself is.............. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 12759
Location: Boise, Idaho | Get Plugged In to what? I'm still working on why I can't see the Phantom power. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2003
Posts: 430
Location: Lebanon, TN | ...Insert one digit in the orifice of your choice and whine in a dirge-like fashion just like Ewan McColl taught us!
for the illinformed please see 'dirge' at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirge |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Ewan Mcoll can be forgiven all of his finger in the ear dirge-like whining just for being Kirsty McColl's dad. Kirsty was one of the finest English songwriters ever. Up there with Richard Thompson, Nick Lowe, Ray Davies and Boo Hewerdine. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 713
Location: Alberta, Canada | Originally posted by Paul Templeman:
No problem. The correct way to go folk yourself is.............. I saw this Peter, Paul, and Mary movie once...
Ooops, wrong forum. :o
Edited: Then again, on reflection of some of what I've read here...perhaps not!
:) |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2003
Posts: 430
Location: Lebanon, TN | Originally posted by Paul Templeman:
Ewan Mcoll can be forgiven all of his finger in the ear dirge-like whining just for being Kirsty McColl's dad. Kirsty was one of the finest English songwriters ever. Up there with Richard Thompson, Nick Lowe, Ray Davies and Boo Hewerdine. Touche! and agreed :-) |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2005
Posts: 3736
Location: Sunshine State, Australia | Temp, I hope you haven't frightened slartybartfast off! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2004
Posts: 580
Location: NW NJ | Originally posted by Mark in Boise:
Get Plugged In to what? I'm still working on why I can't see the Phantom power. Because it wears this white mask thing most of the time and is kinda hard to see when it has it on. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 14842
Location: NJ | ". . Kirsty was one of the finest English songwriters ever . ."
- in THESE shoes?? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 83
Location: Columbus, OH | Do all OFC threads go this off topic? I feel like I'm back on the Hamer board! ;-) LOL... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2004
Posts: 580
Location: NW NJ | Topic ... what topic? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 51
Location: Arizona | Originally posted by Paul Templeman:
Originally posted by Slartibartfast:
The overall flatness spec for the Op-Pro has a 3dB rolloff at 7.5kHz compared to 100kHz for the Op-30. Neither makes much sense, but at least the Op-30 is flat throughout the audible spectrum. The low EQ center frequencies for the Op-Pro high-band (as you point out) means it's tough to recover that HF rolloff with the EQ.
And 86dB SNR for the Op-Pro vs 92dB for the Op-30 is pretty glaring. As far as I can tell from the various specs on the Ovation site the Op-Pro is technically the worst pre-amp that they make, and noise in the pre-amp gets amplified throughout the subsequent stages of the system.
I don't wish to appear smartass or churlish, but I used to teach this stuff to post-grad level and I'm struggling a little with your terminology.
BTW, I'm not a n00b at this. I've an advanced degree in Electrical Engineering and over twenty years of experience, and also taught EE at the college level for a while, so we should be able to talk the same language.
I respectfully suggest that it is absolutely impossible to arrive at your conclusions purely from the specs published on the Ovation website. That's why in my original post I started with "Spec-wise...". Subjective assessments aside, Ovation does publish some relevant specs on their website. My thoughts are just that _only_ in terms of those few specs that Ovation has on their site the Op-30 looks to be a better pre-amp than the Op-Pro in at least a couple of important measurements.
Can you qualify your statements any further? Why do neither frequencies make sense? Sure. The upper 3dB rolloff point of the Op-Pro response, according to the Ovation site, is at 7.5kHz. I don't think very many people would claim that any music reproduction system is going to be very good with such a low 3dB cutoff. Of course, we don't get to see the full response curve, but even if the filter only has two poles it's going to be rolling off pretty steeply beyond that. In other words, there's either not much response above 7.5kHz (which in practice doesn't seem to be the case), or the filter is just a crappy filter, i.e., not very flat. In any case, a 3dB point at 7.5kHz for a musical system should send up yellow flags for most people. I'd have hoped for something in the high teens, e.g., ~17-19kHz.
Likewise the Op-30 spec indicates a 3dB rolloff of 100kHz! WTF? Mice don't even hear up there as far as I know. So in this case the filter is again, apparently, not very optimal but in the other direction. The downside of this is allowing noise/interference energy that isn't of interest to reduce the useful dynamic range of the amp.
What do you mean, in this context by the term "high band"? What do you mean by "recover the HF rolloff"? Please define "Flatness spec" in terms that an acoustician could relate to. In this case the point is that the Op-Pro spec on the Ovation website, whether it's accurate or not, says that it rolls off with a 3dB point at 7.5kHz. You can use their indication of the equalizer bands to define High Band, but in any case what I was referring to was that if the amp filter is really as Ovation says it is then it's attenuating anything from 7.5kHz and up by AT LEAST 3dB relative to the band peak between 10Hz and 7.5kHz. I'd think that most people would be interested in preserving the high frequencies (i.e., stuff above the 7.5kHz cutoff in this case), as it adds a LOT to the sound. I'd hope that this isn't lost on the folks around here.
What I meant by "recover the HF rolloff" is that even cranking up the HF knob on the EQ isn't, apparently, going to be very effective in recovering the high-frequency energy. Since the indicated center frequency of the HF EQ filter is only 3.6kHz (again, according to the website), it can only influence, at the most, frequencies from 0-7.2kHz, if it covers the whole range down to DC (which would make for a crappy high EQ knob), but the point is that it's not likely to be able to boost the highs lost above the 7.5kHz rolloff.
By "flatness spec" I only mean the ability of the pre-amp to pass frequencies at relatively equal energy, i.e, not filter them out. Ovation doesn't publish the full filter response, just the 3dB points, i.e., the attentuation is less than 3dB between 10Hz and 7.5kHz. Outside of those frequencies it's going to be more.
For those unfamiliar, 3dB attenuation cuts half the power from the input. 6dB reduces the power four times (it's a log scale).
Please explain the "glaring" signal to noise ratio problem with the OPpro in terms that the non-technical members of the OFC may grasp. Again, just using Ovations numbers from the website:
Op-Pro signal-to-noise ratio = 86dB
Op-30 signal-to-noise ratio = 92dB
This is essentially a measure of how much thermal noise (and or distortion, maybe Ovation should define what they mean by SNR) from the amplifier goes through with the signal from the pickup. In this case there's a difference of 6dB, so the Op-Pro, with the same level of signal, will also be passing four times as much noise power as the Op-30 according to these figures.
The problem with a pre-amp generating noise is that any subsequent amplification stages adds power to the NOISE content, i.e., amplifies the noise as much as the signal. For this reason one generally wants as quiet of a pre-amp as possible, and the Op-30 is 6dB quieter than the Op-Pro according to Ovation's numbers.
All current Ovation preamps work perfectly. Really? You must have a loose definition of "perfect", because I don't know of any electronics, anywhere, that work "perfectly".
They all sound a little different, but so do the guitars. As do the players, the sound systems they are played through and everything else in the signal path. In the grand scheme of things a few Db or couple of Khz variance between the various Op preamp models amounts to not much. The end users seem to make'em work and I don't expect the factory have had many returns because the OpPro is "technically the worst" preamp they make. Again, all I'm saying is that if you look at the number on Ovation's site, the Op-Pro looks worse than the Op-30. Look for yourself, the numbers are quite different, and they mean something. If they didn't mean anything there'd be no point in publishing them, and they are, in fact, useful specs for comparison.
I have an Elite-T with an Op-Pro, and it sounds fine to me. I haven't stuck a spectrum analyzer on it, but it sounds to me like it has highs significantly above 7.5kHz, so I'm wondering how Ovation arrived at those numbers.
And I only brought it up because there are people who can discern a couple of dB and a few kHz, but a cutoff of 7.5kHz just seems crazy to me for what is supposed to be one of their "better" amps. Why take out the highs (above 7.5kHz)? Why not preserve and reproduce the highs? There's no point in preserving high frequencies beyond the range of human hearing, though, so I don't understand why the Op-30 preserves highs up to 100kHz...??
One can adjust the EQ to change the tonal qualities of the amplification to make it warmer or brighter as one desires, but only if the pre-amp is passing the needed frequencies in the first place. If the pre-amp takes out the highs, the EQ can't restore them, and that's what I'm observing expressed in the specs on the Ovation site for the Op-Pro.
I suspect that the figures may not be accurate or they're only part of the story, but the part of the story that's told makes the Op-Pro look worse than the Op-30. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 12759
Location: Boise, Idaho | Obviously you didn't get scared off. I was wondering about the same thing you said in the last sentence. Ovation's website has several mistakes. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2004
Posts: 1634
Location: Warren,Pa. | Keep talking gentlemen. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 713
Location: Alberta, Canada | Yes, please continue! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2006
Posts: 659
Location: Hiram, Georgia | if the filtered freqencies are rolling off at steeper angles say 6 or 12dbs, wouldn't that induce phase shift, an unwanted side effect? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Well Slarty, that’s quite impressive, you got me. I apologise if I appeared confrontational, but in your first couple of posts in this thread you came across like any number of self-appointed web-forum experts who operate on the principle that in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king. So on that basis I couldn’t resist a little sport and you kicked my ass. Well done.
As far as the Op-pro goes the published spec is so incomplete that it’s open to misinterpretation. It’s also quite possible that it’s just wrong, which wouldn’t surprise me. I would tend to agree with you that the Op-pro “sounds” better than it “looks” on paper, but then it’s usually more conclusive to listen with ears rather than eyes.
If you have the time, inclination and equipment it would be interesting if you could test your Op-pro and see if the actual performance is anywhere near the spec. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2005
Posts: 3736
Location: Sunshine State, Australia | Aww... We woz enjoying the confrontation.
Didn't understand a bloody thing you were talkin' about, though! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2005
Posts: 5331
Location: Cicero, NY | Great discussion, guys. And I'm guessing very informative to some here. As for me, you lost me at "Gigged with my new Elite T LX tonight."... but what can you expect from a guy who find shiny coins distracting... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 51
Location: Arizona | Originally posted by Paul Templeman:
Well Slarty, that’s quite impressive, you got me. I apologise if I appeared confrontational, but in your first couple of posts in this thread you came across like any number of self-appointed web-forum experts who operate on the principle that in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king. So on that basis I couldn’t resist a little sport and you kicked my ass. Well done.
It wasn't confrontational from my perspective, I'm just passing on my observations.
One thing I did notice since my last post, though, is that the power consumption listed for each pre-amp shows that the Op-Pro is in a different class from the Op-30,50.
Op-Pro Idle current: 2.10mA
Op-Pro sleep current: 34 microAmps
Op-30 Idle current: 5.1mA
Op-(40) sleep current: 40 microAmps
The more than 2x difference in the idle currents suggests a pretty significant design change from the Op-30 through 50 with an eye toward extending battery life. So perhaps the performance suffered a little bit in order to get the power consumption down, which isn't an unusual tradeoff at all. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 713
Location: Alberta, Canada | Originally posted by Mitzdawg:
And I bought my Op-Pro because I thought it looked prettier.
(BSME) And we all know they sound better when they look pretty! :D |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2006
Posts: 2804
Location: ranson,wva | it hepls to have a good preamp even if you dont plug in..lol jason |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2006
Posts: 1017
Location: Budd Lake, NJ | I got scared for a moment; I thought I'd accidently been enrolled in a course that I didn't understand but would still have to take (and pass) the final. S-s-i-i-g-g-h-h of relief. ;) I am glad for those people who do understand this particular field--their knowledge and expertise develop products that greatly increase the fun levels of my playing; I'm just happy, though, that my enjoyment of my guitars doesn't depend on an academic understanding of how they work!
--Karen and the crew
1111-4 "Gertrude;" CE868LX-4 "Jewel;" CC026 "Estelle;" 1271-4 "Blanca;" 1211-4 (I think) "Nonnie;" Guild D-50 "Gilda;" American Strat "Ivory;" Steinberger Spirit 5-string bass "Sugar;" Galiano mandolin "Plink;" Vega 5-string banjo "Twang;" and fiddle of uncertain antecedents "Shriek" |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 12759
Location: Boise, Idaho | For most of us this was like listening with dog ears: "Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, Fido, blah, blah, blah . . ." |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 14842
Location: NJ | Actually, if you're a "FarSide" fan, it's:
". . Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, GINGER, blah, blah, blah . . ." |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2003
Posts: 9301
Location: south east Michigan | Bulletin board for two...
Cliff... I'll bring my Farside books to the next tour. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 12759
Location: Boise, Idaho | Yep, it was Farside. Couldn't remember the dog's name. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2005
Posts: 486
Location: North Carolina | [ The idea was to be able to use the two guitars at a gig (one being a backup) without there being a drastic volume difference between the two. [/QB]
This might have been addressed somewhere in the thread, but my solution to this problem would be the use of a small, inexpensive mixer outputting to your guitar channel, or using a separate channel for each instrument on your main board. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2005
Posts: 3736
Location: Sunshine State, Australia | Here's the easy solution...
...turn the louder guitar down.
Next! |
|
| |
OP30 vs. OP Pro