Who here owns a Faustine Phantom attenuator?

[rooster]

I was seeing that he went out of business but I ran into the Aracom device. I am hoping there is someone here familiar with both. Thanks.

[Structo]

Not I but man, that sure turned into a fiasco over at the Gear Page.

That's about the third or fourth business that has skated with peoples money.

It's too bad because by all accounts it was a good attenuator.

[MCK]

I have the Aracom and couldn't be happier. Alex also works well with Express & Rocket circuits at a lower cost.

[husky]

I was seeing that he went out of business but I ran into the Aracom device. I am hoping there is someone here familiar with both. Thanks.

I have a Faustine and the Kelley, actually prefer the later but disclaimer is we will be making the latter. Anyone is welcome to come and AB though.

[geetarpicker]

I have a Phantom, the most recent version DX2 is it? Quite happy with it, took a year to get and I've had it since the middle of last year. Really bad folks were left to dry on that deal. That said it's been my favorite ATT so far with my original Express which I typically keep away from such things. Still it sounds nice and the close spaced 2db steps really help. I find the reostat settings just a tiny bit fizzy but I've never played an ATT that wasn't once you get really things really quiet.

[Shai`tan]

I have the Aracom DAG. It seems to do what it says it does. But I was suprised that with all Aracom settings set at minimum, using the Attenuate and Bypass switch, setting to attenuate produced a drop in volume.

You`d think with all the DAG settings at absolute minimum, there would be no aural changes when switching between Bypass and Attenuate. Just find it kinda odd.

[Structo]

I was seeing that he went out of business but I ran into the Aracom device. I am hoping there is someone here familiar with both. Thanks.

I have a Faustine and the Kelley, actually prefer the later but disclaimer is we will be making the latter. Anyone is welcome to come and AB though.

John, aren't you also going to be making Kelly amps as well?

[MCK]

I have the Aracom DAG. It seems to do what it says it does. But I was suprised that with all Aracom settings set at minimum, using the Attenuate and Bypass switch, setting to attenuate produced a drop in volume.

You`d think with all the DAG settings at absolute minimum, there would be no aural changes when switching between Bypass and Attenuate. Just find it kinda odd.

Minimum is still an attenuation step. See the product webpage :

http://www.aracom-amps.com/products/prx150.html

Six levels of step attenuation, plus a continuously variable attenuation control (bedroom mode)

With the switch in the Minimum Variable Attenuation mode, the variable control provides between 16 to 27dB of attenuation.

So you're getting 16dB attenuation when you set all controls to minimum. Hope this helps.

[rooster]

Wait - 16db? At the minumum setting? That can't be right. Well, I see that this would be true if you were using the 'minumum' settings of attenuation option - but it also says there is a 'True Bypass'. To me this translates to 'No Load/Out of the Circuit'. So is this not what the user is hearing?

Well, John, since you brought it up, the Aracom is $800. The Kelly is $$? Also, I don't see this listed on your site. When you say A/B, do you mean right now, today, or sometime in the future?

Glenn, I trust your ears on the subject and have heard similar reports from other players. Too bad you can't compare the two.

[MCK]

Wait - 16db? At the minumum setting? That can't be right.

I'm sorry for mis-information. That is the lowest setting of the Variable attenuation... I am looking to see what the lowest setting of the control on the left (A to F) means.

See the DAG page anyways since the question was based on a DAG version : http://www.aracom-amps.com/products/prx150-dag.html

Rotary Switch provides (6) Step Attenuation Levels
*Approximately 3dB per step (step positions A-E), with an additional 1dB of attenuation
when position "F" is selected, for a total of 16dB of attenuation within the step mode.

I think this is it. So in your minimum all setup you're getting 3dB attenuation. Hope I got it right this time.

[rooster]

Purchased the Aracom. Ships on Monday - a very fast exchange from the manufacturer.

[MCK]

Purchased the Aracom. Ships on Monday - a very fast exchange from the manufacturer.

You will not be sorry. Jeff has a great product and stands behind it.

[vibratoking]

I looked at the Aracom site. I just can't get over the price. Yes, I know, others are even more expensive.

Funny picture on the site showing the unit perched atop a Dumble. As if a Dumble needs an attenuator. That picture leaves me feeling less than enthusuastic about that unit. Pure marketing IMO.

Anyone know what's in the Aracom unit? Rooster - I'd love to hear your impression after you've had some time with it.

[Noel Grassy]

vibratoking,

I have a unit from the 70s that still works and does it well. The model I have uses wire-wound components built on what looks like fish paper and I don't remember seeing any typical "cement" resistors or aluminum finned resistors.
The guts look more like my vintage decade resistors from HP.

Building a simple power soak this way can only be reflected in the final cost. IMO. The positive side is the unit's longevity while performing on stages night after night. It's far more stout than say the Weber attenuator
with it's "parted-out" speaker motor and dimmer switch.

That being said, I drag my DIY "Airbrake" out more than the Aracom. I perceive a more useful high pass filter in the Airbrake. It may be subjective
or biased on my part. But I'm only human. I really believe the audience are
completely unaware of any colorations and could care not a whit. I long for the day when the band's levels aren't at the whim of a greedy club
owner. His clients came to hear the band after all. Rolling Eyes

[rooster]

Noel - Wow, Aracom was around in the 70s? I had no idea. Are you sure?

BTW, the unit arrived on Friday but no one was here to sign for it.