R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 24   Go Down

Author Topic: IC's kill music  (Read 54714 times)

ammitsboel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1300
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #15 on: May 10, 2005, 06:10:19 am »

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 10:46

ammitsboel wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 04:38

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 10:20

It's the implementation that matters, not the part.

No, It's the implementation and the part that matters!
It doesn't work like you are saying, you can't just chose what you are going to use blindly and expect it to be of any use.

I was making the point that giving a good designer IC's doesn't change anything but the implementation...

That's where i believe you are wrong, it's not as simple as you put it.

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 10:46


bblackwood wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 10:20


Quote:

How many releases done in the last 30 years have been done with no opamps anywhere in the signal?

None that i can think of...
But are you suggesting that we shouldn't do it because nobody is doing it, I hope not?

The subject is discussing how IC's kill music and all of his fav records were done without any IC's anywhere in the path. I find this hard to believe unless he's listening to stuff from the 50's...

I am suggesting that many great sounding records have been cut with IC's in the path, so it can be done. Perhaps some people would rather blame the tool rather than their own ability?



The tools and the skills have to go together, I'm sure you agree.
I guess this argument will always come up when talking about equipment and we reach some kind of barrier "Perhaps some people would rather blame the tool rather than their own ability?".

In regards to if good records can be done with the use of IC's, then I'm not in doubt that it could/can be an OK result and I'm also sure that there are far more important factors to improve at the moment than the use of analog IC's.

But the truth is that no one exactly know how it would sound like today if the industry had gone the other way.

Henrik  
Logged
"The male brain is designed for ecstasy" -Dr. Harvey "Gizmo" Rosenberg

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #16 on: May 10, 2005, 07:51:32 am »

ammitsboel wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 05:10

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 10:46

ammitsboel wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 04:38

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 10:20

It's the implementation that matters, not the part.

No, It's the implementation and the part that matters!
It doesn't work like you are saying, you can't just chose what you are going to use blindly and expect it to be of any use.

I was making the point that giving a good designer IC's doesn't change anything but the implementation...

That's where i believe you are wrong, it's not as simple as you put it.

Well, I'm no designer, I have to rely on designers like Dave Hill, Dan Kennedy, etc to get my facts straight. This is what they tell me and I know they know far more about design than you or I do...
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

ammitsboel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1300
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #17 on: May 10, 2005, 09:39:56 am »

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 12:51

ammitsboel wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 05:10

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 10:46

ammitsboel wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 04:38

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 10:20

It's the implementation that matters, not the part.

No, It's the implementation and the part that matters!
It doesn't work like you are saying, you can't just chose what you are going to use blindly and expect it to be of any use.

I was making the point that giving a good designer IC's doesn't change anything but the implementation...

That's where i believe you are wrong, it's not as simple as you put it.

Well, I'm no designer, I have to rely on designers like Dave Hill, Dan Kennedy, etc to get my facts straight. This is what they tell me and I know they know far more about design than you or I do...


I'm not in doubt that those guys know quite a lot more than you and I do, If all they know is completely right is another question.

I guess it will always end up like this, a thread that ends with a question.
These things that I believe is essential to good sound is something many designers sadly can't find any logic explanation to. Not unlike the cable discussion at Dan's forum.
Logged
"The male brain is designed for ecstasy" -Dr. Harvey "Gizmo" Rosenberg

Timeline

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 215
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #18 on: May 10, 2005, 10:24:59 am »

I've been posting this point for years but it's like preaching to the choir.

I wonder when a charactor amp is designed, 2520 block style discrete,  that models
the best characters of the sounds we love.  A knob to create the IM would be quite nice.  I don;t think any design engineer could do it in analog and certainly not with digital.

We love Vacuum tubes and transformer intermodulation distortion & phase but not for everything.

The UA 1108 has some nice tones for vocals with bright mics but then I wouldn't use it on everything either.

The Langevin AM16 is great on direct bass and toms but I would rather have something a bit different on cymbals.

It's a crap shoot even with the best of or past out there and although it's true a chip is a pretty bad sounding alternative to discrete it also has it's place I guess.

For me, I'll take a straight wire any day.
Logged
Gary Brandt
Timeline

Bob Olhsson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3968
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #19 on: May 10, 2005, 11:08:23 am »

A lot of ICs have very limited peak current capability. Some don't and people who are clever can work around the problems with many of the ones that do but have other advantages.

A lot of pedestrian gear and even some that is expensive has been designed by people who, to be charitable, aren't very clever. The parts aren't nearly as important as how they are used and the capabilities of the power supply.

HansP

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 165
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #20 on: May 10, 2005, 03:23:14 pm »

"op-amps are bad for audio"

IMHO this discussion is lacking a serious point:
OP-amps are not designed for audio !!

The semiconductor industry knows very well, what is good for audio applications, and what not. Therefore, IC designs have been created, that have a somewhat similar behaviour to OP-amps but THEY ARE NOT! They are integrated audio amplifier components (wow! -  or audio-whatever-functional), and are more costly than standard OPs.
One design constraint is - guess -  less open gain, and less or none internal negative feedback, and a different HF compensational circuit. Another one is low noise, which has also to do with the size of the structures, and the type and pureness of the materials.

We can find audio gear that is built with OP-amps (the cheapest and least challenging to construct), and other, built with audio ICs and discrete active parts.
So, when buying, everyone professional should examine what is inside, and this will be of some help to estimate the result...

That said, I fully agree that the design surrounding of the ICs will be crucial in any case. This especially includes mechanic/geometric design and placement of all parts.
Logged

wwittman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7712
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #21 on: May 10, 2005, 03:36:07 pm »

Nathan Eldred wrote on Mon, 09 May 2005 23:09

I'll bet guys like Dan Kennedy, Tim Farrant, or Greg Gualtieri could design an IC based piece of gear that kicks butt!


Then how come NO ONE ever has?
Logged
William Wittman
Producer/Engineer
(Cyndi Lauper, Joan Osborne, The Fixx, The Outfield, Hooters...)

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #22 on: May 10, 2005, 04:22:18 pm »

wwittman wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 14:36

Nathan Eldred wrote on Mon, 09 May 2005 23:09

I'll bet guys like Dan Kennedy, Tim Farrant, or Greg Gualtieri could design an IC based piece of gear that kicks butt!


Then how come NO ONE ever has?

Gear that has IC's in the signal path: Both the Pendulum 6386 and ES-8. Lavry converters (including the venerable 924). Crane Song HEDD-192. Apogee converters. Focusrite consoles and gear. The Neve Air Montserrat console. Empirical Labs Distressors. Everything made by Prism. Studer A800.

I'm sure there are many more if you need them...
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

Tomás Mulcahy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 211
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #23 on: May 10, 2005, 04:41:23 pm »

Yeah, the Quad 405 power amp uses op amps and an ingenious use of feedback. It's a VERY good amplifier, and the designer didn't need audio tailored op amps! I have a mark 1 from 1976, no modifactions made, and it's excellent, very transparent and easy on the ear with the Lentek speakers.

"ICs are bad" or "OP Amps are bad" is an argument that needs to be backed up with science, and so far there has been none. What there HAS been is examples of excellent sounding equipment that used OP Amps. The idea that "it could've been better if only..." is... a fantasy! It is not condusive to producing good sound. There is plenty of great equipment out there, gather your tools and get on with it.

dcollins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2815
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #24 on: May 10, 2005, 04:51:57 pm »

thermionic wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 02:46

The Jensen 990 looks pretty discrete to me.

See what you think, I have attached a schematic.

Justin

edit: The schematic is shown for informative reasons, I'm not trying to patronise anyone saying it's "discrete" Smile


I'm talking about the LM-394 input stage, the very first thing your precious music hits, and even though the 990 schema just shows a NPN pair, it's really something like 50 transistors paralleled together for low Rbb.  Look up the datasheet and see....  Built like those evil IC's I tell ya.

DC

Timeline

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 215
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #25 on: May 10, 2005, 10:01:32 pm »

The LM 394 sounds a bit dark to me.  It's up side is it's punchy.
Logged
Gary Brandt
Timeline

wwittman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7712
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #26 on: May 10, 2005, 10:27:01 pm »

none of that, Brad, in my opinion "kicks butt"

and more specificaly,  none of that is superior or the equal of its discrete counterpart.
I love the AIR desks for many reasons but none sounds as good as the discrete 80xx desks.

Nothing Focusrite makes or made is the equal of discrete equivalents (or certainly of Rupert's earlier discrete designs) and most of what Focusrite makes is simply crappy.

A-D?
I don't know.
I know which ones sound better to me than some others, but I don;t know that IC's are the anser or not.
I'll tell you I'd rather a GML.

IC's are largely unavoidable at SOME point, and certainly if digital recording is involved...
but i think there IS a point to the original post, even if it's simplistic.

Logged
William Wittman
Producer/Engineer
(Cyndi Lauper, Joan Osborne, The Fixx, The Outfield, Hooters...)

dcollins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2815
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #27 on: May 10, 2005, 10:54:41 pm »

Timeline wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 19:01

The LM 394 sounds a bit dark to me.  It's up side is it's punchy.


Then try a MAT-02.  What is in the Calrec?

DC

dcollins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2815
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #28 on: May 10, 2005, 11:09:25 pm »

maxdimario wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 00:07

dcollins,
there is a difference between using a device such as the modern cutterhead at the mastering stage and using something like that in the tracking or mixing stage.



Just pointing out that if NFB was so destructive to music, the LP would be in real trouble as you will be using copious amounts just to get it flat....  The shaded dog would be one.

Quote:


as for the IC sound, there is an advantage only for the kind of music that is based on electronic sounds or ugly ones. Ic's make an outline of the sound but lose the depth etc.



And why do you think that is?  

Quote:


lots of records were made on IC desks, but I'm glad that the best ones were made on discrete desks, because I like listening to them better.


Have you ever really liked a record only to find it was all TL072's mixed to DAT?  I have. Devastating.

DC


jfrigo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1029
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #29 on: May 10, 2005, 11:24:21 pm »

wwittman wrote on Tue, 10 May 2005 19:27

none of that, Brad, in my opinion "kicks butt"

and more specificaly,  none of that is superior or the equal of its discrete counterpart.



If a person can't make a great sounding record on an Air Neve into an A800, that person probably can't make a great sounding record. Even if your personal preference draws you elsewhere, you have to admit that's a pretty good rig, ICs or not. As for one of the other examples, it doesn't get any better than the the Lavry 924. There is no equal to that converter. I don't care if he put lamp cords in it. I might reconsider the use of lamp cords if he did! I don't think the mere existence of an IC somewhere in a device spells certain ruin for sound. That's far too general and simplistic. If it were only as easy as removing all ICs to get a great sounding record.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 24   Go Up