500 Series frames are
Logged
« Reply #8 on: November 11, 2010, 04:32:06 PM »
Geoff, what is your opinion of the "Surface Mount Controversy"?
And if you prefer not to comment, understood.
Thanks.
Logged
« Reply #9 on: November 12, 2010, 11:15:20 AM »
While I wouldn't dare to presume to speak for Geoff - my take on "surface mount" is that most of the stuff we use these days is made with the technology - from some of the best converters to SSL desks and lots of other gear.
While it requires special tools for repair [and a magnifying glass] the fact of the matter is that not too many studios have techs - or the ability to do "on sight" repairs anyway so that shouldn't be a huge determining factor.
There are other factors that occur in things like "vintage" Neev stuff that I don't believe can be replicated in surface mount [like the use of Tantalum capacitors] but the AMS thing is a "new build" that draws from an old name -- should it be judged against the "old stuff"? Probably because it bears the same name -- [like a Universal Audio 610 isn't a piece of garbage, until you compare it to an original of the same name]... so I dunno - whadda you think?
Logged
CN Fletcher mwagener wrote on Sat, 11 September 2004 14:33
We are selling emotions, there are no emotions in a grid"Recording engineers are an arrogant bunch.
If you've spent most of your life with a few thousand dollars worth of musicians in the studio, making a decision every second and a half... and you and they are going to have to live with it for the rest of your lives, you'll get pretty arrogant too. It takes a certain amount of balls to do that... something around three"
Malcolm Chisholm
« Reply #10 on: November 12, 2010, 11:57:10 AM »
| Fletcher wrote on Fri, 12 November 2010 16:15 |
There are other factors that occur in things like "vintage" Neev stuff that I don't believe can be replicated in surface mount [like the use of Tantalum capacitors]
|
SMD tantalums are readily available. I haven't had a chance to compare the sound with the through-hole bead tantalums as used in old Neve stuff though. Looking at some of the pictures of the new 500 Neves it looks like they could have used them (they'll be the rectangular yellow things if that's the case).
Logged
« Reply #11 on: November 12, 2010, 01:54:35 PM »
| Fletcher wrote on Fri, 12 November 2010 10:15 |
the fact of the matter is that not too many studios have techs - or the ability to do "on sight" repairs anyway so that shouldn't be a huge determining factor.
|
If you were good at playing with a Lego set when you were 5, you can replace a cap or resistor. I think it's THE determining factor. The equipment to do so would be less than the cost of shipping out a channel card (the first time).
Logged
« Reply #12 on: November 12, 2010, 03:07:07 PM »
It's probably a great preamp in it's own right, and I would love to hear it. I just find it amusing (and annoying) the use of the model number which is misleading to someone looking for THAT particular model. Are we to understand that THIS is the modern equivalent to 1073 preamp? Or just a 1073 inspired preamp built with modern technology? In the end, the only REAL determining factor should be the sound... Just like when clients look at waveforms...and say they want it NORMALIZED...because it doesn't look right  MI
Logged
« Reply #13 on: November 13, 2010, 10:23:56 AM »
On the model number - one look at Gearslutz and that is obvious - the majority of the kids who got out of 'kordin' skool have no idea that Neve
Logged
CN Fletcher mwagener wrote on Sat, 11 September 2004 14:33
We are selling emotions, there are no emotions in a grid"Recording engineers are an arrogant bunch.
If you've spent most of your life with a few thousand dollars worth of musicians in the studio, making a decision every second and a half... and you and they are going to have to live with it for the rest of your lives, you'll get pretty arrogant too. It takes a certain amount of balls to do that... something around three"
Malcolm Chisholm
« Reply #14 on: November 13, 2010, 12:10:37 PM »
Right, you can't blame a company for marketing something under the name it's known as (in spite that there actually was no 1073 pre-amp). As long as it sounds like the pre-amp in a 1073 etc, it's fair game.
On a side note, I have a vintage 1073 with the marinair xformers etc and we did a shootout against 3 other originals and an AMS version. Believe it or not the AMS version sounded closest to mine than the other vintage units (on acoustic guitar anyhow). So I think AMS is probably trying to do things right even though it is impossible to do things exactly.
Logged
« Reply #15 on: November 13, 2010, 05:10:25 PM »
| Fletcher wrote on Fri, 12 November 2010 11:15 |
...from some of the best converters to SSL desks..
|
in other words, the gamut from best to worst?  Why didn;t Neve call the modules in the 8078 "1073"? why, for that matter, didn't they call the 1081 the 1073b? at SOME point, when it's different, it's different. it's NOT a 1073 in any meaningful way anymore and calling it that becomes simply dishonest. It's certainly the marketing trend, but it's reprehensible. AC30, U47, 1073, A Range... it should be what it was, and then move ON when you build something new. or are we ADMITTING that the company, whichever it is, has no new ideas worth selling and is just selling name recognition? should the KM184 just be called KM84? (just like the U87?).
Logged
William Wittman
Producer/Engineer
(Cyndi Lauper, Joan Osborne, The Fixx, The Outfield, Hooters...)
« Reply #16 on: November 14, 2010, 03:54:43 AM »
Is it a three stage, like the 1290?
The Averill 1073MP is two stage.
Logged
« Reply #17 on: November 14, 2010, 11:23:40 AM »
Hi,
Just my 2c...
As I read this post, I remember when I spoke to Mr. Neve.
He is always trying to improve his designs. Both from a sound and a build perspective.
Now, even though he has nothing to do with this new lunchbox preamp, I do find it interesting to read a lot about the build.
In the old days, there was always a push to make things better, and less expensive to build, as well as more robust.
With this in mind, I think we should all give this device a chance, and listen to it.
I only have one reason, and this is that most component manufacturers will continue to make things smaller and cheaper to build, so the challenge for an audio manufacturer is no longer just about the build and the sound, but also about being able to service these pieces down the road.
If Neve, the company, would only use outdated components, eventually it would become itself obsolete, since eventually parts are improved, and no longer made.
I've been looking into getting some 500 series things for quite some time now.
I will try to listen first, and judge later.
Cheers
Logged
------------------------------------------------- It is quite possible, captain, that they find us grotesque and ugly and many people fear beings different from themselves. www.nicksevilla.com
« Reply #18 on: November 14, 2010, 05:00:27 PM »
Saw this today, thought it was funny... 
Logged
« Reply #19 on: November 14, 2010, 05:36:25 PM »
| wwittman wrote on Sat, 13 November 2010 17:10 |
| Fletcher wrote on Fri, 12 November 2010 11:15 |
...from some of the best converters to SSL desks..
|
in other words, the gamut from best to worst?
Why didn;t Neve call the modules in the 8078 "1073"?
why, for that matter, didn't they call the 1081 the 1073b?
at SOME point, when it's different, it's different.
it's NOT a 1073 in any meaningful way anymore and calling it that becomes simply dishonest.
It's certainly the marketing trend, but it's reprehensible.
AC30, U47, 1073, A Range... it should be what it was, and then move ON when you build something new.
or are we ADMITTING that the company, whichever it is, has no new ideas worth selling and is just selling name recognition?
should the KM184 just be called KM84?
(just like the U87?).
|
Because none of it was ever supposed to be "vintage" - there was never supposed to be this quest for nostalgia that in some cases is warranted, and in most cases is not. They should have seen the beginnings when a 1958 "Gold Top" Les Paul started going for $2000- in the early 70's [which was a shit load of money then - you could buy a new "Camaro" for like $3000 -- but nothing like the unbelievably obscene money they go for now days] -- but no one could have expected the current "junior league revolution". I remember Neve 1073 modules at $1000- each being the top end of expensive in 1990... a 350-400% "return on investment" in 20 years? I wish I held onto some of those fuckers - I'd be swimming in cash right about now!!! They were worth a grandish about then - and with current economics - maybe $2000 - $2250 now - but not a lot more. With the current build technology available, if they went to a "non - union" labor country for the build, chances are they could be shipping them for $1500 per unit [original "redux" modules] - but what fun would that be? As for the "new" 500 version - I'll wait to pass judgement until I've worked with them extensively - but at the end of the day - the Great River MP-500nv does a great job at what I would consider a reasonable price -- and that module works from the perspective of "if the design process had continued - where would it have ended up now? -- which is always an interesting question to ask. Peace.
Logged
CN Fletcher mwagener wrote on Sat, 11 September 2004 14:33
We are selling emotions, there are no emotions in a grid"Recording engineers are an arrogant bunch.
If you've spent most of your life with a few thousand dollars worth of musicians in the studio, making a decision every second and a half... and you and they are going to have to live with it for the rest of your lives, you'll get pretty arrogant too. It takes a certain amount of balls to do that... something around three"
Malcolm Chisholm
« Reply #20 on: November 15, 2010, 11:30:23 AM »
did i mention i sold my 670 for $1000 in about 1980?
Logged
William Wittman
Producer/Engineer
(Cyndi Lauper, Joan Osborne, The Fixx, The Outfield, Hooters...)
« Reply #21 on: November 15, 2010, 12:30:07 PM »
Did you do anything good with the $1k?
Logged
« Reply #22 on: November 15, 2010, 02:12:28 PM »
And I am still enjoying it...
Logged
« Reply #23 on: November 16, 2010, 11:34:19 AM »
MI said...
"However there are better solutions...
Brent Averill, Daking, API...
and then also said..."It's probably a great preamp in it's own right, and I would love to hear it."
I just have to ask, how do you know there are better solutions if you have never heard the unit in question?
Just think of all the time I could save if I don't have to bother hearing something before deciding which is best...
Logged
Doc
« Reply #24 on: November 16, 2010, 12:02:38 PM »
Hello Doc,
I was referring to needing the "NEVE 1073" name per say.
This unit is not a 1073 IMHO in the traditional sense.
For me a 1073 has an EQ in it.
If one NEEDS a 1073, buy an real 1073 reissue, with EQ.
If you ask me for a good high end preamp without EQ,
I'd much rather buy a Daking or BAE.
I apologize, I should have said "I would much rather stick to what I have used"
Kinda like buying an Audi A3. It looks like and Audi, only smaller.
For the same money I would buy a VW.
So if one MUST have a piece of gear that says Neve, by all means buy it.
It's a free world.
Mario
Logged
« Reply #25 on: November 16, 2010, 12:09:01 PM »
| Fletcher wrote on Sun, 14 November 2010 17:36 |
I remember Neve 1073 modules at $1000- each being the top end of expensive in 1990... a 350-400% "return on investment" in 20 years? I wish I held onto some of those fuckers - I'd be swimming in cash right about now!!!
They were worth a grandish about then - and with current economics - maybe $2000 - $2250 now - but not a lot more. With the current build technology available, if they went to a "non - union" labor country for the build, chances are they could be shipping them for $1500 per unit [original "redux" modules] - but what fun would that be?
As for the "new" 500 version - I'll wait to pass judgement until I've worked with them extensively - but at the end of the day - the Great River MP-500nv does a great job at what I would consider a reasonable price -- and that module works from the perspective of "if the design process had continued - where would it have ended up now? -- which is always an interesting question to ask.
Peace.
|
I remember an 8014 16 channel 1073 with 2x2254's I had used in a studio being sold for 30ish thousand in the mid 90's. The same console is today being advertised for over 80,000$. Ok it used to have issues, and supposedly been given the once over... MI
Logged
|
