The Interface Upgrade Thing:

[snow lizard]

A 1073 on classical guitar Snow? Don't have one but I doubt an acoustic guitar would drive it hard enough to elicit much "attitude" and I have already said, mics can always be selected to EVERYONE'S taste? Same goes for pres I suppose.
Classical guitar and rock drums are not likely in the same production?

There's nothing genre specific about recording gear. Once you're at that level, either it makes the A list or it doesn't. 1073 is an interesting choice because of its reputation for classic rock, and also because of all the A list preamps some people have said the 1073 can start to sound hazy at higher track counts. I wouldn't expect a classical guitar to get to 16 tracks. Might sound nice and rich with a good Neumann or stereo ribbon in front of it though. If the preamp were something else along the lines of an Amek, Trident or API I'm not really sure how much difference it would make. The Amek would be on the more transparent side which some might have a preference for, but any of those preamps are capable of anything in the studio despite their differences in character. Selecting a preamp based on what you want to record, or picking flavours for certain things is an idea that began mostly on the internet. Back in the day, the preamps were based on whatever the console was, and they were all the same.

The mark of any good gear be it converters, preamps or whatever is when it doesn't get in the way of making great music. I think a lot of it has to do with phase coherence. Still, there's choices depending on what you like.

The caveat for anyone starting out is that they can have almost anything in the way of gear as long as it all works, but it takes a while learning and experimenting before it's the gear holding them back from making better recordings.

 

[garww]

..."I think a lot of it has to do with phase coherence".

That can be a key to many things. A single MONO track can benefit from that. If one is just listening to some music and one channel is down a bit, the slopes on a scope will show the weak amplitude is displaying part of the phase coherence problem. One might think they don't want any mixer EQ. I dunno if its worth loosing any sleep over unless its acoustic performances. Why do the MONO releases of many recordings sound better ? Old Beatles, Colin Davis and the 1966 Handel on Philips

 

[ecc83]

"There's nothing genre specific about recording gear. Once you're at that level, either it makes the A list or it doesn't. 1073 is an interesting choice because of its reputation for classic rock"

I did not bring up the matter of the 1073. I agree there should be nothing genre specific about gear SO LONG as it does not get in the way of the natural sound of the instrument. We are, I think ideologically somewhat apart here? My limited recording experience has been to capture, as "faithfully" as possible (the TRUE meaning of Hi Fi!) the sounds in front of the microphones. The people on this forum are, for the most part, "creative recordists" want to stamp THEIR concept of best sound on a performance.

"Phase coherence"? If you mean the relative distances of microphones then yes, you need to know the rules. If you mean phase anomalies inside gear? That is a simple function of bandwidth UNLESS the designer did something bloody stupid!

Dave.

 

[garww]

dupe post

 

[garww]

One thing that has been nice with modern "HiFi", is that they often print the whole signal chain down to the shoelaces. These boards get that MIC placement thing and filtering, but it is the whole chain.

I can practice that to a degree. I don't have a lot of options, I can process dual MONO outboard. I'm still onboard with the Fuzz Pedal upbringing, though. I've been able to dabble in synths this last 15 years, and I kind of look at that as the whole audio chain in a box.

It's all good. I think, of my last eight messing around recordings there was one use of the interface, two different disk recorders, a sd card 4-track recorder, and a PCM voice recorder. One sounded better

 

[ecc83]

One thing that has been nice with modern "HiFi", is that they often print the whole signal chain down to the shoelaces. These boards get that MIC placement thing and filtering, but it is the whole chain.

I can practice that to a degree. I don't have a lot of options, I can process dual MONO outboard. I'm still onboard with the Fuzz Pedal upbringing, though. I've been able to dabble in synths this last 15 years, and I kind of look at that as the whole audio chain in a box.

It's all good. I think, of my last eight messing around recordings there was one use of the interface, two different disk recorders, a sd card 4


Yeah, now see, I really did not understand a word of all that!

Dave.

 

[snow lizard]

"creative recordists"

Until the mix is finished, the role of the studio is creation. Good gear shouldn't get in the way of the natural sound of the instrument but there are a lot of ways to enhance and support that sound. For reproduction? Clean and accurate is ideal for me. The point of creation is about good sound, not reproduction. If a well designed discrete transformer coupled circuit or something makes the guitar sound HUGE, maybe it's not bad.

 

[ecc83]

"creative recordists"

Until the mix is finished, the role of the studio is creation. Good gear shouldn't get in the way of the natural sound of the instrument but there are a lot of ways to enhance and support that sound. For reproduction? Clean and accurate is ideal for me. The point of creation is about good sound, not reproduction. If a well designed discrete transformer coupled circuit or something makes the guitar sound HUGE, maybe it's not bad.

Yes but guitars are NOT huge! If you record one at the RFH the listener (and artist!) would expect it to be in scale with the building and acoustic. If part of an ensemble, panned in the correct place and of the right size ref say a grand piano.

Or were you talking of a 2x 4x 12 stack? Sill pretty small at the IEC Brum tho'but!

Dave.

 

[Bobbsy]

Ha! I have an abiding memory of the first time I heard CD. The album was Bat out of Hell and the amp was a 405 driving a pair of Castle Acoustics speakers, the big jibs with the 10" woofer.
From a zero noise level this fantastic sound burst upon me and I thought "I have GOT to get me one of those!" Never could afford a 405 but did quite well with a 60W pch home build amp using ILP modules. The power transformer was actually a hefty C core jobby salvaged from a Philips 2000 VCR, anyone remember those? That amp is still under the bed!

Dave.

Since this thread has taken somewhat off topic, allow me to take it several thousand miles off topic...

Just about the most fun I had with designing an audio system had absolutely nothing to do with recording or mixing.

Way back when (I'm guessing late 70s) one of the journalists where I worked asked if I'd be willing to go with her and visit her godmother in France to advise on a new hi fi system. She wanted to do "record parties" with her friends where she'd invite her neighbours over to listen to classical recordings. I had lots of holiday I had to take or lose it, I said yes.

It was only when we got there that I found out the godmother lived in a huge chateau--and the room she wanted the hi fi in was her library. The library was an old barn converted into one huge room. I've seen smaller theatres.

Anyway, to explain why I thought about this, the system I recommended was stacked Quad ESL electrostatic speakers (3 per side) and a sub disguised as a coffee table. A Linn Sondek LP12 was the selected turntable. Anyhow, I got to go back a few months to install it all and, since then, have been eternally jealous at the sound and knowing I'll never have it in my own home.

(Two other anecdotes...while in France I was breaking in a new pair of climbing boots and, after a walk around the estate, took them off by the kitchen door because they were muddy. I was embarrassed that the next morning I found my boots (cleaned and polished) by my bedroom door. The butler--yes butler--polished any shoes left out overnight. Second, I was given the tour of the wine cellar--which was bigger than the house I live in now.)

 

[ecc83]

I too would LOVE that system Bobbs!
Room for another Quad anecdote? I did some work for a disco company, rather famous in the town. They used a commercial mixer/crossfader amplifier rig. The mixer part was fine (741s iirc!) but the amps were pretty crude "quasi-complimentary" jobs using 2N3055 OP transistors and they kept blowing up!

I suggested a pair of Quad 50Es (no 405 way yet!) and they coughed a bit at the price but after yet another aborted gig relented and gave us the order. For a few weeks all was cool. The Quads drove the two big 15" +horn tweeters cabs to even higher levels (clean but not OUR cup tea soundwise!) and they were happy. Then they said one of the amps kept going distorted. Had it on the bench for 2 days, no problem so I visited the venue at there next gig. Sho'nuf, about an hour into the set the RH channel went weak and distorted.

They had slung the RH amp under a shelf and blocked most of its vents! The 50E was so well designed that it did not fail, just told you it was unhappy. Plonked it on the floor and the rest of the night went swimmingly and for ever after that.

As they ALWAYS say on Flog It, "buying QUALITY always pays!"

Dave.

 

[TAE]

Best quad system hmmmmm? Good times!

Circa 1973 I worked for the SoCal distributor of Zenith Electronics. Zenith was all over this new thang called quad. There were several of us long haired hippie types that worked there and one imp-articular one had purchased one of the Zenith "discrete" ( Thank God it wasn't an indiscreet one) quad stereo system with quad record player and tape deck ( like the 8 track tapes of yesteryear but quad) He'd have several of us over to his apartment at night. We'd be smoking Thai sticks in a huge water pipe, Getting "Loose on Mateus Wine" ( damn it had a cork!) light the candles turn down the lights and experience Pink Floyd'd Echoes...heavy man..

Saw my first ever discrete quad concert at the Hollywood bowl in September of 1972 I was sat dead center right in front of the sound booth...Had no idea what I was in for. PInk Floyd test driving DSOTM pre release HOLY SHIT! they played the whole album and several other amazing tunes like echoes and set the controls for the heart of the sun. When the concert started they started it with the change jingling from one speaker to the next...
It is right there in the top 3 concerts I have ever seen and definitely number 1 for sound...wow.

A year or two later I saw the Who do Quadraphenia at the Forum it was great but The bowl in quad was the schizzle dizzle.

 

[garww]

Well, there was a ton of good stuff by 1978 - maybe the Golden Age of Solid State. hahah

I have kept ALLEGRO 10-inch, 2-way. Real easy to listen to.

My quad is Electric Music For Body and Soul(Mind and Body, actually). I got two QUAD decks, but I don't have matching amps and speakers besides the Minimus 7 Eventually, I want it setup in the Music Room, so I can record QUAD, but I either use two mono tube amps, or the Sansui qs-500 auxiliary amp with the QUAD controls and QUAD synthesizer . Damn nice transformer in there for low watts(30w). Still working on the large fan strobe light

If your testing some speakers though, I'd try the m-05, though. At 105 class-a it can kick some butt with the Telarc 1812. Not the final answer for drawing current, but it will do its part.

 

[Eleanor Fudd]

. In theory, some $1000 One Knob should sound better than a feature packed $1000 interface.
.

Agreed, and that's what I want. I'm test-driving an original (but new) Babyface. I bought it for the converters and preamps I've heard so much about, not for anything else, and I don't need 16 channels. However, I'm not technically-inclined and I feel as if I've been given a maintenance manual for a Boeing 747. I'm now wondering if there are any other interfaces in the $700-$1000 range with comparable clarity and quality.