Middleman
Professional Amateur
Rodger Hartlett said:
Someone making comments on hardware having never used the product while attempting to make speculation a fact, is a poor source of information. Have you ever pondered that?
Someone making comments on hardware having never used the product while attempting to make speculation a fact, is a poor source of information. Have you ever pondered that?
K
KnightMere
New member
Middleman said:
kk thanks man
R
Rodger Hartlett
New member
agreed. they both comprise of completely different circuits .
mattamatta
New member
Different circuits all right. It seems to me that you keep bashing your vision of it, but you seem to refuse to modify your mental vision in accordance with any information anyone brings out. Sounds to me like it isn't a cheap chip based unit, and it doesn't matter how it's preamplification is achieved, or if that differs from a 1073.
Just pretend for a moment that it's just called a Brand X preamp, 2 channels and priced at 1500, and then re-evaluate it. Perhaps it still stinks, I haven't used it, and I dont particularly care right now.
Also, in your defense, it seems that a lot of people dont quite get the point of your arguments in a lot of ways, but it still seems to me that you're stubbornly holding on to a view of a preamp that may or may not be this preamp, and attacking the kind of preamp you're invisioning, however innaccurate it may be.
Just pretend for a moment that it's just called a Brand X preamp, 2 channels and priced at 1500, and then re-evaluate it. Perhaps it still stinks, I haven't used it, and I dont particularly care right now.
Also, in your defense, it seems that a lot of people dont quite get the point of your arguments in a lot of ways, but it still seems to me that you're stubbornly holding on to a view of a preamp that may or may not be this preamp, and attacking the kind of preamp you're invisioning, however innaccurate it may be.
D
Dot
New member
There's a session WAV file examples using Portico 5012 on various settings, API, Great River MP-2, and Sebatron...
http://www.thelisteningsessions.com/session10.htm
http://www.thelisteningsessions.com/session10.htm
Middleman
Professional Amateur
Nice shootout Dan.
API on those cymbals, all the way.
API on those cymbals, all the way.
G
Gearwhore
New member
Missing the details.
I felt compelled to write this because I just shot out a bunch of preamps tonight including both the Great River NV, a UA 610, a Grace 101, a Toft audio channel strip, and a Neve Portico. I own the first 3 pres an I was borrowing the Portico and the Toft. I used three different mics. A Shure SM57, an AKG 414, and a Soundelux 251. I think these mics well represent the total spectrum that is typical for a recording environment. Unfortunately I don't own a nice ribbon. I use Lavry converters and Adam Monitors to give you the total picture.
The neve Portico is a nice preamp. A very smooth top end and has a distinct color to it. It is nice, but does not sound like a 1073 or a vintage Neve other than the fact that it is very colored. The silk and HP filter definitely give it a smooth british eq'ed sound when engaged. It is a noticeably smaller sounding pre than both the GR and UA. Although the Toft pre lacks the top end and clarity of the portico it is a bit bigger too, and in the Trident tradition, very in your face. (It's a lot cheaper too.)
I don't think that the Great River and the Portico are really that close in sound. I find that the Great River is not as colored and has a greater midrange detail and more airy top end. This becomes more apparent when you have a less colored mic (such a the NTK) and better converters. The Great River sounds downright badass when paired with an EQ and an 1176.
I like the Portico on acoustic and electric guitars, and on bgv's. Very dark, warm, and focused. Vintage vibe, modern smoothness. I tracked a Gibson acoustic and really dug the track. This would not be my personal desert island mic pre, but I will probably keep it around for certain uses. I recommend that anyone considering investing in top end mics preamps and expensive mics make sure that they have converters and an overall signal path that can represent the detail and nuance that high end gear can achieve. Otherwise the difference between an SM57 and an U87 can be lost.
I felt compelled to write this because I just shot out a bunch of preamps tonight including both the Great River NV, a UA 610, a Grace 101, a Toft audio channel strip, and a Neve Portico. I own the first 3 pres an I was borrowing the Portico and the Toft. I used three different mics. A Shure SM57, an AKG 414, and a Soundelux 251. I think these mics well represent the total spectrum that is typical for a recording environment. Unfortunately I don't own a nice ribbon. I use Lavry converters and Adam Monitors to give you the total picture.
The neve Portico is a nice preamp. A very smooth top end and has a distinct color to it. It is nice, but does not sound like a 1073 or a vintage Neve other than the fact that it is very colored. The silk and HP filter definitely give it a smooth british eq'ed sound when engaged. It is a noticeably smaller sounding pre than both the GR and UA. Although the Toft pre lacks the top end and clarity of the portico it is a bit bigger too, and in the Trident tradition, very in your face. (It's a lot cheaper too.)
I don't think that the Great River and the Portico are really that close in sound. I find that the Great River is not as colored and has a greater midrange detail and more airy top end. This becomes more apparent when you have a less colored mic (such a the NTK) and better converters. The Great River sounds downright badass when paired with an EQ and an 1176.
I like the Portico on acoustic and electric guitars, and on bgv's. Very dark, warm, and focused. Vintage vibe, modern smoothness. I tracked a Gibson acoustic and really dug the track. This would not be my personal desert island mic pre, but I will probably keep it around for certain uses. I recommend that anyone considering investing in top end mics preamps and expensive mics make sure that they have converters and an overall signal path that can represent the detail and nuance that high end gear can achieve. Otherwise the difference between an SM57 and an U87 can be lost.
R
Rodger Hartlett
New member
Boy you sure must have pretty weird ears .
Middleman
Professional Amateur
Man, how the years roll by. This thread is over 2 years old.
CoolCat
Well-known member
the "british eq" sound....thats what I get with the JoeMeek preamp versus my 1820-interface Ted Fletcher preamp. the old JM has the brit flavor, I guess?
what old piece of equipment does everyone refer to when they say "british eq" sound? I hear that a lot over the years...."the british sound"....what equipments being referred to specifically?
Any Audio History buffs awake can answer this?
I agree, even as a HR hobbyist with cheaper gear, with the comment on hearing the difference between mics.....the preamp imo, is what allows this to happen. I heard that a few years ago.
cool post gearwhore...some hi end pre's.
interesting on the Toft I came really close to trying one of those. I think I'll go Great River if I ever get a pre in that $$ range. seems rare to find a bad post on this GR.
A
arsis
New member
Yea...I'm a little late on this one too but I felt compelled to chime in. The whole "plug pack" not being pro is BS. A vintage Neve 1073 racked up uses a freaking "plug pack". I used to work on a Neve 8088 console and the whole damn board had a "plug pack". I currently work on a vintage D&R console and it has a "plug pack". It makes sense. Magnetic feilds and 60 cycle hum doesn't play well with audio. If you can remove the AC and only have DC near the audio circuits you cut down on the risk of hum. Someone else stated something about Rupert's integrity and reputation. I don't think he's going to put out anything that does his name injustice. Portico may be aimed at the home recording market but in the 70's there was no home recording market! It would be dumb to not consider home recordists.
Shadow_7
New member
Not anything to do with preamps. But yes and no.
Same brand - perhaps
Same look - perhaps
Same feel - perhaps
Same sound - perhaps
Same materials, not a chance in hell. We tended to use metal instead of plastic way back when. Wood was harvested from nature, not grown on a farm. As opposed to these days where wood densities are less dense. Metals are likely lighter or cheaper alloys. And parts that would have otherwise bent and could have been unbent and fixed will now break, or even melt and need to be replaced.
At a minimum that 1954 one has withstood the test of time. If it's still functional, you can rest well at night knowing that it's probably not gonna break on you tomorrow.
The new one may very well break on you the day after you bought it, or the day after the warantee expired. If it didn't arrive from the factory broken to start with. Or otherwise got broken by the UPS guy when he dropped it off the back of the truck when trying to bring it to your front door. Not really specific to preamps or guitars, I'm just saying. They don't make them like they used to.
C
craigmorris74
New member
This thread is hilarious. I like it that our skeptical "electronics expert" has yet to admit that the Portico is transformer in and out. He also doesn't consider the number of high end preamps that use IC's. Rupert Neve in no way is trying to con people in to thinking that this is one of his early 70's designs. ALL the literature and comments from Mr. Neve indicate that this is a NEW design.
This thread reads like somebody shot off their mouth before they thought about it, and have been covering their tracks ever since.
This thread reads like somebody shot off their mouth before they thought about it, and have been covering their tracks ever since.