pcrecord

Quality recording seeker !
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
Hi gang !

I finally got time to finish and post my video on the 1173.
Let me know what you think !!! ;)

 

kmetal

Kyle P. Gushue
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
The uk sound seemed to have that in your face (but some how not harsh) mid range. Like you cranked the master volume up on the guitar or something, tone wise not volume.

Id be very interested to hear it on snare, and especially the pair on overheads. Between the pre and compression i bet it would be quite good.

Not sure if you heard Danny Carey's drum sound on the new tool record (Fear Inoculum), but wtf. Really wtf. I didn't know a kit could sound enormous on a cell phone. If you listen to their previous album 10,000 days, his kit was with API. Very good too. To me the difference is the way the mid range is articulated. Both records recorded and mixed by Joe Baressi. Might be an interesting reference for you.
 

pcrecord

Quality recording seeker !
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
d be very interested to hear it on snare, and especially the pair on overheads.
I did make recordings of the snare and overheads but didn't compared them alone in the video.. I sure will do it in the next one ;)
What is first surprising is the missing sub frequencies. I'm using them via the line ins of the UA-4-710, but I'm going to test them with my Mitek AD96 tonight and check if the sound is different..
Like I said in the other thread, since I was able to calibrate them to be very near in behaviour and levels. I'm start to feel better about my purchase.. ;)
 

Davedog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2001
Those UA 710 units have converters right? And you're using it as a digital out device rather than analog? Just asking. Keeping up with your progress.
 

pcrecord

Quality recording seeker !
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
Those UA 710 units have converters right? And you're using it as a digital out device rather than analog? Just asking. Keeping up with your progress.
The UA 4-710 has 4 preamps but an eight channel converter onboard. So you get 4 line ins at the back that are suppose to be direct path to the converter.
They are said to be of good quality but I will test the 1173 a different way nonetheless. I'll be dawm if they get their sub freq and presence back !!
 

Davedog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2001
The UA 4-710 has 4 preamps but an eight channel converter onboard. So you get 4 line ins at the back that are suppose to be direct path to the converter.
They are said to be of good quality but I will test the 1173 a different way nonetheless. I'll be dawm if they get their sub freq and presence back !!

This answers my question. I was pretty sure the 710 was much like the 428 when you add the converters to it. As far as track count and converter count. I do hope they aren't routing through a mic pre or some sort of filtering but direct out through the conversion
 

pcrecord

Quality recording seeker !
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
I do hope they aren't routing through a mic pre or some sort of filtering but direct out through the conversion
Through mic pre, I'm sure it's not the case, but filtering or not flat response to the converters.. that could be.. I'm going to test and hope it's not the case.. ;)
 

Kurt Foster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2002
UA sez;
Add Inputs and Professional A/D Conversion
With eight analog inputs, the 4-710d is perfect for expanding your studio. Digitized via ultra high-quality 24-bit A/D converters at selectable sample rates up to 192 kHz, the 4-710d easily connects to most interfaces with its dual ADAT optical or AES/EBU DB-25 connectors.
 

Davedog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2001
UA sez;
Add Inputs and Professional A/D Conversion
With eight analog inputs, the 4-710d is perfect for expanding your studio. Digitized via ultra high-quality 24-bit A/D converters at selectable sample rates up to 192 kHz, the 4-710d easily connects to most interfaces with its dual ADAT optical or AES/EBU DB-25 connectors.

Yes. We are both aware of this. Both of us owning 4 channel mic pres with converters. I don't use mine but maybe Marco does. And our discussion is whether there is filtering in place before the conversion in his 710. And whether (if there is) it is affecting the frequency response of the 1173 mic pre. Thus the experiment continues. He will also test through his Mitek which is only conversion. Looking forward to the results.
 

kmetal

Kyle P. Gushue
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
I did make recordings of the snare and overheads but didn't compared them alone in the video.. I sure will do it in the next one ;)
What is first surprising is the missing sub frequencies. I'm using them via the line ins of the UA-4-710, but I'm going to test them with my Mitek AD96 tonight and check if the sound is different..
Like I said in the other thread, since I was able to calibrate them to be very near in behaviour and levels. I'm start to feel better about my purchase.. ;)

Cool that will be intersting. The 1073 had a LF shelf on the eq section, and i dont recall a boisterous low/sub from the calrec. To me Neve is about the mid range (but i am a bit wierd.)
 

kmetal

Kyle P. Gushue
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
And our discussion is whether there is filtering in place before the conversion in his 710.

Maybe not super relavant but my m-auio fw1814 used to filter out a fair bit of bottom. I did a test with my portastudio comparing direct playback of a tape, vs a recording of a tape. The difference was not subtle (or bad, just not accurate) while not amazing, those same converters got used on some major pop tours for backing track playback on FOH.
 

Davedog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2001
Cool that will be intersting. The 1073 had a LF shelf on the eq section, and i dont recall a boisterous low/sub from the calrec. To me Neve is about the mid range (but i am a bit wierd.)

Could be this is the source of the lower low-end response. Even with the HPF switch it could be a built in tailoring of the frequency response to keep it similar to a real Neve. I think you can take a source with a solid low-end in it and test it through plug ins to check this. NOT as a substitute for the testing you're doing now but as general overview of the voicing of different preamps. Try a Neve emulation next to an API. The difference will NOT be subtle.
 

Davedog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2001
Like you, Marco, it is a flavor that I only had one other preamp similar to in my rack. So it was a no brainer for me plus the comp is already in place. Personally I wish it had a separate out for the comp but thats in a higher tax bracket for certain.

In your test I heard nothing that would not prompt me to put this on a number of sources which with mine I will be doing. The dobro I recorded came out very accurate and easily usable.

I thought the drums sounded clean and well within their sonic signature of the tuning you have. To me, this is the most important part of the capture. Especially drums. The last thing you want, IMHO, is to have the drums over compressed or to have their natural EQ to be out of whack from a signature somewhere in the recording chain. Be it mic, pre, or other outboard, an even representation of the drum sound off the floor is essential in having the basis for a fine drum mix. I would rather at this point have an EQ be a tone control rather than a repair tool to try and get rid of offensive standing frequencies. It certainly cuts down on the phase issues which can occur with heavy EQ use.

About the Neve sound. I don't think you are ever going to find two that are the same even the same same model from the same manufacturers built on the same day. They may be close though in that scenario. I do know the AMS Neve sounds a bit different than vintage Neve but a lot can be associated with component aging etc. Clones are all going to have a slightly different aspect to them even with the same components used in the circuits. Same reasoning.

So the question begs is the 1173 an accurate representation of what a true Neve 1073 mic pre sounds like? And the answer is... maybe.... from unit to unit -yes.....hardly..... perfectly..........etc. The reality is it's a really good sounding mic pre and though it may seem spendy and for some it really is....it's still quite a bit cheaper than it's nearest relative the BAE 1073mp. It's kinda in the middle of the Neve and Neve clone market. Also realize that the original 1073 Neve had an EQ. It was inductor based and this alone will stamp the sound. Perhaps the UK company will release a pre with the eq included along with the 1176 comp in one rack. They do make a 1073 w/EQ rack unit.
 

pcrecord

Quality recording seeker !
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
Personally I wish it had a separate out for the comp but thats in a higher tax bracket for certain.
That doesn't bother me so much but of course like you it would be a nice to have.
No to me it's the metering only showing the compression that bothers me.. but hey, I just need to check the levels in my DAW..

Like I said in the video, I'm more happy now that I can rely on the outputs being equal and needles behaving the same way..
As for the sound, I remember listening to the vintech take on the 1073 on piano and felt it was very clean and accurate..
What's buging me is the about 3db missing in the sub freq and thamed HF.. I'm just curious if other Neve exhibit the same curve.
It's said to do 31.5Hz – 20kHz but starts to get down around 60hz.

Of course it's always about knowing the tools.. I guess my process to achieve this is to doubt everything and make a ton of tests..
I'm sure it won't take long before I know exactly when and how to use them to get the sound needed in future projects. ;)

BTW, Uk sound do actually have a 1073 with an eq :
1073-mic-pre-eq-01.jpg
 

Kurt Foster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2002
the unique thing about an 1176 is the button selectors for ratios and the fixed threshold. it's easy to do a fixed threshold on the cheap but you have to have separate selectors for ratio or anything you do will be a compromise. you can't do it with a single selector switch with an all buttons in setting. you're still missing all the other combinations you can get with any 2 buttons or even 3. each button is additive. another thing about the 1176 is there are a few different versions that all sound different. so which one is your clone? the one thing i will say is the meter thing bugs me. obviously a cheap out on UK's part.

i'm a fan of getting separate pieces. the only channel strip i've ever liked was the Origin.
 

pcrecord

Quality recording seeker !
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
you're still missing all the other combinations you can get with any 2 buttons or even 3. each button is additive.
True, but at least they added the feature.. One think I discovered is if you put on the all in button, you get different results depending on the ratio you select.. This might compensate for the how many button you press kind of sound.
I'm sure it's not sounding close to the original.. but I find this compressor to allow a good variety of sounds and clean normal comp as well. I also have a Golden age Comp-3A and it is way more transparent than the 1173.

The Origin !! OMG I'd like to have one.. ;)
 

Davedog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2001
Marco I mentioned the UK 1073/EQ in my post. And the point being that the inductor EQ even when set flat is going to add some low-end to the overall response. Not really "adding" low-end but an overall "beefier" sound. Another thing they didn't add to the 1073 is the line gain. Of course there's no line in so.....there ya go. To me, the magic of the Neve preamps has always been the EQ. MOST English pieces are all about the EQ and how musical they are BEFORE their surgical use. I have a HILL Audio side car mixer. It's a little 16 channel MultiMix. The EQ on it is nothing like anything else I've ever used. Google it to understand what the design was all about. The preamps are clean and it sounds really good on drums which is it's main use here in my room.
 

Kurt Foster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2002
I also have a Golden age Comp-3A and it is way more transparent than the 1173.
an LA 3 is a solid state LA2a. opto comp. 1176 is an FET limiter ...... night and day / apples or oranges. personally an LA3 is all the comp i need. i love 'em. LA22a's are super cool too.
 

pcrecord

Quality recording seeker !
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
an LA 3 is a solid state LA2a. opto comp. 1176 is an FET limiter ...... night and day / apples or oranges. personally an LA3 is all the comp i need. i love 'em. LA22a's are super cool too.
I know the difference Kurt, lol !! That's what I was saying the 1173 allows for many sounds and I also have in my toolbox a clean option if I need it. . .
I get to choose between Apples and oranges.. That's fantastic !! ;)

To me, the magic of the Neve preamps has always been the EQ. MOST English pieces are all about the EQ and how musical they are BEFORE their surgical use.
You know I chose the 1173 in great part because of your suggestions, right ? ;)
 
Top