Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Letters, I get letters...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN, USA
    Posts
    27,246

    Letters, I get letters...

    Here's a response from someone who just finished listening. I got his permission to post it here.

    Hi Lynn:

    First, many thanks for your contributions to the world of recording.
    I've learned a lot from your microphone CD, speaking with you once in
    the past, and recently via the PT vs. Neve project (I'm a bit late
    getting on board here). You've given us fantastic stuff to contemplate.

    I have a hybrid studio with a Mackie HDR/2496 with outboard converters
    (RADAR light) and an automated analog board. When I received the PT vs.
    Neve CD yesterday, I anxiously awaiting the listening test, which
    occurred this evening. And I reacted to one Redbook track immediately,
    and said "Yes, that's the sound. Full, warm, more present." My blind
    notes actually say, "No comparison".

    I almost fell out of my chair when I logged on and read the results: I
    had chosen the PT mix which, to my ears, sounded subjectively superior
    to the alternate mix. This, of course, comes after hearing projects
    done through a Neve 8048 desk that set the pinnacle of sound for me.
    This experience has forced me to re-think my position. I'm dumbfounded.
    (The SM57 wasn't too many paces behind the Telefunken 251 either when I
    sat with the mic CD; I'm starting to really pit my subjective
    perceptions against the biases I've apparently acquired!)

    In sum, thanks again for another unique experience. I realize it is by
    no means the last word on the analog vs. digital debate, but it does
    make one challenge convention.

    Best regards and God bless,
    Lynn Fuston
    3D Audio

    Making beautiful music SEEM easy since 1979.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Valyermo, CA
    Posts
    241
    It's the SM57 compared to the Elam 251 that would cause me to wonder what other factors might be at play in this persons perception. I certainly allow such differences to be theoretically possible between listeners but that particular one is quite a jump (to me anyway). This particular listener can certainly save himself a bundle, well worth the cost of the CD I would say!
    Chris R. Gibson AKA Loopy C
    www.micworks.com
    Ken Tamplin Mastering

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Westminster, California
    Posts
    21
    Hi Chris,

    Sounds like Lynn has stirred the sonic soup once again (in a good way)! I certainly did a jaw drop when I saw the DAWSUM platforms key... my response is on the thread you recommended... "Don't read till you've listened..."

    Keep up your enthusiasm for all this stuff!

    Best wishes,
    John Vestman

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7

    Icon7

    It seems that everybody is discounting the fact that both CD's were recorded through the Neve console. The sound of this board is still present on both mixes. - No wonder it still sounds warm!
    Can Pro-Tools replace the Neve board?
    You still need to get the audio into the DAW in the first place, and what happens if you have a 16 buss recording happening? We are still talking about (16) $64.000 worth of Neve pre-amps.
    Pro-Tools Vs Neve Console....
    Sounds more like:

    Pro-Tools + Neve Pre's
    Vs
    Pro-Tools + Neve Pre's + Neve Bucket

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN, USA
    Posts
    27,246

    Default

    It's called the "PT vs. Neve Rough Mix Comparison CD" for a reason. It is frequently shortened to "PT vs. Neve CD," in conversation for obvious reasons.

    The source files are not the variable, regardless of whether they were recorded on a Neve or a Mackie. It's the mixing platform which is the variable.

    Here's the description from the store:

    This one-off CDR contains two alternate mixes of a 60-piece orchestra recording by Lynn Fuston, recorded through a Neve console to RADAR II. These mixes will allow you to audition the difference between a mix made on the 80-input Neve 8058 at OceanWay Nashville with a similar (not identical) mix performed in ProTools.
    Lynn Fuston
    3D Audio

    Making beautiful music SEEM easy since 1979.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Sorry,
    I can see that this is a mix comparison CD, but reading comments such “The DAW sounded so warm” just seem irrelevant due to the fact that the DAW mix is a hybrid of both Pro-Tools and the Neve. The Neve is responsible for the transient response and colour of the signal; Pro-Tools is responsible for level balancing!

    There are also two variables, the Mixing platform and also the Mixer!

    Plus I thought that the Oceanway board was running 31105 pre's and is split so why is it referred to as an 8058?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7

    Default

    (By mixer I mean Mix engineer)

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN, USA
    Posts
    27,246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luke
    Plus I thought that the Oceanway board was running 31105 pre's and is split so why is it referred to as an 8058?
    You'll have to check with Oceanway. That's what I was told it was. I'm not enough of a Neve expert to dispute what they told me.
    Lynn Fuston
    3D Audio

    Making beautiful music SEEM easy since 1979.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •