Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Auctioneer to sell off Pink Floyd recording console

goldminemag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 55 posts

Re: Auctioneer to sell off Pink Floyd recording console

#31

Post by bogomipz »

sofaofthedamned wrote: post #20
danjambur wrote: post #16

Fun fact, my dad installed this.

Nice. My old boss Mike Grimwood worked for Neve in the 60's and 70's and told us loads of tales about making bespoke desks for the likes of Led Zeppelin etc. Would have loved to have been around then, but I suppose they say the same about the digital era.

It's pretty interesting how bespoke much of this gear was. It's also interesting that lots of the better known studios like EMI/Abbey had their own in house electrical/audio engineers designing and making the house gear rather that purchase off the shelf.

Re: Auctioneer to sell off Pink Floyd recording console

#32

Post by elmar »

bvm wrote: post #29
elmar wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

can I ask what is your view on the no-mixing philosophy? http://www.waterlilyacoustics.com/techspecs.htm

That's a pretty extreme approach! It reminds me a little of my all time favourite musicians, Gillian Welch and David Rawlings - who detail their process here: http://tapeop.com/interviews/85/gillian-welch-and-dave-rawli... One of the relevant quotes: Q: Is everything recorded live? G: Totally. D: Yeah, everything is live. It is pretty much all from takes one, two or three. Very few mixes. This is the first record we'…

thanks for the detailed reply.

All that I can say is that Water Lily records sound amazing if you never listened I recommend then highly.

Re: Auctioneer to sell off Pink Floyd recording console

#33

Post by bogomipz »

dcwca wrote: post #12
quakeguy wrote: post #5

All the console does can be done with a laptop nowadays, the nostalgic value is of course a big point in purchasing it. Still, who would aquire this monster, if not a museum? I can't see any modern recordings done with it, but solely for the goal of achieving said nostalgia. "It belongs in a museum".

One thing people fail to understand about consoles like this, or the Neve, is that they do produce a unique sound, but not for any technical reason. Yes, everything this machine can do can be done in a laptop. Sure there are small differences related to audio signal paths and headroom and distortion, but for the most part those can be simulated or ignored. The big reason working with hardware like this produces uniqu…

>"One thing people fail to understand about consoles like this, or the Neve, is that they do produce a unique sound, but not for any technical reason."

Isn't the EQ, preamps and compression I get a product of the design of that unit? How is that not a technical reason?

Why are there Neve plugins based on the classic 1073 EQs and Preamps if there is nothing technical about why a Neve sounds like a Neve?

If this was the case I could I just artificially constrain my workflow and get the same recording as I would from a Neve.

Re: Auctioneer to sell off Pink Floyd recording console

#34

Post by dcwca »

bogomipz wrote: post #33
dcwca wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing people fail to understand about consoles like this, or the Neve, is that they do produce a unique sound, but not for any technical reason. Yes, everything this machine can do can be done in a laptop. Sure there are small differences related to audio signal paths and headroom and distortion, but for the most part those can be simulated or ignored. The big reason working with hardware like this produces uniqu…

>"One thing people fail to understand about consoles like this, or the Neve, is that they do produce a unique sound, but not for any technical reason." Isn't the EQ, preamps and compression I get a product of the design of that unit? How is that not a technical reason? Why are there Neve plugins based on the classic 1073 EQs and Preamps if there is nothing technical about why a Neve sounds like a Neve? If this was th…

How are you going to artificially constrain your workflow in a way that resembles a massive mixing desk in the room?

I made concessions about the technical details you're asking about in my post, you chose not to quote that part.

Re: Auctioneer to sell off Pink Floyd recording console

#35

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

al2o3cr wrote: post #30
riprowan wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The workflow makes the sound. The lack of automation forces you to make choices. Forces your hand, literally. You raise an excellent point here. A full-blown DAW is practically without limits: hundreds of tracks, unlimited effects on every track, any signal chain is possible. But making art is about working within constraints . Most of the best art derives from the constraints as much - or more - as the capabilitie…

Technically speaking this is all "distortion" of the original signal. Not really - if it was "distortion" you could MEASURE it with an oscilloscope. There's another, less polite, word for most of those comparisons.

If you want to measure it, an oscilloscope is the wrong tool.

You can see it - very clearly - using a lab-quality audio signal analyser from a company like Audio Precision.

https://www.ap.com/

And a popular way to model it is with a DSP technique called a Volterra series.

You may want to consider that impolite words are also used about people who consider themselves very knowledgeable about domains where they show no evidence of understanding the fundamentals.

Re: Auctioneer to sell off Pink Floyd recording console

#36

Post by elmar »

SwellJoe wrote: post #23
dcwca wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing people fail to understand about consoles like this, or the Neve, is that they do produce a unique sound, but not for any technical reason. Yes, everything this machine can do can be done in a laptop. Sure there are small differences related to audio signal paths and headroom and distortion, but for the most part those can be simulated or ignored. The big reason working with hardware like this produces uniqu…

I don't believe it's any of those things. Though, certainly the ergonomics of a traditional studio, and the equipment therein, works best for engineers who learned in those environments and using those tools. Those engineers happen to be the most experienced engineers working, so they are probably, on average, better than most younger engineers with much less experience. However , the reason some of the classic recor…

A great studio or alternatively a great bathroom :)

Jim Morrison’s Bathroom Vocals On “LA Woman” At The Doors Workshop

http://www.feelnumb.com/2009/07/03/jim-morrisons-bathroom-vo...

Re: Auctioneer to sell off Pink Floyd recording console

#37

Post by sehugg »

bvm wrote: post #29
elmar wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

can I ask what is your view on the no-mixing philosophy? http://www.waterlilyacoustics.com/techspecs.htm

That's a pretty extreme approach! It reminds me a little of my all time favourite musicians, Gillian Welch and David Rawlings - who detail their process here: http://tapeop.com/interviews/85/gillian-welch-and-dave-rawli... One of the relevant quotes: Q: Is everything recorded live? G: Totally. D: Yeah, everything is live. It is pretty much all from takes one, two or three. Very few mixes. This is the first record we'…

Frank Black (from the Pixies) did a lot of his solo studio albums this way too: http://forum.frankblack.net/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=961

Re: Auctioneer to sell off Pink Floyd recording console

#38

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

riprowan wrote: post #21
dcwca wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However there is a technical reason why these devices do sound different, and that is that they all impart euphonic distortion. Bass sounds "bigger." Treble sounds "clearer." Mixed tracks "glue together." Vocals "pop out." A sense of "depth of field" may be imparted. Digital advocates are quick to point out that all of those phenomena can be perfectly modelled in the box. We have convolution reverbs and tube amp mo…

> all of those phenomena can be perfectly modelled in the box Nope. How you gonna model the interaction between a microphone and the preamp load it's driving, and the compressor that's driving, and the EQ it's driving, and the nonlinear summing bus that's feeding, when all of these are interacting in a live signal chain, and all entering various forms of nonlinear behavior based on the age of components, their tolera…

This is all true, but there's a point beyond which it stops being musically/artistically relevant.

I've probably been doing this stuff as long as you have, and I'm not actually sure where that point is any more.

I actually hate the sound of most of the Beatles albums. I think they sound crap by modern standards - tinny, rattly, clogged-up, mid-heavy mixes with no deep bass.

Put them up against a modern trance single mixed ITB and the latter sounds huge, dynamic, cinematic, and infinitely more polished.

Which is better? It depends...

The Pink Floyd albums hit a sweet spot by being musically ground breaking while also being the first examples of hifi multitrack recording in its modern form.

Now I tend to think ITB is fine for electronica and dance, because sometimes you want polish and a slightly unreal shine. But for rock, country and maybe even hiphop the older hardware is going to give you more character, bite, and depth.

Ultimately they're just colours you can use. If you have talent, it doesn't matter if you mix ITB or not.

If you don't, it doesn't matter either.

Re: Auctioneer to sell off Pink Floyd recording console

#39

Post by cannam »

quakeguy wrote: post #5

All the console does can be done with a laptop nowadays, the nostalgic value is of course a big point in purchasing it. Still, who would aquire this monster, if not a museum? I can't see any modern recordings done with it, but solely for the goal of achieving said nostalgia. "It belongs in a museum".

I wonder how many individuals there are in the world who have sufficient space for this, something to use it for, and the ability to maintain it? A bit like musing about the potential global demand for high-end yachts.

It's not on anything like this scale, but I recently acquired (sort of by accident) a Revox A700 reel-to-reel tape deck from the mid-1970s. Even though it works, it could be the most useless object I've ever possessed. It only does one thing (I guess two if you count recording and playback separately) and that thing can be done with higher fidelity by a free smartphone app. It weighs 25kg, draws a lot of power, is fiddly to use, and is probably one of the most complex pieces of consumer electronics ever made in terms of the number of distinct components it contains that can fail. What is the purpose of it, today?

Re: Auctioneer to sell off Pink Floyd recording console

#40

Post by bogomipz »

dcwca wrote: post #34
bogomipz wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"One thing people fail to understand about consoles like this, or the Neve, is that they do produce a unique sound, but not for any technical reason." Isn't the EQ, preamps and compression I get a product of the design of that unit? How is that not a technical reason? Why are there Neve plugins based on the classic 1073 EQs and Preamps if there is nothing technical about why a Neve sounds like a Neve? If this was th…

How are you going to artificially constrain your workflow in a way that resembles a massive mixing desk in the room? I made concessions about the technical details you're asking about in my post, you chose not to quote that part.

I actually don't see any technical concession you made, in fact after the above quote you went on to say:

>"The big reason working with hardware like this produces unique results is more about the layout and workflow than the tech inside the machine."

That seems like a clear statement that you believe the technical details have very little to do with the sound.

Post reply on HN