The Neve 1073 is nothing more than a discrete class a bipolar transistor with transformer input/output with good quality construction....high voltage supply, stepped gain controls etc. Numerous designs are very much like it!! So where is the "magic" coming from?? Transformer saturation, lower harmonic emphasis....Is it really that much different, better, colorful than others similarly designed? You opinion appreciated.
So whats the cause(s) of the Neve "1073 magic sound"?
- Thread starter nicoro
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
Welcome to out forum!
I will guess here, I'd need to have a real one with the 'others' you mention, which would be useful that you bring some examples, to look for and start a conversion from one to other and then see when they start to produce a similar signal.
Neve is a really good designer, and it's about design the differences between one circuit and other, rather than topology, of course topology is an important fact in the response of a piece of equipment. But when designing something you have to pick every single value and type of components, devices to use, etc. And here is where the compromise happens. I think he picked really careful not only the topology but al the variables together and that's what makes the difference, then is a matter of taste, from the designer and end user, how will respond and what sounds better where respectively. Neves designs, not only 1073, has really good critiques compared with other designs with a similar topology, you can go for some AB type consoles, or even mass production ones, and all will have something interesting. Take the focusrite, or some amok as example. Other designers also has their own signature, Saul Walker designed the eq you know around 1970 and still in production by API with slight changes, they incorporate jensen transformers when it came out, when switches used no longer available they asked custom made switches and take this opportunity to add some freq to the bands, etc. but the design is just the same. Saul also worked in other companies but not too much work on audio signal path but more on automation or broadcasting/movie mixers. But we still like the Quad8 eq where he has involved for example. A lot to learn from gurus like them, study their schematics in a critical way and understand those completely is a good way to start, try to make assumptions why did they take those choices is a good exercise, guess why the difference between one design and other I'm not sure is a good practice, doing a good and clever comparison may be good though.
JS
I will guess here, I'd need to have a real one with the 'others' you mention, which would be useful that you bring some examples, to look for and start a conversion from one to other and then see when they start to produce a similar signal.
Neve is a really good designer, and it's about design the differences between one circuit and other, rather than topology, of course topology is an important fact in the response of a piece of equipment. But when designing something you have to pick every single value and type of components, devices to use, etc. And here is where the compromise happens. I think he picked really careful not only the topology but al the variables together and that's what makes the difference, then is a matter of taste, from the designer and end user, how will respond and what sounds better where respectively. Neves designs, not only 1073, has really good critiques compared with other designs with a similar topology, you can go for some AB type consoles, or even mass production ones, and all will have something interesting. Take the focusrite, or some amok as example. Other designers also has their own signature, Saul Walker designed the eq you know around 1970 and still in production by API with slight changes, they incorporate jensen transformers when it came out, when switches used no longer available they asked custom made switches and take this opportunity to add some freq to the bands, etc. but the design is just the same. Saul also worked in other companies but not too much work on audio signal path but more on automation or broadcasting/movie mixers. But we still like the Quad8 eq where he has involved for example. A lot to learn from gurus like them, study their schematics in a critical way and understand those completely is a good way to start, try to make assumptions why did they take those choices is a good exercise, guess why the difference between one design and other I'm not sure is a good practice, doing a good and clever comparison may be good though.
JS
Obviously you have to remember that the 1073's design has been recreated, modified, and used as a starting point for circuit designers ever since it came into popularity. So many of the examples you might have might stem from it.
To answer your question a lot of your tone goes down to components. Circuit most importantly giving you the magic but also the 2n3055, 1166, 10468, 31267, BC184Cs, Ect.... This stew of components ended up being the winning combo and I'm sure there are people on here more qualified to tell you the intricacies on why they produce the sound they do. From what I've heard Neve was very selective on the parts they used and made sure everything matched their criteria. They sourced parts from a ton of different brands and sourced the same parts from different brands as long as they were up to speck.
To answer your question a lot of your tone goes down to components. Circuit most importantly giving you the magic but also the 2n3055, 1166, 10468, 31267, BC184Cs, Ect.... This stew of components ended up being the winning combo and I'm sure there are people on here more qualified to tell you the intricacies on why they produce the sound they do. From what I've heard Neve was very selective on the parts they used and made sure everything matched their criteria. They sourced parts from a ton of different brands and sourced the same parts from different brands as long as they were up to speck.
Thanks Guys:
The idea was to obtain "the sound" using simpler methods. Neve originally basically copied the tube mic pre sound using the "NEW" SS technology. Its been 40 years since the early 70s and integrated chip technology has advanced to the point that it surpases discrete designs in most parameters (except in overhead and current output). The INA and THAT mic preamp chips provide a lower noise floor in ready built units. Other chips like the LME49720 series OPA 2134 etc can be used for mic pre designs. The idea would be to provide more "COLOR= the sound" to these easy built mic pre designs. An input transformer that can be switched in and out saturating with increased lower harmonics would help providing more "color". It would also add increased CMMR / RFI protection and remove an electrolytic from the signal path. An output transformer likewise would color the sound and make impedance matching easier. Actually chips circuits can be designed to provide variable emphasis of lower harmonics primarily 2nd order. It seems that "the sound" is reachable in simpler designs.
The idea was to obtain "the sound" using simpler methods. Neve originally basically copied the tube mic pre sound using the "NEW" SS technology. Its been 40 years since the early 70s and integrated chip technology has advanced to the point that it surpases discrete designs in most parameters (except in overhead and current output). The INA and THAT mic preamp chips provide a lower noise floor in ready built units. Other chips like the LME49720 series OPA 2134 etc can be used for mic pre designs. The idea would be to provide more "COLOR= the sound" to these easy built mic pre designs. An input transformer that can be switched in and out saturating with increased lower harmonics would help providing more "color". It would also add increased CMMR / RFI protection and remove an electrolytic from the signal path. An output transformer likewise would color the sound and make impedance matching easier. Actually chips circuits can be designed to provide variable emphasis of lower harmonics primarily 2nd order. It seems that "the sound" is reachable in simpler designs.
okgb
Well-known member
Acceptable [ desirable ] distortion ?
