Home
AudioAsylum Trader
Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

For Sale Ads

FAQ / News / Events

 

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.

You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login


Login to access features only available to registered Asylum Inmates.
    By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username:

The Name that you picked or by default, your email.
Forgot Moniker?

 
 

Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".

Password:    

Forgot Password?

 Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:  
Your Email:  
Subject:  

Message Comments

   

Original Message

Rupert Neve interview

Posted by Bill Way on December 15, 2013 at 22:40:38:

Rupert Neve is responsible, more than any other individual I can think of, for the studios we have today. His designs of consoles, amplifiers, mic preamps, EQs, and of course his "Flying Faders" are iconic, and for good reason.

The link is a lengthy interview/talk he gave to engineers and students at the Paris SAE Institute this past October. (You can also find it on GearSlutz in the music computers forum.) It is fascinating. Among the gems:

* About 40 minutes in he tells of a console Geoff Emerick received that had a problem in three channels. It was a wiring error in transformers that caused a 3 dB bump at 54 kHz. He suggests that, even though we cannot measure hearing past 20 kHz (and far less in mature males) we can measure brain activity in response to sounds far higher, or perhaps to currently unmeasurable artifacts below 20 kHz *created* by anomalies well above our measurable hearing range. He believes audio gear must perform well up to 100 kHz, and suggests that he would expect significantly better brain wave response to SACDs than redbook CDs, despite the fact that audio measurements of SACD do not predict a huge difference.

(My note: I think he is on to something here, and it might start to explain how male engineers in their 60's, whose measurable hearing has deteriorated, continue to do really great work.)

* About an hour in, he describes a console they made that measured far better than anything ever had... but didn't sound nearly as good as earlier gear that measured far worse. They eventually traced it to minute crossover distortion in ICs, which they fixed by designing their own. His conclusion: "Excellence in specification [measurements] does not equal excellence in performance."

* He suggests that measuring brain wave response, which is now easy and cheap, may turn out to be as valuable as our traditional measurements of frequency response, distortion, slew rate, etc.

* He says near the end, "Listen. Listen. Listen. Listen with others and discuss what you hear."

That may be what is needed to come up with new kinds of measurements that will improve our entire audio chain.


WW