OT: Has Anyone Tried the Rupert Neve Portico Pre?

[MissHiss]

The introductory price is attractive for a genuine Neve preamp. The closest thing I have to a genuine Neve now is my Vintech X73i, which I think sounds fantastic, but I know some folks who have a good deal of experience with Neve gear say the X73i isn't quite there. A damn good pre, but not quite a Neve...and I paid more for it by the time I got the power supply than the Portico would cost if I took advantage of the introductory price.

I know this thing is brand spankin' new, so there probably aren't that many out there yet. But I'm hoping someone out there has tried it so I could get an opinion.

[Cliffy_Boy]

Check on Gearslutz.com It is getting rave reviews.

[Stig Eliassen]

Hi.

Yes, I own one 5012. I love it. At the bottom of this page http://www.thelisteningsessions.com/session10.htm there are 16 bit wav-files from a session test.

One thing that's for sure is that I now have one more quality unit to choose from when I record. Different preamp, different sound. Check it out.

[PTUser NYC]

The introductory price is attractive for a genuine Neve preamp. The closest thing I have to a genuine Neve now is my Vintech X73i, which I think sounds fantastic, but I know some folks who have a good deal of experience with Neve gear say the X73i isn't quite there. A damn good pre, but not quite a Neve...

Hmm. I'm confused.

The meaning of the word "Neve" seems to change throughout your post, and that, in turn, gives rise to false assumptions that may be leading you down the wrong path.

Here are many different definitions out there for the word "Neve":

1) Rupert Neve - an excellent designer of microphone preamps

2) A set of classic preamps made by a company called Neve, which include the 1073 and 1081, which are very different from eachother, but have some sonic similarities too. These are great preamps, and I believe that Rupert Neve designed them, and gained his first level of fame from them.

3) Other lesser preamps made by the same comapny from the same time period. I don't know to what extent Rupert Neve was involved with the design.

4) Anything ever made by that company, including newer designs that Rupert neve never worked on.

5) Any preamp Rupert Neve ever DID work on, including designs for Focusrite, Amek, and now this Portico unit.

6) Any preamp that markets itself to be like any of the preceeding 1-5

I've heard people use all of those definitions when calling something a "Neve".

In my preamp collection, I have a vintage Neve 1073, and I also have a Focusrite Red 1. They are two of the 3 or 4 most used preamps in my studio. They are each fantastic, and I love them both. Both are based on designs by Rupert Neve, and they couldn't sound more different.

I never really liked the Neve/Amek stuff.

So, there is every reason to believe that the Portico will be a great sounding mic preamp. Rupert Neve does generally mean "quality" to me. But as to what it may sound like, only ears can tell.

To say that 'its a Neve creation, and should therefore be similar to my X73' is a real stretch. Even if the attempt is to 'copy the 1073' anything and everything that gets changed in the design could make the amp sound radically different. I haven't heard that the Portico is even attempting that anyway - are they?

Well even if they are, look at Geoff Tanner's Phoenix GTQ-2 as a great example. Geoff worked for Neve for a long time, and was very familiar with the classic 1073 circuit. He set out to make a Neve-esque copy(ish) and ended up making improvements as he went. The result is a new piece, that definately has 1073-ish qualities, but is also quite different. The GTQ-2 isn't superior or inferior to the 1073, its a valid alternate choice - they are actually quite different. Its like comparing white bread flour, baking flour, and wheat flour - none is better, each is different, all do basically the same thing, and yet when you want one, its obvious that the others won't do. Describing them in words, especially by composition and function, could easily make you think that they are interchangable, but tasting them makes the differences immediately obvious.

Lore has it that the first Marshall amps are the same circuit as the Fender Bassman, but the parts used were different, specifically a lesser transformer, and the sound was obviously a LOT different. Not better or worse, we'd all like both in our studios, and would prefer one over the other by a wide margin for any given application.

So, same guy, even if it was same circuit (does the Portico even make that claim?) could be very different. What I figure is that if Rupert is hearing the results, and tweaking the new design until it sounds "good" to him, that I probably want to hear it for myrself too, since he's had so many great results. I don't predict whether it will sound crunchy like a 1073, or clean and open like the focusrite stuff, or maybe GML-like, or API-like, or Trident-like or even something totally new?

The counter point should be made too: sometimes radically different designs can sound similar, or evoke the sound of the other, in certain applications, if used in a creative manner by the engineer.

Art is damn hard to quantify, even if you know exactly which colors and brushes the artist began with.

[MissHiss]

Hmm. I'm confused.

The meaning of the word "Neve" seems to change throughout your post, and that, in turn, gives rise to false assumptions that may be leading you down the wrong path.

Fair enough. I'm basically talking about audio gear, specifically preamps in this case, that were designed by Rupert Neve and manufactured by the company he designed them for. The guy is a legend, and in the case of the Portico, it's his own company and he designed it, and that's about as "Neve" as you can get.

To say that 'its a Neve creation, and should therefore be similar to my X73' is a real stretch

Well I don't think I quite said that. I think I said, "the closest think I've got to a Neve..." I would definitely agree that comparing an X73i to any sort of classic Neve gear is a stretch (to the best of my knowledge -- I've heard classic Neve gear, but not in my own studio, which is the only place I can really accurately judge). My statement was based on the idea that there is quite a bit of Neve influence in the x73i design. The idea behind it, as I'm sure you know, was to base it on the 1073, but change a few components that weren't available when the 1073 was designed to make it sound better.

I already have some nice preamps, including a Great River MP2NV, Avalon 737, Grace 101, and Groove Tubes Vipre. I had always thought the "Neve" thing was probably a bit overblown until I got the X73i, which sounded good on everything but especially strings. NONE of the preamps above sound as good as the X73i on strings, especially acoustic guitar, to my TASTE. Others may disagree. That's cool.

But it was because of the X73i that I caught the Neve bug because there's a lot of Neve "influence" in the design. So now I want a REAL NEVE!!

Maybe I wouldn't like the Portico. I don't know. But I get to blow about five grand per year on toys and I'm thinking of making this my next one. You get some pretty darned good opinions here from people who have listened to TONS of preamps, and that's basically the objective of this post --what do people who have listened to tons of pres think of the Portico. I do realize there could be hype with this piece of gear. Maybe Rupert is trying to cash in on his name to rake in a big retirement fund. But I can't believe a legendary designer of gear would do that. It's an ego and legacy thing.

[PTUser NYC]

I'm going to have to keep arguing with you.

Let me say here that I don't mean anything personally, and in fact I'm trying to be helpful, so if I disagree strongly, please don't read any extra personal dimension into my words, because I certainly don't intend any - only to argue the point. I hope we're cool.

You wrote:

I would definitely agree that comparing an X73i to any sort of classic Neve gear is a stretch (to the best of my knowledge -- I've heard classic Neve gear, but not in my own studio, which is the only place I can really accurately judge). My statement was based on the idea that there is quite a bit of Neve influence in the x73i design. The idea behind it, as I'm sure you know, was to base it on the 1073, but change a few components that weren't available when the 1073 was designed to make it sound better.

I'm with you so far. Without being too fussy, it is fair to relate the sound of the X73, the Great River NV, and other 1073 type designs into a similar category. While it is true that they are different, they all have a similar growl, and warm and sometimes gritty or dirty relationship with the transformer. They are "Neve-y" (1073-like).

Then you said:

But it was because of the X73i that I caught the Neve bug because there's a lot of Neve "influence" in the design. So now I want a REAL NEVE!!

And this is where I get totally confused. What does a "REAL NEVE" sound like? The Focusrite Red series is the antithesis of the 1073 - the Red 1 is smooth, sheeny, airy, and has a totally different presence than the 1073 type did. It isn't similar at all, it lives on the other end of the audio spectrum. Its a great preamp, in fact a tremendous compliment to the 1073 in a mix, but it sounds completely different.

What does a Neve design sound like? The only commonality I've ever heard to them is quality, and saying that, I really didn't like the Amek stuff he did - which again, sounded very different from either of the other two.

Now don't me wrong, I'm not being fussy and saying that every preamp in the world is different from every other, which is true, but often subtle - I'm saying that over the years Rupert Neve has designed some VERY different mic preamps, and I wonder how you can assume that they will bear any resemblance to a 1073, or its cousin your X73?

What the heck is "Neve influence" from the point of view of audio color?

If you had a great chef cook you an amazing beef roast, would you then assume that if you ordered chicken the next time that it would taste "beefy"? You could rightly assume that the chef would make something GOOD, but as to what it might taste like, it would be hard to tell without eating some.

What if the Portico sounds like the Red series? Or something totally new? How could you buy one, over spending the resources on something else, without knowing what it sounded like, and whether that was a necessary, common, and currently unfilled role in your studio? Not to mention whether you personally liked it or not.

I think that the philosophy of using a complex man with an diverse career as an adjective to sell yourself on a purchase without really knowing anything else is intellectually lazy, and likely not to bear fruit over the long run. Its nice to undertand everything in terms of quick little sound bytes and ideas, but the truth is more complex, and requires more attention.

Now, again, I apologize for being rude, it isn't my intention, I am attacking the idea and not you personally. By doing that, I'm actually hoping to help you, and others reading the thread. I hear this same misuse of the name (and concept) of "Neve" in a lot of places, and so I'm really speaking to our entire recording world here, rather than just to you.

If you say 1073-like I understand you.

If you say 'Rupert Neve designed it, so I am interested to check it out, since he often has fantastic designs' I understand you.

If you say you want "a lot of Neve "influence" in the design." I don't know what you mean, and when you say something is a "REAL NEVE" I wonder what that means regarding how it will sound? 1073, Amek, Focusrite all sound totally different - with totally different goals and approaches.

[c-tone]

In my preamp collection, I have a vintage Neve 1073, and I also have a Focusrite Red 1. They are two of the 3 or 4 most used preamps in my studio. They are each fantastic, and I love them both. Both are based on designs by Rupert Neve, and they couldn't sound more different.

I never really liked the Neve/Amek stuff.

The 1073 is a Rupert Neve design, the Focusrite Red is not.

I personally love the Amek 9098 mic pre, EQ, and compressor. As a matter of fact, I think that the EQ is the best and most flexible EQ ever made.

[PTUser NYC]

The 1073 is a Rupert Neve design, the Focusrite Red is not.

What I said was that the Red Series was "based on designs by Rupert Neve" which is true. Rupert designed the ISA 110 mic preamp, the ISA 115 Mic Pre / EQ, and the ISA 131 compressor for Focusrite. The Red Series is said to "use the same circuit topology as the console and the ISA modules". I have heard and worked with the ISA series - the Reds do sound different from the ISA, but they are in the same "family", certainly with different transformers. Both the smooth Reds and the edgier ISAs each sound nothing like the 1073 or 1081, so the point I was making still remains. I chose to speak of the Reds because I have them, and wanted to stick closer to something I knew well.

http://www.trinitysoundcompany.com/focusrite1.html

I personally love the Amek 9098 mic pre, EQ, and compressor. As a matter of fact, I think that the EQ is the best and most flexible EQ ever made.

Yes, the "matter of fact" is that you have your opinion, and I have mine. Each is valid. If you were talking about an Alesis 3630 or something, perhaps there is room for some quasi-objective condemnation, but the Amek stuff does not "suck" I just don't like it. You do. That's fine, of course.

The same thing is true of the Focusrite Red too - a lot of people don't like them - I love them. Different strokes I guess. Anyway, I said early in the thread that different gear performs differently depending on who is driving it, and two engineers might get a very similar guitar sound by radically different methods.

I generally don't like dark mic preamps - I don't like really bright mics either. I'm more for a U87, or M49 into a 1073 than a C12 into an Avalon - this might have something to do with discrepancies between approaches, i.e. what you're going to use the device in conjunction WITH, and what role you're looking for the device to play?

[c-tone]

PTUser - you seem to be spending a lot of time and effort into nit-picking other peoples posts and reading things into them that aren't there. I had a feeling from your earlier posts that you'd come back with this reply. I never said what you said wasn't true, although since you were razzing the original poster for not being clear enough on his definitions (even though they seemed fine to me), it seemed like this info might be helpful. I was adding some information which was clearer than what you stated, i.e. the 1073 is not "based on a Rupert Neve design" - it IS a Rupert Neve design.

Of course, it is understood that we are talking about subjectivity here. The original poster is asking for opinions on the Portico.

maybe that's what this thread needs

[Cliffy_Boy]

The Portico is commented on in detail here