RNDI between III and monitors?

As for the preamp part, I have a Chase Tone Secret Preamp, a take on the Echoplex pre, and I could easily leave it on all the time when using my regular amp rig. I don’t know what it does, specifically, but it is musical. G.E. Smith actually does leave his on all the time. There is just something present in the tone with the pre in the line that isn’t there without it.
 
Someone run a white/pink noise generator through the NRDI and into the AXE and post the RTA output with and without it engaged. It would be interesting to see if the effect can get created with an EQ and a compressor block . . .
 
Someone run a white/pink noise generator through the NRDI and into the AXE and post the RTA output with and without it engaged. It would be interesting to see if the effect can get created with an EQ and a compressor block . . .
I don't think you could create the same effect with internal blocks.
I'have tried with preamp simulation, EQ, ... RNDI gives a nice analog colour
 
I don't think you could create the same effect with internal blocks.
I'have tried with preamp simulation, EQ, ... RNDI gives a nice analog colour
I'm not sure about that. "Nice analog color" means that there is a change to the sound right? Any reasonable change to the sound is just a manipulation of EQ, compression, phase, or time alignment. There is no such thing as mojo or some unmeasurable yet audible effect.

If we can measure it we can reproduce it even if Cliff needs to create new tools. Once its digital all things are possible.
 
I'm not sure about that. "Nice analog color" means that there is a change to the sound right? Any reasonable change to the sound is just a manipulation of EQ, compression, phase, or time alignment. There is no such thing as mojo or some unmeasurable yet audible effect.

If we can measure it we can reproduce it even if Cliff needs to create new tools. Once its digital all things are possible.

Yes, maybe or not ;)
At this time i really prefer the Axe with good analog gear in the chain.
 
One of Mr. Neve’s most endearing qualities was the attention he paid to HF response extending above 18K. I believe he said that by extending the HF response while maintaining linearity one could minimize undesirable “hearing range” anomalies — and then fiddle about working within hearing range more freely. His designs all seem to add that “air” quality so valued in his analog gear without appearing to alter the character of the source.
 
I'm very skeptical of this. Just this past week I had my AX3 in the studio and as an experiment with the engineer we reamped the same guitar track through the AX3 into a vintage Neve 1073, API 512c, and line level straight into the Burl converters. The API had more mids and low mids than the other two, and obviously you can bring out more of a mic pre's "character" by driving it harder, but it would be a significant overstatement to claim one sounded "better" than the others. They were all just slightly different, and to me definitely not worth the cost for recording guitars.

I do most of my guitar tracking from home and before this test I was considering adding a couple 500 series mic pres but after doing this test I will continue just recording direct with USB.

So to me, if these expensive mic pres don't make a significant difference on guitars, I'm very skeptical that adding a DI would. I've also done an A/B between a $250 DI marketed as having "Jensen transformers" and a $25 Livewire DI, reamping the same clip through both, and they sounded identical.

My only gripe with the AX3 is I wish it correctly reported its latency on Mac. It's annoying to have to run the I/O latency test in my DAW every time I want to record, enough that I am considering getting an interface with coax SPDIF so I don't have to deal with it any more. Never had to do this in the past, even with cheap interfaces.

With all that said, one piece of Neve gear I really love is the RNHP. I am into high end headphones and the RNHP made a noticeable difference compared to the headphone amps on Helix, AX3, FM3, HX Stomp, Pod Go, etc, especially when playing along with audio from my computer. For me it's important to have a consistent headphone amp with which to compare the different units. Maybe I will be able to get rid of it if I pick up a dedicated interface with SPDIF...

Thats good for you ;)
You dont have to buy any new gear !
To me the différence is big so I m happy to use it in place of USB recording.
I m searching this character.
 
Yes but in my tests I always plug the Axe in my preamps (it s sounds better than USB in my opinion).
The RNDI gives a really Nice color and the sound has more "life"
I‘m doing the near same but with an SSL Six. Axe - Six, Six - RME UCX, Six - A7 Monitors . It‘s kind of „old school“. 🎶
 
My only gripe with the AX3 is I wish it correctly reported its latency on Mac. It's annoying to have to run the I/O latency test in my DAW every time I want to record, enough that I am considering getting an interface with coax SPDIF so I don't have to deal with it any more.
If you're on a mac, have you tried using an Aggregate Device via Audio MIDI Setup?
I have an interface with SPDIF, and I honestly prefer just hooking the AxeFX up via USB

1632636344629.jpeg1632636356992.jpeg
 
I have a RNDI (Neve DI), which I've used in the past with great results with acoustic guitar and bass. It's the single channel (mono) version.

It takes line level input too, so just to experiment I connected it between one of the (L/R) outputs of the III, then into a simple mic pre (required for level) and into one of the two monitors.

When comparing that channel to the other one without the RNDI (just XLR/XLR), the one with the RNDI sounds better, more lively and clear.

It's not the cables, monitor etc. Please explain the reason before the urge arises to buy a 2nd or stereo RNDI for this purpose.
Take an IR of it. Then compare the two. That will tell you if it's just frequency response or if the RNDI is adding distortion that you find pleasing.
 
So I was daytripping through an old Tape Op Magazine interview with Mr. Neve, and it finished with this:

The Geoff Emerick story

In December 2000, I attended an open house at Music Lane Studios in Austin. They had cookies and beer and vegetable platters, reps from API, Amek, and Drawmer were there, and people were allowed to play with the gear and record some stuff. The real draw of the evening, however, was a presentation by Rupert, focusing on the new 'Channel in a Box'. The highlight, the bit that blew everybody's mind, was the story he told about Geoff Emerick. Sadly, the presentation went unrecorded (go figure, it was held in the main room of a recording studio), so I'm paraphrasing here, but I got the main points right.

Some years back, Geoff was having a problem with a Neve console at AIR Studios, so he called the company and some techs came to check it out. They did, but they didn't find anything wrong, it was all within spec, and Geoff was still unhappy. George Martin then called Rupert to ask if he would please come take a listen.

The problem according to Geoff: three channels had something wrong with the high end, a brittleness or sharpness that wasn't in the other channels. They a/b'd them for a bit and Rupert agreed, though the variance was very slight. Test equipment was called for and every channel was checked. The result: on the three channels in question (and only on them) they found a 3 dB bump at 54 kHz.

Rupert will be the first to admit that the human ear cannot hear a pure 54 kHz signal, however, the story is proof that signals outside the 20 Hz — 20 kHz range can make an audible difference on the signals within that range.
 
I have a RNDI (Neve DI), which I've used in the past with great results with acoustic guitar and bass. It's the single channel (mono) version.

It takes line level input too, so just to experiment I connected it between one of the (L/R) outputs of the III, then into a simple mic pre (required for level) and into one of the two monitors.

When comparing that channel to the other one without the RNDI (just XLR/XLR), the one with the RNDI sounds better, more lively and clear.

It's not the cables, monitor etc. Please explain the reason before the urge arises to buy a 2nd or stereo RNDI for this purpose.
@yek , did you ever find out what the RNDI was doing to make it more lively and clear? I saw Cliff's suggestion of creating an IR to analyze. Not sure if you found out and I'm curious. cheers
 
My experience suggests that the difference comes down to the "value added sonic conditioning" (transformer loading, harmonic saturation = distortion, etc.) the preamp is providing, and which many listeners enjoy and prefer. My experience is based largely on DI with a Focusrite ISA1 and a V72. These and Neves, etc. are classic gear because there is general agreement that "it sounds better". And it does in many cases. But having the accurate, uncolored Axe conversion is essential to accuracy and repeatability not just when re-amping, but for the accuracy of the modeling in general.

Not to suggest that one shouldn't use a classic transformer or tube pre if or when its wanted (and this has been done by some players for decades).

I expect if the Axe FX were to offer a DI model in the Drive Block to model transformer and tube pre behavior with RNDI, SSL, V72 or V76, API, and ISA presets: the differences between using an analog pre and a model of one would be negligible.

If one is of a mind to experiment with this in the DAW, you might compare the Axe DI with the RNDI or other transformer pre, and add a transformer modeling plugin such as the Kush Audio to the Axe DI chain and see how close you can get to the RDNI.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom