Are newer products better than old ones?

[Revelation]

It seemed when George Massenburg came out with his EQ’s, the recording industry jumped and rejoiced in unison. No one has ever heard such a wonderful transparent EQ before. Almost every studio either had one or wished they had one. The Avalon 737 also received high praise with numerous of studios buying them, and even today they are seen in many studios. Avalon 2055 was another EQ that received high praise when it came out. All of a sudden products from Cranesong, and new Rupert Neve come out and people act like the old stuff that received high praise now is just ordinary and the newer products are better. Now Great River is coming out with a mastering EQ and again, it’s like ok now I can get rid of my Massive Passive. It sounds too mushy in the low end, and now this new product is better. I think all these products are great, and it is just personal preference at this high end market. But is a preferred sound for today’s music that people are going ga ga over it? Studio owners using Pendlumn MU’s and pre’s over the Manley gear. Cranesong EQ’s over the Massenburg EQ. Now we hear that the Massenburg EQ gives a hard diamond sound, while the Cranesong has a nicer sonic sound. But these complaints were not heard whey the gear came out.

I agree with new technology, the plug ins are getting better which is understandable. However with the exception of a real Fairchild and some other difficult old gear to find, the new gear seems to sound and be better than gear that came out in the 80’s or 90’s. I know that many still love their Manley, and Massenburg gear, but there is a trend that the new is better. What is your impressions on why this is?

[MIKEHARRIS]

Better may not be the case...some of the newer gear compliments the current "contemporary sound"...but only till the rage switches back to "vintage"

[Matt Syson]

hi
There is probably too much choice now and people do not always learn to use the equipment they have got. With an 'old' desk and virtualy no outboard you learned to get the sound you wanted with what you had. A SSL (insert any 'old' desk name) could provide virtually all that was needed but some would say the sound is poor now compared to product XYZ.
Used skilfully it should be possible to produce good work on virtually any gear although preferences of control layout and general ergonomics may make working on some things a better 'experience' than others. Using a digital rig running on a laptop in a broom cupboard is not as satisfying as sat in a control room with a 72 channel monster desk but it is possible to produce technically better work.
Matt S

[Capstan Cappy]

i partly agree to new products suiting the new "trend" of sound, but main reason for most products like SSL is flexibility vs sound, is the sound good and the flexibility great then it will be regarded as "better" then old consoles or outboard equipment.
many designs are based on what is already build, people are more into flavours now then "correctly" build equipment according to for instance the "braunbuch" standard..

[GYang]

Some new products ARE definitely better simple due to reason that no equivalent (in sonical characteristics) existed 15 or 20 years ago.

Came to mind:

-hyperrealistic mic pres as DAV, Gordon, DACS
-very clean, realistic LDC mics as Brauners
-gigacompressors as Atomic Squeeze Box, Pendulums, Distressor
-superbly high resolution studio monitors
-superb power amplifiers

In department of clean and resolute technical development did many nice steps.

Still,

-the best vacuum tubes are from 1950's
-tube preamps from 1960'-1970's are classic
-arguably the best vocal LDCs from 1950-1960's
-arguably the best DIGITAL reverb from 1980's
-analogue tape machines, some Eqs, analogue delays, reverbs (well today they serve mostly as effects)

Is old better than new. - No chance !
Except NOS vacuum tube, most of new, but top quality replicas/clones are equal or significantly better than 30, 40 or 50 years old crap .

[Capstan Cappy]

Originally Posted by GYang

Some new products ARE definitely better simple due to reason that no equivalent (in sonical characteristics) existed 15 or 20 years ago.

Came to mind:

-hyperrealistic mic pres as DAV, Gordon, DACS

E601 TBG mic-pre, 1979, neve ?? API?? helios??, cadac?? siemens??, telefunken??

[quote]-gigacompressors as Atomic Squeeze Box, Pendulums, Distressor[quote]

faichild 760, telefunken U73 , valley people 440 , neumann U473a, urei 1176 , DBX 160 clasic , DBX 201 clasic, all pre 1980??
[quote]

-superbly high resolution studio monitors

westlake HR1 one of a kind, tannoy SRM15XB

-superb power amplifiers

yamaha P2200 (BIG VU meters) first 100watt class A , bryston,

In department of clean and resolute technical development did many nice steps.

Still,

-tube preamps from 1960'-1970's are classic

this is actually the discrete era, like siemens V276 etc

-arguably the best DIGITAL reverb from 1980's

what is there to argue about , take an EMT 250 lexicon 224XL and compare, good hunting , u'll need it

-analogue tape machines, some Eqs, analogue delays, reverbs well today they serve mostly as effects

effects? , now I'M confused!!

Is old better than new. - No chance !

HELL YEAH!!! or alteast some come very close, i'll give you that

Except NOS vacuum tube, most of new, but top quality replicas/clones are equal or significantly better than 30, 40 or 50 years old crap .

waky waky

there is absolutely NOTHING new in ellectronics, they are ALL based on what is already build my only conclusion is that companies take advantage of the sound of today and ofcourse they have to make money and therefore build something new as if it's the new revelation , new colours, cool faceplate, different taste, yeah i want one....

peace

[vernier]

What is your impressions on why this is?

It simply isn't the case.

Many still use old gear because of the way it sounds: ...Langevin, RCA, TAB, Kron-Hite, Cinema Engineering, Altec, Universal Audio, GE, Pulse Techniques, etc, etc, etc.

[Bassmec]

Originally Posted by vernier

It simply isn't the case.

Many still use old gear because of the way it sounds: ...Langevin, RCA, TAB, Kron-Hite, Cinema Engineering, Altec, Universal Audio, GE, Pulse Techniques, etc, etc, etc.

Put some modern poly power supply caps and silver mica supression in one and nothing sounds like that old tube pre. Alot of modern retro gear is neither one thing nor the other. It trys to be all things to all men and can't do any of it.
Regards.•:*¨¨*:•. ¸¸.•´¯`•.Mark Fairfax-Harwood, Engineer Springvale Studios

[peeceebee]

every circuit/device has a different "sound", and range of performance, old or new. It's a matter of preference- if you like what one box does as compared to another, it's "better" (for you), regardless of when it was made.
Older units don't stop doing what they do just because something newer comes out...

[ethan_c]

Only newer Higher End products products are better than older stuff. Unless of course the older stuff is High End in which case it becomes better. Now in event of both pieces of gear being "High End" then the tie comes down to the following criteria:

- which is the most transparent?

- which "glues" the mix together the best?

- which has warmest roundest sound?

- and the tie breaker... which is more 'High End' ?

[vernier]

I never understood the "transparent" slogan. Seems if it was important to anyone, they'd use an M149 (which in many cases doesn't need a pre). Now that would be transparent!

[Dirty Halo]

Can't really generalize here.

There IS some vintage gear that IS better than new gear because they are made of materials that can't be used today or the build is cost prohibitive in today's economics.

Then there is new gear that IS better than vintage gear because it takes advantage of all that we have learned from that vintage gear and slowly improved on ideas, designs and newer material for better sonics.

It depends on the piece, the design, case by case.

AND, you can't even use price as a indicator because price can be so misleading, it can be cheaper today and still better than some vintage gear because of manufacturing costs are cheaper or economies of scale...or conversely a vintage piece can be way more expensive not because it is better, but because of supply and demand, i.e. it is simply more rare.

So, you can't say vintage OR new is better than one or the other.

It's about the piece itself and evaluate it on its own merits...the sound and functionality.

My two cents.

Oh, then there's our own emotional attachment to any given piece and that just sends "value" and price out the window

-andrews

DIRTY HALO www.dirtyhalo.com

[Diablo]

Originally Posted by Revelation

However with the exception of a real Fairchild and some other difficult old gear to find, the new gear seems to sound and be better than gear that came out in the 80’s or 90’s. I know that many still love their Manley, and Massenburg gear, but there is a trend that the new is better. What is your impressions on why this is?

The top of the line, no expense spared, totally discrete, gear from any decade will always sound good. It's the low end, mid-range and pro-sumer gear that is benifiting from the rapid increases in IC technology. Relatively inexpensive IC's are getting cheaper as their performance increases, their signal to noise ratio's improve and their distortion is lowered. Newer A/D and D/A chips keep on sounding better and better.

Basically the low end gear of today performs way better than the low end gear of yesterday. Just wait until the latest generation of chips finds it way into gear, even more improvment is on it's way.

[nukmusic]

Originally Posted by Diablo

Basically the low end gear of today performs way better than the low end gear of yesterday. Just wait until the latest generation of chips finds it way into gear, even more improvment is on it's way.

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by Capstan Cappy

C




what is there to argue about , take an EMT 250 l

Actually the EMT 250 came out in the 70's.

[natpub]

of course, didnja know new> old? neato

sorry, sarcasim off