Topic: Oade 148 Vs Neve 5012

[Wiggler]

Can anyone describe the sonic differences between these units.
I'm having a hard time picking a favorite between these.
For those which have had both boxes which did you prefer and with what mics?
I like the idea that the 148 is constructed with point to point wiring and I like the neves adjustable gain.

[ingsy]

i hesitate to post, because i really comment much on the sonic differences between each.  i ran the portico 5012 for a few shows, but never the 148.  my purpose in writing is to point out that the 5012 has 2 options in terms of sound, you can have regular or w/ the 'silk' button engaged.  i would imagine that w/ the silk engaged, it sounds very similiar to the 148, and w/out, maybe more transparent.  this is a bonus (IMO) as you could decide to use the silk or not depending on the sound in the venue or band being taped.
although you have adjustable gain on the 5012, i would bet you would probably keep this somewhere around +20 and then change the gain on your AD or recorder - i am not that smart, but it took me a while to figure out that going much higher on the 5012 brickwalled my AD.
anyway, i think the 5012 is a great piece of gear and the better choice, unless you can find a 148 for a good price.  i wish i never sold my 5012.  hope this helps.  cheers, ingsy

[habit]

This is a tough one.

The 148 wins in the size and battery department. If you have a mental picture of the portico, increase the size by half. Sucker is big and heavy. To my ears, the portico is a good deal warmer than the 148, especially when running silk. The bigger question would probably be what mics you're planning to run with the pre.

Running with the JW Mod 460s I prefer the portico to the 148 for the added warmness. Another point and it may just be an issue with my recorder, I don't seem to be able to get enough gain out of the 148 to have my levels peaking at -6 to -3 without cranking the gain on the Busman T-Mod R4. I generally run the portico around +30 (with the +trim knob for tuning) and the R4 gain around 11:00 setting. With the 148 > R4 combo I have to run the gain wide open to get levels to peak close to -12. I'm thinking I could increase the R4s sensitivity by 2bB and trim the gain back some, but have not had a chance to try that yet.

Either way I don't think you can go wrong.  Good luck.

[Wiggler]

Thanks guys.
I'm using muddy schoeps and have heard many tapes with the 148 that I really liked.
I have not listened to many neve tapes with that combo.
What I have heard of Neve recordings I liked alot.

[habit]

Thanks guys.
I'm using muddy schoeps and have heard many tapes with the 148 that I really liked.
I have not listened to many neve tapes with that combo.
What I have heard of Neve recordings I liked alot.

I think the 148 would be the better choice with the schoeps given the extra warmth of the portico. That's my ears though. Dennis Tyler on the board here is pulling super sweet tapes running the schoeps directly into an acm p2.

[Wiggler]

I have a ACM671 now that I am happy with.
I just have the itch to upgrade.

[dennisrtyler]

Thanks guys.
I'm using muddy schoeps and have heard many tapes with the 148 that I really liked.
I have not listened to many neve tapes with that combo.
What I have heard of Neve recordings I liked alot.

I think the 148 would be the better choice with the schoeps given the extra warmth of the portico. That's my ears though. Dennis Tyler on the board here is pulling super sweet tapes running the schoeps directly into an acm p2.

[Kindguy]

Thanks guys.
I'm using muddy schoeps and have heard many tapes with the 148 that I really liked.
I have not listened to many neve tapes with that combo.
What I have heard of Neve recordings I liked alot.

Check out some schoeps >M-248 recordings.

[monochromic]

Thanks guys.
I'm using muddy schoeps and have heard many tapes with the 148 that I really liked.
I have not listened to many neve tapes with that combo.
What I have heard of Neve recordings I liked alot.

I run Schoeps in front of a Portico and love the sound obtained from the rooms I record in around Sydney. I did a Schoeps > V3/Portico comp a little while back.

[F0CKER]

Thanks guys.
I'm using muddy schoeps and have heard many tapes with the 148 that I really liked.
I have not listened to many neve tapes with that combo.
What I have heard of Neve recordings I liked alot.

Check out some schoeps >M-248 recordings.

Personally, I think the 248 is a better match with the schoeps then the 148, others think the 41's specifically sound best with the 148 so it might depend what schoeps you're running.

Also to consider, the 148 is really a tapers best friend in terms of use.  All you do is turn it on and adjust gain off the a->d.  very simple. The rechargeable internal batteries are also a huge plus...and it's built like a tank for field use.  Also it travels well and sets up easily in a gear bag.  To me those were things that made taping with a 148 so much more enjoyable...great sound, but built for field use like ours.

[carlbeck]

I agree the 248 is the best pre for a pair of Schoeps. When I had my MK4's I had a 248 & 148, I preferred the 248 hands down personally. As far as the 480's are concerned, I love the 481>248 & the 483>148 sound, you just gotta have both 

[Evil Taper]

The 148 is more taper friendly by far and has good warm sound.  However, this is a completely subjective question so it's up to you.

Neve the company is not affiliated with Portico in any way, Portico is just Rupert Neve's current company, so it's actually a Portico 5012...that's just how it is.

[Wiggler]

I don't understand what you are saying.
Rupert Neve's company is called Rupert Neve Designs, Inc not Portico.
http://rupertneve.com/company/history/

[Evil Taper]

Rupert Neve's original company was Neve, which still exists, which is completely independent of his current Portico company.  He's Rupert Neve, legendary gear designer, so of course he's going to want his name affiliated with his company (Portico) but Portico is not affiliated with Neve (the original company).  I guess people can care less but it's just misleading to say that you have a Neve pre when in reality it's not a Neve pre, it's a pre designed by Rupert Neve.  Focusrite was also founded by Rupert Neve, but we call those Focusrite pres and not Neve pres (Focusrite is no longer affiliated with Rupert Neve).

My point...actual Neve pres (like the Neve 1073DPA which is a vintage reissue of the 1073 and retails at $3000) are on a different level than the Portico gear and should be solely distinguished as genuine Neve preamps.  I'm not saying the Portico gear isn't really nice, it's just not old school genuine Neve gear.

[Wiggler]

Thanks Evil.
Hope your having a good time making the move into the professional world.
I'm leaning toward the 148.

[Wiggler]

A couple of years ago it was somewhat difficult to get one.
Recently with so many people moving to the all in ones they appear to be popping up more often.

[Evil Taper]

If it was known what model transformers are in the 148s it would be possible to build very similar units...but we don't know and that's the way Doug wants it and so it remains.

[stirinthesauce]

If it was known what model transformers are in the 148s it would be possible to build very similar units...but we don't know and that's the way Doug wants it and so it remains.

I thought they were Jensens.  At least that is what I read from an old post linked to dat heads and to oades old forum.  I thought the big bonus to the 148 was the design on the power supply, not the actual pre since it gets the 20db of fixed gain from the transformers.

found an old thread.  Jensens, point to point wiring, no dc to dc voltage step up.  http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,52730.0.html

[Nick's Picks]

Check out some schoeps >M-248 recordings.

DING DING DING!!!!!!
mk4>248 is the shit.
mk41>148 is even better

[Jammin72]

Check out some schoeps >M-248 recordings.

DING DING DING!!!!!!
mk4>248 is the shit.
mk41>148 is even better

He did design the box while using Schoeps microphones so this makes a lot of sense.

And... in general hypers can stand a little warming while the low end rich cards (Schoeps, AKG, Neumann 140) find some percieved balance with a slightly brighter box.

Of course me... I'll take warmth on warmth please, wrap me up in a sonic blanket and let me rest my bones for a spell.

[Nick's Picks]

140>248 wasn't right to my ears.
140>148 would be much better.

schoeps are a different best though.  they are so thick in the middle, that the 248...which leans towards the transparent / detailed side of things (vs the 148), really works best.
especially w/the cmc6

the original m118 was "voiced" with cmc5, or earlier.  which to my ears..are a bit exaggerated around 250Hz and the 148 warms the shit right out of them, yielding such gems as those smokin' 1985 GD shows on archive.

[Jammin72]

140>248 wasn't right to my ears.
140>148 would be much better.

schoeps are a different best though.  they are so thick in the middle, that the 248...which leans towards the transparent / detailed side of things (vs the 148), really works best.
especially w/the cmc6

the original m118 was "voiced" with cmc5, or earlier.  which to my ears..are a bit exaggerated around 250Hz and the 148 warms the shit right out of them, yielding such gems as those smokin' 1985 GD shows on archive.

Of course each mic has it's own signature and I'm dealing with generalities.  Personally I'll take the 148 over the 248 for most any microphone for recording shows.  In fact I don't think I ever recommended the 248 for Schoeps mics in general unless that person told me he had a fondness for the treble knob.

It's fun seeing how other people group gear or place labels on things. What sounds hard, sterile, or overly accurate in my mind can be described as low end rich or warm by others.  Many times I find myself responding to a post here only to hit the delete button simply because another opinion only furthers the conversation, not necessarily getting any closer to a truth for another.  In reality the best that can be accomplished is that folks begin to find trends with which they can begin to discern how another individual hears things based on his/her classifications combined with personal experience.  Then you can decide whether you're in sync with that and attempt to get and idea of how it's going to sound to you based on those ideas.

As far as these two boxes go... the Portico is one of the few new boxes being used in this scene which has really peaked my curiosity, such great detail with a bit of warmth while remaining extremely open, and I'm already big fan of the 148.

[Nick's Picks]

I'd really like to run one for a while.

If any of your portico owners ever want to fly an Apogee mini MicPre ....
drop me a line

[dactylus]

**.**

[Nick's Picks]

http://nickspicks.com/mp3/sw2008-06-22track25.flac

Stevie Wonder, Greatwoods ...and not FOB.
mk4>248>mr1
proof in the pudding right there.

[jadedphan]

so i know this is an old thread - i’ll repost as a new thought if no replies -

i just snagged one of these, and knew the rack wars would make it tough to carry around in my orca bags. didn’t realize how deep this sucker is, and regardless of how it sounds, it’s as useful to me at the moment as a boat anchor around my neck. how do you all transport/bag it?

i haven’t seen a bag that tolerates rack gear well that’s less than 5-7 hundred bucks, and i can afford it, but don’t see a reason to buy a 5th gear bag for this monster, and am thinking of dumping it instead. really bummed with it.

[fireonshakedwnstreet]

so i know this is an old thread - i’ll repost as a new thought if no replies -

i just snagged one of these, and knew the rack wars would make it tough to carry around in my orca bags. didn’t realize how deep this sucker is, and regardless of how it sounds, it’s as useful to me at the moment as a boat anchor around my neck. how do you all transport/bag it?

i haven’t seen a bag that tolerates rack gear well that’s less than 5-7 hundred bucks, and i can afford it, but don’t see a reason to buy a 5th gear bag for this monster, and am thinking of dumping it instead. really bummed with it.

Looks like someone ran this beast last year. Maybe you can get his contact info?

Phish
10/29/2021
MGM Grand Garden Arena - Las Vegas, NV

Source: DPA 4015c(NOS/DFC/FOB@6')->Portico 5012->SD788t(24bit/96kHz)->MBit(16bit/44.1kHz)->FLAC

Recorded and transferred by Scott Schneider

[goodcooker]

It only pokes out the top of a Sonicase a little bit. Old school. You can cut off the rack ears if they are in the way.

[jadedphan]

yeah - i thought about butchering the face to remove the rack ears, but the depth (13+" with cables/knobs considered) is what's really getting to me....

I'm a touch ocd as well, and the sticking out the top part is something that is sorta deal breaking

[H₂O]

I thought Neve offered a faceplate without the ears

[scb]

i have an old lowe pro magnum 200 aw bag that I don't need. it'll hold something as tall as the portico (I used it with mytek gear)

[DSatz]

I visited rupertneve.com and was surprised to see there that the 5012 has been discontinued. Its replacement is the full-rack-size model 5211.

On the accessories page I didn't see any non-rack faceplates listed, but I have a similar memory that they used to be offered, and I think it would be worth sending the company an email message to see if they have one still kicking around in stock.