The beautiful capital city got the honors of becoming the world's first multi-room distributed Teranex system. Why the processing was even applied to BBC TV with excellent results.
Here is a bit from the Observer on the building itself.The most drop dead gorgeous and best fitted building I have ever set foot on.To appreciate it's majesty you would have to see in person.
One Hyde Park - review
The best penthouse suite in One Hyde Park will reportedly set you back £140m. But is it worth it?
The Observer, Saturday 22 January 2011
London's One Hyde Park, home to the world's most expensive apartment, and the neighbouring Mandarin Oriental hotel. Photograph: Linda Nylind for the Guardian
It is a silo for oligarchs, a warehouse for sheikhs. It has grown up, like a Beckham sprog, in the glare of publicity. The prices of its flats have become, thanks to carefully planted and unverifiable news stories, the stuff of legend: £15m for three bedrooms, £140m for a 3,000sq m triplex penthouse - reportedly the most expensive apartment ever.
This is One Hyde Park, the £500m development of 86 flats in Knightsbridge, west London. It is the brainchild of Nick and Christian Candy, who were to the dizzy world of 00s property what the Gallagher brothers were to 90s music. They were stars, feted in magazine profiles, celebrated for their stylishness and wizardry.
They are now comparatively cash-lite and, although they have managed the development of the project, they do not actually own the building - it belongs to a consortium that includes the prime minister of Qatar. Instead, Candy and Candy are credited for their "exclusive interior design", a shimmering, silvery cream, leather and silk art decoish affair.
They are part of an array of brands intended to lure buyers: design by Candy and Candy, "legendary service" by the Mandarin Oriental hotel, "acclaimed art" by James Turrell, Rolex and McLaren shops, and security by the SAS or, at least, SAS-trained personnel. It is the self-declared "best project in the world" at the "world's most glamorous address".
It is planned so that residents need never put their feet on a pavement or jostle with the general public. Cars can sweep them into the complex and an underground tunnel connects to the neighbouring Mandarin Oriental hotel, enabling its exquisite room service to get to the apartments. There is a 21 metre swimming pool, spa, cinema and golf simulator. It assuages anxieties, including some you never knew you had: there are iris-recognition scanners, while an optional extra is a camera that films your back and plays it out with time delay on a mirror, so that you know you look as immaculate behind as before.
A reception room in a One Hyde Park apartment.
The project's big brands are its architects, Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners, the practice founded by Lord Rogers of Riverside. Rogers has long proselytised for the "compact city". He argues for high-density development, tempered with "good design" and "high-quality public space", leading to "vibrant" cities. He wants "cohesion". "Unless cities," he wrote, "work constantly to prevent social, racial, physical and economic divisions, their communities will fall apart and the city will not work."
In his day job, as an architect following a brief set by clients, in a climate made by economics and planners, he does not find it easy to achieve everything that, as a seer, he would wish. One Hyde Park, rising to 14 storeys on a narrow site, certainly ticks the density box. Its contribution to social cohesion is less obvious, although its developers have paid for 70 affordable homes in the posh-ish district of Pimlico, as part of the deal necessary to secure planning permission.
One Hyde Park's contribution to public space is to improve a nasty 1960s road layout that came with Bowater House, a big office block formerly on the site. There are routes to Hyde Park on either side of the site, with slightly meagre pavements. Also, in response to some scruples of the planners, some shrubberies facing the street are encased in glass. These are nice enough, a little odd, and don't amount to much, but the architects reasonably point out that they are more than most buildings in the area give to the public. They might have added that, with the 250 hectares of Hyde Park and Kensington Gardens close by, creating more open space is not the most pressing need.
The exterior of One Hyde Park: 'four blocks that are tapered and staggered in plan, which allows views forwards, to the park or across Knightsbridge, but not sideways into neighbours' flats'
The architects' greatest influence on the project comes under the heading of "good design". They have put considerable effort into shaping the new building's volume, which is twice that of Bowater House, so that it doesn't crowd and loom as much as it might. One Hyde Park is broken up into four blocks that are tapered and staggered in plan, which allows views forwards, to the park or across Knightsbridge, but not sideways into neighbours' flats. Glass lift towers are placed between each block, to make the development less fortress-like and monolithic, and allow fragments of sunlight to pierce from the south side to the north. Full-scale mock-ups were made of pieces of the building to see how this would work.
Graham Stirk, the RSHP partner in charge of the design, says that it is "highly crafted", to an extent not matched by the practice since its Lloyd's building of 1986. By this, he means the attention given to each detail and choice of material, from the pristine white concrete frame to the sharp lifts to the pre-patinated copper alloy privacy screens.
He also means that, in the tradition of modernist and arts and crafts architecture, there is nothing cosmetic: everything you see is performing a purpose, as well as trying to look good. He says that One Hyde Park's reddish and off-white colours are designed to echo but not mimic its stone and brick neighbours. Its irregular skyline is intended to be less brutal to views from Hyde Park than Bowater House, which was higher and blunter.
It is still somewhat stark, made tough by its untempered repetitiousness, but it has a quality of conception, proportion and detail that is streets ahead of almost any other new luxury apartment block. The bigger question is whether we should be outraged by this defensive enclave for the super-rich. Or that leftie architects should take modernist architecture, once seen as a tool of social progress, and use it to make such development look respectable.
Actually, I'm not outraged. This is Knightsbridge, a place long made of monuments to exclusivity, and it's better that One Hyde Park should be part of London than behind a fortified fence in some suburb, as it would be in many cities. Last week, I saw an ostentatious, two-tone Bugatti parked nearby, absurdly penile in its folds and curves, supervised by two heavies in a Porsche while its owner went shopping. It was striking, nauseous and funny, but not something to be banned. One Hyde Park is similar, with the difference that its clean-lined design is much better than the Bugatti's.