Tube vs Toob

P

polarity

New member
Would anyone with a higher end tube preamp (who also happens to have a cheap one) record a clip of something on each so we can hear the difference?

I purchased one of the Tube Pre v2s a little while back because I was told I had to have one (I really shouldn't trust salesman).

While I can definitely hear a difference, and if used subtly it's not a bad one. I am curious what the real tube preamps sound like.

I'm honestly not sure if someone would have both of these pieces of equipment but if you do, I'd love to hear the differences.
 
An exercise in futility IMHO.
People chose valve pre amps (one supposes!) because the valve produces distortion of a kind that we tend to find pleasing, even flattering. But the distortion, mainly 2nd harmonic, is proportional to signal level, very small signals, a volt or so, will produce virtually no detectable distortion. So, in comparing a cheap and expensive valve pre we would have to set exactly the same signal level at the valve in each. Even this is not enough for parity. The biasing and HT voltages are likely to be very different in the two amplifiers.

Even if! You could match all that up, valves are not very consistent. If you took a batch of say 50 12AX7*s you would likely get a range of 10:1 in the distortion for the same circuit conditions.

In order to get valve audio circuits to behave consistently, valve to valve and as they age you need to enclose a few stages inside a negative feedback loop...Ah! But then of course they stop distorting!

Stop sweating what the "pros" do and their "booteek" kit! Bit like thinking a set of Tiger Wood's clubs would improve your game!

*Not a good choice for quality audio and a rotten mic front end valve....But that is "old school" way of thinking!

Dave.
 
ecc83 said:
An exercise in futility IMHO.
People chose valve pre amps (one supposes!) because the valve produces distortion of a kind that we tend to find pleasing, even flattering. But the distortion, mainly 2nd harmonic, is proportional to signal level, very small signals, a volt or so, will produce virtually no detectable distortion. So, in comparing a cheap and expensive valve pre we would have to set exactly the same signal level at the valve in each. Even this is not enough for parity. The biasing and HT voltages are likely to be very different in the two amplifiers.

Even if! You could match all that up, valves are not very consistent. If you took a batch of say 50 12AX7*s you would likely get a range of 10:1 in the distortion for the same circuit conditions.

In order to get valve audio circuits to behave consistently, valve to valve and as they age you need to enclose a few stages inside a negative feedback loop...Ah! But then of course they stop distorting!

Stop sweating what the "pros" do and their "booteek" kit! Bit like thinking a set of Tiger Wood's clubs would improve your game!

*Not a good choice for quality audio and a rotten mic front end valve....But that is "old school" way of thinking!

Dave.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree with your 'Tiger Woods clubs' comment.

If the recorded performance is not good or the room it is recorded in is not worthy, there is not a benefit from the mic preamp. Tube or not.

Not even going into mic options because that is futile if you don't have the previous mentioned before making a selection of mic.

I myself do not own any tube preamps so I am not able to post clips. The reason I do not have any is because of the fact that I have used them and was not a fan myself.

Maybe someone else will post some samples of how irrelevant or necessary it is to use one.

Keep in mind, the performance and quality of the sound recorded is the most important. If a tube preamp enhances that, then by all means use it. It will not in any way create something from nothing. Maybe a bit of warmth? lol. I find that term stupid myself.
 
Thanks Ido, that's really what I was looking at.

Just from what I can tell listening to yours the distortion/harmonics seem much more subtle (could be the setting). There are only a few spots I think I can really hear it. If I crank the cheap one up more than just a little it goes from adding a nice sound to adding something horrible and the distortion sounds very out of place. After purchasing I was talking to Jimmy and he was mentioning about the differences between real tube pres and the solid state pres that they have added a tube to, after that I have been very curious to know what the real ones sounded like.
 
Yeah - I thought they might be helpful. I use very subtle and fairly clean settings. 15 db pad, 6/10 pre gain, slight eq boost on bass. slight eq cut on highs, 3/10 compressor. You can really drive these things I guess but that's not what I'm aiming for. Plus I may do ITB changes later on so the more subtle the more flexible later.
 
Check out the last post here:

https://homerecording.com/bbs/equip...ved-plate-toob-gear-vintage-tube-gear-147847/

The "cheap" pre is really a solid state amplifier with a "starved plate" tube circuit tacked on the end, the tube is run in a way to exaggerate harmonic distortion, to add effect, and BTW that can be done with low voltages and therefore low cost. The horribleness you hear is overdriving the solid state, which produces the "bad" sounding harmonic distortion, the tube has nothing to do with it.

the "real" pre is a tube amplifier throughout. The tube is operated where it actually isn't supposed to distort as much, but if you do hit it harder, you'll get progressively more of the "good" and pleasing harmonic distortion. Tubes want higher voltages, which means transformers, and components that can take higher voltages, etc. so more expensive.

There is no fair comparison, and like the guy said, it just the marketing
 
Last edited:
ido1957 said:
View attachment 89225
View attachment 89226
Here's a couple of old files I recorded - just short vocal clips.
First file is Sputnik direct to USB interface.
Second file is Sputnik through UA LA610 MKII to interface.
You can hear the difference the pre makes in the overall sound.
Judge for yourself.
Click to expand...

I liked the first one better. It had more clarity imo. Not sure but the 2nd one seemed to have a artifact or two on the tail off. Either way, a little eq could probably match them up easily.

thanks for the posting of the two, interesting.
 
jimmys69 said:
I would have to agree with your 'Tiger Woods clubs' comment.

If the recorded performance is not good or the room it is recorded in is not worthy, there is not a benefit from the mic preamp.
Click to expand...
I double agree with the Tiger Woods stuff but disagree that a mic preamp has not benefits. It may not offer a pleasant distorted sound but it is not a 'non-benefit' stuff at all. I have a Behringer tube preamp (Mic100) that bought for other than get a saturated output. The fact is that plugging the guitar or microphone directly into the soundcard (I don't have a AI) the signal is TOO low, so the preamp brings my input signal to a fair level. So there IS an use for a mic preamp.

;)

Now why I bought a TUBE one? Well, first it was the cheapest I could find. Second I confess that I was bogused by the advertisement saying that the tube would bring a vintage warm tone to my sound. But I would had bought it anyway because the price and because Behringer is a brand that I like so I think I couldn't go wrong with it. Now, about the vintage warm sound it is pure BS. At least I never heard any difference in the tone itself (just the level). But to tell you the truth I never tried to oversaturate the input of it to see what happens -- I work within the 'safe' range and use it only to do what a preamp supposed to do: amp the signal.

Beside all the explained above, only very recently I made my very incursion into the miced amp realm and the fact is that I have an hybrid Vox VT-15 with a tube preamp inside and that produces an awesome saturated sound when the gain pot is cranked up. So I don't need an extra gadget between my guitar and the amp to get the saturation thing.

As a final note (and as others mentioned above) when micing a guitar signal your tone will be way more than what your amp produces though. Actually it will be a mix of the amp, the room characteristcs, the mic used, the guitar and its pickups, and, of course, the performance of the guitarist. About this last quesite once in a while I find some newby in several guitar forums asking how to mimic the Carlos Santana guitar tone and the truth is that a big part of his tone actually comes from his own mojo, in short, to achieve the Santana tone you would have to be Santana himself or at least to pick his feeling, experience, technique, etc.

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top