Higher end preamps, why and which one?

[EveningSky]

I have read, $ is better invested in the preamp rather than in a high end mic.
Who can share with me, what would I get with an investment of up to $2k in a 2 channel preamp and what modles you would recommend.
Is it advisable to get one with equalizer and compression built in, or save that for the computer program in the DAW?
Thank you.
EveningSky

[tdukex]

Originally posted by EveningSky
I have read, $ is better invested in the preamp rather than in a high end mic.

Where did you read that?

[pdaniels]

It's best to record pre-computer, so you are recording at the highest gain possible.

Getting a better preamp can vastly improve your sound. However, the same can be said about getting a better microphone. Having said that, there are several great mics that will give you a professional sound for well under $1K, but you will probably need to go over $1K to get the same quality from a pre.

[pdaniels]

sorry - duplicate post

[Richard Monroe]

First, I'm with TDukex, huh? I consider the mic and preamp to be equally critical, and a certain magic occurs when the mic, the pre, the source, and the room all like each other.
But to give my answer to your question, as with everything, that depends. I think that if you can only afford one killer preamp to start (like most of us, if we can afford the damn thing at all), I would tend toward a pretty clean preamp. I'm not a huge fan of channel strips (pre's with compression and EQ). With a straightforward preamp you can add the effects you want by outboard gear or plugins of your choice. Preamps are valued for the sound they impart to a signal and some of the very best ones are kind of one trick ponies, but what a trick! Neves seems to be good for Rock, but I use more acoustic instruments, so I use an Avalon AD2022, which has lived up to all the hype in the studio. A preamp, like a mic, should be chosen because it makes *you* or whatever you're going to record, sound good.
I like Avalon also, from a commercial perspective. It will retain its value, and clients will be reassured that they are going through a top shelf pre. People may say your Avalon is overpriced, but not too many people will tell you it sucks!-Richie

[darrin_h2000]

You can get great results with a super preamp and a used $50 SM57... but that pre with a u87 would be nicer.

[Richard Monroe]

Yeah, come to think of it, although the mic isn't less critical than the pre, I think a great pre can bring the best out of a cheap mic that's well made, such as an SM57, but I haven't found that a great mic brings out the best from a cheap preamp, in fact, often the reverse. A great mic can reveal how much your cheap preamp sucks.-Richie

[tdukex]

My limited experience has shown me that an AKG 3000B through an Avalon still sounded harsh--though a 57 sounded great. Obviously you need both good mics and good pres (not necessarily expensive) to get good sound.

As has been stated before, almost anybody with a little experience (even me) can hear the nastiness that a Behringer mixer pre puts out--with almost any mic--or that an AKG 3000B is not a pleasant sounding mic regardless of the pre (these are generalizations, there are always exceptions).

But even in the $500-$700 range we are seeing mics and pres that experienced recordists and pros alike argue back and forth about regarding how well they stack up against the "professional" equipment (witness RNP, Sebatron, Grace, KSM series, BLUE, etc.). As a matter of fact, it has been argued so extensively that I am convinced that it is not only subjective, it is VERY subjective.

My advice: Try to achieve complimentary balance, not only in your mixes, but in your equipment. Don't blow all of your dough on that "Holy Grail" piece of equipment while neglecting the rest of your signal chain. Take your time, do your research, and buy good (not necessarily expensive) equipment that will work well with the other equipment you can afford to own.

[chessrock]

A Neumann U67 will still sound like a U67, regardless of whatever contraption you're using to bring it up to line level.

And a Marshall V67 will still sound like the same cheap and shitty V67 that it is, whether you plug it in to a D.W. Fearn or a Fearn house plant.

I'd rather have a really nice mic pre to work with, but given a choice between the two, give me the better mic and I'll figure out a way to make it sound good and get it to line level.

[jwag]

Our band recorded our vocals through a v67 at a studio with a very capable engineer. It'd be difficult to convince me that the mic is shitty, you might just not like Marshall condensers especially. It was, however, recorded through a nice pre.

-Jake

[EveningSky]

Thank you to all for the input.
I have currently several middle class mics and several middle class preamps.
I have read a lot of discussion about mics on this BB.
What about preamps.
What other preamps do readers with experience recommend as a good all around preamp (at what price level).
Transitor or tube, transformer or transformerless?
Thank you,
ES

[fenix]

Originally posted by EveningSky
I have read, $ is better invested in the preamp rather than in a high end mic.

I would agree with this somewhat because mics (esp dynamic mics) are somewhat standard in home and big studios. The pres and other things in the chain are different.

For example, everyone has a 57 but not all studios have the mentioned DW fearn pre.

[Simman]

Avalon, Focusrite Red 8, Great River MP-2NV, Universal Audio (2) 610, Amek 9098.

Also you may want to take a look at the universal audio 6176 (single 610 pre and a 1176 compressor), I got one on my christmas list!

[ChristopherDawn]

Originally posted by Simman
Great River MP-2NV

I just wanted to repeat that.

[Chip Hitchens]

Chessrock, I usually tend to agree with your observations, but I would lay money down that a Neumann U67 would sound like ass incarnate through my Samson Mixpad 4 running on three 9-volts, assuming that it had enough oomph to get the mic over the noise floor. At best, I think it would sound like a Neumann being broadcast from a slightly-out-of-range AM radio station.

(I've since moved on from that mistake of a mixer, by the way.)

I kind of know what you're getting at though. I knew a guy who played a Charvette guitar (the cheap line of Charvel, which is the cheap line of Jackson) through a Roland JC-120. The most sparkling, pristine amplification of crap ever.

[Teacher]

Originally posted by chessrock
A Neumann U67 will still sound like a U67, regardless of whatever contraption you're using to bring it up to line level.

And a Marshall V67 will still sound like the same cheap and shitty V67 that it is, whether you plug it in to a D.W. Fearn or a Fearn house plant.

you aren't serious right? if i put a u67 thru my mackie pre's its going to sound same if i sent it thru a BA 1073?? shit my mxl 1006 sounds better enough thru my rnp vs my mackie that it had my producing partners asking...why don't the vocals sounds as clean and crisp as the other ones when i was mixing an older song...well duh it went thru the wackie pre amp....lets not even get into dynamic or ribbon mics...

with condensers the mic is more important then a pre with dynamics and ribbons its at least equal if not more important...the pre that is.. at least from my limited experience...

as for which one me personally the 2 on my list are the:

A designs MP2.- great bang for buck (1250)

GTQ2- great bang for buck when you consider it also has 2 neve 1073 style eq's! (2500)

they are both 2 channel

[EveningSky]

Thank you for your information. Can someone try to explain to me what I get in a good preamp if I pay $1200 versus $2200? Is that a good investment of $ or something best left for sound professionals?

[chessrock]

Originally posted by Teacher
you aren't serious right? if i put a u67 thru my mackie pre's its going to sound same if i sent it thru a BA 1073??

I said A Neumann U67 will still sound like a U67. And if I had one, I'd bet I could find a way to make it sound good through your Mackie pre.

I'd have a much easier time of it (making it sound good) than I would with your mxl 1006 through your RNP. Although I'm sure with enough massaging, I could probably get that to sound pretty okay, too.

Originally posted by Chip Hitchens
Chessrock, I usually tend to agree with your observations, but I would lay money down that a Neumann U67 would sound like ass incarnate through my Samson Mixpad 4 running on three 9-volts

Give me a U67 in really good condition, and I'll give it my best shot. Didn't say I could work miracles, but I have friends who are good with electonics and I could always see what they can do with your Samson.

Originally posted by jwag
Our band recorded our vocals through a v67 at a studio with a very capable engineer. It'd be difficult to convince me that the mic is shitty

I don't doubt that a very capable engineer could coax a good sound out of a V67. I don't exactly understand why one would handicap himself like that to begin with. Maybe he was bored and needed a challenge? That's the only explanation I can think of.

[88fingers]

Sytek makes some really high-end stuff that's suppedly amazing... but I've never heard it.

[Big Kenny]

go to mercenary and pick one, they are all high quality and priced competitively the langevin dual is very sweet but everybody doesn't drive a chevy (i use the toft atc 2 and have found it very effective on my mid priced mics)
In His Name
Big Kenny

[Teacher]

Originally posted by chessrock
I'd have a much easier time of it (making it sound good) than I would with your mxl 1006 through your RNP. Although I'm sure with enough massaging, I could probably get that to sound pretty okay, too.




[/B]

i bet the u67 would sound better thru my RNP though

[Rev E]

Originally posted by EveningSky
Thank you for your information. Can someone try to explain to me what I get in a good preamp if I pay $1200 versus $2200? Is that a good investment of $ or something best left for sound professionals?

The short answer... you get a relatively safe place to hide $1000, because many high end pres hold their value pretty well (particularly the bigger names). What you're getting is not necessarily better. But it will be a different flavor. Why don't you go to a shop for yourself and see if the difference is worth it to you?

[chessrock]

Originally posted by Teacher
i bet the u67 would sound better thru my RNP though

Touche

[c7sus]

www.davisound.com

[Richard Monroe]

Originally posted by EveningSky
Thank you for your information. Can someone try to explain to me what I get in a good preamp if I pay $1200 versus $2200? Is that a good investment of $ or something best left for sound professionals?

Can you tell me what you get in a $1200 guitar instead of $2200? Opinions will differ. The question is- what is the right tool to do the job *you* want to do? As in car racing, 80% of the money is paid for the last 10% of performance, and half of that is a function of brand prestige. However, that 80% is often the difference between the checkered flag and second place. And the better driver may win anyway. The question asked is one that every person has to answer for themselves. I think a kickass project studio is always an unholy combination of cheap gear that works, and a few pieces of real top shelf equipment.-Richie