anyone use a john hardy preamp?

capnreverb said:
what was your opinion?

I have an M-2, which is the same as an M-1 sonically. Very nice, full, accurate, detailed - all those and more. I use it side by side with a Pendulum Audio MDP-1a (another great pre) for solo fingerstyle acoustic and classical guitar. Although I don't have a large variety of mics (two pairs of SDs and a few LDs), they all work very well with the John Hardy, as have any other mic I've tried with it.

Mine has the transformer option and LED scale VU for each channel.
 
Last edited:
Disclaimer: I don't have a ton of experience with the Hardy's.

But I know many who swear by them. They're generally considered cream of the crop in the clean / transparent category.
 
I have used the Hardy preamps many times. I would not call them "transparent" since they aren't really a staright wire sound (ala martech, certain Millenia, Buzz, Earthworks etc...). I certainly would consider them "clean" though. They definately do have a sound that belongs to them. I would say a little cleaner than an Avalon 2022, more "honest" (for good or for bad). They certainly aren't a bad preamp to have around. What I noticed though is that they just aren't my favorite preamp, probably for the same reason a lot of people love them though, so it really is just an opinion. I guess I am just a preamp junky, but they just don't seem to have that "magic" sound that so many other preamps have that I love. For me they just don't help you out in any real way. With a good mic and a good source they sound very honest though with a touch of flattery. Not too aggressive, but not too invisible either. I guess I just like the "big" sound. Api, Chandler, Neve, Daking etc... That is just sort of my stlye though. I can also easily see how so many other people do like them.
 
I had four channels back when i was running Protools TDM HD2 system. I really wish i still had them because they are nice pres. But it seems that everything i recorded with that system was dull and colorless. Could be alot of what Xstatic is talking about because yah they really dont do anything special for the sound. Although there are many factors to that. All im using now is my onboard ghost pres and i feel there is much more life in those and i dont consider them even close to the same caliber as the John Hardy. But i just like my recordings through them.

I guess if you gonna get a few channels, make sure you get a preamp that isnt clean maybe? I think if i had a variation it would work very well.

Later,

Danny
 
they're my faves. i used to have 8 channels - now have 4. no output transformer.

the really excel on the lowend stuff (bass), stuff that has a lot of transients (drums), stuff you want to retain the detail in - vocals, acoustic instruments, etc.

they do let your mics speak for what they are so you really have to be careful with mic selection...they will be as they are through a hardy...for better or worse. a 'worse' i can think of is overheads with a brighter mic in a less than flattering room - you'll get an amazing amount of detail...and not in a good way in that case.

no - they do not introduce distortion or much 'color' ala my 1272's and 312's and dakings...but they are big. a bass through a hardy is absolutely huge! they are my go to pres.

fantastic service from a great guy too.

Mike
 
For acoustics instruments, especially anything Americana like folk, traditional, bluegrass, zydeco, and acoustic jazz – I think the Hardy is one of the best preamps for those applications. The M-1 is the quintessential "clean" preamp, IMO. If you wanna record acoustic guitar, the M-1 is a killer for that.

The Hardy pres aren't really all that exciting for rock-type music, IMO.

capnreverb, I looked through your Soutrane website and checked out the artists. I'd recommend API preamps for what you guys are recording.
 
A point of note about the Hardy preamps.

The Jensen output transformer option makes a huge difference in the sound. It makes everything sound larger than life.

Iron = life.
 
Back
Top