Dan Richards Review of the VTB-1

[alanhyatt]

I know many wanted to see a review of the VTB-1 with a Studio Projects C1. The review is a bit burried on another thread. I don't want to cross post, but you may want to read it. It was done by Dan Richards, also known as DOT.

He Quote's:

Review – Studio Projects VTB1 mic pre

This entire thread has just been made obsolete w/ the introduction of the Studio Projects VTB1 mic pre. Full review is Here

 

[Wide Awake]

This entire thread has just been made obsolete w/ the introduction of the Studio Projects VTB1 mic pre.]

Every preamp known to man has become obsolete, or at least until the RNP comes on the market.

 

[alanhyatt]

Re: Re: Dan Richards Review of the VTB-1

Every preamp known to man has become obsolete, or at least until the RNP comes on the market.

Wide Awake,

With all due respect, have you heard the RNP yourself yet, or is your comment based on others ears? Dan's comment was made on another thread that had nothing to do with the RNP, but his comments were based on the use of the unit and I just re-posted it for those who have asked.

Comparing the VTB-1 with the RNP is comparing apples and oranges. They are two very different mic pres at two very different price points. Let the thread be what it is, a place for people who want to read and or talk about the VTB-1.

I am all for your freedom of speech to make comments, but there is no need to be negative right out of the gate. If you do not like the VTB-1 because you have bought one and heard one, then your comments are welcome. If you have not heard a VTB-1 and a RNP side by side...then why all the rolleyes? Do you know something we all don't know?

 

[MandoManiac]

Ouch, what's with the either or thing? I like apples AND oranges. I want BOTH. You can never have too many colours or channels. Thanks, Alan for raising the quality bar and lowering the price barrier. I've ordered a couple VTB-1's and when the feeding frenzy is over I'll get an RNP. And I will have saved so much I can get a set of SD mics with interchangeable capsules. Any suggestions? he-he.
-Jim

 

[Harvey Gerst]

Alan, three things bothered me about the review Dan did on the VTB-1 (which basically is almost identical to my findings, although way more like a typical magazine review):

1. He didn't try it with very many different mics - just 2 LDs and an SD - all condensers. Pretty limited selection to be making those kinds of sweeping generalizations.

2. He said, "As we made each guitar pass and cranked on the tube-drive knob, the presence and intensity of the tone and sound would increase." What the hell does that mean exactly? The "presence" and "intensity" of the "tone" would "increase"?

3. Dan made no mention of one of the most important features on the VTB-1 - the mic loading switch. At least, I think it's important. Didn't he notice it? Did he just leave it in one position for all the tests?

Did any of those things bother you about Dan's review, Alan? They really bothered me.

 

[Middleman]

I completely agree, Harvey. This sounded more like a paid effort promoting the product and designer over just the plain facts. I found it distasteful and my comments are in that thread so I won't repeat here.

Very ambigous and promotional vs the review by WATYF Chessparov and yourself which stated the features, likes and dislikes of the unit.

 

[WATYF]

yeah.. accept for the fact that I don't know what I'm talking aboot... I just know what I like and don't like.. man, I love being a newbie.. ignorance is bliss...

WATYF

 

[Meshuggah]

/me buys Harvey a beer

 

[Dot]

Harvey, I didn't mention quite a few things, like the level meter, phase reverse, phantom power, mic/line switch. I noticed they were there and even used them. Those are all listed in the specs at the link in the top of the review. I tell my story and you tell yours. You didn't mention that you tried any instruments other than your voice. Should we sue you for that?

I spent a few hours w/ the mic pre. I spent a couple of hours on writing and editing the review. I never set out to be the defacto word on this box, I just wanted to get the word out because I was pretty fucking impressed w/ this pre and wanted others to know about it.

I'm not payed to do this, like I'm sitting on my ass somwhere working for a magazine. I have no bias.

My C1 review last year helped get the ball rolling and continues to help sell thousands of those mics. That makes me happy as hell! People thank me every day on internet boards and in email – because I turned them on to a great mic – which has made them happy by giving them a better music experience.

That's pay enough for me.

Now I want to turn people on to a great pre.

– Dan Richards

 

[chessparov]

Middleman, thanks for your comment.

For purposes of clarification, however, let me state for the record that the
only concern in using the "tube blend" feature was my propensity to
overdo it! A little goes a long way.

With all due respect to Alan and Harvey, the real questions seem to be;
1) Does this mic pre have it's place in a home studio?
2) Does it also have one in a "pro" facility.

As Harvey said for the home studio it's a "no-brainer".
And in view of a typical pro studio's equipment allocation costs they might
as well get BOTH the VTB-1 and the RNMP.

Although some of the technicalities are above my current level of judgement,
Dan's enthusiasm is certainly justified IMHO!

Chris

 

[darrin_h2000]

Atcually I found the lead in that dan gave in his reveiw did remind me of magazine reviews, but he also did mention all he had to for 1 page.

I have nothing but respect for good writing. Maybe He should work for a magazine.

I have read all I need to to want to try this mic pre.

 

[alanhyatt]

Alan, three things bothered me about the review Dan did on the VTB-1 (which basically is almost identical to my findings, although way more like a typical magazine review):

Did any of those things bother you about Dan's review, Alan? They really bothered me.

Harvey,

Actually no, Dan's review did not bother me. I think every one has their own style of reviewing or commenting on a product. I think Dan's opinions and findings are valid, just as Chessparov's and others who have commented on the VTB-1 based upon them using it. I think your comments are valid, but more people know you than DOT on HR. On VS Planet, DOT is supported as you are here, but on HR he is accused as a plant by others...not by you Harvey.

I think Dan explained how he did his testing, so for those who want to listen to his opinions, I guess they will, and those who don't...will not.

To the rest of "those" on this group that accuse me of planting or hiring plants, I guess that will never change. To those that express your opinions without ever listening to or using my product, then that is your loss. I can't change a few bad apples on this this group.

All I can say is you will never see me fail..you will only see better and better quality gear from my company. With additions like Malcolm Toft, Brent Casey, and Stephen Paul, you guys can cry foul, plant or what ever all day long and accuse me of what ever you choose to. The VTB-1 should be as big of a success as the mics have been because the VTB-1 is a well designed unit. It does not matter who says it, Harvey, Dan, Chessparov, or any other person who gets a hold of it. I know what it is, and that is good enough for me.

 

[Dot]

darrin, you said

I found the lead in that dan gave in his reveiw did remind me of magazine reviews...

Fair enough! Let me explain and settle the score. It was developed and intended for a magazine. I co-publish a tech and culture zine called Mindjack. It's well respected and we have some serious digerati among our authors and advisors.

Anyway, I thought I'd write the review and put it up at Mindjack. Well, after writing it I realized that a review about a mic pre wasn't quite right for our audience. So, I just decided to stick it up on a few boards on the net.

So, there you have it. That's why it reads the way it does.

Glad my review got through to you, anyway, darrin. : )

– Dan Richards

 

[Harvey Gerst]

Originally posted by Dot
Fair enough! Let me explain and settle the score. It was developed and intended for a magazine. I co-publish a tech and culture zine called Mindjack. It's well respected and we have some serious digerati among our authors and advisors.

Anyway, I thought I'd write the review and put it up at Mindjack.

So, there you have it. That's why it reads the way it does.

– Dan Richards

Dan,

That explains why it came off as it did. If I had known that, I would not have responded in the manner I did. I apologize for my response, but I wish you had prefaced the review with something like, "This is a review I originally wrote for a magazine I co-publish."

 

[Bowisc]

DOT,
I enjoyed the review, although I too was skeptical about it at a first glance, but didn't sweat it. Great writing, you are gifted there.
(NYC here too).

ALAN,
You just keep doing what you are doing, in spite of the "bad apples". In due time, you'll reap the fruit of your labors (if not already). I know that somewhere down the road, greater skeptics will hang their heads for their ignorance.

HARVEY,
Thanks for all your honesty, time and effort spent in putting out reviews on new products. I appreciate it.

HOME-RECKERS,
Keep the joy of recording alive within you!


Bowisc

 

[chessrock]

This is pretty amusing stuff. Two whole threads worth.

You know, it really is an issue of cosmic proportions that could shape the future of all of us and future generations.

In all honesty, though, I wish Alan the best of luck on his new product. I also wish the Coca-cola company the best of luck on their impending launch of Diet Vanilla Coke. In fact, I wish all manufacturers anywhere manufacturing anything the best of luck in their products, because our economy could use a nice kick in the arse.

The most interesting thing, to me about Alan's products, though, is the owner's direct involvement in our satisfaction of said product. This truly sets his new products apart from the pack. Every time I see someone post anything that isn't completely glowing or that is sceptical, there's Alan defending it.

For example; Watyf said it wasn't for him. He tried it, didn't like it and got something else. And wouldn't you know it -- there's the owner of the company harrassing him and accusing his entire signal chain and methodology of being suspect.

What if every time you went to the grocery store and bought a Stouffer's TV dinner over a Tyson . . . and had to endure Tyson's CEO badgering you on the way out of the store for buying the Stouffer and not the Tyson. "I have to question not only the microwave oven you're using, but also the very taste buds in your mouth!"

In an earlier post, Harvey mentioned that I shouldn't lump your products in with "bottom feeders" like the Mackie. I'm glad that Harvey can say things like that without Greg Mackie jumping all over his statement saying: "Who 'you callin' a bottom feeder?"

I'd like to buy the vtb-1, but personally, I'm afraid of the harassment I might have to face if I should discover I don't like it and, god forbid, post it somewhere on the net . . . as I'm sure Alan will hunt me down and tell me that my methodology was flawed. Followed, of course, by a generic token disclaimer: "But hey, different strokes for different folks, I guess."

Alan, I was right on with the PT Barnum reference. You are the ringmaster of what is probably the greatest show on the web. Your antics are fun, mad-cap . . . full of intrigue, controversy and suspense. If your products live up to it all, then that's merely icing on the cake for what is already a show well worth the price of admission.

 

[Harvey Gerst]

In an earlier post, Harvey mentioned that I shouldn't lump your products in with "bottom feeders" like the Mackie. I'm glad that Harvey can say things like that without Greg Mackie jumping all over his statement saying: "Who 'you callin' a bottom feeder?"

I guess that statement needs some clarification. I doubt if Greg Mackie would take serious offence to my statement, but I wanna set the record straight. The preamp section of a Mackie mixer is a great value - very low noise, and pretty clean; actually quite good, considering the cost. But it's a very simple device, and the rest of the mixer has some serious problems for use as a recording board (the eq section and the summing buss in particular).

It's not on my short list of recomended products for serious recording, although it's a good deal if you just use the preamp part and go from the inserts directly into the recorder, bypassing the eq and the summing buss. But that just buys you a simple preamp with a gain control and some overall phantom power. It's a clean, if not very exciting, signal source.

The VTB-1 has a lot more going for it, but it's more money per channel than a Mackie. The impedance switch lets you tailor the sound and provides a better match to a lot of different mics, and the starved plate design actually works as advertised.

Adding a DI, output control, polarity reverse, i/o metering, and balanced outputs makes the VTB-1 a better unit than the Mackie, if you're serious about recording and can afford an outboard preamp.

If you need six "plain jane", but good, preamps, a used Mackie 1202 is the way to go, but it's in a different league than a dedicated preamp like the VTB-1.

In my opinion, Alan hit a home run with this unit - it's very good and the equal (so far) of preamps costing a lot more than $179. I haven't found any major "gotcha's" yet and if there are some, believe me, I'll let everybody know, in no uncertain terms.

Over the course of a year, I've become good friends with Alan (at least I hope I have), and I still maintain a good friendship with Wayne at MXL, Dan Kennedy at Great River, Taylor Johnson at the Sound Room, and Mark McQuilken at FMR Audio.

I think that's possible because they all recognize that I will be fair in testing any unit they want to send me and that my friendship with the other people won't cloud my judgement. I've never talked to anybody at Behringer, but that didn't stop me from giving a strong recomendation on the ECM8000.

In the final analysis, buy whatever you feel comfortable with, and if a manufacturer's style of promoting his products bothers you, don't buy his products, but be aware that you may be missing out on a good deal.

But that choice is, and always has been, yours alone to make.

For me, substance takes precedence over style, and if the manufacturer stands behind the product, and the product deserves consideration, I'll consider buying it, regardless of how I feel about the way the manufacturer represents the product. Even though we're friends, you've seen me nail Alan here publicly when I felt he may have over-reached on some of his claims in the past.

 

[alanhyatt]

For example; Watyf said it wasn't for him. He tried it, didn't like it and got something else. And wouldn't you know it -- there's the owner of the company harrassing him and accusing his entire signal chain and methodology of being suspect.

Alan, I was right on with the PT Barnum reference. You are the ringmaster of what is probably the greatest show on the web. Your antics are fun, mad-cap . . . full of intrigue, controversy and suspense. If your products live up to it all, then that's merely icing on the cake for what is already a show well worth the price of admission.

Chessrock,

See now, there you go again. Regarding WATYF, he claimed he was getting no gain on the VTB-1, and that everything was muddy. All the users of the VTB-1, including Harvey claim the unit has lots of gain, and that it is a very clean sound. I did not harass WATYF, and the communication between him and me was fine. Why must you butt in and be the one to say I harassed him, no one else did, but you force your opinions on everything on this group when it comes to me.

If WAYTF felt this way, he would have said something directly to me because we were talking back and forth and understood each other fine. I am sorry, but he was doing something wrong in his interfacing, because the VTB-1 is not muddy, and it has lots of gain. That was not harassing him. I was trying to help him. If you wish to accuse me of harassing him, then learn how to spell the word first!

The VTB-1 is mic pre, end of story. You either like it or not, but I don't need you to stick your nose into it and start calling me names over what you think. Personally, I don't care what you think about me, or my products. I think the general population here knows me and they know how to decide to deal with me without your running interference for them.

You know, most here are very kind and are happy that we have put out a quality unit for them to look at and maybe purchase. Many want opinions and information to maybe make a decision on the unit. They don't get the information for Guitar Center or other chains, so they look to me for the information. How they choose to deal with the information is up to them.

Personally, I am just flat out tired of even having to deal with you and your snide comments on this group. You take too much for granted.

 

[Harvey Gerst]

Chessrock,

See now, there you go again. Regarding WATYF, he claimed he was getting no gain on the VTB-1, and that everything was muddy. All the users of the VTB-1, including Harvey claim the unit has lots of gain, and that it is a very clean sound.

Wow, I didn't see WATYF's post, but I'll bet I know what the problem is. The mic impedance switch can make a big difference in the final sound, and the results can vary dramatically, depending on the particular mic and the switch setting.

I'll bet he set the switch for maximum bass rsponse, which is not always the correct setting with all mics, and it gave him an artificial bass boost and rolled off highs, which, in combination with the tube gain, would sound very muddy, indeed.

Adding a microphone impedance switch is a wonderful feature at this price point, but, if you don't understand how it works, it's just another element that's possible to be abused, or used incorrectly.

 

[Michael Jones]

**YAWN**
Some of this is getting really old!

I wonder how well it would work with the SP T3?
Tubes on Tubes? Good Idea or not?