Importance of pre's on limited tracks ?

[funckyfinger]

Having treated my room and found mic's I really like I was wondering if a good mic pre would be a the next logical step. After my reading on this forum and other's it seems that the real advantage of a good pre is when you start adding a lot of tracks. My needs are for personal use and I usually use only three tracks but may on occasion use six. I have been using a DMP3 and seems to fair well but I'm always looking to improve. What do you think? Would a better pre add much improvement or at this point only be trival ?

 

[jonnyc]

Well a better pre is going to yield better results but how much better is the question. Depending on your monitoring chain it may be such a small step from your dmp3 to something like an rnp that you may not even notice a difference. I just went through a huge preamp upgrade and it does make things easier mixing wise for me but really I don't think my tracks are significantly better than they were before, just easier to get to that final sound.

 

[funckyfinger]

Well a better pre is going to yield better results but how much better is the question. Depending on your monitoring chain it may be such a small step from your dmp3 to something like an rnp that you may not even notice a difference. I just went through a huge preamp upgrade and it does make things easier mixing wise for me but really I don't think my tracks are significantly better than they were before, just easier to get to that final sound.

Thanks. That was pretty much what I thought but just needed to here it from someone else.

 

[jonnyc]

Thanks. That was pretty much what I thought but just needed to here it from someone else.

Just remember, if this is just for you and your friends then don't sweat how great your equipment is. Work on your songwriting and performance skills, it almost doesn't matter how poorly a great song is recorded, it's still a great song.

 

[Blue Groove]

...

Do you have a compressor? A pair of FMR RNCs, etc... might be the next step if not. A good step up on the pres would be helpful, an API 3124+ or a John Hardy (the Hardy can be ordered as a three channel)

 

[jmorris]

Just remember, if this is just for you and your friends then don't sweat how great your equipment is. Work on your songwriting and performance skills, it almost doesn't matter how poorly a great song is recorded, it's still a great song.

EXCELENT F...ING POINT! Too many people forget that!

 

[funckyfinger]

Just remember, if this is just for you and your friends then don't sweat how great your equipment is. Work on your songwriting and performance skills, it almost doesn't matter how poorly a great song is recorded, it's still a great song.

I guess my needs are more than just personal. I record and it is usually just me but the CD's are for demo's and hopefully more. I'm trying to get the best quality I can.

Do you have a compressor? A pair of FMR RNCs, etc... might be the next step if not. A good step up on the pres would be helpful, an API 3124+ or a John Hardy (the Hardy can be ordered as a three channel)

I have been debating on the RNC. I think it could be useful but for now I've just been using the compression that came with Cakewalk . I'll take a look at those pre's.

 

[xstatic]

If you get a much better preamp, it will make a noticable difference. I would not say that an RNP would be that drastic, but if you get one of the "big boy" pre's you will notice a difference. Just make sure that you are willing to sacrifice the dough. There is some truth though to how good pre's start to make more and more of a difference as the track count rises, but that is pretty logical

 

[jonnyc]

If you get a much better preamp, it will make a noticable difference. I would not say that an RNP would be that drastic, but if you get one of the "big boy" pre's you will notice a difference. Just make sure that you are willing to sacrifice the dough. There is some truth though to how good pre's start to make more and more of a difference as the track count rises, but that is pretty logical

The thing is, a dmp3 stacks up really nicely. People really underestimate how clean it is. I'm working with a True Systems now and there really isn't a drastic difference. Mixing is easier now with the true but the songs I did with the dmp3 and 3Q still sound as good. I think I might have to move up to something like a Cranesong or something more colorful like a Shadow Hills before I'll notice a big difference. Using the 002r's converters may also mask some of the differences.

 

[xstatic]

Well, a DMP3 may stack up nicely against a True Systems preamp, but that is not what I meant by a "big boy" preamp. I do agree though that the DMP3 is one of those few items that really outperforms its price point. However, if the move were made to a DACS Clarity preamp, or a Martech, I would bet that all of a sudden a lot of detail would pop out and the soundstage would appear to be much wider and deeper etc... If the move were made even to just a great river preamp, I bet more detail would be revealed as well as having the otpion to throw a punchier edge on the track. So, nothing against True Systems stuff, its well built decent products, but I definately do not place them in that higher eschelon with the other stuff. Good solid middle ground though.

 

[jonnyc]

Well, a DMP3 may stack up nicely against a True Systems preamp, but that is not what I meant by a "big boy" preamp. I do agree though that the DMP3 is one of those few items that really outperforms its price point. However, if the move were made to a DACS Clarity preamp, or a Martech, I would bet that all of a sudden a lot of detail would pop out and the soundstage would appear to be much wider and deeper etc... If the move were made even to just a great river preamp, I bet more detail would be revealed as well as having the otpion to throw a punchier edge on the track. So, nothing against True Systems stuff, its well built decent products, but I definately do not place them in that higher eschelon with the other stuff. Good solid middle ground though.

No doubt the Martech's sound great but they're nearly 2 grand a channel. My point is if you're recording in your house(not an ideal enviroment) and using the converters of a 002(definately not great) then dropping all kinds of cash on expenisve pre's is probably not going to yield the "wow' result that the price dictates it should. If you're a professional studio recording bands on a daily basis then yes go for the gold. If you're a home recordist just tryin got put something good out there it certainly can be achieved with something like a dmp3. BTW no offense taken, of course the True Systems P8 isn't up to something like a Martech, it's 300 per channel vs. 2000, there better be a difference at that price.

 

[xstatic]

I actually agree with you Jonny. The original post asked about the impact of an upgrade, so I merely wanted to point out what that upgrade might be and how it would leave it's impact on a project. I did not intend for it to be a message to the original poster to run out and buy a Martech. My reference to the True stuff was partly intended to show that the difference between the True preamps and the DMP3 is not all that great. Channel for channel, they are in a similar price range. Personally, I would rather use the True P8 rather than a DMP3, but I wanted to point out that the real instantly noticable high impact difference would not really show that much until the high end preamps are reached. Even great river at $1k a channel though would be readily noticable. I agree with the wekest link theory, but adding a Martech to the Digi002 and the home environment would certainly reveal a huge change in quality and possibilities. Sure there are limiting factors that I personally would also address first, but at least if the good stuff was there, when the rest of the cahin changed the front end would be ready Either way it does not seem like a waste of money to me, just not the most logical first step

 

[XLR]

After my reading on this forum and other's it seems that the real advantage of a good pre is when you start adding a lot of tracks... I usually use only three tracks but may on occasion use six. I have been using a DMP3... Would a better pre add much improvement or at this point only be trival ?

I have a similar situation re track count. Usually 2 tracks, sometimes 3 or 4, rarely more. When I upgraded to a Great River pre from an assortment of low end pre's it made a HUGE difference.

Here's what I've noticed: With lots of tracks haze tends to build and a great pre can help prevent that. But with just a direct-to-two-track recording the realism of it is determined to a large extent by the pre used. Assuming good mic technique, a great pre can sound like the performer is there in the room with you. A low end pre might still sound good if the performance is good, but it will sound more artificial.

 

[danny.guitar]

I have a similar situation re track count. Usually 2 tracks, sometimes 3 or 4, rarely more. When I upgraded to a Great River pre from an assortment of low end pre's it made a HUGE difference.

Here's what I've noticed: With lots of tracks haze tends to build and a great pre can help prevent that. But with just a direct-to-two-track recording the realism of it is determined to a large extent by the pre used. Assuming good mic technique, a great pre can sound like the performer is there in the room with you. A low end pre might still sound good if the performance is good, but it will sound more artificial.

How do you rate the Great River on acoustic guitar? I'm happy with the DMP3 but I notice what you mean about "sounding more artificial". And your recordings always sound like your in the same room.

Don't know why I'm asking because it will be awhile before I can afford something like that, but I'm still curious.

 

[funckyfinger]

I have a similar situation re track count. Usually 2 tracks, sometimes 3 or 4, rarely more. When I upgraded to a Great River pre from an assortment of low end pre's it made a HUGE difference.

Thanks Timothy, thats good to hear.The Great River is a bit out of my reach right now, perhaps in the future. For the most part my recordings sound decent but I wouldn't feel comfortable charging someone for my CD, at least not full price.

 

[MCI2424]

I have a similar situation re track count. Usually 2 tracks, sometimes 3 or 4, rarely more. When I upgraded to a Great River pre from an assortment of low end pre's it made a HUGE difference.

Here's what I've noticed: With lots of tracks haze tends to build and a great pre can help prevent that. But with just a direct-to-two-track recording the realism of it is determined to a large extent by the pre used. Assuming good mic technique, a great pre can sound like the performer is there in the room with you. A low end pre might still sound good if the performance is good, but it will sound more artificial.

Aw hell. I was going to say this but It has already been said in a competent manner.

Like he said.

 

[jonnyc]

Thanks Timothy, thats good to hear.The Great River is a bit out of my reach right now, perhaps in the future. For the most part my recordings sound decent but I wouldn't feel comfortable charging someone for my CD, at least not full price.

So, you aren't comfortable charging full price for a cd because you don't think your preamp is up to par? That's kind of ridiculous logic. If the recordings are that bad then there's probably something else going wrong with your mixes besides the preamp used to record them. I've had several bands release full lenth cd's that I've recorded or that my facilities were used on(all independent of course) and not a single band has come back and said that people were complaining or not wanting to buy them. In fact I've had several call backs from bands telling me people love the cd, which to me proves it's more about the performance than the equipment used. Up until recently every album I've recorded has been done with 002r, dmp3, joe meek and behringer preamps.

 

[funckyfinger]

So, you aren't comfortable charging full price for a cd because you don't think your preamp is up to par? That's kind of ridiculous logic.

Not sure how you put that together.It's my recordings that aren't up to my personal standards. Maybe a good pre would help get the results I want. I'm just looking for ways to get the quality I'm after. Of the demo's I've done with my current setup I've recieved nothing but compliments.I was simply trying to say my recording sound good but I'm trying to work my way to professional sounding.

 

[jonnyc]

Not sure how you put that together.It's my recordings that aren't up to my personal standards. Maybe a good pre would help get the results I want. I'm just looking for ways to get the quality I'm after. Of the demo's I've done with my current setup I've recieved nothing but compliments.I was simply trying to say my recording sound good but I'm trying to work my way to professional sounding.

I put that together from your last sentence in the post before your last one. You said your recordings sound decent but you aren't comfotable charging full price. IMO there are many other things to consider before the preamps come into play. Do you have good monitors, room treatment, decent converters, quality mics? The most important thing though is skill, there's a local guy around here that charges a fairly large amount of money and primarily uses Focusrite Trackmasters and Alesis ADAT's and his recordings really sound great. I just think some people, and some newer engineers think that getting an expensive preamp and other toys is all of the sudden going to make their recordings sound amazing and sometimes(most of the times in the hands of a newb) they aren't. To this day the biggest difference in my mixes took place after I purchased a pair of decent monitors. So, don't take this the wrong way, I'm a gearslut I go nuts for quality gear and definately for preamps, so I'm not telling you to not get a quality pre I'm just saying don't be really disappointed if your final mixes aren't all that much different from your mixes now.

 

[XLR]

How do you rate the Great River on acoustic guitar?

I got that particular pre to use with ribbon mics since it can apply lots of gain with no noise. But it made all my mic's sound much better. I've been happy with this one and just stuck with it so I can't really rate it against other high end pre's. I think GR makes the MP2 MH (what I have) only on custom order now, and mainly sells the NV model. The verbal comparison I heard of the two was that the MH sounds like you're listening through an open window and the NV sounds like the voice of God speaking, heh-heh.