Just got my DMP3...not what I expected...

It's also possible that an inexperienced ear doesn't know what to listen for. I find that some of the most obvious differences between a poor pre and a better one are in how the better one deals with transients and bass frequencies. Try listening for those. As you get more experience, you will start to hear all sorts of additional differences.

I'm of course, speaking generally, as I've never specifically compared these two pre's. I do think the DMP3 is very good for the money though.
 
thehymns said:
Also, I have a Sytek MPX-4Aii, and when layering only a few tracks, it doesn't sound much better then the stock pre's on the Digi002R I use. However, when you're recording a complete song with 10 or more tracks, you really hear the difference.
Click to expand...


this right here is the key...its what i was trying to tell you...Kevin also mentioned it...its not gonna be night and day, but itll help in terms of clarity, and dimension to the final mix...i could hear the difference right away compared to the sad excuse for a pre thats in the Fostex MR8 (im glad i sold this piece of crap)...you're probably not gonna hear a difference between the dmp3 and some starved plates either, and you may even prefer the starved plate tube effect thing, but in the end, you'll thank whomever gave you the advice of going with the dmp3...

plus, you're gettin views from ppl that probably took more or less the same path you're taking...like, from a small mixer to a dmp3. i say trust the folks that use it, and learn to work with it and max it out.

personally, i have the dmp3, and have tried the RNP...and frankly, and im sure others will disagree, but i cant see that much of a difference, and actually prefer the DMP3 on clean recordings like acoustic guitars..i dont think the RNP should be that expensive, at least not in direct comparison with the dmp3..idd go with a dmp3 and a RNC over a sole RNP everytime.

on another note, maybe you'll see a much bigger difference when you upgrade your mics..
 
cominginsecond said:
IMO, upgrading pres just don't doesn't make jaws drop. It's important to have the nicest pres you can afford, but they don't usually rock anyone's world.
Click to expand...

AlexW said:
I've never noticed a quantum leap in anything I've done or upgraded, but things just gradually seem to get better as I do small upgrades.
Click to expand...


Both of these statements pretty much nail it on the head.

You just can't expect to plug a mic in to a different gain source ... put the headphones on, and expect instant sonic bliss. :D

You might hear a subtle difference here ... a subtle difference there, and as you upgrade each portion of your signal chain, one by one, and improve your skills along the way, you'll hear much larger improvements in your recordings.

The areas that will make the biggest, most draw-jopping differences are always going to be closer to the source. Upgrading form a garage sale Crate amp, for example, to a Mesa Boogie will pretty much floor you. Going from a cheap accoustic to something like an expensive Taylor will rock your world. Even if you track it with your Behringer pres, once you start dealing with top-quality instruments, you'll understand how good sounding recordings are really made.

From there, work on your room accoustics and get better mics (as Cominginsecond mentions), and all of this recording stuff will start making sense, and you'll be in business.
 
There's a couple of things in play here. First of all, in the last 10 years the bottom of the curve in recording equipment quality has come up quite a ways, and there's very little equipment being sold that really is crap.....the market just won't accept it. So the jump from the bottom to the middle isn't as big as it used to be. More importantly, if you go over to the listeningsessions.com, and listen to the preamp comparisons in session 1 vs the mic comparisons in session 5, the differences in the mic quality is immediatly and profoundly noticable, whereas the pre comparisons are comparitively difficult to differentiate, even when comparing Mackie pres with the big guns.
When I bought my Lynx card it was with high expectations that I listened to my new converters. I had been using Delta 66 converters, and was supprised to find that the difference going to the much more expensive and acclaimed Lynx converters wasn't what I expected. It wasn't that the Lynx converters weren't all that, it was that the Delta converters were pretty darn good. Did I return the Lynx converters? No way! Every incremental step towards a quality signal chain is worth taking, and the rule of diminishing returns applys fully. There's a sweet spot in the curve where the return on investment is right for your budget and needs at the time. I have a DMP3, and found it to be right in the sweet spot in that regard. For stereo micing acoustic instruments or any app where you need a clean transparrent sound, I think it's very very good. Stick with it and don't expect any gear purchase to be the magic bullet that suddenly makes your recordings sound pro.

-RD
 
I was shocked that I noticed any difference at all going from my stock DAW AIO Box's pres and the 3 cheapo tube pres I have to the DMP3. I heard it thru the cans and the mons. And for a super super cheapo price, it's a great deal. I really wanted the Portico, but I really can't afford it now. So I'm just glad that I got any noticeable improvement. That's all I was expecting and it's all I got. Actually, I was hoping for it, but not convinced I was going to get any improvement for only $50 more for the unit, and acually cheaper per channel than the old tube pres I have.

One of the producers in "Behind the Glass" said something like they spend 90% of their time for 10% improvement.
 
I have directly compared Behringer pres, the DMP2, Earthworks, and Great River.
There was not a "jaw dropping" difference among any of them. In fact, it was all extremely subtle, bordering on "imagined". :)

But do you think anyone who has spent $4000 on a pre is going to admit that there is very little audible difference ?
Think again, Batman ! :)
 
yea, at first I thought I was imagining, that's easy to do :) but it's there, it's a subtle clarity, sparkley kind of thing. A crispness or something. All I know is that my crappy voice was improved and that's actually pretty jaw-dropping for me :)

I'm considering another one since I like to record 3 tracks at a time and it's so freakin affordable. I might sell 2 of my tube pres and make some room.
 
This is great stuff. I know I should have not been recording to md to test it. I am certainly going to stick with it, it IS a very nice unit :)

I gueass I was a little over-reacting and I shouldn't have expected it to outshine the behringers on the tests I did with it. I'm glad I made an improvement to my signal chain, and let's face it, it wasn't all that expensive...even for a 16-year-old like me.

so next up would be: mic (V67? V69M? other?) or better sound card, now at Creative SBLive Platinum :o:o (M-Audio? other?)?

you're great people :)

Stan.
 
Oh, and room treatment of course. How expensive would some proper room treatment get for my 11' by 10' room, roughly? thinking of some clouds, wall panels, foam?

Would it be hundreds, or more like 100-150 for something quite decent?

Stan.
 
Last edited:
I was having this dilema myself ... i need a mic Preamp for a couple of condenser mics i just bought but i don't know whether or not to get the M-Audio DMP 3 or the Behringer Tube UltraGain Mic100...

And yes i have no money in case it wasn't obvious enough lol :D

Any Suggestions?
 
DMP3 all the way. It's clean, quiet, and has tons of gain, which is the best you could hope for in your price range. It's by far the best mic pre I've used until you get to the RNP, which is over three times the price.
 
And as much as I like the RNP, it's not a three fold improvement over the DMP3 on most things, more like a 10 percent improvement, if that.

The DMP3 is a bang-for-buck champion.
 
stanjanssen said:
Oh, and room treatment of course. How expensive would some proper room treatment get for my 11' by 10' room, roughly? thinking of some clouds, wall panels, foam?

Would it be hundreds, or more like 100-150 for something quite decent?

Stan.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what raw materials are available over where you're at. Maybe post a separate thread over in the Studio Building & Display forum. I've built all my own treatments out rigid fiberglass (Owens Corning 703). Panel traps as originally designed in an article by Ethan Winer and then just some corner absorbers made from raw material stuffed into the corner and covered with cloth. The O-C 703 can be somewhat pricey; but it depends on what the minimum order quantity is in your area.
 
AlexW said:
I'm not sure what raw materials are available over where you're at. Maybe post a separate thread over in the Studio Building & Display forum. I've built all my own treatments out rigid fiberglass (Owens Corning 703). Panel traps as originally designed in an article by Ethan Winer and then just some corner absorbers made from raw material stuffed into the corner and covered with cloth. The O-C 703 can be somewhat pricey; but it depends on what the minimum order quantity is in your area.
Click to expand...

OK I'll have another look in the studio building section.

Thanks,
Stan.
 
can anyone post a test

maybe one clip with just the pres in there mixer

and then another with the DMP-3



that would probably clear some things up, and test everyones ears too!
 
thehymns said:
Just wanted to let you know, I love Will Oldham.

Also, I have a Sytek MPX-4Aii, and when layering only a few tracks, it doesn't sound much better then the stock pre's on the Digi002R I use. However, when you're recording a complete song with 10 or more tracks, you really hear the difference.
Click to expand...


Will Oldham!?!
His Grandpa was the Doctor who delivered me. :D
My Brother is good friends with Will's brother Paul, who is an excellent recording engineer.


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