Art Tube MP

B

blinddogblues

New member
I have an ART Dual Tube MP that I use every time I record. I have gotten the impression from some on this forum that this is not a well respected preamp. Do most of you feel this way? I didn't have anything to compare it to until now, I just bought a new Mackie 1642 mixer with their XDR mic preamps (it has 10). I haven't even had a chance to use it but I am interested to hear what some of you think about which will sound better.
 
hey Doggie:
No question the pre's in the Mackie will sound better.
But the Art Dual Tube MP (I have one) can be a valuable tool for many sessions, and is a lifesaver when you are recording bands live without the benefit of a Board with Phantom Power.
It's always good to have a functional Phantom power source at your disposal, and the Art Tube MP's are ever a bad puchase.
But use the Mackie's whenever possible.
DJ
 
blinddogblues said:
I haven't even had a chance to use it but I am interested to hear what some of you think about which will sound better.
Click to expand...

Why don't you do a little comparison and post the MP3s? I'd be interested to hear the difference myself. And I'd guess it would be more of a "different" sound rather than better/worse. Though each preamp might be more appropriate for different sources and that might create a better/worse situation.
 
Dougie Johnson said:
hey Doggie:
No question the pre's in the Mackie will sound better.
But the Art Dual Tube MP (I have one) can be a valuable tool for many sessions, and is a lifesaver when you are recording bands live without the benefit of a Board with Phantom Power.
It's always good to have a functional Phantom power source at your disposal, and the Art Tube MP's are ever a bad puchase.
But use the Mackie's whenever possible.
DJ
Click to expand...

Dougie, are you baiting me here to argue this with you? ;) I won't even touch this again. A boring arguement....:)

I not only use the ART quite a bit while tracking, but I ALWAYS run it between the mixer and soundcard while I mix. You are going to find yourself favoring your ART more and more and more as get deeper into good production. In many cases, it wins out over many other preamps that cost quite a bit more per channel. Mackie pre's wind up being what I try when all else fails, and even then, it is not up to snuff. Here and there though it actually works out for what I am after. Mackies are not unusable, but certainly aren't in some class of their own.

Ed
 
"but certainly aren't in some class of their own. "


Neither are the ART pres bro ;-)

But hey thats my opinion, and you have yours and we have been known to disagree in the past hehe.. Keep rocking Ed I'm just jerking your chain..
 
"I just bought a new Mackie 1642 mixer with their XDR mic preamps (it has 10). I haven't even had a chance to use it but I am interested to hear what some of you think about which will sound better."

blinddogblues: well try out your gear, and post your results here rather than asking us to answer questions you're eminently well positioned to answer yourself. Why are you asking before you're trialing?
 
As far as getting better signal "blinddogblues"(man I like that handle) the Art dual mp, is a milestone ahead of the mackie pre, at least to my ears and eyes. I used to record only on the mackie pre's until i was turned on to the mp. Man there's a world of diffrence, while the mackie pre's are pretty clean..I'll give'em that, the mp's tone is mabey more musical? But you be the judge, I would really be surprised if you choose the mackie over the art, in "most" applications.

This announcement was paid for by Ed Rei
 
David, I would agree with that assessment all the way!

A lot of the classic recordings were not very clean at all! A little dirt in the sound is what makes it "musical". I suppose the trick is to know at what level to add the dirt! :)

Too much clean= too sterile of a recording. Mackie pre's offer little versatility in tonal color to work with. When they work on a sound, they work very well. But they really have a limited use.

ART pre's on the other hand will work very well on a number of different applications.

Ed
 
My god Cody, we will be making out back stage if this keeps up!!! ;)

Way back in 1993 or 94 I had a Studiomaster console. I remember when I first tried a Mackie 1202 how brittle and sterile it sounded compared to the Studiomaster! I guess I have never gotten over that....:)

Ed
 
Please pardon my Newbie ignorance, but is the Dual Tube MP essentially just a two channel version of the Tube MP in a rack unit? If so, what are the advantages to using this unit over using two Tube MP's? (I noticed that - IF these are the same units - there is about a $100 difference between the cost of 2 single MP's and the Dual Tube).

Thanks.
 
A couple of things: 1) Dobro- I ask the question only because I got the impression from several other posts that maybe this ART unit is considered the 3630 of Preamps. I just wanted to get more views of this, not necessary because I wanted to get comparisons between this and the mackie preamps. Even though I have been satisfied with the sound, its hard not to be when you don't have anything to compare it to. 2)The Mackie does have the new XDR preamps. In their ads, they spend more space talking about the preamps than any other feature of these mixers. Some of you may be stating experiences with older Mackie mixers. Having said that, I really didn't buy the Mackie for the preamps, I bought it because I needed a good mixer to do premixes before going to tape. and 3) Chris- the Dual Tube MP is exactly like buying 2 of the single units, only you get a rack mountable unit. I bought the dual because I like to record acoustic guitar and some other instruments in stereo., and finally 4) Do you all have an opinion (stupid question) on what would be the best preamp for , say, $500? Would the difference in this and the ART or Mackie be significant? Thanks for the responses.
 
blinddogblues said:
[B3) Chris- the Dual Tube MP is exactly like buying 2 of the single units, only you get a rack mountable unit. I bought the dual because I like to record acoustic guitar and some other instruments in stereo. [/B]
Click to expand...

Thanks. I wonder if they plan on making a Dual rackmount version of the Tube MP Studio.... Now THAT would be something I could sink my teeth into, and feel justified about spending the extra $$$.
 
Thanks. I wonder if they plan on making a Dual rackmount version of the Tube MP Studio.... Now THAT would be something I could sink my teeth into, and feel justified about spending the extra $$$.
Click to expand...

Actually I think the Dual MP has somewhat better level monitoring which is pretty much the main added feature of the Studio version. From the pics on the ART website it looks like the Dual MP has 4 LEDs as opposed to the single LED of the Tube MP and the VU meter of the Studio.
 
Dolemite said:


Actually I think the Dual MP has somewhat better level monitoring which is pretty much the main added feature of the Studio version. From the pics on the ART website it looks like the Dual MP has 4 LEDs as opposed to the single LED of the Tube MP and the VU meter of the Studio.
Click to expand...


Man, move over and let me pass, fo' they hafta be pullin' this preamp out yo muthaf**kin *ss!


Uh, sorry, I don't know what came over me... ;)


I haven't seen one yet, but the difference between the MP Studio and the regular MP is supposed to be that the Studio version includes what they call "OPL", or Output Peak Limiting" circuitry. According to the blurb at the Sam Ash site, this circuit controls/maintains the output peak signal, which allows you to run the signal a bit hotter without it clipping/distorting. Has anybody used this? It sounds intriguing, especially for Jazz recording, where you might get only one or two real spikes on an entire track ( improvised spikes, that is - which make it damn near impossible to decide how to set the mic pres).
 
I have one of these

I've had it for like 3 years now it's wasted, DEAD! so im gonna buy a mic pre amp soon, any suggestions. #aimingfor Mackies XDR right now
 
M-Audio DMP3

The king of low end preamps. I have 2 DMP2s that I love. They are the same preamp with different metering but hard to find.

I can't compare them to anything more expensive since I can't afford anything more expensive.

Thanks,

Hairy Larry
 
Talk about an old thread.

I had an Art Tube MP. It'll bridge the gap, but not that swell of a preamp. If you pushed the gain on the one I had, a pretty high noise floor. At a minimum it has an identifiable sound all it's own. Which isn't always a good thing.

The DMP3 is a noticeable step up. Art MPA Gold with tube replacement has compared well with more expensive options. Depending on how much per channel you want to spend and how many channels you need. I now use two SD MM-1's to feed my field recorder. It really depends on the specs you want or need for your usage. Is price the primary consideration or something else? Better low end, lower power consumption, lower noise floor, more clean gain, name dropping when talking with clients, ...??? What matters to you and how much is that worth to you? Or more importantly, how much is it worth to your clients? Assuming that you want to use your gear to make money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top