Preamp vs Channel strip

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nite88
  • Start date Start date
N

Nite88

New member
Hello fellow producers!

I'm considering buying a new mic preamp and I've narrowed my choices down to two preamps:

1. ART PRO MP II
2. Mindprint Envoice MKII

I'm going to get a Shure KSM32 mic soon and a decent mic, needs a decent preamp. At the moment I own Presonus Bluetube Preamp and I want to know if any of these two preamps would be a step up from Bluetube? Would it make any noticable difference?

I've read tons of good things for both of them, everybody are saying that they bang fot the buck, but I'm not shure, if I should get only a preamp or a channel strip with EQ and COMP?

I was talking to a radio sound engineer and he told me not tu buy a channel strip, becouse it's better to do EQ and COMP later in mix. But I also read, that Mindprint EQ and COMP are barrely noticable and don't harm the sund in a bad way. An ex-owner of Mindprint also told me that it is a great unit and I should get one instead of ART preamp.

I also do not have a lot of recording experiences, so I thought, that ART preamp would be easier to use for me, but then I've read a lot of comments, that are saying that Mindprint is really easy to use.

I've heard some raw recordings, made with Rode NT2 and Mindprint and it sounds pretty nice to my ear, but I've never had a chance to hear recordings made with ART preamp, but read a lot of nice stuff about it.

I'm really confused what to get, onlay a preamp (ART PRO MP II) or a channel strip (Mindprint)? I'll be recording only rap vocals with Shure KSM32. So which one would you guys suggest me to buy?

Please share your experiences and opinions, becouse I really don't know what would work better for me?

Thanks,

Nite
 
I believe in getting things that specialize in doing one thing very well. There are channel strips out there that have it all covered with high quality but from what I've seen they cost a lot.
I wouldn't get a low level channel strip, because I know that I'd be disappointed with the quality of the compression and whatever other effects it might have. I would rather get a great mic preamp now, compress with the computer, and wait a while until I can buy a great sounding compressor, that specializes in what I want it to do.
This is what frustrates my about DAWS is that they come with 10 zillion special effects, but they all sound terrible.
 
I like Art stuff. The MP seems pretty cool. I kinda want one too. :D

I am a little concerned about what the radio engineer guy said to you. It is true that you can do alot of that tweaking later on. But in my experience, don't rely on that too much. And what I mean by that is, don't just quickly record something and figure that you can fix it later. Take your time. Make sure that you are getting a good signal and a good sound that you think sounds good in your track and then track your vocals(or other things). THEN you can tweak it, and it shouldn't be too much of a head ache.

I mean you can polish a chunk of gold, or try polishing a piece of crap. Your choice.
 
I'll give you my 'theoretical' opinion, since my 'hands on' opinion of your two choices is nil.

You are buying in at the low end of 'decent.' I know the from my reading that the Art Pro MP II is considered a good value in that range.

But if we are talking 'dollar for dollar' value comparison, I think all your cash should go into one thing. Why? Presumably the one item will be of higher quality than any of the 3 in a preamp, EQ and Comp combo. Plus, in the long run it will be more versatile as you can get the others in the future.

I'm not sure exactly what the engineer told you ... or what you heard ... ;) ... but it doesn't quite sound right to me. You're getting a good mic and preamp because you want to track, not mix. It is true that EQ in is probably not as important as it once might have been, given all the ITB resources for that. But, Comp for tracking is a different matter for controlling the dynamics of vocalists, acoustic guitarists, etc. It's just like in photography, all the photoshop tricks and plugins in the world cannot make up for an excellent negative/ exposure.

So while I'd strongly prefer the pure preamp to the channel strip at the same price point, I wouldn't say a compressor is unnecessary.

Prado
 
I'm always a big fan of buying one thing at a time... why not get the new Mic and see if you're happy with the results through your original preamp before you start upgrading there.

And I'm another vote against channel strips... anything that does more then one thing, compromises on some things, plus it limits you on some diversity in choosing which components you'd like in your signal chain.

Even on the higher end channel strips, theres often comments in reviews about the Pre being excellent but don't bother even trying to use the compressor, or the EQ is brilliant but the Pre is a bit brittle sounding, etc. Stick with discrete components
 
For just a preamp - take a look at the FRM "RNP" big bang for the buck.

But if your looking for more of a channel strip take a look at the Joe Meek TwinQ.






:cool:
 
MOFO Pro said:
I'm always a big fan of buying one thing at a time... why not get the new Mic and see if you're happy with the results through your original preamp before you start upgrading there.

And I'm another vote against channel strips... anything that does more then one thing, compromises on some things, plus it limits you on some diversity in choosing which components you'd like in your signal chain.

Even on the higher end channel strips, theres often comments in reviews about the Pre being excellent but don't bother even trying to use the compressor, or the EQ is brilliant but the Pre is a bit brittle sounding, etc. Stick with discrete components
Click to expand...

I think we all had them and sold them, channel strips that is. At first they are great but soon you start hearing the difference and you just use the pre anyway
 
Thanks for al the responses, I really appreciate that.

I have already tested Shure KSM32 in a friends studio, with my existing preamp and difference with or without Bluetube were barrely noticeable. I know that this is not a high-end preamp, but I hope it will be a step-up from a Bluetube.

I also dissagreed with radio engineer, that's the reason why I asked, becouse I wanted to get a second opinion.

I was also looking at Joemeek, that one of you guys has mentioned it here, but I've read a lot of opinions that were against him.

I must say, that I'm still confused, becouse guys on other forums said, that a Mindprint is a better decision and that there is nothing wrong with EQ and COMP, that Mindprint has.

I just want to get a decent recordings, that will be useful later in mixing.
My budget is still not big enough to buy anything, so I still got some time to do some more researches.

Is there someone who has some real experiences with one of those preamps, are they useful or not?

Thanks,

Nite
 
The critical part of the tracking process is getting the performance recorded as cleanly and accurately as possible... There are a million great plugins, many free, for EQ or compression. The hardware money is more wisely spent on microphones and preamps until your satisfied with what you can get into the box... then you can start on the other hardware toys.

I see no need for compression or EQ while tracking in a controlled studio environment... Compression, gating, and EQ are important for a live performance, but even then I would only EQ and gate the House, and just limit the direct outs for recording.

Digital technology has pretty much changed the purpose of a compressor from dynamic control (to keep the noise floor down) to an effect, a vibe...

Equalization should be done on the whole mix, not the individual tracks... how many out there have spent hours EQing a stand alone track to perfection only to then bring it up in the mix and make the whole mix sound like ass?

Ok, I'll step down now.
 
^ "in a controlled studio environment" true. But most hobbyists don't have one or professional talent that understands how to sing to the mic. That's why I feel a need for a compressor for tracking.

Also, I'm pretty sure you meant this, but it is slightly unclear in your post.

You said: "Equalization should be done on the whole mix, not the individual tracks... "

Didn't you mean: "Equalization should be done on the (individual track while listening to) whole mix, not the individual tracks (soloed) ...

But if my interpretation is incorrect, I'd love to hear more. :)

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