Is a mic preamp worth it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter adriannav
  • Start date Start date
Lt. Bob said:
I've heard so much excellent stuff recorded with cheap gear and terrible stuff recorded with great gear that I just have to think the most important thing is the experience/abilities of the 'engineer' and the performance by a significant amount.
Click to expand...

Yes, this. ^^^^^^^
 
Bobbsy said:
Has anyone actually heard a pre amp so good and so different from the norm that you felt "blown away"?
Click to expand...

I have. The Avalon imparts a bell-like musicality to some sources that is really obvious and very musical, like the different between a guitar string ringing out and a piano string ringing out. However, that added roundness, or sweetness does not survive the transition to mp3 or to consumer grade speakers, so I'm not sure if it really matters. Maybe the "spread across many tracks" factor compounds it to a point where it becomes meaningful, but again, it only really shines on certain sources.

If I were opening a commercial recording studio who's purpose was to produce product and make money, I wouldn't have half the crap that's in my studio now, because the 10% improvement in sound quality for ten times the money doesn't make good business sense. I have that stuff in my hobby studio because it's cool and I like the way people nearly soil themselves with glee when they walk in. The point is, if you want some badass preamps, go buy em' and don't feel like you have to justify it to anyone. But if you don't want to do that, don't feel like the absence of those boxes is holding you back either.
 
JohnWatkins said:
The point is, if you want some badass preamps, go buy em' and don't feel like you have to justify it to anyone. But if you don't want to do that, don't feel like the absence of those boxes is holding you back either.
Click to expand...

Yes, this ^^^^^^
 
Why would it not show up on consumer grade speaker? If it is there , it should, or no one would hear it anyways.

No, the difference is not great, but it is greatly exaggerated.
 
My argument is that, if no one could hear it, what difference would it make? Nobody has the magic speakers , or do they need the golden ears too? I find that using the better speakers , makes it sound better. Then playing back on lesser media sounds terrible. You need to get it to sound good on all media. A handheld radio, car, garage, etc.

RTA and an oscope can help break down a signal you want to sonicly copy.
 
mark1971a said:
My argument is that, if no one could hear it, what difference would it make? Nobody has the magic speakers , or do they need the golden ears too? I find that using the better speakers , makes it sound better. Then playing back on lesser media sounds terrible. You need to get it to sound good on all media. A handheld radio, car, garage, etc.

RTA and an oscope can help break down a signal you want to sonicly copy.
Click to expand...

The argument there is better mic pres show their quality when used over multiple tracks rather than just one. The argument goes, you may not hear the difference between a good mic pre and a bad mic pre with just one recorded track, but after many tracks, the bad one will degrade the quality while the good one doesn't.

This is what White Strat intends to find out with his A/B comparison. He wants to use different mic pres over the whole song, on all/most of the tracks. Then we will see if we hear anything. I'm kind of anxious to see how it comes out.
 
JohnWatkins said:
The Avalon imparts a bell-like musicality to some sources that is really obvious and very musical, like the different between a guitar string ringing out and a piano string ringing out. However, that added roundness, or sweetness does not survive the transition to mp3 or to consumer grade speakers, so I'm not sure if it really matters.
Click to expand...

Yeah...some mics/pres just have a signature sound that almost always adds to the source in a good way. I hear people always say that a lot about API gear...that it just has "something" that makes it stand out from the crowd.

JohnWatkins said:
The point is, if you want some badass preamps, go buy em' and don't feel like you have to justify it to anyone. But if you don't want to do that, don't feel like the absence of those boxes is holding you back either.
Click to expand...

I agree....though it seems more people have a need to justify using cheap/inexpensive gear.
The guys who can afford all top-shelf stuff are rarely worried about justifying it from what I've seen....they just get the best gear that they can and need for the recording business they have.

Home-rec is a whole 'nother animal. There's way more soul-searching and second-guessing going on about everything to do with the process of recording....from which gear to buy to where to put the mic in front of a guitar speaker, right on up to how to make everything sound more commercial-quality polished.
With better gear....one of those concerns is effectively taken out of that equation, and yeah, you pay a lot for all those 10% gains.

AFA as preamps (and I would include mics in this too)...IMO, it's about having more flavors for specific situations. The subtleties of one preamp/mic to another don't always come through in the home-rec environment, so people end up with "it doesn't matter" views...and when they do that, it probably doesn't matter.
 
Bobbsy said:
Now a serious question: earlier somebody used the phrase "blown away" in reference to a pre amp. Has anyone actually heard a pre amp so good and so different from the norm that you felt "blown away"?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't go so far as blown away, but my eyes were certainly opened.
For a small home setup I have a good few mics but back when I used my digi 003 I used to audition, audition, audition mics struggling to get something that sounded right.

I never set out to upgrade my preamps, but when digi dropped the necessity for their hardware I sold that 003 and racked up eight modules from an old canadian console.

I did definitely notice a difference. My SM7b went from being a 'why did I buy an over priced 58' mic, to being my go to vocal mic.
 
sm7b is a great mic, I bet you liked it.

If you are starting with a already good B class pre, like a aphex tubesscence, or joemeek they get the job done. No it is not Avalon, but I don't see it being that different in the mix with layered tracks. It is the cheaper pre that some rely on in the hardware that I question in the layers. I don't know, for sure.

The comparisons are always a fun listen , and sometimes you learn something.
 
Chili said:
The argument there is better mic pres show their quality when used over multiple tracks rather than just one. The argument goes, you may not hear the difference between a good mic pre and a bad mic pre with just one recorded track, but after many tracks, the bad one will degrade the quality while the good one doesn't.
Click to expand...

The experiment may certainly be interesting...but I honestly don't know if that's the definitive arguement for or against high-end pres.
I mean....there have been some cases where a producer/engineer might use a single pre on most of the tracks....but I don't think that is the norm, however, they may very well use nothing but a variety of high-end pres across all the tracks...and I can bet in that case the tracks and mix would stand up better to a variety of low-end pres.

It's not going to be as clear what is being "discovered" when you combine multiple tracks and mix done with one pre against the same done with another. You may prefer one end-result over the other....but any preference will be specific only to those mixes. IOW...you won't walk away with any general views of high-end pres VS low-end pres that would be applicable in all situations.

This is where I think the home-rec mindset steps away a bit from a broader recording SOP.
Most guys recording at home are doing one thing, over and over. It's often the same style of music, the same tones, the same limited selection of equipment, the same SOPs....over and over.
They then fine-tune their gear/techniques for that one thing...and feel they've found absolute recording nirvana….and they very well may have….for that one thing.
However, it's only when you start moving away from the repeating SOP that the gear needs and the subtleties becomes evident….IMO.
 
WhiteStrat asked for ideas/suggestions on how/what would make the experiment accurate/worthwhile/etc....
...my comment is in response to that.

This is an open forum....so a lot of folks WILL be paying attention, so the experiment has to be valid for the intended goal, otherwise the wrong conclusions will be drawn from it and it all comes back to pure subjective opinion......or doesn't that matter?
 
I think it's an interesting experiment and will have some useful results.

I don't agree with you that it's pointless.
 
Lt. Bob said:
I think it's an interesting experiment and will have some useful results.

I don't agree with you that it's pointless.
Click to expand...

I also said at least 2-3 times that it will be an "interesting experiment".

I never, anywhere said it would be "pointless"...all I said was that based on how at this time the execution was planned, the end result would not be a definitive one....IF the goal was to prove the value of a high-end pre compared to a low-end pre.
You're a smart guy...I think you know the difference there and in what I was saying.

There may be an obvious difference between the two pres, but it could very well end up being just the difference in how the various tracks stack, and that one mic/pre may favor or not favor particular tracks....and that cuts both ways, the experiment cound favor the high-end pre or the low-end pre tracks.
Like I said...that result will be interesting...but AFA what it will definitely prove....that's hard to say.

Look at the 3D Audio Preamp Shootout...you can find the details of how they set that up on the Internet...just type it in.
They were configuring levels to be within 0.02 dB of each other, among other very calibrated measurements...and event THAT didn't really show which pres were best, it only showed that there were differences and maybe changed what some people though a particular preamp was going to sound like....so even that ended up with a lot of subjective results.
That’s all I was pointing out….but I’m still interested to see the outcome of WhiteStrat’s experiment.
 
Lt. Bob said:
I've heard so much excellent stuff recorded with cheap gear and terrible stuff recorded with great gear that I just have to think the most important thing is the experience/abilities of the 'engineer' and the performance by a significant amount.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100%--that's my motivation. I'm always troubled when folks (yeah, mostly noobs) complain that their stuff doesn't sound "professional" so which $2000 preamp should they buy? Somehow preamps have been made into the stuff of legend--the ultimate magic bullet if you will. I have never found that to be the case. When I built and treated my room--I saw a jump. When I get decent mics, I saw a jump. But neither of those jumps even compare to the gradual improvement that came with me learning to track and mix.

As far as preamps go, I have never seen the same "jump" in sound, but then I've never worked with anything beyond mid tier. Thus the test (as soon as I get my hands on the UA).
 
Bobbsy said:
Now a serious question: earlier somebody used the phrase "blown away" in reference to a pre amp. Has anyone actually heard a pre amp so good and so different from the norm that you felt "blown away"?

I've been blown away by a great performance. I've been pleasantly impressed by a good microphone or a set of acoustics. However, the most I've heard from a pre amp is a subtle improvement when everything else is good. I guess even the word "improvement" is subjective--what I've heard is a subtle colouration that works well on a particular combination of voice (or other source) and microphone. Now, if everything else in the chain is great, then that subtle improvement can be worthwhile--but if the voice or the mic or the room acoustics are less than perfect, a pre amp isn't going to fix them and your money is likely better spent on other areas. (Though I don't know how I could have spent money to improve my daughter's voice when I recorded her!)

If there's a pre amp that is really, truly in the "blow you away' category, I'd love to listen to it.
Click to expand...

Nope, I never have been "blown away" by the sound of a preamp. But some folks still talk about 'em like they will blow you away. Some old-timers (more on other boards than this one) have nothing but contempt for cheaper preamps, and so you get the noobs who hear that and think all they need is a $2000 preamps and they're set.
 
Curious what is mid teir?

What is aphex, or joemeeks vc6 stuff? What is behringer , or mxl?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top