Since you're a bit confused, could you take pictures of both sides of the mic and post them? I think we might be able to spot the potential trouble spot if we could see what you've done.
Craig
I'll echo the earlier post suggesting you stick to just the SE3. Another mic could introduce phase issues that you'll be able to tackle with more experience. I'd suggest 3 postions:
1. 8-10 inches off the 12th fret
2. 8-10 inches a couple of inches behind the bridge.
3. over the right...
The pres on the mixer are probably ripoffs of a Mackie circuit, while the stand-alone is some bizarre thing with an LED lit tube. I'd trust the mixer pres.
Save your money until you can afford one of the better low end pres recommended around here.
Craig
Dithering is for reducing bit depth, not sample rate.
Didn't investigate the Geoff Emerick story, eh?
Also, has anyone read Bob Katz work during which he talks about the filtering of supposedly inaudible frequencies creating noise at audio frequencies?
There are many other studies that...
Read the links posted above and you'll realize that there is useful DETECTABLE information above 20 kHz.
Also, look up the Geoff Emerick story on how he detected a 54kHz peak due to miswired transformers on a console.
I agree 100%, and I think that was the point Mr. Lavry is trying to make-192kHz is pointless, not that 44.1kHz is best. That's why he only makes converters that sample up to 96kHz.
Just because one paper claims that 44.1 is the optimum sample rate doesn't make it a fact. I've read a couple of published pieces that measured potential for greater error at 192k. Some converters DO perform worse at 96K (ones that use a mutiplier by 44.1 to achieve 96k). My converters do...
But why record at less than optimum fidelity because people choose to listen to recordings in less than optimum fidelity?
Especially when recording important projects, consider when remastering takes place 20 years from now. I think artists/engineers will be glad they chose higher depth/sample...
I agree about being able to make a great recording at 44.1K, but it's not always going to be the target rate-someday we'll look back at it and laught (many are already doing so).
Didn't say it had to be expensive, just implying that it if took me a long while to save up money for a mic pre, I'd find the best one for my money. The eight channel SM Pro Audio model I recommend is selling for around $50 on Ebay right now.
If you're happy with what you have, ignore me. I...
No offense taken, any douche can sit around and spew worthless advice on a forum and rack up rep points! I've tried a lot of this stuff, and it's fun now having great gear, but it's not necessary to go high end to get good sounds, just the time to sift through the marketing.
Do you mean rep points greater than 1?
Seriously, the Presonous MP20 can be had used for less than $200. It is a tranformer balanced pre, using a nice IC in a simple circuit.
Also, I use a JoeMeek 3Q, a very nice clean pre that includes a "character" compresser and simple EQ. For more...
Of course, wait unitil you have to mix 30-40 tracks amplified by that IC and cheap cap garbage signal path. The mixing process for my first record was excruciating because of the buildup of garbage created by using poorly designed, cheap gear (behringer, ART). Since upgrading my preamp...
Excactly, I'd feel better about what they were selling if they'd offer one simple, but very good solid state design, and maybe a transformer input, tube pre with maybe a nice, simple solid state output stage.
But you're right, mshilarious, they probably wouldn't move a lot of units if they...
What's always troubling about the ART products to me is that if there wasn't a tube in the things, I'd doubt anyone would give them a second glance. For the record this topic was briefly kicked around at Prodigy Pro, and upon viewing the ridiculously complicated schematic (the tube preamps...