BigRay
New member
In your face???DAV BG-1
Do a search on it
Do a search on it
sbcgroup2 said:
S
sbcgroup2
New member
Re:
I think I have my mind made up on settling on two API 512C's to enter the high end realm for my pres. They are affordable because they give me my two channels of the 3124+ (getting 4 channels are more than I want to spend right now).
The Great River looked good too, but it's cheaper to go with the API's. And they were both recommended....
-Ed
I think I have my mind made up on settling on two API 512C's to enter the high end realm for my pres. They are affordable because they give me my two channels of the 3124+ (getting 4 channels are more than I want to spend right now).
The Great River looked good too, but it's cheaper to go with the API's. And they were both recommended....
-Ed
cavedog101
Well-known member
Fraserhutch, I think that xstatic's point about the value relative to a client was very clear as was my extension of that as far as selling time to a new client or the value of marketing your business. It is true that soundwise, the relative difference in the sound of many pieces of gear, be it micpres,mics,consoles,whatever, on a one to one basis, does NOT support the gap in prices of the gear. But in a lot of cases, the difference in being hired for projects depends VERY MUCH on this price gap and therefore as a 'relative value' cannot be ignored when purchasing gear for the business.
Jmorris readily defines it as 'hype' and quotes Les Paul with "people tend to hear with their eyes"...yet he fully admits to owning and purposefully buying pieces that are full of this very 'hype' as an added value to his situation.
Nothing at all wrong with that. The market bears this out on a day to day basis. I am no longer a for hire shop. I only do my own personal projects and projects for friends. I no longer need the 'hype' factor for those coming through the door. When I did operate on a professional paying customer basis, it was VERY important that first time customers were impressed at first glance when walking through the door. This meant console, racks of shiny stuff, and several impressive looking mics sitting sweetly in their baskets on sturdy professional-looking stands, cables neatly wound and hanging in a nice array, drum booth clean and clear of drumstick residues....etc....you get the picture.
Its these kind of impressions that can make or break a deal for work, and the point is, having these little bits of 'bling' has nothing to do with the relative differences in sound but has much to do with clientele happiness., which was xstatics point originally. Mine was simply an extension of this.
Jmorris....I cant really tell you if I would be able to discern any differences in sound through MP3 reproduction or whether your test would prove anything or not. I dont track on entirely high-end stuff and am a clever enough engineer to hide audio deficiencies in a mix. But I am interested in hearing what cha got.!!
Jmorris readily defines it as 'hype' and quotes Les Paul with "people tend to hear with their eyes"...yet he fully admits to owning and purposefully buying pieces that are full of this very 'hype' as an added value to his situation.
Nothing at all wrong with that. The market bears this out on a day to day basis. I am no longer a for hire shop. I only do my own personal projects and projects for friends. I no longer need the 'hype' factor for those coming through the door. When I did operate on a professional paying customer basis, it was VERY important that first time customers were impressed at first glance when walking through the door. This meant console, racks of shiny stuff, and several impressive looking mics sitting sweetly in their baskets on sturdy professional-looking stands, cables neatly wound and hanging in a nice array, drum booth clean and clear of drumstick residues....etc....you get the picture.
Its these kind of impressions that can make or break a deal for work, and the point is, having these little bits of 'bling' has nothing to do with the relative differences in sound but has much to do with clientele happiness., which was xstatics point originally. Mine was simply an extension of this.
Jmorris....I cant really tell you if I would be able to discern any differences in sound through MP3 reproduction or whether your test would prove anything or not. I dont track on entirely high-end stuff and am a clever enough engineer to hide audio deficiencies in a mix. But I am interested in hearing what cha got.!!
M
MadMax
New member
OK, first off, thanks for continuing this thread without turning it intoa bash fest.
Secondly, I've made a little revelation. Last week, I got my Royer 121. I started using it on my Marshall cab next to my good old sm-57.
They sound different. But as I played with them and repositioned them and solo'd the tracks and panned the tracks and blended them, I've grown fond of the new sound and when I go back to the old 57 sound, it's now missing something. The 57 by itself sounds kind of harsh. So the Royer will stay and it's now a part of my guitar sound.
I guess the moral is the midrange stuff doesn't sound bad and it certainly works, but you won't know what you're missing until you hear it. It's maybe icing on the cake, but once you taste it, you won't want to go back.
Secondly, I've made a little revelation. Last week, I got my Royer 121. I started using it on my Marshall cab next to my good old sm-57.
They sound different. But as I played with them and repositioned them and solo'd the tracks and panned the tracks and blended them, I've grown fond of the new sound and when I go back to the old 57 sound, it's now missing something. The 57 by itself sounds kind of harsh. So the Royer will stay and it's now a part of my guitar sound.
I guess the moral is the midrange stuff doesn't sound bad and it certainly works, but you won't know what you're missing until you hear it. It's maybe icing on the cake, but once you taste it, you won't want to go back.
jmorris
New member
Exactly, and that would called HYPE.cavedog101 said:
jmorris
New member
That is a very good choice from what I heard of those pre's. Plus, they maintain their value.sbcgroup2 said:
jmorris
New member
Cavedog, you make a very good point about the mp3, but I tend to think it would work. My only point here is to say that yes, I do think there is rather a bit of hype with high end pre's. Not they are not good, not that they do not make a difference. Like I said I have sat with mine and really compared units. At least my mic pre's, there is no blow your hair back pre that I own. I have a bunch of nice ones. Each has its own sound and purpose...kinda of. I have 2 Filtek MV1 preamps that nmo one has every heard of and Ireally like them on accoustic guitars. Does my V72a pair blow them away,no. I'm like you I think where as I track on a lot of different pre's .Some highend, some jus basic Octopre's. I do not have the $$$$$ to fill up 24 tracks of vintage highend. The mixes as a whole sound uniform and satisfying.cavedog101 said:
X
xstatic
New member
Actually, my intend has been greatly misconstrued here. My clients expect quality, and I expect quality. It has NOTHING to do with bling. It has EVERYTHING to do with getting a higher quality. My point was that some mics are 20 times more than some others. They may not sound 20 times better, but that does not mean that whatever the quality difference they do bring is not worth it. I have never regretted any of my big purchases and that even includes my large format console. I would be sick if I had to go back to mixing on a Mackie or something. Many of my clients own their own middle of the road and/or cheap gear, yet they are continualy floored by the results we get here. Even when they bring their own mics in with them. A big part of that is using a nice preamp and/or compressor. To me, it is more than worth it to spend $1000 a channel on a preamp than get 8 channels for that same price.
fraserhutch
Flypaper for freaks
This is NOT what Xstatic was talking about, and what I was referring to.
I do not see how it is possibly a logical extension of what he was saying.
I do not see how it is possibly a logical extension of what he was saying.
cavedog101 said:
cavedog101
Well-known member
Isnt the discussion here whether or not the more expensive is worth the extra money as compared to lower end stuff? And hasnt the general consensus (mine too) been that one on one theres very little difference in sound quality, and perhaps not enough to warrant the huge amount of price difference?
I guess I should defer in the future to those more knowledgeable than I when agreeing with someone.
I completely support Xstatic's view that for his purpose and clientele, nothing but the better gear really does the job. I do the same for my projects. I just dont need to own the expensive stuff. But it is a fact that it sounds better in most cases.
If my use of the word 'bling' has confused anyone I apologise. I thought I made it clear what I was putting forth as truth as far as my experience has taught me. I guess 20+ years in the business never gave me a right to voice these opinions.
I did not put forth these thoughts as argumentative as some seem to be taking this. I in fact agree with most of the views and was quite enjoying sharing.
But I suppose it takes all kinds. Thanks for the kindness.
I guess I should defer in the future to those more knowledgeable than I when agreeing with someone.
I completely support Xstatic's view that for his purpose and clientele, nothing but the better gear really does the job. I do the same for my projects. I just dont need to own the expensive stuff. But it is a fact that it sounds better in most cases.
If my use of the word 'bling' has confused anyone I apologise. I thought I made it clear what I was putting forth as truth as far as my experience has taught me. I guess 20+ years in the business never gave me a right to voice these opinions.
I did not put forth these thoughts as argumentative as some seem to be taking this. I in fact agree with most of the views and was quite enjoying sharing.
But I suppose it takes all kinds. Thanks for the kindness.
fraserhutch
Flypaper for freaks
Take a pill, chill, relax, this is not a personal attack, and I for one could not care less how many years you have in the biz. No one has attacked you, and no one is denying you the right to voice your opinion, and no one is contradicting or invalidating your oipinion.
Sheesh.
Now, relax, take a deep breath .... I was merely pointing out that Xstatic's point was that while the difference in sound may not be as large as one might expect for the price difference, his clients expect and are willing to pay for that little difference. I think the point here is that they do not know and probably do not need to know what gear is used, it is the end results they want, and if it costs them exponentially more to get that little bit of improvement, it is well worth the cost to them.
That is far away from saying that one bought the gear for it's bling factor, and for the name recognition to get clients to the studio. I stared I believe that is NOT what he was referring to. That does not implyu we do not all do it, or that it is not a vliad approach, I was merely pointing out that it was not what he was referring to.
So chill.
Oh, and I'll skip the obvious "it takes all kinds".......
Sheesh.
Now, relax, take a deep breath .... I was merely pointing out that Xstatic's point was that while the difference in sound may not be as large as one might expect for the price difference, his clients expect and are willing to pay for that little difference. I think the point here is that they do not know and probably do not need to know what gear is used, it is the end results they want, and if it costs them exponentially more to get that little bit of improvement, it is well worth the cost to them.
That is far away from saying that one bought the gear for it's bling factor, and for the name recognition to get clients to the studio. I stared I believe that is NOT what he was referring to. That does not implyu we do not all do it, or that it is not a vliad approach, I was merely pointing out that it was not what he was referring to.
So chill.
Oh, and I'll skip the obvious "it takes all kinds".......
cavedog101 said:
cavedog101
Well-known member
Thanks again. I got it the first time. No ones unchilled. Kay?
Its the freeking internet...Anyone that gets upset about crap on here needs a life.
You certainly seem to be a knowledgeable chap about others meanings.
Take care. And thanks again.
Its the freeking internet...Anyone that gets upset about crap on here needs a life.
You certainly seem to be a knowledgeable chap about others meanings.
Take care. And thanks again.
M
MadMax
New member
Guess I spoke too soon.MadMax said:
Later.
S
Soundmind??
New member
I think several factors need to be considered.
First, the high end gear is usually has more wiring instead of circuit board that has to be hand soldered. This supposedly reduces the distance between circuits when compared to a larger circuit board. Better, more costly components are used that have lower tolerances and longer life expectancy are used.
Second, look at the specs. The cheap gear may have a frequency response of 20hz to 20khz, or maybe a little better. The high end gear usually covers 2hz to 500khz or so, a very wide frequency band, which will better amplify harmonics and handle the audible spectrum with ease. This wide range requires special transformers which cost 10-20 times more than the mass produced ones.
Third, Image/appearance. This is the one I don't particulary care to pay xtra for, but in the business, it's a reality we have to face. If I hire someone to do work for me, one of the things I tend to look for is whether or not the person has been successful in his trade. The vehicle he drives, the tools he has to work with, what other customers have said about him/her, etc. If I wanted to hire a carpenter to remodel my kitchen, I wouldn't chance hiring someone in an old rattle trap truck with a bunch of cheap, rusty tools. Especially if he bad mouthed his competitors because they are a bunch of rich snobs.
A few years ago, while repairing my house after a storm, I remember the electrician ranting and raving about how stupid HVAC people were. A few months later, the circuit breaker to my kitchen tripped one day. To troubleshoot the problem, I removed the cover to my breaker panel and found several loose, burned connections. I replace the damaged breakers and tightened about half dozed loose connections, and thought about the fact that I almost had a house fire because a sorry electrician was busy bad mouthing others when he should have been thinking about how improve his skills.
Is a Cadillac or Lexus worth 3-4 times the price of a Hundai. Not in my day to day commute, but they are to real estate brokers. If you're into recording for fun and pleasure, the cheap stuff will do. If you want the best, you have to pay for it. It's simply a matter of personal satisfaction...just don't bad mouth those with those who set higher standards...and don't look down on those who are satisfied with less expensive gear.
First, the high end gear is usually has more wiring instead of circuit board that has to be hand soldered. This supposedly reduces the distance between circuits when compared to a larger circuit board. Better, more costly components are used that have lower tolerances and longer life expectancy are used.
Second, look at the specs. The cheap gear may have a frequency response of 20hz to 20khz, or maybe a little better. The high end gear usually covers 2hz to 500khz or so, a very wide frequency band, which will better amplify harmonics and handle the audible spectrum with ease. This wide range requires special transformers which cost 10-20 times more than the mass produced ones.
Third, Image/appearance. This is the one I don't particulary care to pay xtra for, but in the business, it's a reality we have to face. If I hire someone to do work for me, one of the things I tend to look for is whether or not the person has been successful in his trade. The vehicle he drives, the tools he has to work with, what other customers have said about him/her, etc. If I wanted to hire a carpenter to remodel my kitchen, I wouldn't chance hiring someone in an old rattle trap truck with a bunch of cheap, rusty tools. Especially if he bad mouthed his competitors because they are a bunch of rich snobs.
A few years ago, while repairing my house after a storm, I remember the electrician ranting and raving about how stupid HVAC people were. A few months later, the circuit breaker to my kitchen tripped one day. To troubleshoot the problem, I removed the cover to my breaker panel and found several loose, burned connections. I replace the damaged breakers and tightened about half dozed loose connections, and thought about the fact that I almost had a house fire because a sorry electrician was busy bad mouthing others when he should have been thinking about how improve his skills.
Is a Cadillac or Lexus worth 3-4 times the price of a Hundai. Not in my day to day commute, but they are to real estate brokers. If you're into recording for fun and pleasure, the cheap stuff will do. If you want the best, you have to pay for it. It's simply a matter of personal satisfaction...just don't bad mouth those with those who set higher standards...and don't look down on those who are satisfied with less expensive gear.
Middleman
Professional Amateur
jmorris, wow, this thread has taken off since you asked me your ??s above but heck yeah, I'll participate in the test. I don't think anyone can identify a particular preamp by the sound out of a group, unless they use one particular brand all the time. I could probably tell you which sounded better but not a particular brand.
I think the bottom line here is if you want to compete with commercially successful music, you are going to need to spend some money on high end preamps, compressors and effects. At least today given what we expect from commercial sound. You can produce some great stuff without it but it rarely measures up. There are exceptions however. I think to some extent this is the point of using high end gear; as long as it produces a sound that is difficult to make with less expensive gear, people with more money (or access to the gear) are going to have a lock on commercial sounds and, this is the important part, listeners are going to think this sound is minimally necessary to be a good sounding record.
My hope is, especially with the new NEVE 1073 emulation from UAD, that we are moving to where computers and knowledge are advancing and that high end gear will not always be required to make music that people are willing to accept. The great sounds of the past are primarily done with tubes, we just need to get to the point where plug ins or studio software can closely emulate tube response. The smoothness that tubes and transformers impart is what separates low end preamps from high end preamps. Once somebody figures out how to closely emulate this sound it will be a step forward for project studios.
The tough one will be vari-mu and other high end compressor sonics that take an average recording and gives it that commercial sheen. If you have these sometimes it doesn't matter if you use a radio shack mic and pre, they will have "the sound".
I must say, this has been a relatively civil thread given the controversial nature of the subject, kudos to all involved.
I think the bottom line here is if you want to compete with commercially successful music, you are going to need to spend some money on high end preamps, compressors and effects. At least today given what we expect from commercial sound. You can produce some great stuff without it but it rarely measures up. There are exceptions however. I think to some extent this is the point of using high end gear; as long as it produces a sound that is difficult to make with less expensive gear, people with more money (or access to the gear) are going to have a lock on commercial sounds and, this is the important part, listeners are going to think this sound is minimally necessary to be a good sounding record.
My hope is, especially with the new NEVE 1073 emulation from UAD, that we are moving to where computers and knowledge are advancing and that high end gear will not always be required to make music that people are willing to accept. The great sounds of the past are primarily done with tubes, we just need to get to the point where plug ins or studio software can closely emulate tube response. The smoothness that tubes and transformers impart is what separates low end preamps from high end preamps. Once somebody figures out how to closely emulate this sound it will be a step forward for project studios.
The tough one will be vari-mu and other high end compressor sonics that take an average recording and gives it that commercial sheen. If you have these sometimes it doesn't matter if you use a radio shack mic and pre, they will have "the sound".
I must say, this has been a relatively civil thread given the controversial nature of the subject, kudos to all involved.
jmorris
New member
Very good points middleman, ver good indeed! My only point as many have stated is it take a lot of items to make a good "soup" I personally think the "oh my god, this mic pre sounds incredable" mentality is all a bunch of crap. It it is a decent piece of gear it will sound good, put together with other decent "tools" you will have a very nice end result. I bought my V72a's from Vintage King. I cant remember who I delt with, maybe a guy named Mike? Anyways, I had commented to him"will I be blown away by the sound" ? He said no, they will sound good, but there are many additional factors in getting "the sound". I do get a bit pissed at people that take the stand"if you cant hear the difference,your ears are not developed ". That is a bunch of bull*%^&#. "The Emporer's Clothes "coment is just the best and I think the most accurate. 
Oh! , and my wish for people to try to identify a mic pres was more to tell the cheap one from the high end one. 
Jim
Oh! , and my wish for people to try to identify a mic pres was more to tell the cheap one from the high end one. Jim
X
xstatic
New member
So its not Ok for people to say that if you can't hear the difference then your ears aren't developed, but it is OK to say that if you can hear the difference then you are just fooling yourself into believeing it?
Preamps are just a different beast. They are not as readily noticable as mics are, but are more like converters. You may not hear the difference right away, but by the end the difference is definately there. In fact, using good preamps throughout an entire recording makes a HUGE difference on the end result and what it takes to get it there. I really really do wish it was not true because I could save a lot of money. I am not saying everyone should ignore the rest of their signal chain and just go buy a bunch of expensive preamps. However, owning some is certainly a good thing. They make every mic you run through them different. They grow with you. I remember when I first got my Chandler TG2. The first thing I did was grab a mic and plug it in an A/B it against my console. I was dissappointed at first. The difference did not seem that great. However, it only took laying one track to go into a mix before I was instantly gratified. The difference seemed subtle in my first test, but in a real life scenario the difference was huge. I know it seems harsh to say that if you can't hear the difference than you just need more ear development and training, but I still think that is true to some extent. How do you explain how all the people who can hear the difference do any other way? You can try the "Emperors Clothes" analogy, but maybe it is important to remember who you are talking about. In general the people who say there is no noticable difference do not own any nice preamps, and often times have never even used one. Many of the people who claim to know the difference though and who do swear by good preamps are also the people who are the most respected in the industry. I am sure that everyone does not stock their racks with many thousands of dollars of preamps just because. I am sure there is a reason. I know it is not just because it is made by "company X" or because it is expensive, otherwise the people that know better and actually use them would not have certain models they do not like. In fact the same argument could be made for mics. The quality compared to price difference in this day and age is incredibly narrower then it was just 6 or 7 years ago. Does that mean we should forgo the Neumanns, Telefunkens and Brauners and stock up on B1's? I would think not. I certainly agree that the price difference is not necessarily in direct proportion with the quality and capability difference, but then that is true of every industry.
In the end though, if you can not tell the difference between using an API preamp and a Behringer, than I stand by the "your ears need development" statement.
Preamps are just a different beast. They are not as readily noticable as mics are, but are more like converters. You may not hear the difference right away, but by the end the difference is definately there. In fact, using good preamps throughout an entire recording makes a HUGE difference on the end result and what it takes to get it there. I really really do wish it was not true because I could save a lot of money. I am not saying everyone should ignore the rest of their signal chain and just go buy a bunch of expensive preamps. However, owning some is certainly a good thing. They make every mic you run through them different. They grow with you. I remember when I first got my Chandler TG2. The first thing I did was grab a mic and plug it in an A/B it against my console. I was dissappointed at first. The difference did not seem that great. However, it only took laying one track to go into a mix before I was instantly gratified. The difference seemed subtle in my first test, but in a real life scenario the difference was huge. I know it seems harsh to say that if you can't hear the difference than you just need more ear development and training, but I still think that is true to some extent. How do you explain how all the people who can hear the difference do any other way? You can try the "Emperors Clothes" analogy, but maybe it is important to remember who you are talking about. In general the people who say there is no noticable difference do not own any nice preamps, and often times have never even used one. Many of the people who claim to know the difference though and who do swear by good preamps are also the people who are the most respected in the industry. I am sure that everyone does not stock their racks with many thousands of dollars of preamps just because. I am sure there is a reason. I know it is not just because it is made by "company X" or because it is expensive, otherwise the people that know better and actually use them would not have certain models they do not like. In fact the same argument could be made for mics. The quality compared to price difference in this day and age is incredibly narrower then it was just 6 or 7 years ago. Does that mean we should forgo the Neumanns, Telefunkens and Brauners and stock up on B1's? I would think not. I certainly agree that the price difference is not necessarily in direct proportion with the quality and capability difference, but then that is true of every industry.
In the end though, if you can not tell the difference between using an API preamp and a Behringer, than I stand by the "your ears need development" statement.
X
XLR
______
Within the selection of pre's in my studio, pre quality is plainly audible on delicate sources like classical guitar.
Tim
Tim
jmorris
New member
xstatic
you make very good points. No one( at least not me) has said there is NO difference,simply there is no as I have said in prior post,
no "blow your hair back" difference. Yes,cumulitive effect of high end pres will make a difference. Its not like " buy a highend pre and you'll be amazed at how good all of a sudden you recording/mixes will sound". This is aan idea that I feel a lot of people have, that and "I have to have a highend pre to get that studio sound'. That is all Im try to relate. You had the exact response I have had with your TG2 as I have had with some of my pres. They fetch a high dollor because people will pay it, not because it is the magical ingrediant to a great recording. Like vintage guitars as I have stated. People will pay up to 300 grand for a 59 burst due to hype, not because it is THAT much better than a 2006 Les Paul. It hype
you make very good points. No one( at least not me) has said there is NO difference,simply there is no as I have said in prior post,
no "blow your hair back" difference. Yes,cumulitive effect of high end pres will make a difference. Its not like " buy a highend pre and you'll be amazed at how good all of a sudden you recording/mixes will sound". This is aan idea that I feel a lot of people have, that and "I have to have a highend pre to get that studio sound'. That is all Im try to relate. You had the exact response I have had with your TG2 as I have had with some of my pres. They fetch a high dollor because people will pay it, not because it is the magical ingrediant to a great recording. Like vintage guitars as I have stated. People will pay up to 300 grand for a 59 burst due to hype, not because it is THAT much better than a 2006 Les Paul. It hype
jmorris
New member
what pres are you using where it plainly audible?Do you mean there is like a difference from "this one sounds awful to this sounds fantastic?"Timothy Lawler said: