ART MP or Joemeek VC3Q?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Leeking
  • Start date Start date
Leeking

Leeking

New member
hi guys,

I am using my behringer mixer as preamp at the moment. I am thinking of getting a better preamp to improve my vocals recording.

if you have a choice between ART tube MP or Joemeek VC3Q, which one would you go for and why?

would like to hear testimonies from people who own them as well....

thanks! :)
 
I have owned both and without a doubt the JoeMeek comes out on top. Quieter, warmer and easy to use.. The sound is much more true out of the Meek then the MP, hence the price tag on the Meek as compared to the 90.00 tag on the MP. But then again some people don't like the sound of a Meek box, why I have no idea ;-) but to each his own..
Hope this helps somewhat...

Cody Young

YMG Studio
http://www.youngmusicgroup.com

"All the power of digital, with the warmth of, , well, , digital"
 
*Raises Hand*
Green Guy wins!



Thats two votes for the JoeMeek, I had about 3 of those boxes at one time. The MP studio is nicer than the MP but even then the JoeMeek still wins hands down... The ART stuff isn't junk its just the JoeMeek stuff is really nice.. And yes Shakes who wouldn't like the sound ? ;-) One thing I noticed was people that said it had a certain sound to it they didn't like have never messed with the exciter knob that will take the warmth right out and make the sound more crisp. But you can't take the sound of an MP and make it sound like a JoeMeek, only a JoeMeek sounds like a JoeMeek.. LOL
 
I recently had the opportunity to use the Meek VC3Q in some very serious recording sessions. In that same studio, there was a ART Pro MP.

Contrary to what has been posted, I found that the ART had a MUCH more open sound, and much more of the original sound I heard in the room was respresented with what went on tape.

I did not find even one application where the VC3Q had any advantage over the ART! Mostly, the VC3Q had a very plain, ordinary, closed in sound, even with the Enhancement circuit engaged. I also found it hard to get very hot levels without totally hitting the input of it hard, which produced a tone that was on the verge of distorting.

Before any try to gig me on a bad cable or operating level problems.....

I was using a Monster Studio Pro 1000 into and out of the Meek unit. Operating levels were checked and double checked.

I just didn't like the way it sounded at all. Very plain and dull mostly.

The ART in my opinion is a much much better sounding preamp.

Ed
 
Hey Ed,

I've always been amazed how lots of people slam the ART when you have the tracks to prove that it can work quite well.

I'm not quite sure if you just know how to use the darn thing better or they're just not giving it a chance. What do you think is going on here?
 
Nobody slammed it ;-) And Ed for god sake we all know you love the stuff...hehe But I could'nt tell somebody a MP is better than a VC3Q and sleep at night..
 
"I just didn't like the way it sounded at all. Very plain and dull mostly."

Sounds to me like you didn't know how to work it, because I don't think anybody who uses a JoeMeek thinks it sounds plain and dull ? Maybe you are too used to that ART sound or something...
 
I'd take the Meek over the ART, because it has EQ and compression, which the ART doesn't have, and that gives you more control when tracking, which is better than more control when mixing as far as I'm concerned. But I've got a VC6Q (same animal, with more knobs, basically), and everything I put through it is noisier than what I put through the Mindprint Envoice. Noisier than what I put through the ART. Hiss really pisses me off these days. The ART's quieter the way I use it, but I still opt for a box that's got EQ and compression. In the end, that's why I'd get a Mindprint Envoice if I were you. :D

What I'm saying is this: there's sound, there's control and there's quiet. You want all three, but the Meek wins out over the MP because the sound's as good (for what I do, using the mics I use) and the control's better.
 
Save your money...

I have not used the Meek, but have heard it, and I have used the ART, and it does not seem to be a particularly good preamp. In fact, I am using a Behringer MIC2200 that I am reasonably happy with. It is actually the same preamp circuit as on the mixer boards, so I don't think that either the ART or the Meek is a significant step up. The Behringer is definitely more "accurate" than the ART. I sense that the Meek is a small step up from the ART, but unless you really feel you need that small step, it may be better to save up until you cane really get a *significantly* better pre than the Art/Behr/Meek category.

Just a thought,
Rick
 
Dolemite-

I DON'T know what is going on here....:) Me? Just a simpleton from ol' Portland Oregon with washed up ears who does crappy demo work for .50 and hour for punk bands who are out of tune......;) You know, I just started yesterday in this, so I still have a lot of things to figure out about what sounds good and all....:D One day, I may know what all the knobs do! :) God knows, I haven't played around with anything Class A in my life to make comparisons to, and using thos Auratones as my main monitors, maybe I am missing something :(

I was actually quite shocked when I started using the Meek. I was really expecting a preamp that would have all this wonderous upper harmonic content and headroom to spare. Maybe I need a Mackie mixer and Yorkville monitors and a NT1 to appreciate this preamp! :rolleyes:

:eek: :confused: :eek: :confused: :eek: :confused:

I don't know of too many things that I could possibly be doing different using an ART. I increase the input until I am in the upper "Warm" zone, then get nice hot levels going to the XT 20's (okay, I use Type I ADAT's except when I work at this other studio....). I played with the Meek for a good solid 30 minutes trying different settings, switched to another one because I thought it might be broke! Still, plain, dull, closed in sound. Cheap sound comes to mind actually! I tried a lot of input gain, less input gain. Heavy compression and no compression (and quite a bit in between). I tried the exciter then no exciter. blah blah blah.....In comparison to the ART, it sounded dull and I had a hard time getting levels hot on the ADAT. I ran the same sources to a Drawmer 1960 pre/comp unit just to make sure that maybe the sources were messed up. Tried them to a Focusrite Red too just to make sure again. All was good. Went to the ART and actually found the smooth response and open sound I was looking for! Go figure.......I have favored the ART over some pretty stiff competition in the past. I consider the Meek to be pretty light weight competition at this point. I heard nothing on the VC3Q that was anything like Class A preamps. Actually, I thought it sounded more in league with the Aphex Tubesence, just not as noisy.

So I don't know. Just being a dummy with bad ears, one should maybe follow the herd, and take advice from those who you have never heard their work and just get a Meek. Then they can suggest it without the burden of letting all hear what it does too!

Well, time to go and mix another train wreck.

Ed
 
OK, now I'm confused...

Ed, I know you're going to hand me my head for this, but why would you track through the ART unit when you have a Focusrite and Drawmer unit in the control room? If I had access to those, I would suspect the art and meek wouldn't even get plugged in.

I understand the desire to compare the two units though. They are somewhat simlarly priced, and if I were going to the music store I would be comparing the two.

My advice would be to apply what is something of a mantra around here. "Use your own ears and decide." Ask the guy at the music store to setup a comparision and then go away. It should only take a few minutes to find out what the best unit for your purposes is.

I did just that when I was looking at pre's a month ago, and it was quite telling. I picked the DBX 5 series over several like priced alternatives. Others may disagree with my choice, but I know to my hears it was the right one.
 
Why would I use the ART over a Focusrite and Drawmer? On some things, it just plain outright sound much better! The Focusrite to my ears only sounds good on a few things. The Drawmer I have been tending to use it's tube compression more than anything. The preamp is okay, but seems to lack a certain something over the ART. I would take the ART over the Drawmer pre in 99 out of 100 applications. The ART vs. Focusrite would be ART 60 out of 100 applications.

I need to get a place to put my whole slew of mp3's back up to. I used to have about 15 mp3's posted on my old website of a cross section of genre's. Most of it used the ART as the main preamp. Spinkled in was a variety of other stuff, Focusrite, Demeter, TL Audio Classic, API, Neve, Peavey VMP 2 (YES!!! Peavery actually DID make a great sounding preamp once upon a time....:)), Mackie HHB, etc..... Hey, on some of this stuff, it wasn't just me that was favoring the ART. The producer that I worked with on The Heavy Brothers CD (if you have been around for a while, you heard of this stuff I posted in the clinic.....) was used to working with mostly class A gear. When we tracked the HB CD, we ALWAYS tried the "better" pre's first. Who wouldn't. In the end though, we found ourselves going back time and time again to the ART because there was something magical happening in the sound with them. We were getting great record levels on TypeI ADAT's that we couldn't even get close to with some of the fixed gain stage pre's, like the Focusrite, and the top end on these was so nice and extended! Adjustments to the input to output on the unit allowed us to achieve a variety of colors, not just a one trick pony sound like many other pre's.

Well, call me crazy here! But for those of you that haven't heard what I record and mix, I suspect that you are going to be very surprised. You will not be the first. I have had gear snobs envy some of this stuff. Sound like I am patting myself on the back here? Well, maybe, but when people who's work I respect give out these compliments it may be natural to feel validated in my selections of gear.

This is going to be a bold statement to make, but I have made it before, and will probably make it again. Few on these boards have enough experience, good enough gear, or any much examples of a variety of work for all to hear to be throwing around much advice. Should one heed my advice over anothers? Depends. You want results like mine? ;) But that is not the end of the story. Once you have enough time behind the console (yes, REAL consoles and not some poorly written software code wannabe mixer....) and monitors (not stuff with 5" woofers!!! or home stereo speakers....) and have to deal with clients who tend to create sonic messes for you to deal with, you start hearing things a bit differently. When you are paid to do this, you start dropping pre-concieved ideas of what stuff should sound like and start dealing with what is there. Once you start dealing with what is there, and not relying upon electronics to alter it in ways that it really can't be altered too, you start realizing that a few pieces of gear tend to work better than others. Maybe this gear reflects the way you like to do things, but I don't think so.

I have been handing out advice on this BBS, with examples of my work to back it, for almost two years now. There are many local studios in Portland that buy gear based upon my recommendations because they have heard my work with it and are impressed. After a short time of working with that gear, THEY TOO start appreciating what this gear can do! They come back asking advice again in the future because I steer them in good directions.

If you all want to believe me recommending a few choice pieces of gear time and time again is not good advice compared to other "sound good de jure" stuff that the herds buy, I cannot stop you. Some of you will never be convinced. Some of you will try it out and be VERY happy that you did. Others of you will try it out, think it sucks, buy something 10X the price and think IT sucks too! All in all, my advice is just that. My reviews of gear is like an asshole! We all have them.

I continually hear people achieving great results with a few pieces of gear that don't cost all that much. Event 20/20 monitors, ART Tube MP's, SM-57, AT-4033, Allen and Heath mixers (for 'budget' consoles) and Soundcraft for higher end consoles.

Before anyone starts trying to knock my preference of an ART over a Meek, please post a lot of different stuff that you use the Meek on for me to hear. I take your results quite seriously. I take your words with a grain of salt.

Ed

Ed
 
Ed,

I suspect that the ART is actually a quite decent piece of gear but its your knowledge and experience that really make it shine. I think a lot of people think they can get an SM57, and a Mackie or a decent mic pre like the ART and expect that the gear will do all the work when in reality they really need to spend the time to set levels, experiment with mic placement, simple things like that.

I was digging around this BBS looking for advice on whether I needed a compressor to use during digital tracking and I came across this thread. I know you're always talking about getting hot levels to use the full bit resolution so I thought for sure you would recommend compressing during tracking. I was a little surprised by this:

I have found more times than not that those nasty little peaks while tracking are transients, usually, high frequency, so you really need a way of smoothing out those buggers. A tube mic pre-amp is the way to go for this. Hitting the input of the pre-amp pretty hard, then trimming the output to get full meters. I always do this on sharp attacking sources. It works like a dream. Transients are gone, and you find that the dynamic of the track really isn't that big.
Click to expand...

I was hoping you could elaborate a little on this technique. Is this a good way to avoid having to use a compressor while tracking a fairly dynamic vocal? Also, have you found the Tube MP useful for this function?
 
We're getting off-thread here, but I think Leeking's got a pretty good range of opinions to work with, so I'll join the digression.

My impression is that it's standard to get input gain just comfortably under clipping point, and then adjust output so that the level to the recorder is right. No? Not so much a technique as the best way to get your gear to work at its optimum. No?
 
well, sonusman was comparing the VC3Q with a ART Pro MP.
I dunno how similiar is the ART tube MP and the ART Pro MP.

from what I gather, I guess the Meek is pretty good... like dobro said the additional EQ and compression is an added advantage as well.

Thanks for you advise guys... :)
Continue to yank away! :D
 
Dolemite said:
Ed,

I suspect that the ART is actually a quite decent piece of gear but its your knowledge and experience that really make it shine. I think a lot of people think they can get an SM57, and a Mackie or a decent mic pre like the ART and expect that the gear will do all the work when in reality they really need to spend the time to set levels, experiment with mic placement, simple things like that.

I was digging around this BBS looking for advice on whether I needed a compressor to use during digital tracking and I came across this thread. I know you're always talking about getting hot levels to use the full bit resolution so I thought for sure you would recommend compressing during tracking. I was a little surprised by this:



I was hoping you could elaborate a little on this technique. Is this a good way to avoid having to use a compressor while tracking a fairly dynamic vocal? Also, have you found the Tube MP useful for this function?
Click to expand...

Dolemite-

I am not sure what I need to elaborate on. In ANY case of tracking, you trust what you hear.

I just recorded a bass track tonight that you WILL hear in about a week that was recorded with the imput gain really slamming! The artist was excited about the tone and the control on the track. I had to do a tad of instruction to him about how to control his right hand to keep him from overloading the input to the preamp from the bass. He is a really good musician, and had little trouble with a couple of takes of practice on getting it right. The track was a huge improvement over what he did previously on the track, and the song is much better off with this new bass track.

In tracking, you HAVE to think on several different fronts to get a good track on tape. Hot meters work out well, but you also have to have an understanding of what the performer is going through with their playing of the part. If you are trying to track an instrument that you don't have a very good understanding about in the actual physical part of performance, you will have little to offer the performer in suggestions about how to make the track fly. If you DO have an understanding of what they have to do, then you can assess how what they are doing is going to work with the equipment your are using to track them.

I have always found that the ART units offer a nice range of input to output control that allows the artist to not have to alter their performances too terribly much to achieve a great sounding track. While not everything may be perfect, good results with a bit of coaching helps. Few other preamps allow me this kind of versatility.

Sound weird? Maybe so, but the results are what count.

The thing I like best about the ART Tube MP, in any version of it, is that by bringing up the input gain to a semi carefull level, I can hit the A/D converters with a good level without going over the top with distortion from the preamp. I have found other preamps with input and output gains to be far less forgiving than the ART. So, while the ART may not deliver a pre-made "I have heard it before" sound like some other named preamps, excellent results can be achieved with it because the preamps offers a lot of room for natural sounding dynamics before obvious distortion that other mic pre's just don't seem to deliver. When I get an artist who can keep great control of their performance, the ART seems to shine even better because I am then able to use the pre to color the sound in a variety of ways.

Again, I will state that many seem to want some pre-conceived type of sound on an instrument. My experience suggests that this is not always for the good of the overall tonality of the song. If the song and arrangement is decent, a well written part performed by a decent performer will generate a great sound. Striving to get the "X" sound will usually do nothing but frustrate both the performer and the engineer.

In one of my articles on the http://www.homerecording.com main page, I talked about not trying to make a track do something that it won't do. That concept is hard to articulate to get the point across. But I do hear a lot of songs were the engineer was trying to make the instruments sound a certain way that it DON'T want to sound based upon the performer, their gear, and the song! The way that I know that it was manipulated in a bad way is that it didn't fit really well in the end.

I find myself being surprised more times than not with how a good sounding track come to be. It is never the same adjustment two times in a row. Simply, it is taking a "let me hear it" attitude to the tracking stage. Play for me, and if the sound is right, it will be evident immediately. If the sound isn't right straight away then my years as a performer, engineer, producer take over and I start playing with the available knobs to make something fit. Seldom is it the ART that is at fault when something don't sound right. Usually, it is a poor source sound.

The way I use an ART preamp? I adjust the input gain to hit "red" on a few few notes. From there, I adjust the output for good meters. If the output varies a bit too much, and the sound doesn't seem to sit well in the mix, I start trying different compressors after the ART to help tame dynamics a bit. Seems to work well for me....:)

Ed
 
I would never spend money on an ugly green box with a murderers name on it... Couldn't sleep at night. I guess it's like Jeffrey Dalmer inventing a line of cooking wear... Wouldn't you feel guilty paying into his benefit.. (or his estates benefit).... I know Joe meek is gone and someone else is running it, but your still paying into the "name".

Joe
 
He killed his landlady and then himself on Feb 3, 1967 - exactly 8 years after Buddy Holly died. Meek was obsessed with Buddy Holly.

The VC3Q (or any Meek) is a kinda flavored thingy. If your're going for the 'Dude, I'm compressed!'-sound it's the way to go. IMO, the Art works on a wider range of stuff in the sense that it doesn't color things as much as the Meek.

micmac
 
Ed - thanks for the post, nice and good. Lots of stuff to get into and soak up - not gear, but approaches and goals.

C7 - that's twice I've been informed in this thread that the Meek isn't noisy. Well, mine's loads noisier with an NT1 than the Envoice is with the same mic. But tonight I tried the Meek with a really quiet mic, and it was really quiet. Draw your conclusions.

As for not buying some gear because one guy who contributed to it earlier in his life got really confused at the end of his life - well, that's just silly. When somebody comes up with something good, you admit it and avail yourself of it - take what's good, avoid what's bad. Use the preamp, don't kill yourself or anyone else.
 
dobro said:

As for not buying some gear because one guy who contributed to it earlier in his life got really confused at the end of his life - well, that's just silly. When somebody comes up with something good, you admit it and avail yourself of it - take what's good, avoid what's bad. Use the preamp, don't kill yourself or anyone else.
Click to expand...

In your opinion it's silly... which is cool. Your entitled to it, and it is very valid.. But I don't agree. Im not even religious, but I have enough morals instilled in myself, that I would not subscribe to a piece of equipment with a murderers name on it, regardless of how "awesome" it is.. Thats it!.. Don't say it's silly just cause you don't agree with it, Now thats silly.

I "admit" that it is a piece of gear that probably rocks!....

Joe.

P.S> (The guy murdered his landlord......Murder is slightly more than confusion.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top