ART Tube MP - for Chessrock

  • Thread starter Thread starter notCardio
  • Start date Start date
N

notCardio

I walk the line
You said in another post that the ART Tube MP wasn't that bad of a pre. First off, I never know if you're just yanking my chain, but if not, let me ask you this.

First off, besides ribbon mics, what type of mic or application in particular does it suit itself to?

Second, as there are 3 or four versions of that pre, does this apply to all of them, or just one in particular. I thought they were probably all basically the same pre, with different (useful or not) bells & whistles.

And, do you (or anyone else here) know if those similar models are any different as a bass DI, or are they the same?

Thanks
 
Aren't the Tube MP's a little noisy as well? I had one of the originals back in the 90's and it was on the noisy side and the "toob" really only provided mud. I'd personally opt for a Studio Projects VTB-1 or DMP3.
 
If looking for a cheap/worthwhile pre, look no further for the DMP3 is king. Save that 150 buckaroos and get one. Heck, it's evem got 2 channels. Best investment I've made for my "studio" besides the core components. Otherwise, save more money for a used Grace 101!
 
I really only wanted one as a bass DI, they have a good rep for that. I couldn't imagine that anyone would recommend one as a mic pre. Then I saw Chess's post about it, and thought I might bump it up the list.
 
It's very unfashionable to say anything good about the Toob MP around here, and so many people have dumped on it that I think maybe I just happen to have one that is a cut above the rest. I still think for the few bucks that they sell for, they are a handy little device to have around, and a sevicable mic pre for the cash strapped novice. But at the price that the DMP-3 sells for, it's certainly worth saving a few more coins to get that instead.

-RD
 
I understand

I just wanted to know what particular niche it filled, what it was that it supposedly does well.
 
It's a great DI for bass and/or keys. And it doesn't sound too bad as a mic pre, either.

It has a very low input impedence compared to most mic pres on the market, which might make it a good fit for older ribbon mics and/or dynamics made in the 50's / 60's. But then again, that's just theoretically speaking. It might just be an ideal fit for a particular mic. Or it might sound like dogshit, too. :D
.
 
As for your other questions ... I'm afraid I haven't studied the Evolution of the ART Tube MP thoroughly or in great detail. Some of your questions might be better answered by someone within the company.
 
Thanks

The various ART model question wasn't directed at anyone specifically.

As far as a mic pre, you're just saying the impedance makes it useful for certain mics that like a lower impedance. Got it. I guess I was reading something more into it. Never mind.

Thanks.
 
I have the studio version...as far as I know the only benefit is the meter...I've used it as a DI, but I'm thinking about unloading it now...

Jacob
 
I'm a really a novice to recording, but I run a ART tubepac (pre-amp + compressor) on a sm57 to a tascam recorder. I don't have experience with any other mic preamp to compare it to, but I can definatley say that the ART preamp is better than the one on my recorder and some lighly dialed in compression really comes in handy. It does add some fullness to the track, which I guess is what people call coloring? I don't know. But what I do know is that my recordings are getting better with it than without it.
 
I've weighed in many times for the ART MP. It's great, and not just for the money. You could spend $1000 on preamp that sounds exactly the same. It's not about the money - every piece of equipment does something, and that something is potentially useful. The MP works well on a lot of things. I like it as mic pre -- it think for pop music it's stellar - I mean, once you've got a strong signal in your computer, you're going to mash it to bits anyways to achieve a pop sound.


Furthermore, with how easy it is to get a strong, clean signal into a current computer recording setup, the weakest bit is EASILY whoever is sitting in front of the mic.

Buy an MP! It will satisfy your gear hunger for little money and you'll have a fine new tool.
 
Sonic Idiot said:
You could spend $1000 on preamp that sounds exactly the same.

You could, but I'd sure as hell return it if I did.

I mean, once you've got a strong signal in your computer, you're going to mash it to bits anyways to achieve a pop sound.

No, I'm not.

Furthermore, with how easy it is to get a strong, clean signal into a current computer recording setup, the weakest bit is EASILY whoever is sitting in front of the mic.

The problem is that the TubeMP will not give you a "clean" signal. It will give you a mucky signal. Not "warm"; mucky. Cloudy. Veiled. You can buy other units for around the same price point that will give you a much cleaner signal. So, why would you buy a TubeMP? I've never tried one with a ribbon mic. Maybe it excels there. It's also not bad as a bass DI. As a mic pre, though, it is quite poor in relation to its competition.
 
i've never been a fan of any ART gear. just a few hundred more will put you in a different catergory.

Buy an MP! It will satisfy your gear hunger for little money and you'll have a fine new tool.

yes that's very true. but you could be making leaps and bounds rather than little steps. that unit isn't built around quality it is built around price.
 
Sonic Idiot said:
You could spend $1000 on preamp that sounds exactly the same.

nkjanssen said:
You could, but I'd sure as hell return it if I did.

:D Good one.

It is what it is. Lower input impedence often means a somewhat rolled-off high end. And if you engage the misbiased toob feature to any great degree, you'll be sacrificing some clarity. Truth is most modern condensers aren't all that sensitive to loading, and if you don't go too crazy with the toob, it can make for a perfectly good mic pre. And with a hi-z instrument input that can compete with the best of them as a bonus. And all for the grand total of 50 bucks if you buy used (last time I checked, at least).
.
 
Would it work as a pre for a sort of 'low-fi' sound, or if you wanted something that actually sounded garage band-ish? Micing any particular instruments? And the various models? I assumed the 'pre' part was the same on all of them, but I didn't know if the OPL on the Studio & V3 would squash the thing that made it good as a bass DI. Would the V3 be helpful for a novice, with the presets, or would they limit what you can do with it, or worse, the presets are inaccurate? Meaning, what they call the 'bass' setting isn't anywhere near what someone using it as a bass DI would set it at.

Thanks again.
 
Cardioidpotent said:
Would it work as a pre for a sort of 'low-fi' sound, or if you wanted something that actually sounded garage band-ish?

Not really. For that, you might try using a bunch of 57's to a 4-track cassette multitracker or something like that.
.
 
jaykeMURD said:
If looking for a cheap/worthwhile pre, look no further for the DMP3 is king. Save that 150 buckaroos and get one. Heck, it's evem got 2 channels. Best investment I've made for my "studio" besides the core components. Otherwise, save more money for a used Grace 101!

You like Shinedown, eh?
 
Cardioidpotent: Would it work as a pre for a sort of 'low-fi' sound, or if you wanted something that actually sounded garage band-ish?

chessrock: Not really. For that, you might try using a bunch of 57's to a 4-track cassette multitracker or something like that.

Or actually go "real" garage band: one 57 to your consumer tape deck. :cool:
 
bpr103 said:
Or actually go "real" garage band: one 57 to your consumer tape deck. :cool:

That'd do it, or straight to a boom box with built in mic!

War
 
Back
Top