Audient MkII Preamps vs DBX 286s Preamps?

[Hat89]

Hello everyone, I've been doing a video and audio podcast for about 4 years, streaming, I also do voice-over for videos, and I'm looking at the Audient MkII as an upgrade, here is what I currently do:

I've upgraded a lot over the years but at the moment my current setup is as follows:

- Shure SM7B w/Dynamite lifter
- Focusrite Solo
- DBX 286s
- I also have 4-inch acoustic foam covering the walls, and 18-inch thick bass traps in the corners, with a thin layer of acoustic foam covered in a black-table cloth covering the hard surface of my desk to reduce audio reflections in a carpeted room.
- Mogami xlr cables

For what I do, this is better than many, but, I've been reading lots of reviews on the Audient MkII M4 and M14, and the general consensus is that the pre-amps are fantastic for the cost, and a giant improvement over my Focusrite. The thing is, I plug my mic into the dynamite lifter, right into the back of the dbx 286s and from there, into the Focusrite at line level with gain on zero on the focusrite. So, from my understanding, I'm basically not using the Focusrite at all, other than to put the sound into the PC. With that in mind...

Would the Audient MKII M4 & M14 have improved preamps over the dbx 286s? Also, if it does, I think I'd still want to route the mic through the dbx 286s the same way, but just use the bypass preamp switch on the DBX, and basically use it for the de-esser and subtle noise gate, which I guess means, the DBX would have to be secondary then... If the DBX 286s has better preamps still, then I won't even bother buying the Audient device.

Would appreciate any insight, thanks!

 

[Orson]

We use an Audient 14 the mk1 type and it is routed through the 286. At times when I didnt use the de-esser in the 286, I dearly wish I had.

Although lots of things can be done in post processing, it is much better not to have to do them.

Are the pre-amps better? I think that is the least of the things you need to concern yourself with because they aren't going to make editing free voice overs even if they are twice as good as the mk1 which are perfectly acceptable.

 

[Hat89]

We use an Audient 14 the mk1 type and it is routed through the 286. At times when I didnt use the de-esser in the 286, I dearly wish I had.

Although lots of things can be done in post processing, it is much better not to have to do them.

Are the pre-amps better? I think that is the least of the things you need to concern yourself with because they aren't going to make editing free voice overs even if they are twice as good as the mk1 which are perfectly acceptable.

Thanks for the feedback!

I think there is some confusion.

I still intend on using the dbx 286s de-esser, regardless.. If I got the Audient MKII, I'd just flick the "bypass preamp" on the dbx itself, but still use the de-esser and noise gate, whic the dbx lets you do. That is entirely depending on whether the pre-amps were better in the Audient, otherwise, I'll just stick with the same interface that I have now, as I'm not going to spend $200 - $300 for Audient preamps, only to bypass it and use the dbx's preamps.

 

[Orson]

I see. I haven't noticed anything down on the system in the way I use it. I would be interested in what the results of your experiment is.