Brick loses in showdown to Behringer. wtf?!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hiwatt Bob
  • Start date Start date
Like most inexpenive audio recording gear, Behringer gear colors the sound in a way that is pleasant to the human ear, but make it tough to sit well in a mix. As it has already been pointed out, if you start piling these tracks on one another in a project (song), you'll begin to notice some "interesting" audial anomalies which will cause you to go "WTF was that?!!" For the price point, Behringer gear "works" and is a good starting point for beginners.

The Brick "tells it like it is" regarding the source (sh1t in = sh1t out) and doesn't color the sound in the same way. The tracks I've recorded with the Brick (bass, as a DI, acoustic guitars, mandolin, guitar cabs, etc.) sound like the source, sit in a mix correctly, and can easily be modified ITB however I want, while retaining their original "feel" and sound.

IMHO, the Brick takes some time to get used to ...I mean, h3ck, it only has one huge knob (to adjust gain) and doesn't have 5 hundred little buttons like most (Behringer) gear has nowadays. The gain settings on the Brick make a HUGE difference in the results you'll achieve. Work with it for a while and you'll find its sweet spot for every source...

Good luck!

-mr moon
 
bob, i know where you're coming from. the behringer gear is definitely working for ya, as the preamps in my ada8000 are working for me. my gear works fine for my sideproject (indie/lofi-ish)... where i start to notice the differences are in denser mixes. they are most definitely not terrible, but i'm still lookin for "something" in most of those cases.
 
I have a Behringer UB802 mixer that I use to monitor with headphones. The pre's in it sound dull and lifeless. They don't even sound nearly as good as the pre's in an M-Audio Audiobuddy. I just can't understand how anyone would prefer the muffled sound of the Behringer.
 
not surprising. everything I have read on this board from brick users bought it and use it because it is supposed to be "clean". As for the behringer, yeah those can sound great too. especially with not that many tracks. but like everyone is saying, I found, after recording an album with a small behri mixer, that having more "pallettes" will make for a much easier mix. if you want a dirty sound, take back the brick and get a bluetube and some monitors.
 
ocnor said:
I have a Behringer UB802 mixer that I use to monitor with headphones. The pre's in it sound dull and lifeless. They don't even sound nearly as good as the pre's in an M-Audio Audiobuddy. I just can't understand how anyone would prefer the muffled sound of the Behringer.
Click to expand...


Exactly. If you know what to listen for, there's NO WAY you can prefer the MX series pres over the Brick, FOR ANYTHING. Those MX pres are probably about 5 to 10 dollars worth of parts. I can buy an MX602 for 20 bycks on Ebay. The components simply are total crap, and there is simply no way that it could DO ANYTHING BETTER than a Brick, unless you think bad is good, and good is bad. What I am saying is, if you think it swounds better than a brick, THEN THERE IS SOMETHING ELSE OUT OF WHACK. I have owned an 802, 602, and 2004A. All having the MX series pres, and they are simply the cheapest components Behringer could find. They are dull, noisy, lifeless, not transparent... a pre that cost about 10 bucks to make CAN DO NOTHING BETTER THAN THE BRICK!! The components simply won't allow it. Like I said, if you think they souynd better at anything, then something is not right somewhere else. Either you don't know what "GOOD" is, or there is something else wrong. The components in the Brick and the 10 dollar MX pres are not even in the same league, and shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence. Now, having said this, I do like some Behringer gear, I have heard good recordings from the toob Mic 220, I also have had a UB series board, and it was WORLDS better than the MX stuff, and compared good to the Mackie VLZ pro pres. I also like the multi effects Virtualizer, the new model, nice verbs and not a thing wrong with it. So I have been a supporter of Behringer in the past, do a search on this board for my username, and you will see a post called "lots of unfair Behringer bashing going on here". In it, I actually post a clip of a song done with a Mic 220 tube unit, and also a clip from a Great River pre to show how a room is more important than a preamp. So, I have no problem buying Behringer gear, but I assure you, I have owned a Brick and many MX eries pres, and there is simply no comparison. Soemthing else is off here if you are thinking it is. DO NOT SELL YOUR BRICK, you will regret it in the future. I had to sell mine for money reasons, and I swear I want another real bad. I also usede to own the peavey vMP2, and I think the Brick is better than that was, though it cost more for two channels than the VMP2 did, so I guess that's not a fair comparison.

Jeff
 
jeff, i decided to keep one of the bricks, the other went back today. i agree that it is very quiet and it does work well in mixes--so i'm keeping it as another tool in the arsenal.
 
Hiwatt Bob said:
jeff, i decided to keep one of the bricks, the other went back today. i agree that it is very quiet and it does work well in mixes--so i'm keeping it as another tool in the arsenal.
Click to expand...


Good for you. In wish like Hell that I had not had to sell mine. I am a single parent of two kids, and I am a soloact for a living. It is a meager existence, but it is what I do for my own happiness. I had to sell mine to come up with enough money for my little girl to go to 4H camp this summer. I loved the Brick, but my little girl is more important, and she had worked hard and done good in school this year. Someday I'll be able to afford another. I now use a DMP3, and it's pretty cool, but man I want that Brick back. I am afraid the prices on the Brick will go up instead of down. I have an almost new set of Wharfedale Diamond pro 802 monitors that I really like, but I am thinking of selling them to get a Brick again. I have an extra power amp for my live show and I could get a set of the cheaper Behringer passive monitors and use them. I think I would then be wishing I hadn't got rid of the 8.2's in the future. You will love the Brick more and more, I assure you.

Jeff
 
jeff, although i'm not a parent quite yet--i applaud you on your choice. kids are much more important than any piece of gear.

well...maybe not my Hiwatt. :D
 
hiwatt bob, very nice tunes you got there. what gear were you using for those tunes? they sound well recorded, even though they are masked by that famous myspace distortion. i'm interested in knowing what mics you used and your room's conditions.
 
Last edited:
thanks alot travis. for "themotion", "the cold moon" (which are off my second album, where i had slightly more experience/knowledge) i used a sennheiser e609 silver for the guitars, the bass was direct into my Behringer, the drums used an AKG D112 for kick; an Mxl 603s for the snare, and an MXL 2001 placed about 3 feet behind the drummer at roughly the height of his head. i used the Mxl 2001 for vocals and harmonica, the mxl 603s for the mandolin. the piano on "the cold moon" is a yamaha s08.

"mobile" i have less a recollection on how what mics i used--this was a really lo-fi effort, i basically set up some mics and went. the drums were recorded in two parts, one part was a full kit with a kick mic and one room mic. the second part(s)--which you can hear in the chorus sections-- is comprised of a few separately recorded tracks of snare and toms. i'm positive i used the 603s on the acoustic. that ambient noise you hear at the beginning is me circling the rims of some crystal wineglasses filled with varying (tuned) levels of water.

all three of these tracks were recorded in my lovely basement. not the best room, but i try and adapt to it (by basically close mic'ing most things :D )

"all the pain in the world" was actually recorded in a studio, my friend owned it and has since sold it, Echo Bay it was called. I believe we went through his board, which i believe was an API--it was made for Lenny Kravitz's home studio, but he reneged on it, so they picked it up on the cheap. the mic for the acoustic was a shure sm81 and the vocal mic has a story behind it. it was a neumann (i'm pretty sure). it was reported once at Abbey Road studios and used by Paul McCartney for his vocal tracks on the White Album!! i guess it was then sold to a studio in LA and subsequently to my friend's studio. i can't verify this--but i trust that at least he was telling the truth on his end. anyhow i tracked it there, and then imported it into my Cakewalk program at home.

sorry for the long post--
 
Oddity

i pulled out the Brick from it's (durable) casing to look at the guts--tubes especially. it's got a GT12ax7, a JAN 6205, and get this a GT 12AU7 that is labelled as such in silver print:

12AU7
ECC83/7025

well. anyone remotely familiar with tubes/valves knows that a 12AU7 is the american code corresponding to the european code for the same tube: ECC82.

ecc83/7025 are codes for the much higher gain 12AX7.

strange.

plus, it's kind of stupid because someone who didn't know what they were doing might actually replace it with an ECC83--and i'm guessing that substitution wouldn't do much good for this piece of gear.
 
I like using nicer pres when I can ... but I don't particularly freak out if I run out of spare channels, and I'm forced to use something cheap ala DMP-3.

I've worked with some uber-nice and expensive mic pres, and they don't do anything to make my mic'ing technique, source, or tracking/mixing skills any better. I still have to make sure I'm doing things the right way.

And by the time I get all that stuff out of the way, it doesn't much matter very much what I'm plugging the mic in to. Or at least it's not nearly as significant as all the other stuff.

I should be able to make good mixes regardless of whether I'm using decent low/mid level pres (no Behringer -- even I have to draw the line there :D ) or if I'm using something fancier. If it doesn't, then chances are, something else I did was lacking.
 
oh yeah, travis and anyone else interested:

if you'd like copies of my discs, email me a mailing address and i'll mail you them.

ryan@skbinc.com

for free of course.
 
chessrock,

i agree wholeheartedly. an inspired performance will trump expensive gear anyday of the week. the gear should just be there to enhance capturing it.
 
Hiwatt Bob said:
oh yeah, travis and anyone else interested:

if you'd like copies of my discs, email me a mailing address and i'll mail you them.

ryan@skbinc.com

for free of course.
Click to expand...

I'm taking you up on that. cold moon is my fav. :D oh yea, how'd a lowly musician get such a good looking wife?
 
diogo said:
thanks Bob...euromixer :D good god i never thought seeing anyone praise that piece of gear, especially on this board ;)

the new meeks are supposed to be real good...i almost picked up a 3Q myself..but i prefer keeping my dmp3 and add an Electro Harmonix tube pre in the future...a good track going in, wont need eq right, well most of the time.. so i guess im gonna focus in sending in good tracks than getting a pre thats an eq and a comp all in one...although they do look good and tempting.

i think your line of thought regarding the brick might be the best...in a crowded mix, the "invisible" qualities of that pre might surface..but who knows...hey, maybe you got two defective units with the 2 bricks, highly unlikable but...u never know :D
Click to expand...

Good God, do a search of my posts and read them. I have said all along that the Behringer pre-amps were not bad at all. I had the MX8000 24 track mixer (the big 8 buss one) and that board sounded very good. It beat my brother's Mackie to hell and back.
 
I'm taking you up on that. cold moon is my fav. oh yea, how'd a lowly musician get such a good looking wife?
Click to expand...

travis,

i went to italy.

literally.


Good God, do a search of my posts and read them. I have said all along that the Behringer pre-amps were not bad at all. I had the MX8000 24 track mixer (the big 8 buss one) and that board sounded very good. It beat my brother's Mackie to hell and back.
Click to expand...

maybe we have different (better) pre's than the other (smaller) behringers?
 
My very limited experience in the mic pre department is that cheap mic pres tend to colour the sound a lot. Which means that they are very useful in a limited area, and that this very much also depends on the microphone.

For example: On the guitar test, you used an SM57. The SM57 has a dedidely weak HF response, which is why it sounds good on vocals and guitars. In other words, the SM57 in itself is warm. So it's a bad indicator of how "warm" a mic pre is.

Using an SM57 with my Line Audio preamp, I might think it is a warm preamp. It isn't, it's fantastically transparent. Which is noticeable when you use a good condensor. The Art Tube MP preamp sucks for everything, except vocals, because it has a similarily weak HF response as the SM57 has, thereby giving a nice warm sound to the vocals. But using it on acoustic guitar, and it sounds all wrong. :)

Secondly, you bought the Bricks because you expected them to sound "warm", being tube pres. That's simply a myth. There aint nothing "warm" about tubes except the glow. ;) The warm sound of many old vintage tube things simply come from the fact that it's old "crap" with a limited frequency response. :D

So, the Brick is a clear and transparent preamp. Which the Joemeek is not supposed to be (it's advertised as adding colour to the sound) and which the Behringer is not expected to be (being ridicously cheap). So you are comparing two non-warm preamps, and it turns out the Behringer is the warmest. No big suprise there, really.
 
turnitdown said:
I now use a Aphex 107 w/ a NOS JAN12ax7 tube,
Click to expand...

I have an Aphex 207D and I love it! The digital out gave me two more channells on my Digi002-Rack! The Mic/Lim and PAd features are awesome!

This puppy is so warm I heat up leftovers with it!
LOL!

-Zin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top