K
kenoflife
New member
OK folks, you got me curious....
who's really tried/owned one, how's it sound -
compare and contrast, if you will.
who's really tried/owned one, how's it sound -
compare and contrast, if you will.
teainthesahara
New member
I've just recently had one delivered. I've recorded a few things with it, but havent tracked a full mix with it yet. It's pretty cool. Built well, tons of headroom and output. Has a face only a mother could love....my art dual MP looks better in the rack! The sound is impressive. Here's my comparisons with use on vocals, and thoughts in general on what preamps would go or stay if i coudnt keep/use them all:
DAV bg1 VS symetrix 528
- Both are of the clear and open type of sound. Bg1 makes the 528 sound less detailed and 'smaller' overall. The symetrix is a totally usefull channel strip with a cool sounding eq, and i wouldnt sell it or stop using it...it holds it's own (as chessrock put it one time, it doesnt embarrass itself with better preamps), but you can tell the difference on a track by track basis.
DAV vs symetrix 201
Sound comparison as above. I would consider getting rid of a 202 with the DAV in its place - because the 202 doesnt really offer anything else to justify its place.
DAV vs Ti Audio Tube preamp (http://www.vintageaudio.org/)
Bananna's and organgitangs eating coconuts. One is cool because of the overall substance/richness it gives to the sound (DAV), and the other is cool because of the glassy tubey warmy whatever you want to call it vibe.
DAV is more versatile overall, but cannot do what the Ti preamp does nicely (harmonic distortion or something like that).
DAV vs VTB-1 (without tube engaged)
DAV again has more detail/richness/'bigness" to the sound. I dont think i'd sell the vtb-1 though...you get tons of quiet gain with the thing, and without the roll off engaged, it does have this low-mid sound all of it's own. It pairs up quite nicely with my unidyne III shure 57 because of that feature - unique and good sound.
DAV vs RANE FM14
Again, both pre's of are the clean and clear type. The rane has some usuable eq and a nice preamp. Bg1, again, more detailed, bigger sound. The rane is pretty close to what the symetrix preamps deliver, but the symetrix preamps do it a little better. So i would consider ditching the Rane.
DAV vs ART tube MP/ ART Dual MP
For clean and detailed with a touch of something else going on with the sound, of course,the DAV amp. But my ART preamps are staying put....even when i compare them to my "real" tube preamp, the ART still has it's own thing that works pretty damn good on bass/synth DI, and for 'special effect' distorted vocals.
DAV vs Fostex VF preamp
DAV is awesome. VF...well, i guess everyone has to start somewhere. They had their time and place and did the job ok enough when the word "mic preamp" had no meaning or significance...which was fine cause at that time learning where to point the mic and what mic to use was way more important than any preamp....
Final thoughts....DAV is a bargain at it's current price for the sound it makes!
Im not one of those 'preamp is everything' type guys - the differences can be relatively subtle amongst the clean preamp comparisons - BUT significant once other things are taken care of...
DAV bg1 VS symetrix 528
- Both are of the clear and open type of sound. Bg1 makes the 528 sound less detailed and 'smaller' overall. The symetrix is a totally usefull channel strip with a cool sounding eq, and i wouldnt sell it or stop using it...it holds it's own (as chessrock put it one time, it doesnt embarrass itself with better preamps), but you can tell the difference on a track by track basis.
DAV vs symetrix 201
Sound comparison as above. I would consider getting rid of a 202 with the DAV in its place - because the 202 doesnt really offer anything else to justify its place.
DAV vs Ti Audio Tube preamp (http://www.vintageaudio.org/)
Bananna's and organgitangs eating coconuts. One is cool because of the overall substance/richness it gives to the sound (DAV), and the other is cool because of the glassy tubey warmy whatever you want to call it vibe.
DAV is more versatile overall, but cannot do what the Ti preamp does nicely (harmonic distortion or something like that).
DAV vs VTB-1 (without tube engaged)
DAV again has more detail/richness/'bigness" to the sound. I dont think i'd sell the vtb-1 though...you get tons of quiet gain with the thing, and without the roll off engaged, it does have this low-mid sound all of it's own. It pairs up quite nicely with my unidyne III shure 57 because of that feature - unique and good sound.
DAV vs RANE FM14
Again, both pre's of are the clean and clear type. The rane has some usuable eq and a nice preamp. Bg1, again, more detailed, bigger sound. The rane is pretty close to what the symetrix preamps deliver, but the symetrix preamps do it a little better. So i would consider ditching the Rane.
DAV vs ART tube MP/ ART Dual MP
For clean and detailed with a touch of something else going on with the sound, of course,the DAV amp. But my ART preamps are staying put....even when i compare them to my "real" tube preamp, the ART still has it's own thing that works pretty damn good on bass/synth DI, and for 'special effect' distorted vocals.
DAV vs Fostex VF preamp
DAV is awesome. VF...well, i guess everyone has to start somewhere. They had their time and place and did the job ok enough when the word "mic preamp" had no meaning or significance...which was fine cause at that time learning where to point the mic and what mic to use was way more important than any preamp....
Final thoughts....DAV is a bargain at it's current price for the sound it makes!
Im not one of those 'preamp is everything' type guys - the differences can be relatively subtle amongst the clean preamp comparisons - BUT significant once other things are taken care of...
SonicAlbert
Super-Sonic "Herb" Albert
I recently bought the DAV BG-1 and also have a Grace 201. Both are wonderful preamps in their own right, in my opinion.
The BG-1 is a big and open sounding preamp with a lot of gain. Tracks really seem to "pop" with it (in a good way), and the realism of the sound is excellent.
The Grace 201 is maybe a bit more silky smooth and refined sounding. The Grace also has a top quality rack case design that looks gorgeous, and has independent phantom switches for each channel. It also has phase reverse on both channels.
The BG-1 has one phantom switch for both channels, but also features three low frequency roll-offs that can be selected by button presses. It has another nifty feature where both channels can be summed for listening in mono (it puts the signal in the center of the stereo field). This might seem sort of useless, but I've already found it to be a great feature.
To sum up, the BG-1 sounds incredible and is an amazing value for the money in my opinion.
The BG-1 is a big and open sounding preamp with a lot of gain. Tracks really seem to "pop" with it (in a good way), and the realism of the sound is excellent.
The Grace 201 is maybe a bit more silky smooth and refined sounding. The Grace also has a top quality rack case design that looks gorgeous, and has independent phantom switches for each channel. It also has phase reverse on both channels.
The BG-1 has one phantom switch for both channels, but also features three low frequency roll-offs that can be selected by button presses. It has another nifty feature where both channels can be summed for listening in mono (it puts the signal in the center of the stereo field). This might seem sort of useless, but I've already found it to be a great feature.
To sum up, the BG-1 sounds incredible and is an amazing value for the money in my opinion.
BigRay
New member
I own the dav BG-1(2 of them), I own millennia HV-3c, which is 3 times its price.
I have used lunatec v2 and 3)have owned the v2), hardy m1, and a couple of other pres... It is the best pre I have ever owned. It is better than the milliennia. The millennia is clean , clinical and fast with transient attack. The DAV is all that AND lends a certain richness to the sound that the lunatec, millinnia, hardy or any of the other "clean" pres just dont have.. Its not a tube amp, so it isnt going to add any color so if you want color, get a fearn, manley, etc..but if you want a solid state, clean rich, finished record sounding 2 channel preamp..look no further. It is world class , FORGET price point...it is stellar at ANY price point. This is why decca commissioned it, and why mark knopfler and david gilmour and many other professionals use it. I will never look outside of DAV for my clean preamp needs. And I dont give a rats ass about looks so it could be puke green with a bloody penis stump for a knob and id still love it. im too busy recording to worry about how something looks.
Granted I do only location classical recording but still...run and buy one. Trust me. do a search on gearslutz, recording.org ,3daudio...youll see just how much it is revered. I plan on owning 12 channels of these babies before long. It is no less than world class without the world class price. Id get one before they get much more popular(they are being sold like hotcakes)
http://www.michaelsawitzke.com/teddy/ (some samples)
www.davelectronics.com
I have used lunatec v2 and 3)have owned the v2), hardy m1, and a couple of other pres... It is the best pre I have ever owned. It is better than the milliennia. The millennia is clean , clinical and fast with transient attack. The DAV is all that AND lends a certain richness to the sound that the lunatec, millinnia, hardy or any of the other "clean" pres just dont have.. Its not a tube amp, so it isnt going to add any color so if you want color, get a fearn, manley, etc..but if you want a solid state, clean rich, finished record sounding 2 channel preamp..look no further. It is world class , FORGET price point...it is stellar at ANY price point. This is why decca commissioned it, and why mark knopfler and david gilmour and many other professionals use it. I will never look outside of DAV for my clean preamp needs. And I dont give a rats ass about looks so it could be puke green with a bloody penis stump for a knob and id still love it. im too busy recording to worry about how something looks.
Granted I do only location classical recording but still...run and buy one. Trust me. do a search on gearslutz, recording.org ,3daudio...youll see just how much it is revered. I plan on owning 12 channels of these babies before long. It is no less than world class without the world class price. Id get one before they get much more popular(they are being sold like hotcakes)http://www.michaelsawitzke.com/teddy/ (some samples)
www.davelectronics.com
teainthesahara
New member
BigRay said:
Jeeze leweeeze what a description
That's pretty cool that it compares well to those other preamps you guys have used.
BigRay
New member
I didnt believe it would at first...I had about 5g to spend on a preamp or two and was about to splurge on a couple millennias, when an engineer whom I respect very much told me about the DAV pres. After doing some more research(and buying one) I saw that they really brought it home in a big way. They are proof that you dont need thousands to have a great preamp. I will probably sell my millennia actually, and grab another DAV. The only reason I would buy another preamp is to add some tube color. (forselltech fetcode is in my radar). I am also taking one of my DAVs and having the IC replaced with a Burr Brown version to see how that makes a difference. They are stellar as is though. at least 3 engineers I know use the DAVs exclusively. One of those guys is a multi-award winning location recording engineer.
teainthesahara
New member
BigRay and Albert;
have you guys ever used the DAV as a DI? If so, did you simply get a stereo1/4 to XLR cable? Also, have you ever had to hook this up to unbalanced equipment?
T
have you guys ever used the DAV as a DI? If so, did you simply get a stereo1/4 to XLR cable? Also, have you ever had to hook this up to unbalanced equipment?
T
SonicAlbert
Super-Sonic "Herb" Albert
The BG-1 does not have DI inputs, just mic level inputs. So you can't really use it as a DI in the typical sense. You could certainly put a DI ahead of it, and then get your gain from the BG-1 instead of whatever board you'd normally use.
I ran a mix through the BG-1 recently, but I have gear that can handle high levels. Even with the -26dB switch in the BG-1 puts out a lot of gain. Giving it a line level signal really maxed out the levels in even a +4 scenario. So I think you'd really want to have a DI ahead of the BG-1 in most situations when using it as a DI/preamp.
As far as the bal/unbal thing, as long as you have properly wired cables you should be able to do that no problem.
I ran a mix through the BG-1 recently, but I have gear that can handle high levels. Even with the -26dB switch in the BG-1 puts out a lot of gain. Giving it a line level signal really maxed out the levels in even a +4 scenario. So I think you'd really want to have a DI ahead of the BG-1 in most situations when using it as a DI/preamp.
As far as the bal/unbal thing, as long as you have properly wired cables you should be able to do that no problem.
teainthesahara
New member
Thanks for the reply;
I've read about other user's using it as a DI (plugging a high Z signal directly into it, and watching the output carefully). I may try it out using my lynxone, i think it can handle a high input. Did you notice any significant differences running your mix through it? What was your signal path?
I've read about other user's using it as a DI (plugging a high Z signal directly into it, and watching the output carefully). I may try it out using my lynxone, i think it can handle a high input. Did you notice any significant differences running your mix through it? What was your signal path?
B
Big Kenny
New member
I'd like a weigh in for anyone who has one of these, I'm on the fence. I need two more channels and am looking at all my options
SonicAlbert
Super-Sonic "Herb" Albert
What both my engineer and I noticed was that the mix seemed to "pop" a little bit more when run through the BG-1. Which was good because it worked for that particular project. The signal path was the Mix "B" output on my Speck X.Sum mixer, to the BG-1, and then to the analog inputs on my UA-2192 converter.
I should say again that the BG-1 is really not a DI, so while you might be able to get away with using it that way in certain circumstances, it shouldn't be considered a true DI in any of the usual senses of the word or usual applications.
If you want me to weigh in again on the BG-1, I think it sounds wonderful.
I should say again that the BG-1 is really not a DI, so while you might be able to get away with using it that way in certain circumstances, it shouldn't be considered a true DI in any of the usual senses of the word or usual applications.
If you want me to weigh in again on the BG-1, I think it sounds wonderful.
B
Big Kenny
New member
Thanks Albert
BigRay
New member
Kenny....
It is the heat. Trust me. I own amps 3 times as expensive and it smokes them.Mick is a great guy too. The channel strip is nice as well..rumours of a DI are floating around.....email him...mick@davelectronics.com
I will also be glad to call him and ask questions for you if you want..since I get free euro calls.
Teddy
It is the heat. Trust me. I own amps 3 times as expensive and it smokes them.Mick is a great guy too. The channel strip is nice as well..rumours of a DI are floating around.....email him...mick@davelectronics.com
I will also be glad to call him and ask questions for you if you want..since I get free euro calls.
Teddy