dbx386: many opinions, little consensus

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hughes
  • Start date Start date
H

Hughes

New member
Trying to get an idea from posts on various BBS's about the quality of the sound on this unit. Some people feel it's great, that it's quiet and clean, while others think it's pretty mundane, even calling the resultant sound quality "brown".

Anybody here used this box and have an opinion? Seems like it covers a lot of bases; digital outs, tube warmth, etc., for not too much money. Has anybody heard how it sounds on the Mic Pre shootout CD?
 
1 Drstawl's got one, and he loves it.

2 The 3D Audio Pre CD is a revelation - cut after cut, WITH VERY LITTLE DIFFERENCE IN SOUND. I've listened to it on a commercial CD player, and through my soundcard with headphones, and at first the suspicion crossed my mind that the whole thing was a scam - they'd recorded just the one track and multiplied it 36 times, and then charged everyone for the CD! Of course, I knew that wasn't true, because there were pictures of the event with all the different pres stacked up and being tested, plus the shootout was covered in a major audio magazine, plus the guy who organized the event, Lynn Fuston, is not the kind of guy who'd run a scam like that. Also, the singer varies her delivery on a couple cuts, which also proves they actually did the test. :) The point I'm making is - that's how little difference there is in quality pres as far as I'm concerned - so little it's hard to tell the difference. I think there are differences, but that they are so small as to amount to conoisseur material only. They're for engineers to argue about. And if you believe that, then when you pick the pre you want, there's not much to lose, is there?

This might turn out to be interesting - I think I'm pointing out the fact that the emperor's not wearing any clothes, but others will probably say, nah, you just can't hear right. :)
 
I bought one in April,used it for 3 weeks and returned it.I feel the converters are quite good,but I didn't think that it stood out judging it as a preamp.Several magazines have reviewed it lately and from what I've read the posts on this site are reflective of the magazine reviews:mixed.Cheers!
 
Dobro: I kind've thought that the 3D Audio Pre CD shootout would sound like what you described.

Hughes: I think that "mundane" is what I was looking for in a pre. Two channels. Clean. Plenty of gain and simultaneous digital and analog I/O. It's not as "do-all" as some other pres that add compressors or other effects.

virtual.ray: You omitted one important detail in your post. You say that the 386 didn't stand out as a pre. OK. Against what?
 
I have one and I'm thinking about getting another one. I'd like to use it for a front end on a portable system to record two tracks direct to DAT.
 
I recently go the 3D Audio CD. When listening to the CD, I would recommend that you take a few breaks between listening to prevent everything from running together. To me the CD revealed that the difference between many preamps are very subtle. Unlike dobro, I found that there WEre some very noticeable differences between preamps. I'd suggest listening on good studio monitors in a good room. I immediately found preamps that I liked.

I must say that I picked the 386 blindly in both voice and guitar tests. It made my "good" list, which included about 5-7 of the pre's. I suppose everyone's going to have their own opinion. I think the take-home message is that you should make your own opinion. However, I will say that I haven't really heard anyone actually say that they didn't like the sound. Most of the complaints against the dbx 386 has been it's lack of built-in compressor and EQ. Personally, for two channels of tube preamplification and digital output AND a separate analog output, it's hard to beat. Many of the units that people compare it to are ONe-channel units with compressor and EQ... A total incorrect comparison.

Rev E
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top