DMP3 vs. ART Tube MP
- Thread starter lucid
- Start date
mixmkr
we don't need rest!!
I owned an Art MP for an evening before I sent it back... No...no buzzing, etc... the clip light was useless, however. I just found it to be no better than a pre on a little cheapie mixer. I'd say spring for a little Mackie 1202 instead, or even something cheaper if the wallet is a little lean. The Art MP is aimed at the home hobbiest who thinks he is getting a "special" preamp, at a budget price. I'd put its value around $35 to be more realistic.
participant
New member
Own(ed) both ART Tube MP Studio, and DMP3.
Like most cheaper pre's I've used, they're fine if you don't need too much gain.
Tracks recorded with the Tube MP seemed to be more difficult to mix... bass tracks in particular seem to take up a lot of space.
The DMP3 is very clean, again, in the "lower ranges" of the gain knob. It's great for vocals and acoustic guitar recording... using good mics/mic technique, you won't need much gain anyway. Vocals recorded thru it sat better in mixes than those thru the MP (w/same mic) and stereo acoustic guitar thru it is very mixable... DMP3 does work well as a nice clean DI for bass, too.
The DMP3 does offer two channels, definite plus for you there.
Chad
(PS: Both the VTB-1 and FMR RNP are actually on their way here --my wallet's sad
-- 
Avalon 737 or Great River MP-2NV if I win the lottery 
)
Like most cheaper pre's I've used, they're fine if you don't need too much gain.
Tracks recorded with the Tube MP seemed to be more difficult to mix... bass tracks in particular seem to take up a lot of space.
The DMP3 is very clean, again, in the "lower ranges" of the gain knob. It's great for vocals and acoustic guitar recording... using good mics/mic technique, you won't need much gain anyway. Vocals recorded thru it sat better in mixes than those thru the MP (w/same mic) and stereo acoustic guitar thru it is very mixable... DMP3 does work well as a nice clean DI for bass, too.
The DMP3 does offer two channels, definite plus for you there.
Chad
(PS: Both the VTB-1 and FMR RNP are actually on their way here --my wallet's sad
-- Avalon 737 or Great River MP-2NV if I win the lottery )i think i better spring for the DMP3 then. christmas is coming!
or is there anything else worthwhile adding to my setup instead?
-behringer (i know...) mx2004a mixer
-delta 44 soundcard
-AMD XP1800+ based com
-Mackie HR824 monitors
-Sennheiser HD270 headphones
-SM-57
-2 ECM8000s
would like to get a nice large diaphragm condensor... but availability of stuff here is pretty limited...
or is there anything else worthwhile adding to my setup instead?
-behringer (i know...) mx2004a mixer
-delta 44 soundcard
-AMD XP1800+ based com
-Mackie HR824 monitors
-Sennheiser HD270 headphones
-SM-57
-2 ECM8000s
would like to get a nice large diaphragm condensor... but availability of stuff here is pretty limited...
The price range in your list there is interesting...I just bought a Delta 44 and got rid of my behringer mixer...Headphones would be the last thing I buy...And those monitors are dirty expensive..But very nice...
I just bought and AMD XP 1800+ with a motherboard and new harddrive for under $400 canadian but I haven't installed it yet..I will let ya know how that is when its up and running...
I just bought and AMD XP 1800+ with a motherboard and new harddrive for under $400 canadian but I haven't installed it yet..I will let ya know how that is when its up and running...
yeah i know the price range is a bit strange... dirty expensive is a nice way to put it, but the sound is all BUT dirty. he he. i am thinking that the weakest point now is the mixer and it's pres in particular. i want to keep the mixer for routing capabilities, but possibly get a nicer pre to get some nicer sounds. would the DMP3 provide an AUDIBLE difference from the pres on my behringer mixer?
headphones last thing you'd buy? well, i needed them for live tracking. and that is pretty much all I do.
headphones last thing you'd buy? well, i needed them for live tracking. and that is pretty much all I do.
darrin_h2000
Banned
they make a passable headphone amp.
christiaan
Active member
Ah ok. well check this then:
www.fmraudio.com
www.fmraudio.com
VirtualSamana
New member
Ed,
I am curious if you have used any tube mics with the Tube MP and achieved good results.
Also, does the sound you get depend on tweeking the settings on the MP a lot? Do you find you need to compensate with EQ with the MP.
thanks for the great info.
I am curious if you have used any tube mics with the Tube MP and achieved good results.
Also, does the sound you get depend on tweeking the settings on the MP a lot? Do you find you need to compensate with EQ with the MP.
thanks for the great info.
sonusman
Banned
Whether I use a lot of eq after the fact generally has little to do with the preamp I used. Usually, if I have enough time to adjust the source sound and have the right mic for the capture, I can get EXACTLY what I want going to tape. This holds true no matter which preamp I use. It seems that these two "little" things are always forgotten.
We have a Focusrite Red at the studio. It get's used on almost NOTHING anymore. Overheads and the occasional acoustic guitar track. I have a very hard time with that preamp sounding "warm". I find myself eq'ing out a LOT of high mid's on any source I put through it. It does do the trick when I need to give a sound more edge while tracking, but I usually prefer to just get more edge out of the source.
I usually track vocals using a Oram MWS preamp/eq box. I generally also use a 4050 as the "go to" first mic. It is usually a very good sounding combo, and is even better with a Drawmer 1960 compressor after it. The other day, I had a vocalist that just sounded horrible on the 4050. The AKG 414 sounded much better on him. But, the 414 sounded horrible on him via the Oram. I used the Drawmer 1960 preamp/comp and everything sounded good! On most singers, this combo would be horrible. You know what? The ADK Tc51 via the Oram sounded almost like the 414/Drawmer. I went with the 414/Drawmer because I had a little more exact gain staging I could do (the ADK doesn't have any output sensitivity selection..the Drawmer doesn't have "fixed" gain stages like the Oram). So really, either combo could have worked, but the one I went with allowed me a little bit more gain control
I will contend here that most of you here would make very different decisions concerning which combo you would have used. You all might have heard things quite differently than I did. That is all cool. The fact remains though is that on any given day, a different mic/pre combo is going to work better for some things than others.
Like mic's, I use preamps to achieve different things. I would love to add about, oh, 20 more different preamps and 100 different mics to the mix at the studio. That would rock! But that is expensive.
All I have ever really stated here is that the ART is as capable on any given day as just about ANY other preamp on the market. It is a good sounding preamp. I base this upon over 6 years of using it on a variety of things.
If you are JUST going to buy ONE preamp, get whatever you want. It is NOT going to be any better or any worse than any other decent preamp in a overall way! I have done recordings that sounded great using almost nothing BUT the ART. These recordings have sounded better than stuff I have heard using almost all classA pre's. What was the difference? The pre's? I doubt it. Maybe I just took more care to get the sound I wanted, whether that meant changing the source sound, and/or the mic.
In the end, most "decent" preamps can help you achieve your end result.
What I like about the ART is that it has variable control of the input and output. The Pro MPA also has an adjustable High Pass Filter. That is very useful. I have never experienced the types of problems others have described about the ART in my 6 years of dealing with these pre's. I also haven't experienced many of the problems many describe with the Alesis 3630 compressor either! So, explain to me why there is a difference between what I have done with these boxes and what others have done with them?
My experience with listening to people's mp3's is that a lot of the audio I hear sounds sort of stake and cold. Is this the source sounds? Effects of their monitoring environment? The A/D converters? The mic? The preamp? The processing they do after the fact? Probably a mix of all the above.
My point is simply this. If you are looking for a solution for everything in one box, you are going to be sadly disappointed. A good engineer is going to get very good results no matter what they use. The ART is not always the first box I grab for, but if I had to buy 8 channels of something on a budget, it would be the first box I would buy! On average, it works out very well.
Ed
We have a Focusrite Red at the studio. It get's used on almost NOTHING anymore. Overheads and the occasional acoustic guitar track. I have a very hard time with that preamp sounding "warm". I find myself eq'ing out a LOT of high mid's on any source I put through it. It does do the trick when I need to give a sound more edge while tracking, but I usually prefer to just get more edge out of the source.
I usually track vocals using a Oram MWS preamp/eq box. I generally also use a 4050 as the "go to" first mic. It is usually a very good sounding combo, and is even better with a Drawmer 1960 compressor after it. The other day, I had a vocalist that just sounded horrible on the 4050. The AKG 414 sounded much better on him. But, the 414 sounded horrible on him via the Oram. I used the Drawmer 1960 preamp/comp and everything sounded good! On most singers, this combo would be horrible. You know what? The ADK Tc51 via the Oram sounded almost like the 414/Drawmer. I went with the 414/Drawmer because I had a little more exact gain staging I could do (the ADK doesn't have any output sensitivity selection..the Drawmer doesn't have "fixed" gain stages like the Oram). So really, either combo could have worked, but the one I went with allowed me a little bit more gain control
I will contend here that most of you here would make very different decisions concerning which combo you would have used. You all might have heard things quite differently than I did. That is all cool. The fact remains though is that on any given day, a different mic/pre combo is going to work better for some things than others.
Like mic's, I use preamps to achieve different things. I would love to add about, oh, 20 more different preamps and 100 different mics to the mix at the studio. That would rock! But that is expensive.
All I have ever really stated here is that the ART is as capable on any given day as just about ANY other preamp on the market. It is a good sounding preamp. I base this upon over 6 years of using it on a variety of things.
If you are JUST going to buy ONE preamp, get whatever you want. It is NOT going to be any better or any worse than any other decent preamp in a overall way! I have done recordings that sounded great using almost nothing BUT the ART. These recordings have sounded better than stuff I have heard using almost all classA pre's. What was the difference? The pre's? I doubt it. Maybe I just took more care to get the sound I wanted, whether that meant changing the source sound, and/or the mic.
In the end, most "decent" preamps can help you achieve your end result.
What I like about the ART is that it has variable control of the input and output. The Pro MPA also has an adjustable High Pass Filter. That is very useful. I have never experienced the types of problems others have described about the ART in my 6 years of dealing with these pre's. I also haven't experienced many of the problems many describe with the Alesis 3630 compressor either! So, explain to me why there is a difference between what I have done with these boxes and what others have done with them?
My experience with listening to people's mp3's is that a lot of the audio I hear sounds sort of stake and cold. Is this the source sounds? Effects of their monitoring environment? The A/D converters? The mic? The preamp? The processing they do after the fact? Probably a mix of all the above.
My point is simply this. If you are looking for a solution for everything in one box, you are going to be sadly disappointed. A good engineer is going to get very good results no matter what they use. The ART is not always the first box I grab for, but if I had to buy 8 channels of something on a budget, it would be the first box I would buy! On average, it works out very well.
Ed
kid klash
The original Mr. Nice Guy
I'd have to side with Sonusman here... I've been using the Tube MPs and the Dual MPs for the last five years with great results. Never had a problem with any of them; they're nice an quiet; and you can dial in as much "warmth" as you need for the sound you're going for. They make a slammin' DI for bass or synth too.