Focusrite Platinum vs. rnp comparisons?

[Guernica]

........I hope im not beating a dead horse here Does anyone have any hands on experience comparing these 2 pre's? Is it just a preference thing..... or are there some characteristics that make one better than the other? I would be using it primarily for vocs and accoustic guitars.

....thanks alot in advance

 

[acorec]

I have a Focusrite Platinum Pro. It replaces my burnt-up Blue Tube. Really nice unit full of great features. It takes time to really learn to use it, but I am impressed with it. The RNP gets a great reputation from so many people that I would believe that it is first rate. Depends on what you want. The FR has more modules and is complicated (until you learn it). The RNP is a great mic pre-amp.
If you don't own good compressors, noise gates etc. the FR is a great deal. If you have this stuff already, then the RNP is probably the way to go.

 

[tdukex]

Apples and oranges. The Plat is a single channel voice processer with pre, compression, and eq. The RNP is a dual channel mic pre.

It's not a matter of which is best but which best suits your needs.

 

[Guernica]

thanks guys,
In terms of the pre-amp only though..... not including the bells and whistles on the voicemaster, etc. How does the dry pre compare to the rnp?

 

[Middleman]

The voicemaster has a warmer tube sound than the RNP.

 

[Teacher]

the RNP is prolly more natural sounding or transparent as some would say, and would be used more often in a professional studio then the focusrite

 

[acorec]

the RNP is prolly more natural sounding or transparent as some would say, and would be used more often in a professional studio then the focusrite

The Focusrite Platinum pro and other Focusrite products are in more pro studios than any RNCs. Check out Abby Road!

 

[Middleman]

the RNP is prolly more natural sounding or transparent as some would say, and would be used more often in a professional studio then the focusrite

I agree on the transparency of the sound but that may or may not be a sound you want in your recording. If I only had the platinum and the RNP, and I was recording Norah Jones, then I would reach for the RNP. If I were recording Kid Rock and Sheryl Crow I would reach for the platinum over the RNP.

As far as the pro studio thing, I have seen a lot of weird things in studios, like $50 guitar pedals on primary vocal tracks running into an SSL mixing console, so I don't think you could limit either peice of gear showing up in a pro studio.

 

[Teacher]

ur right...FMR just got me hooked the RNC is like a gateway drug...

 

[chessrock]

Strictly in terms of the mic pre itself . . . not counting anything else, I think you'll actually find more acceptance for the RNP amongst professionals and gear snobs.

I'm basing this on what I gather from the guys at Rec.audio.pro. Most of the AE community kind of turns it's collective nose up at anything below the Red as far as the Focusrite line is concerned.

I think a lot of it has to do with the rather simplistic way the Platinum range is designed and layed out -- it's quite obviously taylored towards the prosumer market. A serious AE would likely get a good laugh out of the controls. It's the kind of thing Fisher Price or AOL might come up with.

From what I gather from the quality of the mic pres, I think they would be considered in the same general class of the transparent variety, as the RNP is. I'm not sure where middleman gets the whole tube thing -- especially considering the fact that it's solid state transformerless. Could be it's "tube blend" button, which again, I assume is considered mostly kind of a novelty feature (perhpaps a toy for the R.A.P. guys).

When you boil it down, you're probably looking at two fairly similar pres in a similar class at reasonably similar price points, with the focusrite having the advantage in terms of the extra goodies it comes with, and the RNP having an advantage in terms of quality for the dollar.

 

[cominginsecond]

Strictly in terms of the mic pre itself . . . not counting anything else, I think you'll actually find more acceptance for the RNP amongst professionals and gear snobs.

I think this is just a reputation thing rather than an actual sound thing. Lots of pros like the Joe Meek, but my Penta beats my Mq3 on nearly everything. I love my Penta more and more the more I use it.

 

[jslator]

I think this is just a reputation thing rather than an actual sound thing. Lots of pros like the Joe Meek, but my Penta beats my Mq3 on nearly everything. I love my Penta more and more the more I use it.

Have Focusrite upgraded the pre's in their platinum series? Because they used to be rather poor (certainly no better than a Mackie).

 

[cominginsecond]

The preamp section of the platinum have gotten nothing but good reviews. Sometimes, people have problems with the lack of flexibility in their compressor sections, but I think 99 percent of the people who have used both (including myself) will agree that the plantinum pres beat a Mackie pre hands down.

 

[nwsoundman]

They are two totally different beasts. The FR is darker and slower sounding. The RNP is brighter and faster sounding. The controls onthe FR are not to be laughed at. There are presets but EVERY parameter has a knob. The compressor is opto and is usable. I find I like the comp for bass gtr and some vocals. Both units are ok and choosing one of them depends on what you need it for. The RNP is two channels w/ no comp. The FR single channel with comp/limiter. Also the FR is not so dark that it would end up an effect pre.

Kirk

Oh ya, either unit wil blow away mackie crap.

 

[chessrock]

I think this is just a reputation thing rather than an actual sound thing.

Precisely. And I should have made that point a little clearer.

I think I've mentioned this before . . . I've heard some very good work done with them, so my guess is that a lot of AE's dismiss them because of their price, or because it's controls -- doesn't it have labels like "presence" and "air" and stuff like that? -- pretty hokey.

But yea, that shouldn't have any bearing on how it sounds, and from what I gather the pre section sounds fabulous for the money. I don't think I've heard a bad focusrite product, yet, to be honest.

 

[jslator]

The preamp section of the platinum have gotten nothing but good reviews.

I havn't read any of the magazine reviews, but I tried a couple of units out a couple of years ago and wasn't the least bit impressed. Unlike the Red and Blue series, everyone I've ever spoken to about the Platinum series generally had a similar impression (I've often heard the "Voicemaster" referred to as the "Voicemasher"). That's why I wonder if they have improved the pre's in the platinum series in the last couple of years.

I'm not busting you're balls. I'm honestly curious. I know TLAudio/HHB recently upgraded their pre's. Maybe the Focusrite Platinum stuff has been improved as well. The older Platinum stuff is pretty unimpressive though.

 

[Robert D]

doesn't it have labels like "presence" and "air" and stuff like that? -- pretty hokey.

Yah, that idiotic control name "air" was coined by some moron name Rupert Neve when Focusrite hired him to design their EQ's.

I've put an 87 and a Red up, and found the combo too brittle, and would have preferred the platinum on that particular source. I agree, this isn't a which is better question, just a which is better for this mic and source. For warmth it's the Focusrite (especially with it's opto comp switched in), for transparency it's the RNC.
Cheers, RD

 

[Middleman]

Where the platinum line gets its sordid reputation is because of the compressor. Vocal compression settings which don't really work all that well on voice and the tube sat, tube sound etc. sections have a tendency to sound bad fast. Beginners will most likely abuse these effects and get a crappy sound. The compression if used lightly on vocals and heavier on instruments works fine. Not as fine as the RNC however.

I recommend that someone new to these units should turn this stuff off. The preamps are really great sounding and they sound warm enough without the other effects that they fall into the tube sounding range of things. Chessrock is right though, technically they are not tube designed in and of themselves.