How important are microphone preamps to a home studio?

[Minion]

What "Big Daddy" seems not to realize is that this is "Home Recording.com" not "Professinal Recording.com" so poeple here aren"t nescessarilly trying to get a pro studio sound , They are just trying to record something that sounds OK to them.....

You can"t really compare someone with a 500k studio to someone who has a 1k studio in his bedroom or basement, and because someone might sleep at there 500K studio doesn"t make it nescessarily Home recording, well not in the fashion that this sites users are home recording....Most poeple here probably have less than 5k in equipment and many like me have much less than that, we are just trying to get the best sound with our limited resources......

 

[Big Daddy]

I would have thought that it sounded great 25 years ago too.

Until I started really doing live sound and making money doing it.

That really refined my ears. I had to work on the fly doing front and monitors. Some times from the side of the stage, I would have to leave the board and run out in front to hear everything.

You quickly learn, you have to. You need to make adjustments instantaneously. You don't have the luxury of thinking about it. Like what freq is giving me trouble, more snare, less kick...too many mids. How much compression on each vocal mic.......people aways complaining as all musicians do especially female vocalists and Italian tenors.

I did everything from street fares, to rock clubs to weddings.......$100,000 weddings, no mic feedback or your fired weddings. Even if the idiot points the mic at the monitor.

I stopped when the money started drying up because of DJ's. In fact I sold my systems to a DJ...LOL.

So I do have ears and I know electronics some what, you have to build tube guitar amps. I did go to school for AC-DC theory, and I do have pretty good ears.

To me it's like; doing live sound is Einsteinian Physics and recording is Quantum Physics. The science of the very large as opposed to the very small.

 

[Todzilla]

I'll weigh in on the topic.

I think preamp are certainly one of the subtler parts of the audio chain. I find a huge difference in microphones, in performances and in recording spaces when compared to preamps. That's not to say they're not important, but I've found the sonic differences to be less obvious until you hear the results in the mix.

To wit:

- the drums in this were recorded with 2 channels of Demeter preamp and 6 channels of MOTU 896HD. The Demeter is pretty nice gear, but not top end. The MOTU pres are kind of pedestrian.

- I borrowed 3 channels of my neighbors API pres: undersnare and overheads. Plus two Demeter pre channels

In my opinion, the Rocket Science drums just have a lot more punch.

The mic closet was pretty much the same for both tracks, but the punch is all API.

 

[leddy]

What "Big Daddy" seems not to realize is that this is "Home Recording.com" not "Professinal Recording.com" so poeple here aren"t nescessarilly trying to get a pro studio sound , They are just trying to record something that sounds OK to them.....

You can"t really compare someone with a 500k studio to someone who has a 1k studio in his bedroom or basement, and because someone might sleep at there 500K studio doesn"t make it nescessarily Home recording, well not in the fashion that this sites users are home recording....Most poeple here probably have less than 5k in equipment and many like me have much less than that, we are just trying to get the best sound with our limited resources......

In other words, a 500k studio should produce better recordings because they have better gear...like better mic pres?

 

[Big Daddy]

Oh yeah the second recording's drums are much more punchy and in front, more presence.

But to be honest, the first song is the first recording I DID NOT have to use the EQ on the media player. I'm talking about everything I ever played including Cd's on my PC needed some minor EQ adjustment.

Really, really nice work. I think you got that almost live in front of you sound, as though you were in the room listening to them live.

My hats off to you, Great work and if before I die if my stuff sounds as good I'll die a happy man.

I dig the heaviness of the first song and the production.....harmonica and horns in such heavy down beated 2 and 4 music. Good players....

Great production and effects overall with the delay at the beginning of the first song. More paper on the second snare(if you know what I'm talking about.) I can hear more spring from the snare and tick from the HH.

Not my kind of music but pleasurable and interesting to listen to.

Do you have more stuff I can listen too that you did?

You also captured the emotional content of the vocalist, I can hear a lot his influences.

 

[leddy]

My points are misunderstood and nobody has tried to answer my critiques about Mr Van's work.

I'll back you up on this. Ford's mix sounded good, but not professional in my opinion. Using it to make a case for low-budget gear getting pro results? Nope.

No offense, Ford. I'm not trying to place any judgement on your skill, I'm only saying that the example you put forth may be an excellent hobby-studio sample, but does not stand up as what would generally be accepted as a professional job, IMO anyway.

 

[fraserhutch]

That's a common argument, but not totally applicable here - many people are creating 'pro quiality' home studios now. In fact, many people here expect to be able to get 'pro quality' at home.

Unless a poster comes out an states their expectations up front, there is no way of knowing what their expectations are. When you ask 'what is a good mic pre' - what is your bar for 'good'? There are those who have low expectations, and others who have high expectations.

IMHO, the argument that one needs to settle for less because it is a home studio is a fallacious one.

What "Big Daddy" seems not to realize is that this is "Home Recording.com" not "Professinal Recording.com" so poeple here aren"t nescessarilly trying to get a pro studio sound , They are just trying to record something that sounds OK to them.....

You can"t really compare someone with a 500k studio to someone who has a 1k studio in his bedroom or basement, and because someone might sleep at there 500K studio doesn"t make it nescessarily Home recording, well not in the fashion that this sites users are home recording....Most poeple here probably have less than 5k in equipment and many like me have much less than that, we are just trying to get the best sound with our limited resources......

 

[Big Daddy]

I only expect to get the most of the equipment I buy.

If it's pro sounding then I expect my end product to be pro sounding once I know how to use it.

I have been in million dollar studios and the results were less than satisfactory.

Yet I'm remember a kid doing better stuff in his basement circa 1980 with a 2 track machine.

Talent is talent and ears are ears, if you have them great. If you don't, work harder, but be humble and admit it, at least to yourself.

I think I'm going to listen to that stuff again.....really nice production. Although they could use a better guitar player, that was obvious.

Great job fixing his vocals!!!!!!!

I can hear when he goes white and looses pitch at the end of a line. He tries to hit what sounds like an octave off the root and looses it. He also has no falsetto so you covered that up too. Great job!!!!!!!!

 

[leddy]

Also consider that the difference in pres may be more or less obvious depending on what's being recorded.

A bunch of Chinese condensers recording a punk band probably has more margin for low budget pres than using one pair of Schoeps to record something with the dynamic range of an orchestra.

 

[Big Daddy]

I think the quality of what you record comes first. Make it sound as good as you possibly can with the musicians you are working with before you record them. If you have balls tell them to go back and practice the songs more, as not to waste their money doing basic tracks.

Once it's in the machine that's what you have. So to me the chain is very important and that means know the nuances of your equipment before they even get to mix.

Once you have the best sound you possibly could you fix it.

The only way to do that is to sometimes do 2 or more tracks of the same thing with different pres especially on the overdubs. That way you can A/B them. This is were the computer based recording seems to come in because you can have so many tracks. Hey do I like the lead break on this track with these mics or that one with those.

Working with good musicians who can duplicate what they play helps. But some times the better recording doesn't have the magic the the inferior one does......fix it the mix the best you can and go with the magic.

I heard years ago that a band did not release some great live stuff because they were out of tune. No problem now!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Big Daddy]

double post time to take a nap

 

[Todzilla]

Oh yeah the second recording's drums are much more punchy and in front, more presence.

But to be honest, the first song is the first recording I DID NOT have to use the EQ on the media player. I'm talking about everything I ever played including Cd's on my PC needed some minor EQ adjustment.

Really, really nice work. I think you got that almost live in front of you sound, as though you were in the room listening to them live.

My hats off to you, Great work and if before I die if my stuff sounds as good I'll die a happy man.

I dig the heaviness of the first song and the production.....harmonica and horns in such heavy down beated 2 and 4 music. Good players....

Great production and effects overall with the delay at the beginning of the first song. More paper on the second snare(if you know what I'm talking about.) I can hear more spring from the snare and tick from the HH.

Not my kind of music but pleasurable and interesting to listen to.

Do you have more stuff I can listen too that you did?

You also captured the emotional content of the vocalist, I can hear a lot his influences.

Thanks man. The vocalist, guitarist(yes, I suck), keyboardist, songwriter, producer, janitor is me. I played bass on the second song too.

I got more stuff here: http://www.toddejones.com/jukebox.html if you care to listen.

I'm prouder of the production on the first song, but I'll admit the API drums sounded better. In fairness, there were two other variable at play in the better sounding drums of Rocket Science: the drummer (my kid brother) was playing in the middle of my studio room, which has a 14' vaulted ceiling. So, we had plenty of air. Secondly, we were using a modified version of the "recorderman" three drum mic technique, in which one mic is directly above the snare, by two drumsticks distance. The second mic is over the drummer's right shoulder, also by two drumsticks distance above the snare at which it points. We added a Neumann U89 undersnare mic and of course, the requisite kick mic, which I confess, we used to trigger a sampled kick.

The first song "Hairdo" was done under the studio loft, with beater head and in-kick mics for the kick, over snare and under snare mics, overheads, hi-hat and room mic.

I may borrow the APIs again. Or perhaps it's time to pony up for some Seventh Circle Audio preamps...

 

[Fishmed]

From my experience, the mic pre is the most important link in the recording chain outside of the talent of the musicians and the instruments they play. Here is my reasoning I posted on another thread:

I think I can help you on this one as I have just recently learn from experience myself. Many inexpensive mic pres do not capture clean signals from the microphone or they may add a little noise to it. In a recording using just a few tracks the quality may not be that noticeable, but as you add more and more tracks to the mix using that mic pre the limitations of that mic pre tend to increase. Think of it when one person claps their hands, not very loud right? Now think of a room full of people or even a stadium full of people clapping; the more people you add to the clap that louder it gets. Poor signals from mic amps work pretty much the same way.

The thing is that you really cannot train your ears to hear the deficiencies until you have done recordings with better pres for awhile and then go back to the cheap mic pres; at least that was my experience in learning the difference. Now when I listen to mixes, I can tell a little better the quality of the equipment used to record. To me, the drums are the give away since they cover a wider range of frequencies.

The experience of a good engineer can help reduce the inadequacies of such cheap gear.

I think Ford Van is a good engineer who has learned his gear and how to get the most out of it. One thing that does bother me which he has stated MANY times is for some one to choose which 4 mic pres where used out of 32 tracks (the other 28 from a lesser quality mic pre); I have finally figured out why that statement now bothers me. That is ALMOST like asking out of 32 tracks of guitars playing at one time, which 4 guitar tracks are actually in tune while the other 28 guitars are out of tune in various ways. After having so many tracks with the lesser mic pre, adding 4 tracks with a good mic pre is not going to save the sonic damage of the mix; the noise has already been added and there is no way of removing it to regain the detail of the source.

 

[Todzilla]

Fishmed,

You think preamps are more important than mics?

 

[Fishmed]

Fishmed,

You think preamps are more important than mics?

Most definitely, the mic pre is more important the mic, but that is not to say the mic is not important. I think with just about any mic, using the right positioning, you can get a very good recording using a “great mic pre”. If you flip the tables and use a crappy sounding mic pre, just about every mic you put on it is NOT going to give you that good of a recording. Again, a crappy mic pre may sound ok for a couple of tracks, but after 4 or so it will start to disintegrate the quality of your mix.

 

[Big Daddy]

Hey Todzilla "I'm so F'ing happy" I came here...LOL.

Because I learned something that was really bothering me and that is the feeling that the pre is the weak link.

Having the ability to reproduce what the mic is picking up is the key. Not even what is being played as much as what the mic itself is picking up. That's were placement and type of mic is important to me. Picking up the best of what's being played and maybe not picking up other things.

Once that is done you need to amplify that signal, hence the weak link.

Am I making sense or full of shit?

Bad pre = bad sound no matter what the mic picked up.

Good pre = the ability to amplify whatever the mic is picking whether it's good or bad.

 

[Micter]

Thanks man. The vocalist, guitarist(yes, I suck), keyboardist, songwriter, producer, janitor is me. I played bass on the second song too.

I got more stuff here: http://www.toddejones.com/jukebox.html if you care to listen.

I'm prouder of the production on the first song, but I'll admit the API drums sounded better. In fairness, there were two other variable at play in the better sounding drums of Rocket Science: the drummer (my kid brother) was playing in the middle of my studio room, which has a 14' vaulted ceiling. So, we had plenty of air. Secondly, we were using a modified version of the "recorderman" three drum mic technique, in which one mic is directly above the snare, by two drumsticks distance. The second mic is over the drummer's right shoulder, also by two drumsticks distance above the snare at which it points. We added a Neumann U89 undersnare mic and of course, the requisite kick mic, which I confess, we used to trigger a sampled kick.

The first song "Hairdo" was done under the studio loft, with beater head and in-kick mics for the kick, over snare and under snare mics, overheads, hi-hat and room mic.

I may borrow the APIs again. Or perhaps it's time to pony up for some Seventh Circle Audio preamps...

Somebody is a huge Zappa fan!

 

[Fishmed]

Hey Todzilla "I'm so F'ing happy" I came here...LOL.

Because I learned something that was really bothering me and that is the feeling that the pre is the weak link.

Having the ability to reproduce what the mic is picking up is the key. Not even what is being played as much as what the mic itself is picking up. That's were placement and type of mic is important to me. Picking up the best of what's being played and maybe not picking up other things.

Once that is done you need to amplify that signal, hence the weak link.

Am I making sense or full of shit?

Bad pre = bad sound no matter what the mic picked up.

Good pre = the ability to amplify whatever the mic is picking whether it's good or bad.

I think you have summed it up well.

 

[XLR]

Some mic's are sensitive to pre's re their sound quality, others aren't.

...the mic pre is more important the mic...

57 to a high end transformer-input pre... yes. But try this: on ac gtr compare a cheap mic like a V67, 603, B1, etc. to a Schoeps MK4 or 41 going into a cheap pre like a Mackie VLZ. Then plug the same mic's into a high end pre, like a Great River. In my own tests the Schoeps sounded noticeably better with the Mackie than the lesser quality mic's did with the high end pre.

 

[fraserhutch]

I would respectfully edit that to state "Some mic's are less sensitive to pre's than others re their sound quality".

Some mic's are sensitive to pre's re their sound quality, others aren't.

57 to a high end transformer-input pre... yes. But try this: on ac gtr compare a cheap mic like a V67, 603, B1, etc. to a Schoeps MK4 or 41 going into a cheap pre like a Mackie VLZ. Then plug the same mic's into a high end pre, like a Great River. In my own tests the Schoeps sounded noticeably better with the Mackie than the lesser quality mic's did with the high end pre.