Mic Preamp and Drum Recordings

  • Thread starter Thread starter chewbacaface
  • Start date Start date
C

chewbacaface

New member
I have bought and now decided that the Aphex 107 Tubessence is one of the best budget home studio dual preamps you can buy. It blows away any of my Presonus and dbx preamps. I picked one up at guitarcenter used for 89$ bucks and then bought a second one on ebay for 99$. I have to say that I am amazed at the warmth they bring and at how easy they are to dial in. Does anyone else have any experience with these units. I liked them so much that I decided to read about other aphex products and wound up also getting a used 204 Enhancer/Exciter with Big Bottom. I was less thrilled with this but it still sounds good and really works well on drum overheads. It's tough to dial in but once you get it set, you can get some really nice overhead harmonics from your toms and cymbals. Here is a sample of a drum recoding I did after setting these up in my rack. This is a just a simple loop I recorded and I'm not much of a drummer but I was happy with the results. This is a simple four mic setup with a basic recorderman overheads (NT5s), a Senheisser e609 snare, and a Shure Beta 52A kick drum. This was done in my tine 10x12 room and has no post processing.



Additional ideas are always welcomed. I just thought I would pass on my thought on this Aphex preamp since I know a lot of people are looking for good budget preamps.

Ryan
 
Hi Ryan,

Glad you've got the guts to say you like this pre - seems like there are a lot of folks that don't have good things to say about it. Some say it sounds too colored. Others say the sound's not colored enough, and the tube circuit adds little or nothing to the output.

Regardless of what others say, I agree with you. This is a versatile pre with very good "bang for the buck." I've been using one of these on drum overheads for years. It also sounds good on acoustic guitar and electric guitar amps. I've used it on pretty much everything at one point or another and have never thought, "Wow, that sounds terrible."

Rick
 
Yeah, I read a lot of negative stuff about them but then I wen to ElectronicMusician and read their review and they said that while it colored the signal it did so favorably. Now, that's all opinion but I think it sounds good. I also think the tube does affect the signal. I think most of it depends on the application and the type of music. I play music with a lot of jangly high pitch to the guitars. banjos, mandolins, accordians, etc... I like the drums, pianos, basses and strings to be really warm to balance it out and this definitely seems to achieve that. It isn't the cleanest sounding preamp but again, I like it to sound a little fuzzy in my ears. I have only been testing it with drums so far. I am excited to see what this does for my electric guitar.
 
for what your using(and from what i understand) those drums don't sound bad at all.

my suggestion would be two things,

one, cut the frequencies from 300 to 600 Hz on the kick, it'll still punch through the mix but with less thud and more clarity.

and two, compressing compressing compressing, then compress it again. especially the snare drum.

but good job and keep it up
 
d-rock said:
for what your using(and from what i understand) those drums don't sound bad at all.

my suggestion would be two things,

one, cut the frequencies from 300 to 600 Hz on the kick, it'll still punch through the mix but with less thud and more clarity.

and two, compressing compressing compressing, then compress it again. especially the snare drum.

but good job and keep it up
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'll definitely give that a try.
 
Here's a recording I did back in 2002 using that preamp almost exclusively. The Aphex 107 was used on drum overheads, acoustic 12-string, guitar amps, and voice.

This recording was done in a very makeshift recording environment. You'll notice the guitars (particularly noticeable on the 12-string acoustic in the intro) have an odd ambiance to them. Pretty much all the guitars were recorded in a bathroom. :)

Anyway, this might be an interesting example of an entire song recorded with an Aphex 107 in an acoustically untreated house.



Rick
 
MrBlackthorne said:
Here's a recording I did back in 2002 using that preamp almost exclusively. The Aphex 107 was used on drum overheads, acoustic 12-string, guitar amps, and voice.

This recording was done in a very makeshift recording environment. You'll notice the guitars (particularly noticeable on the 12-string acoustic in the intro) have an odd ambiance to them. Pretty much all the guitars were recorded in a bathroom. :)

Anyway, this might be an interesting example of an entire song recorded with an Aphex 107 in an acoustically untreated house.



Rick
Click to expand...


Yeah, that's what I mean about it being versatile. We play completely different styles of music and you managed to make a clean, good sounding recording with an Aphex 107. I thought it was extremely easy to dial in the sound that I wanted with it. Nice example.
 
Thanks... The thing I like about the 107 is that it's warm and clear without needing to fuss with it. I have a Bellari MP110, a tube pre of similar quality. It takes a lot more work to get the Bellari to sound good. You can get some very interesting tones off it if you're patient, but out of the box, the Aphex wins easily here. Plug it in, turn it up, and you're off and running.
 
If you like it, that's what counts.

Just make sure not to listen to Neve, API, Millenia, John Hardy or Pacifica preamps.
 
There's no reason to be snarky, Todd. The brands you mention have no place in this conversation. I realize that being pretentious is, unfortunately, commonplace in the recording industry. That being said, it's unnecessary. There's probably a BBS somewhere on the internet that isn't about /home recording/ that you might feel a bit more comfortable in.
 
I'd actually never even consider the idea of spending more than 500$ for a preamp for my home studio. The idea of that is sort of ridiculous.

Some friends of mine actually used old software, a couple 57s and MXLs condensors, and they took their time and recorded the tracks well... sent it off for mastering and came out with an album that holds up with most big budget studio albums I have heard coming out these days.

The thing is you can have tons of expensive equipment and still end up with a crappy engineer. The price tag on the equipment is secondary to how well you can apply it. These guys are just good at setting up rooms and capturing sounds in the style of music they play. They've become proficient with what they have.

Have a listen...

http://www.myspace.com/thestillcity

Now you tell me if they needed 1500$+ neve preamps.

ryan
 
I'm a very big believer that the right people, with the right skills, don't need much to make a great recording. Will their recording sound slightly better with a boutiquey preamp? Probably. But is the extra cost worth the benefit? Some will say yes, others no. It's a matter of opinion, not fact.

I do believe that there is real value in having a preamp on-hand like the 107. Ultimately, it's not going to sound a million times better than some on-board pres, but it's got enough character that it has its uses. That's what counts, not how much you paid for it.

A good analogy here is if I were to post on a automotive BBS, "My Honda Civic Hybrid has surprisingly good pickup," and got the response, "Don't drive a Porche, then." The target audience for these products is completely different.

I like your buddies' songs... They kinda remind me of a mix between like Cold Play and They Might Be Giants - not sure why those two bands come to mind, but I really dig those two groups.

Rick
 
Agreed.

I like them a lot too. There are a lot of good bands coming out of Denver and the scene there is sort of blowing up at the moment. They are getting a lot of attention and it wont be long before they get some national attention I would suspect.

I haven't talked to them in a while but the last time I asked them about recording their stuff they made it sound like it was a lot more about the time they spent on it rather than any fancy equipment they had. They may have upgraded some stuff but their old albums sound just as good, so, I kind of doubt it.
 
Their recordings have a very interesting texture that is pretty appealing. It's quite good work.

Just for the record, I didn't naively buy the Aphex 107 thinking it was going to sound better than what I had. At the time, I was recording with a Tascam US-428 and M-Audio Quattro, both requiring an external preamp on two or more channels. I bought the 107 out of necessity; a bonus was that it was cheap and the magazine reviews I read were quite positive.

Today, I record using a Tascam FW-1884 with upgraded op amps on the pre's. I've been extremely happy with it. Even so, I still turn to the 107 for many tasks because I just really like how certain sources sound on it, particularly drum overheads and acoustic guitar. Knowing what I know now, I'd still buy a 107 without hesitation.
 
I read an article about the guy who designed it and talked a lot about the different patents they have for the tube circuit etc... So it was basically saying that love it or hate it nothing will sound quite like an Aphex 107. To me, that's a good thing.
 
I actually think one of the reasons I bought the 107 was because of that article (or one like it). I was sufficiently intrigued by the description, and at the price I paid, I figured it was a worthwhile gamble.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top