Mic pres: Spend $200 or $2,000 ? ? ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter chessrock
  • Start date Start date
Any ideas of which of these may be better for solo acoustic guitar recording and why? You guys seem to cover the grounds I'd like to walk on.

DMP3
Sytek
envoice

Thanks
 
Ohhh, good idea, why don't you spam your crosspost onto some more threads!

;)
 
Dolemite,

I'm trying real hard...Thanks for the advise.
Do you know any any others???

CROSSING POSTING IS BETTER THAN CROSS DRESSING!!!
I think! Would you know?
 
Actually, dolemite - I referred him to this thread when he was asking about pres over on GM's forum.
 
Right On LEON!

Let's get back to the subject.
Now, can anyone elaborate on the load impedance thing?
I'm told that a higher load impedance will be worse for dynamic mics.
 
Load impedance, eh?

Well, in general, a dynamic type mic, including ribbons is sensitive to the load, because it is after all a generator.

When operated into a light load the higher frequencies will typically be extended. With a heavier load i.e. lower input impedance, the high end will drop. At some point the lower impedance will also interact with the inductance of the mics output (be it a matching transformer or the coil itself) and this will cause the low end to start rolling off as well, giving a honky midrangy tone.

With some condensors, those with output transformers and wimpy amplifiers, like KM-84's, original U87's you'll get fairly similar responses plus that always desirable distortion boost when that poor little FET is driving a low-Z input.

Others, like most Schoeps, about half of the Chinese knock-offs and most of the new Neumanns don't really care. The other half of the knock-offs will behave like the KM-84, but worse because they have truly crappy output transformers.

Most mics are designed for load impedances of 1K to 3K for "flat" response.

What's it mean for you? Try it, use it like an equalizer, be sure you aren't causing the mic to puke with too low an impedance and have fun. You won't cause any damage to the mics, it just may not sound good. It might be louder, but be careful with that, listen to the characteristics, not volume.
 
Hmmm. (Scratches head).

So what you're saying is lower input impedence = less high-end detail, and potential for honkier tone? And higher input impedence = extended high frequency response?

I guess what confuses me is the light load = higher impedence and heavy load = lower impedence. It sounds kind of backwards at first, but I think I'm starting to understand it. Am I close?
 
I think that holding out for the RNMP will be well worth the wait - I read that Its going to have vintage RCA flavorings - I also feel that it will be "better" than the DMP3 -

you always hear how the Beatles used a 4 track...but....you never hear about the kick ass mics and mic pres that George Martin and Geoff Emerick fiddled with (not to mention the sweet rooms they used) {or the blinding talent of Lennon/Mccartney}
 
For those of you unfamiliar with his name, Dan Kennedy is the owner/designer of the Great River Electronics line of mic preamps, including the MP-2 and the MP-2NV - two of the finest preamps on the planet. He's a walking encyclopedia of knowledge about all things related to audio, and his appearence and participation here is a welcome addition.

One small note: Guess which preamp Mark Mcquilkin (the owner and designer for FMR Audio, creator of the RNC and the RNMP) uses in his own studio setup? One of Dan's MP-2 preamps (maybe more by now).
 
Harvey Gerst said:
He's a walking encyclopedia of knowledge about all things related to audio, and his appearence and participation here is a welcome addition.
Click to expand...

A newbie is a newbie is a newbie....:)

Hey, if he's is a walking encyclopedia won't his pages get wet in a rain storm?

Peace,
Dennis
 
Hi Dan / Harvey,

I would like to take advantage of your presence here on this forum to ask you a question:

I am a big music/recording/electronics fan and own a small home studio with lots of reasonably good quality recording equipment and microphones.

I am however also a big electronics fan and for instance at the end of the seventies I build my first guitar amp from scratch including al circuit print boards etc (I was very young then).

I would be most delighted with a nice project for a good mic pre. I’m sure that you will have some ideas laying around for a charming little pre that would be good for experimenting.

I still have some correspondence from years ago with the people from Soundcraft (Graham Blythe) in the UK who helped me modify one of their mixers. I do understand electronics reasonably well and would love a really serious project.

I’m not commercially involved in electronics (actually I’m working in the pharmaceutical branch) but still have this passion for electronics and would be really grateful with some construction ideas or schematics.

Thanks,

Jan Bakker
 
Man, I sure would love it if we could turn this in to another "How does diaphragm size . . . etc." thread but a PREAMP version of it. So many questions. We got Mark Kennedy . . . we got Harvey.

. . . What do you say guys? I loved the explanation of load and impedence. How about a little bit about Class A versus Class A/B, etc.? I have heard from some that Class A is simply marketing hype, while others claim that class A design does indeed lend itself to lower distorion. Wondered what you might have to say to that? I'm also curious about the whole discreet versus chip issue. And what the heck is EIN anyway? :) Thanks!
 
I have to apologize for Harvey, he's been having delusions of my grandeur for some time now.

Jan, I am always willing to help the DIY'er with projects, I am happier talking on the phone than typing up long involved notes however. I'm usually in the shop from 8 until 6 or 7 every day and will be happy to discuss things.

Chessrock, there's more in your paragraph than any one answer can really cover well, so maybe if I introduce myself and my stand first maybe it would give everybody a way to judge my opinions and statements. Then we can talk up a subject or two at a crack.

I've been designing and manufacturing electronic equipment since the late 1970's, much of it pro audio, a lot of it industrial and instrumentation equipment. My project today is the system controller for a hydraulic elevator. Great River does mostly signal conditioning and embedded control system stuff. Which if you think about what equipment and technologies are involved are just a sidestep away from audio.

I don't believe in magic cables. I do believe that cables can change the sound. I also believe that if a cable does change the sound of a piece of equipment that that piece has some serious design problems, intended or not.

I do believe in the sound differences in various grades and types of components, and spend a fair amount of time listenning to confirm parts, but I am not a zealot by any stretch.

I am perfectly willing to say that a good mic preamp can be built with about $15 worth of parts. That's for the preamplifier part of the circuit only. That doesn't include proper power supplies, proper chassis work, proper assembly, circuit board layout , the real grounding, all the things that make a truly good preamp worth quite a bit more money.

After all, a Neve 1073 module has under a dollars worth of transistors in it (and $80 worth of transformers, $200 in switches, and so forth).

I tend to call them as I see them, and one thing that I disagree with fairly strongly is that you can build good mic pre's with compressors and EQ's in a box with digital converters and ad money and fancy metalwork for a street sale price of under a grand.

But now that I'm rambling, another thing I feel very strongly about is that it is more important to good recordings to have good source material than good preamps. The song, the players, the arrangement, the room, and the vibe are all _way_ more important than the mic preamps. So much so that it is sometimes embarrasing to see all the talk about them. Although on occasion it does pay for a tank of gas.

Any how, if anybody does want a slightly opinionated and casual discussion of things technical I'm willing to spout off, and defend or identify references and resources for you.
 
Hey Dan,

Welcome to the boards. I hope you get as much out of it as I do.

This thread is exactly what I got hammered for at rec.audio when I made the same claim as Ed did. In either case, I completely agree with Ed. You don't have to spend big bucks to get a great sound. As companies like ART, FMR, and even mine, Studio Projects continue to bring out quality low cost gear; it offers the user opportunities to far more variety. I too believe mic-pres are like mics, the more you have to do the job of the day, the better.

I think for those that can afford the best, and have the knowledge and gear to support it, companies like Dan's make great gear. I would love to add a Great River to my collection. I know Dan bought one of my mics, and I respect his gear quite a bit. I have used his products in sessions, but do not own one yet, but they are one hell of a mic pre.

As most of you know, we did the Studio Projects Session CD and used five different priced mic pres from a Joemeek VC1Q to a Dan Alexander V72. In between we used a Neve 1089, Trident "A" Range, and a Focusrite Red 7. Most could not tell the difference between the mic pre that cost $500 to the one that was $3000.00.

No disrespect to any of the pres used, but given the right application, the proper gain stages, and a good room, the results are hard to tell apart.


Peace :D

Alan Hyatt
PMI Audio Group
 
Quote:

"I don't believe in magic cables. I do believe that cables can change the sound. I also believe that if a cable does change the sound of a piece of equipment that that piece has some serious design problems, intended or not."

--------------------------

Bless you, Dan Kennedy! I had been out of audio for about 8 years, and upon my return fairly recently, one of the first things I noticed was that someone was selling a 10-foot pair of second-hand speaker cables on Audiogon.com for $7,500 -- retail was supposedly $15K.

I thought for sure someone was playing a joke (it turned out they weren't), so I started a thread there asking what the heck had happened in 8 years, and I got more than 150 responses, most of them reassuringly sensible.

Nevertheless, no matter how often I point it out, no one in so-called "high-end" audio wants to look at what's wrong with their designs if their components only sound their best with wires that cost more than most people's complete home stereos. I purchased a respected brand of CD player recently (one that retailed for over $2200 when new) that came with a notice from the manufacturer stating that it would take at least 2 weeks for it to warm up and stabilize properly before sounding OK. Sometimes I feel like I'm wading in it.

I think it first hit home for me a decade ago when I broke a contact in the outboard crossover of a pair of Vandersteen 4 speakers. I've talked with Richard Vandersteen, and he seems like an intelligent, no-nonsense sort of guy, not at all like some of the snake-oil types I've encountered. The outboard processor was an alternative and an upgrade to the built-in crossover network in his refrigerator-sized speakers.

When I took off the lid, I noticed that the *entire musical signal path* of my system was passing through plain old 22-gauge plastic-insulated copper wire (that sells for about $1.50 a spool at Radio Shack) on its way to a gold-plated RCA output on the active crossover. I re-soldered it and was back in business, as good as new. But I had to ask myself why some manufacturers would tell me I then needed a $200 (or $500) pair of interconnects to pass that same signal on to the inputs of my amps? (Not Vandersteen, by the way, who recommended anything that would make good contact.)

I too hear differences in wire on some equipment. I have a lovely and very musical pair of largish 2-way British box speakers (Rogers Studio 1A's with upgraded caps, internal wiring and binding posts) that don't like certain amps and don't like certain cables, but in extensive testing over a period of months, there was absolutely *no* correlation between cost and compatibility. In the end, the cheapest cables I had on hand sounded by far the best. A stone could have heard the differences.

I only know your microphone preamps from Lynn Fuston's very useful set of preamp and microphone comparison CDs, which have saved me a ton of money by pointing me towards certain equipment to audition further (and away from others). But I know you set a standard that many other makers aspire to.

If you don't mind my asking, what potentiometers do you use in your pres, and why did you choose them over something else (Noble or Penny & Giles or stepped attenuators, etc.). If you don't wish to comment in a public forum, that's fine, but I've always wondered if that wasn't one of the weaker links in the chain for many products, both on the recording and the playback side of things. What's your outlook on this?

Welcome to the forum, Dan. I am immensely grateful to have this opportunity to learn from the regular contributors here, and I hope that you will feel comfortable sharing your knowledge with those of us who are new to the world of recording.

Best wishes,

Mark H.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top