My new preamp sounds like my cheaper one? HELP!

[chessrock]

In a typical home recording environment, you're not likely to be in a situation where you're necessarily going to be able to hear the differences ... nor are you necessarily going to be able to appreciate them fully.

Now I'm not trying to knock anyone, but there comes a point where you have to be realistic about your situation and your circumstances. An amateur / hobbyist recording guitar and bass tracks, etc. in his bedroom or basement with an Edirol or similar consumer-level interface ... has just got a lot of limitations. And it's actually the limitations, as a whole, that "stack up" over several tracks ... much moreso than any distortion or other artifacts associated with a cheaper preamp.

Things like mic pres and converters need to be in the right environment in order to be appreciated. And even then, they can be very subtle, and one needs to weight the cost / benefit before making a significant investment. Investing in better instruments and/or amps will make an immediate, unmistakeable impact on the sound quality of your finished product that can easily be justified. The same can be said for better accoustics and rooms. Mics and mic'ing technique will affect the sound in an obvious way as well.

Once you get in to things like mic pres and converters, it's already assumed that all of the more obvious things have been addressed ... and that all you're looking for at this point is that last 1%. And after all of the more obvious things I mentioned have been addressed ... that last 1% can seem much more magnified.

If the other things haven't been addressed first, then you're only operating at 35% to 40% to begin with. And at that juncture, who gives a crap about the difference between 35% and 36% ? Yippee. What's your reasoning for even having it? So you can hear your shitty-sounding room all that much better? "These old cymbals I got at the garage sale sound like crap, and my bass that hasn't been set up in 2 years has seen better days ... but I sure am glad I've got this nice mic pre."

Again, there's just something backwards in that rationale. If you don't address the more obvious stuff first (instrument, accoustics, mics, technique, etc.) then it does little good to address the smaller stuff. Its like waxing a dirty, unwashed car. Wash first. Then wax. Take the shower. Then put on the deodorant.

.

 

[Robert D]

.......What's your reasoning for even having it? So you can hear your shitty-sounding room all that much better? "These old cymbals I got at the garage sale sound like crap, and my bass that hasn't been set up in 2 years has seen better days ... but I sure am glad I've got this nice mic pre."
.

There are in fact, situations where a softer focus or more color is desirable, and where the stack effect can work in the opposite direction. A reviewer of the Grace 101 once said "It will allow you to hear every detail of your mics, whether you want to hear them or not". This can be said of the room too, and every other pimple on the face of a non-professional recording project.
Take something like the Portico, it's not about transparancy, and it may be that Hemmick reef wasn't really looking for it either. I want it on acoustic guitar, mandolin, strings, but not usually on bass & electric guitar as Hemmick had thus far tried with the Brick.

Hemmick reef - It may be that you haven't found the right application for the Brick, or it may be that you're looking for something more colored. Ultimately you probably will want both, which may mean you're halfway there.

 

[Reggie]

sell the dang thang

Maybe I can simplify all this for you my friend: if you have nobody to impress but yourself, and you are not impressed with the Brick, then sell the dang thang and keep your money.

I personally think it kills the lower-end IC/opamp pres, but that is just me and my particular ears. Comparing DI stuff between pres is not as easy to me as comparing how different mics sound.
If you are looking for a good pre/comp combo, the SafeSound P1 just oozes functionality. The pre is sort of back to your basic, just-better-than-average preamp, but the whole package sounds very good. Especially for vocals. I still use it for the line input sometimes to run my Brick or SCA pres into.

 

[hemmick reef]

Robert D wrote:

Hemmick reef - It may be that you haven't found the right application for the Brick, or it may be that you're looking for something more colored. Ultimately you probably will want both, which may mean you're halfway there.

The problem with buying gear for a home studio is knowing what to buy and how far to go in quality, and how it will work in its environment once its bought. Basically there are no local stores where I live to test recording equipment in a decent environment, so I cannot buy gear based on experience It then comes down to magazine reviews, user reviews and forum conversations.
In the end after all of that it comes down to trial and error which is what I am doing.......

I have read.... I have bought..... I experience.... I learn....

 

[Gilliland]

Comparing DI stuff between pres is not as easy to me as comparing how different mics sound.

I agree with that. I posted a bass DI sample because that was one of the stated goals of the owner. But I tested a vocal as well, and I found that the Brick didn't offer anything that I couldn't get from my SP828s for vocals either. As always, your mileage may vary. Of course, it may also just indicate that the SP828 is better than your typical IC-based mic pre.

My needs are different than most. I do remote live concert recordings almost exclusively. So I'm typically working with stage mics (anything from a Beta58 through a KMS105) and vocalists who are working them rather closely. In a studio vocal situation, the differences might be more pronounced.

I should reiterate, though, that I do like the Brick. But for my purposes, it wasn't a good match.

 

[jmorris]

Along with good mic's, preamps, processing don't forget about the room. Many combined very slight improvements add up to a lot nicer result. I have very nice preamps like old V72A's, Langevin AM16'S, Altec 9475a's and when I first used them and compared them to my console preamps or my Aphex 207, I did not hear much change. But after a while I noticed a bit of an improvement in my overall sound. Maybe just more experience under my belt. Maybe had better musicians for later recordings. Maybe better preamps. Maybe a bit of all.

 

[FALKEN]

Along with good mic's, preamps, processing don't forget about the room. Many combined very slight improvements add up to a lot nicer result. I have very nice preamps like old V72A's, Langevin AM16'S, Altec 9475a's and when I first used them and compared them to my console preamps or my Aphex 207, I did not hear much change. But after a while I noticed a bit of an improvement in my overall sound. Maybe just more experience under my belt. Maybe had better musicians for later recordings. Maybe better preamps. Maybe a bit of all.

yea I am noticing that the "better" preamps just allow your work to flow a little more easily. if I had all day I could get by with anything and make it sound cool.

 

[Good Friend]

Jmorris has v72s?

O man how do they sound? I always used to listen to abbey road stuff from the early days before i even knew what v72 was and i loved the sound. It sounded very "orange" or "red" to me. Then later recordings kinda lost that sound and a wider range of colors were present. But i still dig all the recordings from those earlier days. I am no preamp expert but they seem to have some sort of a midrangey quality, some sort of "orange grit" sound to them.

Is this how they sound to you or am i crazy?

 

[robin watson]

O man how do they sound? I always used to listen to abbey road stuff from the early days before i even knew what v72 was and i loved the sound. It sounded very "orange" or "red" to me. Then later recordings kinda lost that sound and a wider range of colors were present. But i still dig all the recordings from those earlier days. I am no preamp expert but they seem to have some sort of a midrangey quality, some sort of "orange grit" sound to them. Is this how they sound to you or am i crazy?

I dig what you're saying, bro. I've had cascading rivers of pebbly purple burst forth from the simplest, two-transistor mic pre when the pot hit's the sweet spot. API on LSD is extra-spectral, dude.

 

[60's guy]

In a typical home recording environment.....if you don't address the more obvious stuff first (instrument, accoustics, mics, technique, etc.) then it does little good to address the smaller stuff. Its like waxing a dirty, unwashed car. Wash first. Then wax. Take the shower. Then put on the deodorant.

.

Exactly!

I responded to Hemmrick because he may have bought the Brick and perhaps thought that by simply purchasing the Brick and using it, it would somehow be a dramatic improvement. At best, it's a great step up beyond real low end preamps.

You cannot simply buy into any product that promises within the advertising claims for the product to be to the end all solution to all of the problems within your recording issues when in fact you may not have addressed other more important issues......

As Chessrock alluded to.....any step up....equipment wise ....can be a step up provided..... that you have addressed your environment., etc.

ENVIRONMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If your recording, monitoring, and mixing environment suffers in any area...., it's reasonable to assume that your end product when listened to by yourself, or others will sooner or later come inder scrutiny.

The problem here is, is that we are listening to mp3 files as is most often posted here. MP3 files suck for the most part. It isn't very often that I listen to an mp3 file that approaches CD quality.

"Wax On......Was Off".............Karate Kid"

The Brick is a great unit IMHO.

I also own and employ an ART TUBE MP, MAudio DMP3, Sytek MPX-4A, and a few other freak preamps I have laying around.

My point is.....don't look....and don't purchase with the thought that any "one" preamp will meet all your needs.

Pure and simply stated......'that' particular experience, for you... will not occurr anytime soon.

There are simply too many variables involved.

 

[hemmick reef]

Sorry to go slightly off topic here, but the comments have been very helpful on this thread.

How important is that I use balanced cables as I have realised that I have been using an unbalanced cable. The brick and edirol have balanced outs/ins. I am not picking up any hum though!

 

[leddy]

As always, your mileage may vary. Of course, it may also just indicate that the SP828 is better than your typical IC-based mic pre.

Pardon the slight topic shift for moment .

Gilliland. I listened to the sample you posted in another thread about the SP828. You seem happy with it. Do you have any info you can add about it? Still happy? Is it transparant, colored, etc. Can it power a ribbon? How easy is it to overload?

I have a VTB1, but I understand the 828 is quite different.

 

[Gilliland]

Sp828

Pardon the slight topic shift for moment .

Gilliland. I listened to the sample you posted in another thread about the SP828. You seem happy with it. Do you have any info you can add about it? Still happy? Is it transparant, colored, etc. Can it power a ribbon? How easy is it to overload?

I have a VTB1, but I understand the 828 is quite different.

I haven't used the VTB1, but I believe that's true - they are unrelated technologies. I am happy with the SP828. It's a low end mic pre, no one should expect it to behave like a Great River or a Hardy, but as a generic front end into my HD24XR, it is a pretty good match. It is quite transparent, not colored. Definitely an improvement over the mixer mic pres that I had been using.

I haven't powered a ribbon with it yet (perhaps sometime later this year), and I haven't had any problems with overdriving it. It seems to have decent headroom. I am concerned about the ribbon question, though. I haven't had to use it with a really low output mic yet, and it does seem to exhibit a bit of noise when you really crank the trim pot.

As I've alluded in this thread, I don't hear a lot of difference between the 828 and the Brick. The difference isn't zero, but it's certainly not dramatic, and for my purposes (live concert recordings for broadcast) it's truly not significant. They're both transparent, mid-level quality mic pres. But the 828 offers eight channels for less than the price of two channels of the Brick. And the 828 offers more gain than the Brick (which is pretty limited in that department).

So while I'm happy with it so far, I really need to have some more experience with it before I can give you a full review. I recorded six full concerts with it in November, but I've only mixed two of them so far (plus that one song that you heard in the earlier posting). So I'll know more as I get to some of these other shows over the next couple of months.

Also, I'll be recording another show here next week, so that may shed some additional light.

Interestingly, one of the concerts that I have gotten mixed is now under consideration to be released as a live album. I do pretty much all of my recording for broadcast, not for commercial release, but this one may be the exception. I'm not sure whether you should read anything into that with respect to the SP828. <g>

Come to think of it, another show that I recorded with the 828 is going to provide some tracks to an album. I didn't mix these, I just did the tracking.

I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that PMI audio has some of the SP828s on their B-Stock list at an absurdly low price right now. But I have no connection to them, and you shouldn't take this as a recommendation. I'm merely reporting my experience to date.

 

[Gilliland]

The problem here is, is that we are listening to mp3 files as is most often posted here. MP3 files suck for the most part. It isn't very often that I listen to an mp3 file that approaches CD quality.

There's some truth to that, but it is quite possible to produce an MP3 that can show the nuances associated with the equipment that we are discussing. When I post an MP3 to show some facet of audio quality, I'm always careful to use a good encoder, and to operate it for maximum quality. In addition, I always use a reasonably high bitrate (generally 320k stereo or 160k mono) so that any encoding loss is minimized. Typically, I will produce the MP3 directly from the 24 bit master (as I did the samples in this thread and the track that Leddy referenced above). I always do some listening comparisons between the MP3 and the original WAV to make sure that I'm accurate representing the audio. I would hope that others do the same.

The audible differences between a suitably high bitrate MP3 and the WAV file that it represents is quite small indeed. If that difference is enough to mask the differences between two pieces of gear, then those differences must also be pretty small. That's not to say that they don't matter - sometimes they will and sometimes they won't. But I do think that it is possible to use MP3s to demonstrate any significant differences in most cases - if we're careful with them.

 

[rsolinski]

I said it before and I will say it again..the Brick is not a great pre..for that price point it can't be unless groove tubes has a transformer winder enslaved in their basement...it is a decent pre because at least it uses real tube voltages. A high end pre will have as much in parts as a brick retails for! The comments on headroom and distortion were spot on. Good pre's use alot more voltage internally than chip based circuits and hence have far superior headroom and distortion characteristics. In a mix of good pre tracks you will notice that: A) you don't eq them much B) you can achieve big compression without it sounding smashed and C) that verb you weren't quite sure about will suddenly sound great...Good mic (no crappy knock offs or chinese voodoo) and good pre (I have never heard one that was less than 1000$) makes a good recording..You can do okay in the mid price point but you need to examine your goals and budget. Who are you recording for? Another option is to find a company that rents high end mics and pre's and try some out..My go to chain for vocals is a U67 (rented)- My API 312 with a John Hardy opamp and a Manley vari mu (also rented)..I posted a test of acoustic guitar tracks and various pre's a while back..I will do it again if someone will host the tracks.

Cheers,
Ray

 

[mrbowes]

Ray,

I can host the tracks. Send me a PM and we'll work it out.

 

[thedude400]

Where is the approximate point when a pre would go from a "budget" pre to a noticible "wow" pre? budget=$50-400 : wow= $400-3000? higher?

 

[mrbowes]

thedude,

There's no definitive amount, since deals can be had all the time on great sounding vintage gear that can certainly impart some "wow" when used appropriately. It also depends on your budget gear. If using crappy pres on a crappy mixer, than moving up to something in the $500 range might make you say "wow". If the rest of your chain isn't up to par with your pres, then the chance you're going to say "wow" is reduced. It's all relative, but I'd say roughly $1000/channel.

 

[treymonfauntre]

I haven't used the VTB1, but I believe that's true - they are unrelated technologies. I am happy with the SP828. It's a low end mic pre, no one should expect it to behave like a Great River or a Hardy, but as a generic front end into my HD24XR, it is a pretty good match. It is quite transparent, not colored. Definitely an improvement over the mixer mic pres that I had been using.

I haven't powered a ribbon with it yet (perhaps sometime later this year), and I haven't had any problems with overdriving it. It seems to have decent headroom. I am concerned about the ribbon question, though. I haven't had to use it with a really low output mic yet, and it does seem to exhibit a bit of noise when you really crank the trim pot.

As I've alluded in this thread, I don't hear a lot of difference between the 828 and the Brick. The difference isn't zero, but it's certainly not dramatic, and for my purposes (live concert recordings for broadcast) it's truly not significant. They're both transparent, mid-level quality mic pres. But the 828 offers eight channels for less than the price of two channels of the Brick. And the 828 offers more gain than the Brick (which is pretty limited in that department).

So while I'm happy with it so far, I really need to have some more experience with it before I can give you a full review. I recorded six full concerts with it in November, but I've only mixed two of them so far (plus that one song that you heard in the earlier posting). So I'll know more as I get to some of these other shows over the next couple of months.

Also, I'll be recording another show here next week, so that may shed some additional light.

Interestingly, one of the concerts that I have gotten mixed is now under consideration to be released as a live album. I do pretty much all of my recording for broadcast, not for commercial release, but this one may be the exception. I'm not sure whether you should read anything into that with respect to the SP828. <g>

Come to think of it, another show that I recorded with the 828 is going to provide some tracks to an album. I didn't mix these, I just did the tracking.

I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that PMI audio has some of the SP828s on their B-Stock list at an absurdly low price right now. But I have no connection to them, and you shouldn't take this as a recommendation. I'm merely reporting my experience to date.

shhh, i'm picking that up after my next paycheck!

 

[mrface2112]

i think we need to go back to what chessrock said......how do you know it's the pre that you don't like, and that it's not your room (or monitors or converters) that's coloring your judgement? what it amounts to is this: can you truly trust your room and monitoring environment?

because the simple answer is if you can't trust your monitoring environment, how can you tell the subtle differences between a $100 and a $1000 mic pre?

and as for them stacking up across the context of a large mix......i'm torn on this for the home-recording hobbyist.

there's no doubt that using the same preamp for everything will undoubtedly leave a "sheen" on the mix--be it a VTB1, a Brick, or a Neve. by all accounts, my symetrix 528 is a "perfectly usable" preamp, and it sounds great when used on a couple tracks. but if you build a mix out of 15 tracks that were all run through the 528, it certainly affects the whole of the mix--and once you identify that sonic signature, there's no mistaking it. that's one reason why most people favor having multiple pres.

but on the other side, how often are we building mixes with more than 6-8 tracks? i would assume that most folks here are recording acoustic guitar/vocals type stuff.....and that those who record drums tend to have multiple preamps anyway. if you can record 6-8 tracks with 1 preamp and not have it give the track a "sonic buildup", then maybe you're better off? i dunno.

i just know that i hear a good bit of difference between the pres in my Tampa and 528 compared to my mackie 24*4, rane MS1a and VTB1.


cheers,
wade