pre amp on all input signals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter michael.butler
  • Start date Start date
M

michael.butler

New member
I record w/ a roland 2480. I have a dbx 386 pre amp. Currently I only use the pre for vox inputs and acoustic instruments. I usually send drum and guitar amp signals directly to the recorder. Should I instead send all signals through the pre instead? And if so, how will I handle recording several sources at once when the pre ony has two inputs?

thanks
michael
 
Michael, the sad truth is you won't send all those signals at once through 2 channels. Either overdub the additional signals or add more channels. Overdubbing will give you less bleed and crosstalk and will make the mixdown easier. What the hell, you've got a kickass stand alone setup. Why not add another pre or two to the rack? The 386 is pretty transparent, why not add a Joe Meek or a single channel Avalon for warmer vocals? You needed a new wife anyway.-Richie
 
Yo Mike:

A cheaper solution would be to buy a couple of 1/4 inch splitters. You can put in two 1/4 inch feeds and then plug in the 1/4 inch plug from your pre outs.

Maybe it'll work and maybe not. I have the splitters but haven't used them that particular way.

Green Hornet:D :cool: :p :p :p
 
michael.butler said:
I record w/ a roland 2480. I have a dbx 386 pre amp. Currently I only use the pre for vox inputs and acoustic instruments. I usually send drum and guitar amp signals directly to the recorder. Should I instead send all signals through the pre instead? And if so, how will I handle recording several sources at once when the pre ony has two inputs?

When you say "drum and guitar amp signals," I assume you mean microphones on a drum kit (overheads, kick, snare, whatever) and microphone(s) in front of a guitar amp?

Why do you prefer the 386 over the pres in the Roland when using the mics you're using it with on vox and acousting insts? Do you think what you like about the 386's sound (v. the Rolands' pres) would also be a similar advantage with drum and guitar sounds?

You're probably using the 386's A/D converters too, so that could enter into the equation as well. I doubt they're a whole lot different from the Roland's, but I really don't know.

As for sending more than two mic inputs into a two-channel mic pre ... good luck. I doubt using a 1/4" Y-cord to mix two mics is going to be a great idea. Obviously, a mixer is a great tool for mixing the signals from multiple mics ... but you amplify the signals to line-level before you mix them.
 
That's just it, sj. My ears really can't tell a difference between signals that were recorded through the pre, than that of those recorded direct. I just hear/read from so many who swear you can't get as good a sound or signal or whatever using a daw's on board pres. So.....I got the 386?? I've recorded several projects, from start to finish, using a bunch of tracks, some recorded through pre, some not, and, it's kinda embarrassing, but sometimes I wonder why the heck I got the 386 anyway. I only use it w/ acoust. and vox cause I assume their the most "delicate" signals to record.

feeling kinda stupid,
Michael
 
Richard Monroe said:
....or a single channel Avalon for warmer vocals? ....

Adding the Avalon piece was definitely some good advice, Richie. ;)
 
You guys are worse than crack dealers. I dont think he's ready to pony up for an Avalon.
 
Hi Michael,

The reason you may not be able to hear the difference between the dbx and the Roland preamps could be due to a number of factors:

1) the dbx may be similar in character to the built-in preamps. I don't know this for a fact, since I own neither, but it is not unlikely. In addition, let's face it, the dbx 386 is not a particularly good or interesting pre, so you may not be gaining much anyway.

2) you didn't describe your monitoring set-up. Perhaps the equipment you are using (speakers/headphones) are not providing enough detail to be able to hear subtle differences.

In any event, forget the splitter idea - if you split the outputs of the pre you would just get the exact same signal going to two tracks instead of one on the Roland. No advantage there. And splitting the inputs is always a seriously bad idea.

If you are looking for "low cost" preamp alternatives to add to the dbx 386, try the Sytek unit (four channels for about $800) or keep your eye out for the FMR RNP (Really Nice Preamp) due out very soon.

You may want to describe in more detail just what you are recording (style and instrumentation), and how many simultaneous tracks you need. Then we can give some more specific advice.
 
Right now I'm recording mostly pop guitar rock...micing semi dirty amp tones, real drums, organ, layered backing vox etc. For the project I'm currently working on, it's pretty much track at a time overdubs, so routing possibiliteis are wide open. But what about, when later on, I want to record a rock combo live? What signals should I send through the pre, and which ones are fine going direct....and why? And does it even matter if the 2480's pre's are comparable to the dbx. Are they? I dunno.

I wanna get the most out of the roland, but I'm starting to think all these pre amp variables are gonna mean serious bucks and a fair amount of headache, which is what I wanted to avoid by purchasing a "stand alone" daw to begin w/. (By the way, I monitor through event 8's)
 
The real question is:

Are you satisfied with the quality of the recordings you are making?

If you are, then forget about it, and have fun.

If you're not, you need to isolate where the weakest link is in the process. While it might be the preamps, it might also be the mics, your mic technique, your mixing tecnique, your monitors, your cables, your room acoustics, etc.

The best way to figure out the most efficient way of spending money is to borrow or rent some gear if possible, and see how much difference it makes to your ears. If the problem turns out to be not so much the gear, but your recording skills, then you'll know simply throwing money at the problem may not be the best solution!
 
Back
Top