Preamp Price point or "Is it good yet"

[darkorb]

I've beat my head against the wall long enough. I bought the wrong compessor (3630-didn't know any better). I have wrong preamp (Tube MP why don't the vocals sound professional?) Wrong mixer (Alesis 1622-hey, it was $250). I could go on but I just need to know 2 things.

1. What is the lowest price point at which you can get good CLEAN, more-or-less uncoloured, no excuses, professional sound from a Mic Pre?

2. What Product(s) would you recommend at said price point?

I am not worried about a fat sound, I want to get the cleanest, most accurate sound possible, to minimize "buildup". I want as low a price as I can get without that "you-did-it-at-home" sound.

The RNC gets high marks for Compressors, and Studio Projects mics are generally well rated, but I see the most disagreement regarding pre's.

I have figured out that $200-300 isn't likely to get me what I want (but i'm listening) but how much do you have to spend for a neutral preamp that will let you get a good clean signal to "tape"?

 

[Dethska]

I have the M Audio DMP-3 and it seems pretty clean to me. Cost me about $200 at 8thstreetmusic.com.

It has a pretty good rep around here.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

It depends.... most people don't get the maximum potential out of their gear even at budget price points, mostly due to lack of experience or overall recording skills.

(ie, George Massenberg with a Portastudio will get better results than a monkey with a Neve!)

Before you throw more money at it, why don't you work at improving your skills with what you do have!

 

[wheelema]

It depends.... most people don't get the maximum potential out of their gear even at budget price points, mostly due to lack of experience or overall recording skills...
...Before you throw more money at it, why don't you work at improving your skills with what you do have!

Two answers to that observaton. The first is, of course, it's his money. The second is that perhaps he, like myself, would rather know that the goal which he is reaching for is attainable with the gear he has, rather than knowing that no matter how hard he tries he will never hear the sound he wants.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Two answers to that observaton

Well - it was a suggestion more than an observation....

The first is, of course, it's his money.

Fair enough.... but he could drop a couple of K on a good pre and still not get a good sound.... it all starts with skills....

The second is that perhaps he, like myself, would rather know that the goal which he is reaching for is attainable with the gear he has, rather than knowing that no matter how hard he tries he will never hear the sound he wants.

I don't think it's quite so cut 'n dry.... as I said, a Massenburg mix on a Portastudio will probably still sound a lot like a Massenburg mix..... poorer gear usually simply means you have to get a bit more creative obtaining the sound you want. And at the very least, you have to sharpen your recording skills even more to squeeze out every last bit of performance you can from the budget stuff...

 

[wheelema]

...What is the lowest price point at which you can get good CLEAN, more-or-less uncoloured, no excuses, professional sound from a Mic Pre?

That question cannot be answered as it is eternally debated. Look through the posts here and at gearslutz.

My personal position is $500 to $1,000.

...What Product(s) would you recommend at said price point?

FMR RNP $475, Grace 101 $560, Speck Mic Pre 5.0 $850, John Hardy M-1 $1,050.

 

[wheelema]

.....poorer gear usually simply means you have to get a bit more creative obtaining the sound you want. And at the very least, you have to sharpen your recording skills even more to squeeze out every last bit of performance you can from the budget stuff...

You are absolutely right. I recall the story of a wealthy man who vastly perferred driving his ratty old pickup truck on winding roads than his sports car as his pickup truck, as slow as it was, was much more challenging to try and keep on the road! Still and all, personally I would prefer the Porsche.

 

[chessrock]

Here's my "War & Peace" novel on the subject . . .

The latest instrument amplifiers to come out in the past year or so are getting a lot better . . . and the crappy ones have been discontinued, mostly.

Lately, I've been seeing a lot of lower-priced mic pres that are built around the newer burr-brown chips. A really simple design that incorporates the Burr-Brown INA163 instrument amp should be able to get you perfectly good results without having to break the bank. Two of them that come to mind are the M-Audio DMP-3 and the Rane MS-1B.

One of the nice things about these designs is that the newer chips don't have that brittle sound that the older ones used to get a bad rap for. I asked Scott Dorsey about this, and he mentions that the older chips that most of them used to employ -- the INA2017 -- had an excessive amount of high frequency distortion that the published specs kind of left out. And for those of you who don't know, Scott is one of those dorks who just kind of knows everything, so I trust him in these matters.

Secondly, in the simpler designs, you don't necessarily have to have a lot of juice -- so wallwarts aren't as much of an issue, apparently. Although know-it-alls (read: Kurt Foster) seem to be convinced that all wallwarts are evil, etc. etc.

The only thing you might have to concern yourself with is the longevity of some of these things. I'm not going to profess to be an expert on electronic components, but most of my techie-type friends and acquaintances seem to be concerned with the fact that most of these cheap designs are using cheap capacitors. One thing you could do is swap them out for better ones after a few years or so -- or you could just take your chances and ride them out untill you can afford something better.


Another bit of knowlege I gleaned after talking with some of the senior designers at Summit Audio . . .

The A-#1 factor that makes one of the boutique-ish mic pres unusually expensive is not the quality of the components or the complexity of the design. It's simple economics. Any of you guys who are or have taken some intermediate econ classes should understand the idea behind economies of scale.

Now consider that most of these boutique mic pre manufacturers are pumping this stuff out on a very small scale. Some are even being made by hand. Knowing this, and understanding the market demand and equilibrium pricing, and distribution forces that are going to apply . . . who do you think can produce a piece of equipment less expensively? Focusrite . . . or Davisound? Mackie or Manley?

Obviously, Focusrite has some advantages of mass distribution and economies derived from their scope and scale. We should all know that it is much less expensive on a per meal basis to feed a hundred people than it is 4. Why? Because you can go to Sam's Club and just buy everything in bulk . . . which lowers your per-unit cost on everything. Same thing with Focusrite. Every single component they use can be bought in mass quantity, which brings it's cost down significantly. Furthermore, labor, marketing, and all other costs are divided amongst thousands of units rather than a few.

Same thing with R&D. Who can better justify spending more in this area? Someone who can spread the cost over several hundred thousand units over a year, or one who has to divide it up over a thousand or so over a few years?

I'm looking at my Sytek MPX-4A sitting there in my rack right now. And I figure the casing on this thing must have cost the manufacturer around $200-300 or so. Just for the housing, never mind the parts inside or his labor putting it together. Now I'm looking at my M-Audio DMP3, and I'd estimate the housing on that thing to have probably set Midiman back maybe $5 ? ? That's partly because it's housing is cheaper, but I'd also bet that M-Audio could probably pump out the same exact housing as the Sytek uses for maybe $25 to $50. And that's just because of the advantages they have due to size and scale.

So think about it from an economics standpoint, and ask yourself what you're paying for? Are you paying for a good design . . . are you paying for the fact that it was hand-made . . . and how much of your total expenditure is going towards the quality of components and how much to the external case, power supply, etc.? And to what extent are you subsidising less-efficient business models, manufacturing processes and distribution methods?

 

[lumbago]

I've found the Focusrite Trakmaster to be an affordable and reasonably idiot-proof mic pre-amp, both with a Rode NTK condenser and also a Beyer M88 mic and also using a stratocaster directly into it.

I use optional A-D card and from there it's very clean and musical.
I send the digital signal on to a Lexicon MPX550 reverb, then into a Roland M-1000 line mixer, then into an Echo Mia card or a USB port (all digital signal from the pre-amp onwards).

Some here don't like the Focusrite Platinum series pre-amps, but I've found them to be quite forgiving and very clean. As usual, try before you buy.

 

[rushfan33]

I completely agree with Blue Bear! when I first bought decent gear, I really had no clue what I was doing. I saw knobs and knew what they did but not what they did in detail. When I listen back to those recordings, I am amazed at the sonic quality that was achieved. That's due in part because when you don't know a thing, you can only explore! You use your intuition more (you have to!). As I "progressed", I learned more about the gear I was using. Now, as I read that the gear I purchased when I first started out is crap (aka Alesis 3630 etc,) my inclanation to explore THAT piece of gear has been wiped out and replaced with a false sense that I need new gear to acheive what I want to acheive. Then the cycle starts all over again. We'll buy the next best thing and think "how did I ever survive with my 3630?" We explore the new gear....Then as we see that the gear we bought to replace it wasn't at all "pro" as read on a BBS somewhere.

Chessrock started a thread (Treat your rooms) and he was so right. We all get hung up on gear and as a result, we lose focus on the recording. We think things like "We can't do that with this piece"! When in fact, as blue Bear pointed out, many of us (most of us for that matter!) don't use our gear to its full potential, even at low level product lines. As Neil Peart says, "those who wish to be must put aside the alienation, get on with the fascination, the real relation, the underlying theme"!

If the poster wants to buy something in the same price range, what's going to be different between the two models? Anything? Okay, maybe one uses "xy" technology and the other uses "yy". What does that REALLY mean in the lower line models to a not very experienced person? Anything? I didn't think so. I agree with chessrock, treat your rooms and make sure WHERE you're listening is not the problem. Remember, the grass is always greener on the other side (unless you're looking in a mirror !).

just my four cents!

 

[wheelema]

Re: Here's my "War & Peace" novel on the subject . . .

... to what extent are you subsidising less-efficient business models, manufacturing processes and distribution methods?

Well... look into this thread in the Cave. Subsidising inefficent business models is not automatically a bad thing. God willing, some people will see fit to subsidize mine.... just as soon as I can figure what business model is going to work!

That information on the new chips was VERY interesting!

 

[kristian]

You are all insane

if you took the same mic position, for the same mic, for the same source, down the able to a different pre the difference between buying a 4 channel mackie mixer for $200 used and spending $800 for one channel will not be that big. I understand about layers; 24 tracks of mackie is not equivalent of 24 tracks of different character preamps. Learning to use a Mackie will help you destroy the sounds of anyone who points a grace 101 at any task and hits record "because it is expensive". I think the price point is a small makie mixer with 4 pres, can't beat bang for the buck. People, MANY people have made larger than life drums, smooth vocals, full bass, and lifelike sounding string instruments from a Mackie. MANY people have made cardboard box drums and dynamically varying vocals that sound out of the mix.

 

[Richard Monroe]

I think you have some very good input above, but they are telling you what they believe, not what you asked. What they are saying is that skill in using gear is more important than the gear, and that is true. Now I am not a gear snob, or I wouldn't be using a collection of Chinese hybrid mics and Russian condensers. I'm quite willing to use whatever works. I recorded a symphony orchestra yesterday using an Avalon AD2022 and a DMP-3!
But you did ask for *clean*, *professional* sound. It starts at about $1000 per channel. It is not a Grace 101, a Sytec, a DMP-3, an RNP, or a Mackie mixer. Unfortunately for the pocketbook, it is more likely to come with a toroidal power supply than a wall wart. It *is* a Martech, an Avalon, a Great River, Manley, Pendulum, DW Fearn.
That's the paradox- It takes a professional to get the best out of any signal chain, and professional sound is achieved when a professional employs a top notch signal chain. For what you asked for, $1250 per channel is not unreasonable. I like the solid state Avalons, and Pendulum for tubes, but that's just my personal preference.-Richie

 

[chessrock]

I think you have some very good input above, but they are telling you what they believe, not what you asked.

And you're kind of telling her what you believe.

 

[DJL]

I've beat my head against the wall long enough. I bought the wrong compessor (3630-didn't know any better). I have wrong preamp (Tube MP why don't the vocals sound professional?) Wrong mixer (Alesis 1622-hey, it was $250). I could go on but I just need to know 2 things.

1. What is the lowest price point at which you can get good CLEAN, more-or-less uncoloured, no excuses, professional sound from a Mic Pre?

2. What Product(s) would you recommend at said price point?

I am not worried about a fat sound, I want to get the cleanest, most accurate sound possible, to minimize "buildup". I want as low a price as I can get without that "you-did-it-at-home" sound.

The RNC gets high marks for Compressors, and Studio Projects mics are generally well rated, but I see the most disagreement regarding pre's.

I have figured out that $200-300 isn't likely to get me what I want (but i'm listening) but how much do you have to spend for a neutral preamp that will let you get a good clean signal to "tape"?

I think all of the $200-300 preamps are about the same, give or take a little... you'll start hearing the difference in the $1000 and up range (if you have a good monitoring system and etc...).

 

[StevenLindsey]

FWIW You CAN hear the difference between a cheap tube preamp and the RNP. $475. Get one, charge somebody for using it a couple of times, and it'll sound "professional." The RNP will be useable even if you get more expensive amps later. They're just simply good preamps. Good detail. Really Nice. 'specially with the RNC. If you can't make a good recording with one of these things, you'd might as well give up.

 

[darkorb]

Preamp Price point

I guess either
(a) I should have crafted my query better
(b) The subject is entirely too subjective to ever get a consensus or
(c) Some combination of the two.

I do not doubt that somewhere out there there is a pro engineer who gets good sound out of a 3630 and the track heshe uses it on makes it onto the final mix. StevenLindsey makes a good point, however, in his RNP recommendation:

"If you can't make a good recording with one of these things, you'd might as well give up."

It would appear that aside from being a good piece of equipment that the RNP is a "forgiving" piece if gear. This is good for those of us, like me, who are improving our technique but who may have further to go than others.

I will be checking out all the pieces mentioned, even the Avalon AD2022. I know that you can't use anything on everything and you can use almost everything on something. Having said that I will be looking for the highest quality with the widest breadth for the lowest cost.

I mean if a Neve sounds fantastic on drums, bass, guitar, keys, and vocals but a RNP sounds pretty damn good on drums, bass, guitar, keys, and vocals, GUESS what i'm gonna do.

Having said that, all of the responses have been helpful and thought provoking. Thank you

 

[rushfan33]

I vote for (C)!

 

[Simman]

Welcome to the forum

No Kidding, you bet it's subjective....!
However, that's not too say that there aren't pre amps that truly outperform others, that is obvious.

The one thing you will discover (and have to weed through) is, what is good enough for you may not be good for someone else. You will find that there is great diversity amongst all that partake on this forum. You could read that a guy using a M150 into a Neve pre-amp, into an 1176 telling someone that their $300 mic and $400 pre suck and that he/she should pack it in because they will never produce anything with cheap gear. While on the other side of the spectrum, there is someone totally blow away with a $40.00 software package.

It basically comes down to how much dedication, budget, and time (did I forget mention down right obsession ) you are willing to expend to learn this craft. Then trust your judgment and your ear. What sounds good too you?

Good luck!

 

[omtayslick]

It depends.... most people don't get the maximum potential out of their gear even at budget price points, mostly due to lack of experience or overall recording skills.

(ie, George Massenberg with a Portastudio will get better results than a monkey with a Neve!)

Before you throw more money at it, why don't you work at improving your skills with what you do have!

Well Bear, it's like this... The first thing the guy said was that he was "tired of beating his head against the wall", and wanted something to give him a cleaner "professional" sound.

Would YOU be satisfied with an ART MP and the 3630? If he's beating his head against the wall, maybe he's gotten all that he is personally going to get from his current equipment.

I'm sure that I don't have the knowledge and experience that many here do, but here's what I know:

I used to own a small mixer made by a prolific manufacturer of affordable gear. Starts with a "B". I tried and tried to get good results with this thing, and sometimes did on some sources. But there was always a wierd harshness to the high end. (I beat my head against the wall.) I asked for advice on this forum. Will a DMP3 sound better than my mixer? Advice ranged from "treat your room", "hone your skills" to "there's not any difference in preamps under $1000". On anthoer forum, I ran across a guy who used a DMP3, listened to his mixes, liked 'em, so I bought one. The difference between the mixer and the DMP3 with semi-skilled me using it was quite significant. The sound improvement that I had labored to get with the mixer, (and couldn't) was there immediately, simply by plugging the DMP3 in.

Maybe you or George Massenburg could get my mixer to sound as good as the DMP3, but I couldn't. Sometimes gear upgrades (even modest ones) are a good thing.