Stefan Elmblad
New member
I'd say mics are more important than the preamp, with the mic placement coming in between, and the quality of the sound source (guitar/amp/voice etc) always being the #1 factor if the result will be spectacular or crappy.
B
bleyrad
New member
cominginsecond said:
Yeah, but... I disagree that Chinese mics are just plain worse than top-end mics. The other day I used a U89 for the first time on some male vocals, through my API-ish pre... it sounded stupid and boring, my Rode NT1 sounded better on his voice (and that isn't saying very much). The U89 was ridiculously sibilant, uninspiringly neutral, boring, and surprisingly dry and not rich in the mids.
Frankly I think people are probably better off with a good selection of Chinese mics than with one or two top-tier mics. Far better to match the character of the mic with the source rather than rely purely on the mic's build quality to carry it through, when it may or may not (usually not) fit the source perfectly.
A
acorec
Banned
cominginsecond said:
I do agree with what you say. I will also say that my rooms are treated OK and I switch pre-amps almost as much as I switch mics to get the sound I want. With some mics, a different pre-amp will change the sound so that it is almost a different mic entirely. The GT44 is the one mic I have found that almost has no sound of it's own. It is solely up to the sound of the pre-amp. I can try pre-amps with most of my mics and get markedly different sounds depending on the topology of the pre-amp. The real sound difference is in the mix. That is where the high-enders "do their thing" best. It is also why a Mackie and an Avalon sound the same on a single track. Single tracking is not how I test a pre-amp at all. Many seem to not know this and seem to shop based on a single track of whatever.
A
acorec
Banned
bleyrad said:
You are basing your opinion on 1 mic vs. another mic.
I rode in a BMW once, it got a flat tire. My Toyota never gets flat tires. I think high-end cars are really unreliable. Toyota makes the best cars. I think people are better off with Toyota cars.
johnsuitcase
New member
While I agree that room treatment may be important, in my business it's not a factor. I record everything I do on location, at the artist's house or practice space. I find that if you listen to the room, and spend just the smallest amount of time thinking about things, you can get very good results in any space. The only problem that is hard to overcome is environmental sound, if you're doing something like a very quiet acoustic artist near a freeway!
But for rock bands, the room is a pretty small factor. I really think that if you're not happy with your results, it's probably not your gear (assuming you have at least a digital multitracker like a VF16), it's probably not your mics or pre's (assuming again that they are at least Chinese imports and not plastic karaoke mics), and it's probably not your room (unless you're trying to record in Walmart, while the store is open).
The reason you're not happy is because you haven't learned it yet. On my site I say that "The Most Important Piece of Gear is Your Head," and I stand by that.
I think that if you're a commercial studio, and you're doing projects that are going to be released on a large indie or a major, then yes, APIs and Neumanns are quite probably going to be required. But for the home recordist, the small commercial studio, and the freelance engineer, you need to work, learn, practice.
And don't take "no" for an answer. If you ask "How do I get that Jessica Simpson vocal sound" and someone says API and Neumann, that's crap. You need a large diaphragm condenser with a windscreen, get your singer in close. Use a pre to get her level up, 'til it just starts to crackle, then back it off a bit, compress that softly, then a little harder (chain compressors). That's it. Maybe roll out 400hz a little, and adjust the sibilant frequencies.
But saying you can't get that sound because you don't have the right $5000 recording chain is just a lie.
You can probably tell the difference between my Behringer chain and your API/Neumann chain, but you know what? 90% of the people out there wouldn't be able to. And it's what most home recordists are looking for. If you need that last 10% because it's a major label project, go rent a world class room. You've got the knowledge now, and at this point (and only at this point) will those world class pieces of gear make a difference.
But for rock bands, the room is a pretty small factor. I really think that if you're not happy with your results, it's probably not your gear (assuming you have at least a digital multitracker like a VF16), it's probably not your mics or pre's (assuming again that they are at least Chinese imports and not plastic karaoke mics), and it's probably not your room (unless you're trying to record in Walmart, while the store is open).
The reason you're not happy is because you haven't learned it yet. On my site I say that "The Most Important Piece of Gear is Your Head," and I stand by that.
I think that if you're a commercial studio, and you're doing projects that are going to be released on a large indie or a major, then yes, APIs and Neumanns are quite probably going to be required. But for the home recordist, the small commercial studio, and the freelance engineer, you need to work, learn, practice.
And don't take "no" for an answer. If you ask "How do I get that Jessica Simpson vocal sound" and someone says API and Neumann, that's crap. You need a large diaphragm condenser with a windscreen, get your singer in close. Use a pre to get her level up, 'til it just starts to crackle, then back it off a bit, compress that softly, then a little harder (chain compressors). That's it. Maybe roll out 400hz a little, and adjust the sibilant frequencies.
But saying you can't get that sound because you don't have the right $5000 recording chain is just a lie.
You can probably tell the difference between my Behringer chain and your API/Neumann chain, but you know what? 90% of the people out there wouldn't be able to. And it's what most home recordists are looking for. If you need that last 10% because it's a major label project, go rent a world class room. You've got the knowledge now, and at this point (and only at this point) will those world class pieces of gear make a difference.
B
bleyrad
New member
acorec said:
This isn't what I'm saying at all. I agree that high-end mics are usually a bit better sounding than cheaper mics - but the difference isn't usually worth the difference in price (the vox on major-label recordings never sound very much better than the vox I get in my studio with cheap mics, and my experience with the U89 - and other German mics in live situations - reinforced this). When you throw money into the equation, you're better-equipped to deal with a wide variety of situations and get a good sound with 20 Chinese mics than with 2 German mics. Look at Harvey Gerst here who does exactly this.
Of course there's some justification for getting good mics if you can afford it, but I don't think there's much reason for project studio owners to be throwing their only cash at high-end mics.
BTW I have a $1000 Ford Aspire, and I used to drive a BMW 325i. The Aspire actually is more reliable
it gets me where I want to go, for about half the fuel costs, half the insurance costs, and half the maintenence costs. I'm left to better spend that money on things that actually matter... like the speakers!
A
acorec
Banned
bleyrad said:This isn't what I'm saying at all. I agree that high-end mics are usually a bit better sounding than cheaper mics - but the difference isn't usually worth the difference in price (the vox on major-label recordings never sound very much better than the vox I get in my studio with cheap mics, and my experience with the U89 - and other German mics in live situations - reinforced this). When you throw money into the equation, you're better-equipped to deal with a wide variety of situations and get a good sound with 20 Chinese mics than with 2 German mics. Look at Harvey Gerst here who does exactly this.
Of course there's some justification for getting good mics if you can afford it, but I don't think there's much reason for project studio owners to be throwing their only cash at high-end mics.
BTW I have a $1000 Ford Aspire, and I used to drive a BMW 325i. The Aspire actually is more reliable
Do a nice dense mix and you will answer your own question. Single tracks of anything sound dramatically different in the context of a mix. Set your track so that it sounds like what you want. Now, mix it into the song and solo it. I guarantee you will not like the sound. The same is true for mics. The high-end mics have clarity and tend to hold their place in a mix. The pre-amps help this/hinder this. The cheaper mics tend to "get lost" and give a harsher/muddier sound when placed in a mix. In the end, you will find these things out for yourself. Lord knows how many people say to me after a few years how wrong they were. It takes experience to find out and lots of $$$ shovelled down the chute. I simply have too many years in pro and project studios to even argue over these points anymore. You will find out if you are serious about Audio Engineering.
B
bleyrad
New member
I found exactly the opposite. Once in a dense pop mix, the U89 got totally lost. The only thing that really stood out is the sibilance. I ended up having to EQ it to get it to sound more like my cheaper mics... no kidding... so that it cut through the mix in a much more pleasant way. It's still far from ideal sounding though. It's a very cold sounding mic.
In its defense, the U89 sounded pretty good while soloed. It could be useful for very sparse mixes on roundish/warm voices. Still, I have way cheaper mics that do that pretty well too.
In its defense, the U89 sounded pretty good while soloed. It could be useful for very sparse mixes on roundish/warm voices. Still, I have way cheaper mics that do that pretty well too.
A
acorec
Banned
bleyrad said:
I believe. The U89 was never a good mic and was one of Neumann's clunkers. Don't form an absolute opinion based on the U89. Try some others and you will see the light as they say.
B
bleyrad
New member
I'm sure I will work some other expensive mics again soon, and I'll definitely be hoping for the best. Still, it doesn't make much sense for me to go out and buy them when I can almost always get any sound I'm looking for with my cheap mics and barely hear any improvement on most commercial recordings which DO use those $2500 mics.
And IMHO, if I can work the tools enough to be satisfied with the sounds I'm getting from cheap mics, then anyone else here should be able to as well given enough experience... and if they can't, then do they deserve the upgrade to top-tier mics anyway?
As far as I'm concerned, in order for a big purchase like a U87 or something to be justifed for me, it better enable me to get a BETTER sound than I hear on CD's these days. I guess I was wishing for that to happen with the U89, but it didn't so far.
And IMHO, if I can work the tools enough to be satisfied with the sounds I'm getting from cheap mics, then anyone else here should be able to as well given enough experience... and if they can't, then do they deserve the upgrade to top-tier mics anyway?
As far as I'm concerned, in order for a big purchase like a U87 or something to be justifed for me, it better enable me to get a BETTER sound than I hear on CD's these days. I guess I was wishing for that to happen with the U89, but it didn't so far.
S
Sonic Idiot
New member
Bleyrad,
Brother...I lost my Ford Aspire two years ago. I miss that car. You will appreciate this song I wrote in honor:
www.dullum.net
It's the song called, oddly enough, Aspire.
(Salty tear wells up in eye)...I miss the little guy...
BTW, the song was recorded with a an oktava 319, ART Tube MP, RNC. (drums are done in reason--samples were home made.) I think it sounds great. Would a better mic or a better pre have improved it? Depends on what you mean by the word improve. Would it lose the organic feel it has--depends, again on your terms. I wish I had had a different mic for the sax. (It sounds crappy to me. But what could I do. The mic was all wrong.) But, alas.
Perhaps Aspire inspiration is the key and not pre's and mics. Sigh...
Brother...I lost my Ford Aspire two years ago. I miss that car. You will appreciate this song I wrote in honor:
www.dullum.net
It's the song called, oddly enough, Aspire.
(Salty tear wells up in eye)...I miss the little guy...
BTW, the song was recorded with a an oktava 319, ART Tube MP, RNC. (drums are done in reason--samples were home made.) I think it sounds great. Would a better mic or a better pre have improved it? Depends on what you mean by the word improve. Would it lose the organic feel it has--depends, again on your terms. I wish I had had a different mic for the sax. (It sounds crappy to me. But what could I do. The mic was all wrong.) But, alas.
Perhaps Aspire inspiration is the key and not pre's and mics. Sigh...
lexdrummer
mix mono
truth of catching sound
Fear not the man with a locker full of mics and pre's...fear the man who has but one combo and knows how to use it...
Fear not the man with a locker full of mics and pre's...fear the man who has but one combo and knows how to use it...
lexdrummer
mix mono
aspire is a prime example of using your ears and your artistic magic. Really nice job SI.Sonic Idiot said:
I listen around obsessively. I can't count the all the song magic made with basic equipment that is perfectly acceptable as listening music. Hearing one more phrase (usually from equipment salesmen) concerning top shelf sound can only be found from top shelf gear might very well snap cranial synapse, and pose me to campaign the world for the achetect of this sad and manic gear junkieism. He's gotta be a madman in some dark cave with his portfolio of Avalon and Neuman staring him in the face daily.
Is it that only professional equipment can make a song sound good on consumer equipment, or is it the other way around? And, is there only one tonal spectrum that is considered listening acceptable, or perfect? What is perfect? This is art, isn't it?
I totally agree with an engineer's search for what they work with best, but this is the actual issue. Don't pull out your wallet before you first pull out your ears and experimentation with what you currently own for gear.
A
analogelectric
New member
Great post topic with civil rebuttals all around.
I might sound redundant due to the overwhelming response to the original post and how it's become its own monster-in-a-box but I'll give it a shot.
This is my own take based on experience and money sometimes not-so-well spent:
I like mic pre's but I like mics more-so. If I could focus more on mic pre's I probably would but once I get a couple grand or more saved up I'll opt for a choice mic first. My D&R Orion console is pretty quiet and really the only noise floor I get is mostly from the mic's components and/or tech spec rating.
I severely miss my old Trident Series 24 console and its mic pre's because of its component coloring, I miss my Neotek Series I console for the same reason as my Trident woes but the Orion is so quietly clean it shows me exactly how each mic is performing. It helps to have a "clean" mic pre in the Orion because I know what to expect plus I'm going from the Orion into my Otari MTR90II 2" 24 Track before I dump tracks into my DAW for mixing.
I record "live in performance area" at least 12 to 20 tracks so I'm mostly using my Orion's mic pre's and my Neve mic pre's for certain drum mics, mostly overheads and room. Some other pre's are toss-ups for me like the Drawmer 1960, or the ART PRO MPA.
I'm pretty happy with the mics I have now (I went from over 150 mics ranging from a Telefunken U47 longbody to an Astatic crystal, now I've consolidated to around 60 mics I actually like to use) but if I were to do it all over again taking in mind ALL the money I've spent over the last 11 years this is what I would do:
1) Buy a console used as a monitor return ONLY (unless I got a Neotek/Sytek custom console).
2) Buy all the mic pre's I have learned to love over the years (Manley, Trident, Neotek, Great River, Sytek, Martech, Neve, and Hamptone).
3) Buy all the mics I've learned to love over the years.
Those damn Martech MSS-10's can make an SM57 sound BEYOND amazing but one channel costs around $2000.... but damn, it's worth it.... it's worth it.
-- Adam Lazlo
I might sound redundant due to the overwhelming response to the original post and how it's become its own monster-in-a-box but I'll give it a shot.
This is my own take based on experience and money sometimes not-so-well spent:
I like mic pre's but I like mics more-so. If I could focus more on mic pre's I probably would but once I get a couple grand or more saved up I'll opt for a choice mic first. My D&R Orion console is pretty quiet and really the only noise floor I get is mostly from the mic's components and/or tech spec rating.
I severely miss my old Trident Series 24 console and its mic pre's because of its component coloring, I miss my Neotek Series I console for the same reason as my Trident woes but the Orion is so quietly clean it shows me exactly how each mic is performing. It helps to have a "clean" mic pre in the Orion because I know what to expect plus I'm going from the Orion into my Otari MTR90II 2" 24 Track before I dump tracks into my DAW for mixing.
I record "live in performance area" at least 12 to 20 tracks so I'm mostly using my Orion's mic pre's and my Neve mic pre's for certain drum mics, mostly overheads and room. Some other pre's are toss-ups for me like the Drawmer 1960, or the ART PRO MPA.
I'm pretty happy with the mics I have now (I went from over 150 mics ranging from a Telefunken U47 longbody to an Astatic crystal, now I've consolidated to around 60 mics I actually like to use) but if I were to do it all over again taking in mind ALL the money I've spent over the last 11 years this is what I would do:
1) Buy a console used as a monitor return ONLY (unless I got a Neotek/Sytek custom console).
2) Buy all the mic pre's I have learned to love over the years (Manley, Trident, Neotek, Great River, Sytek, Martech, Neve, and Hamptone).
3) Buy all the mics I've learned to love over the years.
Those damn Martech MSS-10's can make an SM57 sound BEYOND amazing but one channel costs around $2000.... but damn, it's worth it.... it's worth it.
-- Adam Lazlo
Middleman
Professional Amateur
Martech, Mmmmm.....
The only thing I can equate to a Martech is a box of Krispy Kreme donuts.
The only thing I can equate to a Martech is a box of Krispy Kreme donuts.
A
analogelectric
New member
Middleman said:
Krispy Kreme donuts mashed between ground beef burger, bacon, four cheese, then deep fried...... meaning:
"so good it's just plain wrong"
-- Adam Lazlo
johnsuitcase
New member
Has anyone tried the ATI 8MX2:
http://www.soundpure.com/showProduct.do?id=105
How does it compare to some of the high end single channel units we're talking about?
I like that it's small, and the per channel price is pretty reasonable. The specs look pretty solid, as well.
Any thoughts?
http://www.soundpure.com/showProduct.do?id=105
How does it compare to some of the high end single channel units we're talking about?
I like that it's small, and the per channel price is pretty reasonable. The specs look pretty solid, as well.
Any thoughts?
Last edited:
lexdrummer
mix mono
wo man, love the talk. may the gods bless you...Sonic Idiot said:
A
acorec
Banned
Sonic Idiot said:
S
Sonic Idiot
New member
Yeah, I don't doubt it! No one can claim the difference between High and Low end is nill, sound wise. I maintain that the difference has gotting and is getting dramatically smaller. The world is a different place all of a sudden.
For instance, I was listening to Red Headed Stranger last night as reference for a certain sound I was chasing for a mix. That record is very raw, very naked, and sounds just beautiful. Obviously done pro through and through (although Willie Nelson could sing a message onto an answering machine that would probably sound great. But anyways.)
So, my lady friend has an iPod. I decided to load it up and listen on the ear buds. All was lost...the subtle bits that made the recording sound so direct and warm and beautifully balanced in the refernce monitors became all mushy and dull. Threw my mix next to it in that format and I thought it actually sounded as good if not better (no Willie on my mix notwithstanding!). This is both reassuring and sad, as fidelity is taking a big hit for accessability. But it's a worthy trade off, I think. It levels the playing field for the project studio. It doesn't put the reat studios out of business. It just levels the field.
So, mic or preamp? One of both, please...just keep learning the game either way because the walk up is not so steep anymore and the results for the listener are guaranteed.
For instance, I was listening to Red Headed Stranger last night as reference for a certain sound I was chasing for a mix. That record is very raw, very naked, and sounds just beautiful. Obviously done pro through and through (although Willie Nelson could sing a message onto an answering machine that would probably sound great. But anyways.)
So, my lady friend has an iPod. I decided to load it up and listen on the ear buds. All was lost...the subtle bits that made the recording sound so direct and warm and beautifully balanced in the refernce monitors became all mushy and dull. Threw my mix next to it in that format and I thought it actually sounded as good if not better (no Willie on my mix notwithstanding!). This is both reassuring and sad, as fidelity is taking a big hit for accessability. But it's a worthy trade off, I think. It levels the playing field for the project studio. It doesn't put the reat studios out of business. It just levels the field.
So, mic or preamp? One of both, please...just keep learning the game either way because the walk up is not so steep anymore and the results for the listener are guaranteed.