T
travelin travis
New member
does the recorder and preamp have digital connections?
SonicAlbert
Super-Sonic "Herb" Albert
No it won't take them out of the equation. If you put your external signal into the preamp input of the 2488, you are running through that preamp and it will still impart it's sound onto the signal. It doesn't matter whether the 2488 preamp is turned down or not, the electronics are all the same. And it's not turned off, just turned down.
This is possibly why you aren't hearing too much difference between the Focusrite preamp and your 2488 preamp--because you are hearing the 2488 in both cases.
However, if you are running the output of the Focusrite into a line input on the 2488 that doesn't have a preamp, then you should hear less of the 2488 and more of the Focusrite. You'll still hear the overall sound of the 2488, because obviously those are the converters and audio electronics that your signal is going through.
R
RAMI
Guest
Thanx alot for the help, guys. Travis, I'm not sure if there is a digital connection. I'll have to try to get to the back of it tomorrow. I know what you're getting at and it never crossed my mind to try it. The 2488 might only have a digital OUT, but I'm not 100% sure.
I did a comparison and found no difference (to my ears) at all. I'm beginning to think that unless I have an incredible voice (haha!!!), a well-treated room, and a great mic, a medium quality pre-amp is just a couple of more wires and one more component to get noise from.
I'm not putting down the Focusrite at all, by the way.. I like what it's done for me on bass drum and bass. But, I'm going to try vocals straight in for now.
I did a comparison and found no difference (to my ears) at all. I'm beginning to think that unless I have an incredible voice (haha!!!), a well-treated room, and a great mic, a medium quality pre-amp is just a couple of more wires and one more component to get noise from.
I'm not putting down the Focusrite at all, by the way.. I like what it's done for me on bass drum and bass. But, I'm going to try vocals straight in for now.
Last edited:
C
cusebassman
Freakin' sweet
Its a borg preamp?
C
cusebassman
Freakin' sweet
I don't use the 2488, but I'd be inclined to say, go with what you think sounds good. If you're content with the 2488's preamps, stick with em - why waste the money?
I (until very recently) was recording to Tascam digital tape decks, so I needed to use outboard preamps. The DMP-3 always yielded good results.
I recently upgraded to a Firepod to use with my G4 powerBook, and I'll be honest - the Firepod pre's kinda suck. Mics that I otherwise love the sound of are either completely lacking in high-end (they're "muffled", so to speak), and the thing loses clean gain at a rather low level. The DMP-3 gives me clean gain up to the point where my Rode K2 is audibly spying on people talking outside on the street
So, I run the line-level output of the DMP-3 into the line-in's on the Firepod. Still worth the money for the interface since I can use the Firepod pre's for louder sources with no problem, depending on what mic I am using, and I already have a DMP-3, so I don't need to upgrade my outboard (not yet anyway
). It is definitely a matter of noticeable quality difference though, and not so much the ole' "I have it and want to feel like the money was justified so I use it anyway" reasoning.
I'm sure I've used that reasoning in the past though...
I (until very recently) was recording to Tascam digital tape decks, so I needed to use outboard preamps. The DMP-3 always yielded good results.
I recently upgraded to a Firepod to use with my G4 powerBook, and I'll be honest - the Firepod pre's kinda suck. Mics that I otherwise love the sound of are either completely lacking in high-end (they're "muffled", so to speak), and the thing loses clean gain at a rather low level. The DMP-3 gives me clean gain up to the point where my Rode K2 is audibly spying on people talking outside on the street
So, I run the line-level output of the DMP-3 into the line-in's on the Firepod. Still worth the money for the interface since I can use the Firepod pre's for louder sources with no problem, depending on what mic I am using, and I already have a DMP-3, so I don't need to upgrade my outboard (not yet anyway
). It is definitely a matter of noticeable quality difference though, and not so much the ole' "I have it and want to feel like the money was justified so I use it anyway" reasoning.I'm sure I've used that reasoning in the past though...
SonicAlbert
Super-Sonic "Herb" Albert
Is there a way you can listen to the Focusrite without going through the 2488? I'd suggest you try that, and make a direct comparison with the 2488 that way. You really aren't getting a fair impression of the difference between the two units, or what the Focusrite sounds like, since the 2488 is in the signal path the whole time.
M
MCI2424
New member
The true grit of any pre-amp is not on a single track, but the buildup of tracks in a mix. Cheaper pre-amps seem to stack up poorly and can end up either (and) muddy, shrill, "cold" or all of these. Really, do a total mix with more than 4 tracks and see how the mix goes. I have had many people rave to me about their new low cost pre-amp and then tell me weeks later how the mix is crappy.
M
MCI2424
New member
Right. Unless you have a channel insert, you will always add the internal pre-amp. Way to slaughter the sound but good.
R
RAMI
Guest
I don't think it's "slaughtering" anything. It's probably an extra component and wire for nothing. But with the internal pre turned down, I didn't hear a difference. Certainly not one that I would describe as "slaughtering the sound but good".
SonicAlbert
Super-Sonic "Herb" Albert
You don't hear a difference because you are still hearing the 2488 preamp. The Focusrite preamp through the 2488 preamp is what you are hearing. You are hearing the 2488 preamp no matter what, since it follows the Focusrite.
Just because it's turned down doesn't change anything, it is still in the signal path and doing whatever it does--regardless of volume. To hear the difference between the Focusrite and the 2488 preamps, you have to listen to the Focusrite without the 2488 in the signal path at all. Or through an insert or line input, as has been mentioned.
And what I think MCI2424 is talking about is the layering of multiple tracks, not individual tracks. I agree with him in that regard. It's much harder to hear the difference between gear on a single track than it is once you start layering those tracks on top of one another. Once you start doing that, you can start to more easily hear what you are paying for in quality gear.
Just because it's turned down doesn't change anything, it is still in the signal path and doing whatever it does--regardless of volume. To hear the difference between the Focusrite and the 2488 preamps, you have to listen to the Focusrite without the 2488 in the signal path at all. Or through an insert or line input, as has been mentioned.
And what I think MCI2424 is talking about is the layering of multiple tracks, not individual tracks. I agree with him in that regard. It's much harder to hear the difference between gear on a single track than it is once you start layering those tracks on top of one another. Once you start doing that, you can start to more easily hear what you are paying for in quality gear.
R
RAMI
Guest
I understand what you're saying about the 2488 coloring the tracks. And until I get a chance to listen to it through just the FOCUSRITE, I won't hear the difference.
I just thought "slaughtering" was a bit over-the-top. Though, he may be right. The only way for me to find out would be to do a song not using the FOCUSRITE at all and see how much of a difference, for better or worse, there is.
SonicAlbert
Super-Sonic "Herb" Albert
Or find a way to record the Focusrite without routing it through the preamps on the 2488. Like record a bunch of tracks twice, once with the Focusrite and once with the 2488.
But I wouldn't be too surprised if there wasn't too terribly much difference anyway, since the Focusrite and 2488 are roughly in the same budget gear category. I'm not a huge fan of the Platinum series anyway, as I think I mentioned earlier. If you used a Grace 101, Groove Tubes Brick, or DAV Electronics BG-1 and felt it sounded the same, then I'd think something was definitely not quite right. But that Platinum series stuff just doesn't do it for me at all.
But I wouldn't be too surprised if there wasn't too terribly much difference anyway, since the Focusrite and 2488 are roughly in the same budget gear category. I'm not a huge fan of the Platinum series anyway, as I think I mentioned earlier. If you used a Grace 101, Groove Tubes Brick, or DAV Electronics BG-1 and felt it sounded the same, then I'd think something was definitely not quite right. But that Platinum series stuff just doesn't do it for me at all.
Fishmed
Well-known member
+1
I agree whole heartedly. I went from a board with good mic pres to a board with poor pres thinking the quality would not make THAT much of a difference. On projects with a handful of tracks (3 to 5) the difference was not horrible, but on projects with a greater number of tracks, it was a BIG difference. The overall mix got muddy, and the mixing process became more difficult to do. ONE track test comparisons can be quite deceiving in the true quality of a mic pre.
8
89gtsleeper
New member
Seriously RAMI, you know I respect your music and what you've done with your equipment. I'd REALLY like to know what you think about the 2488 pre against the other pre all by itself, not running through the 2488 at all.
I am in the same boat. I've got everything I need for my recordings for now. I got all the initial stuff, ran out of money for awhile, and have gotten really used to utilizing what I've already got. When I first got my 2488, I was thinking, there is no way I'm going to get decent vocals with this thing without a pre. Two months later, I totally disagree. I am about to have some more money to spend, and am at that point where I don't even know if it will do me any good. I know if I spend 5 grand on a pre-amp, I will be very happy with the sound, but a ~500 preamp... I'm starting to think there's no point. Maybe just something for the bass direct in, but other than that, I don't think I need any thing for vocals yet. Let me know. Thanks. --Matt
I am in the same boat. I've got everything I need for my recordings for now. I got all the initial stuff, ran out of money for awhile, and have gotten really used to utilizing what I've already got. When I first got my 2488, I was thinking, there is no way I'm going to get decent vocals with this thing without a pre. Two months later, I totally disagree. I am about to have some more money to spend, and am at that point where I don't even know if it will do me any good. I know if I spend 5 grand on a pre-amp, I will be very happy with the sound, but a ~500 preamp... I'm starting to think there's no point. Maybe just something for the bass direct in, but other than that, I don't think I need any thing for vocals yet. Let me know. Thanks. --Matt
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
I'd like to introduce another factor in the equation as well, (just to mess things up even more 
).
While a buildup of similar mic pres can add too much tint to a mix (equally true BTW for expensive pres, it's just that expensive pres seem to have a more epleasurable tint to the less discriminating ear), the same is true for microphones. Too many similar-sounding mics will have the same kind of effect, arguably even more so.
The factor I'd like to bring in though is the idea of not thinking of mics and pres seperately, but rather as an integrated system. Matching of mics to pres makes a difference when building up tracks. For example, let's say you have two different microphones of signifigantly different sound and signigificantly different output impedance, and you have two different preamps of signifigantly different input impedance and characteristics. You essentially have four different sounds. Add another nic and you don't have 5 different sounds, but you now have 6 (3 mics x 2 pres). And a third pre and the number of potential sounds runs up to 9. (This of course assumes you select a third pre with substantially different characteristics from the fitrs two.)
The point here is that adding a pre or two to one's inventory isn't just a matter of price, but of personality as well. Check the specs and the reviews for input impedance, available gain and circuit type. Look for quality in price, but perhaps just as important, look for something different in character than what you already have, because how they react with the microphones will be different.
Check the reviews by qualified experienced engineers. Often times you'll hear stuff like, "Preamp A sounded the same as preamp B when using mic X, but when using mic Y, such and such of a difference could be heard", or "mic # 1 sounded harsh and tinny through preamp A but crisp and clean through preamp B, but that's the only mic that sounded better that way". etc.
Don't *just* look at price when looking at preamps - especially when on a somewhat limited budget. Instead look at how you can get the most variety of sound (both good and bad) for your money. This means not only a variety of mics, but at least some variety of pres, and mix them up in a production, PURPOSEFULLY matching mic to pre to get a SPECIFIC sound.
This also has the added advantage of cutting down the amount of EQ needed later, of which excessive use of the same EQ will only add it's own coloration and mud to the overall package later.
G.
).While a buildup of similar mic pres can add too much tint to a mix (equally true BTW for expensive pres, it's just that expensive pres seem to have a more epleasurable tint to the less discriminating ear), the same is true for microphones. Too many similar-sounding mics will have the same kind of effect, arguably even more so.
The factor I'd like to bring in though is the idea of not thinking of mics and pres seperately, but rather as an integrated system. Matching of mics to pres makes a difference when building up tracks. For example, let's say you have two different microphones of signifigantly different sound and signigificantly different output impedance, and you have two different preamps of signifigantly different input impedance and characteristics. You essentially have four different sounds. Add another nic and you don't have 5 different sounds, but you now have 6 (3 mics x 2 pres). And a third pre and the number of potential sounds runs up to 9. (This of course assumes you select a third pre with substantially different characteristics from the fitrs two.)
The point here is that adding a pre or two to one's inventory isn't just a matter of price, but of personality as well. Check the specs and the reviews for input impedance, available gain and circuit type. Look for quality in price, but perhaps just as important, look for something different in character than what you already have, because how they react with the microphones will be different.
Check the reviews by qualified experienced engineers. Often times you'll hear stuff like, "Preamp A sounded the same as preamp B when using mic X, but when using mic Y, such and such of a difference could be heard", or "mic # 1 sounded harsh and tinny through preamp A but crisp and clean through preamp B, but that's the only mic that sounded better that way". etc.
Don't *just* look at price when looking at preamps - especially when on a somewhat limited budget. Instead look at how you can get the most variety of sound (both good and bad) for your money. This means not only a variety of mics, but at least some variety of pres, and mix them up in a production, PURPOSEFULLY matching mic to pre to get a SPECIFIC sound.
This also has the added advantage of cutting down the amount of EQ needed later, of which excessive use of the same EQ will only add it's own coloration and mud to the overall package later.
G.
R
RAMI
Guest
I'm sorry I missed this. I don't know how I did. When I responded to the "slaughter" post, I hadn't seen this. The accumalitive effect makes sense to me, and I didn't even consider it until it was mentioned....Thanx for the help.
I was hoping I could take the digital out from the Focusrite, but a digital out attachment is an "EXTRA". Would going from the digital out eliminate my pre's on the 2488???
At this point, I'm just asking to find out.. But the more knowledgeable people that posted in this thread have pretty much convinced me to clean up my signal chain. Thanx for all the help.
SonicAlbert
Super-Sonic "Herb" Albert
Yes, using the converter in the Focusrite would take the 2488 preamps out of the equation.
Cleaning up one's signal chain is always a good idea! Usually, simpler and more direct is always a good thing. The less electronics the better, especailly when dealing with budget gear.
8
89gtsleeper
New member
...and budget cables!!!
R
RAMI
Guest
M
MCI2424
New member
I have had to mix 24 tracks of rock music done with Mackie pre-amps and in this context, the pre-amps slaughtered the whole mix bad. The low end was muddy, the midrange had a "honk' that I never could get rid of completely. There is no fixing stackup of cheaper pre-amps because you can't get back any of the actual detail of the recording. It ends up like looking at a low resolution pidture on your computer. The Focusrite pre-amp line are actually good (at least the platinum series) and probably would not contribute much to the stackup problems, but the end goal of buying any pre-amp is to bypass the stock pre.