The myth of preamp snobbery?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Todzilla
  • Start date Start date
Todzilla

Todzilla

New member
Blame it on my lame ears if you want to, but...

I just don't hear the difference between a solid mid-range preamp and the boutiquey shit that people Jones for.

My mics: Neuman U-89, Crown CM-700s, AKG212, SM-57s.

My preamps: Demeter HM-1, MOTU 896HD, Art Tube MP, Mackie 1202 pre-VLZ

I borrowed my next door neighbors' beloved API lunch box loaded with pres and his Brent Averill neve clones and did a bunch of tracks. Sure, they sound good, but I couldn't really differentiate them from my standard Demeter and frankly the cheap pres in my MOTU box. Low-end preamps certainly suck, and I thought I wanted to build some seventhcircleaudio pres, but my API and Averill experience just didn't show me it is worth it. Kind of liberating realization.

Microphones themselves make a huge difference to my ear, but I just don't see the big whoop about the high-end pres. Maybe I should just buy a second U-89 instead...
 
there is very, very little difference when comparing say a single voice track. in my experience, the difference comes out in the mix.
 
Actually, it is in the final mix that I find little differences.

It may be my lack of familiarity of using these devices optimally, but there's something to be said for liking what you've got.

Here's the track mostly finished, using snobby mic pres into a MOTU 896HD and G5 - >


Here's a track mostly finished, using my Demeter and Mackie pres into a Fostex 8-track, then transferred to the G5 for additional tracks: ->


Using essentially the same mics, other than the hiss from the analog world of Limbo, I don't hear a significant diff...
 
Okay, you're allowed to have that position. This is the reason I don't give good wine to my mom. She is just as happy with Baby Duck as she is with some really nice aged red. I personally want to dump Baby Duck down the drain or polish silverware with it. If you don't get anything out of it, then don't buy it. Heck, it took me 10 years to really HEAR compression and what it was all these old coots were talking about. Whatever. So the question is, does your end result sound good and are you happy with it? That is all that matters. The old adage that you pay 90% for the last 10% of performance certainly applies. It is a silly argument really. I mean, we would all love to have the best of whatever. But don't go starving your kids to get the latest Neve clone.... but if I had the cash, I would have a pile of 'em. :)
 
BGump,

Yeah man, it just may be that my recording skill set is not sufficiently advanced to reveal those diffs. I've been recording semi-professionally since the early 70s, but the more I do it, the more difficult getting the perfect sound seems.

I guess the point of my post is that mics, rooms, monitors and technique make a far greater difference in my sound than pre's, compression and cabling ever have.

But hey, that's just me...
 
One track...maybe not so much but layer up about 60 tracks and the noise piles up. Not to mention the room and cheap mic noise too!
 
Here's how I approach high-end gear, especially pre's:

I use the ones I've got until I can hear their limitations, which might be awhile. I used the ones in my Mackie Micro 1202 until one day I could hear how shitty they were no matter HOW I eq'd or compressed or WHATEVER them. Then, the two on my digi 001 souded like absolute heaven. However, after living with them for awhile, I could hear them holding my mixes back. I bought some cheap externals which were fine... for awhile. Now I'm ready to step up, I'm thinking RNP, or Grace if I can swing it. My point is, when it's time for the next level of gear, I just know it. And in the meantime, I can rest assured I've squeezed every last ounce of usefulness out of my old shit.
 
Dang, man. I have an 896 and I can tell a WORLD of difference in it and some nicer pres. Even the pres in my onyx board sound clearer to me than those things. They can be alright, but the same as an API? Certainly you're entitled to your opinion, but I thought I'd share my experiences with similar circumstances.

rory
 
I went from a Mackie 1202 vlz to a Soundcraft Spirit SX 20 channel (12 pre's -still prosumer). I heard a difference. Not humongas differences, but it was alot better, I could hear the high end without getting harsh even when cranked up for dynamics. Also the low end was much tighter, so you could actually hear the notes being recorded-less mud.
Then I got a Grace 101 !! woah. well maybe not that much, but it really came together as far as HF, mids and lows. Now making a mic placement makes alot more sense. I mean even just a few inches of the angle can a aural difference-and can be heard. I could'nt really do that with the Mackie, got better with the Sx. Now I'm talking about changing the angle within the instruments sound projection, not close and/or ambient distances. The sweet spot per se.
Now for close distances it makes a difference, but maybe not as drastic. For ambient (far field) distances, it make a whole hecka of a difference. I can hear the character of the room, and it could make a change from a corner of near the ceiling etc etc. With the Mackie pre's it just sound like $hit. All in all , a better pre has made be more conscience of where the heck I'm placing the mic, what mic I use and the sound I'm after.
Of course the mic does make a overall bigger difference, but now I can hear the mics characteristics and room to my advantage.
Try to check out a clean pre, and make some comparisons. The pre's ya'll mentioned have color to a degree. Even Smackie has a color itself at certain gain levels.
For me the source/ room is more important than the pre's as long as the pre is decent. But where the budget is for decent pre is up to the users discretion.
The right tool helps if you know how and what to use it for.
I'm not saying I know what the *uck I am doing, far from it. But I have heard the difference in these pre's. But it is a learning process. I pulled the plug on A-designs P1!!

T
 
90% of the cash is spent on the last 10% of the quality
(or so they say)

but yea. pre's make less difference than say, mics.
 
fraserhutch said:
This required YET another thread????????? Sheesh!
Click to expand...

It requires one every two months. I'm already looking forward to the July installment. :D
 
tc4b said:
Here's how I approach high-end gear, especially pre's:

I use the ones I've got until I can hear their limitations, which might be awhile. I used the ones in my Mackie Micro 1202 until one day I could hear how shitty they were no matter HOW I eq'd or compressed or WHATEVER them. Then, the two on my digi 001 souded like absolute heaven. However, after living with them for awhile, I could hear them holding my mixes back. I bought some cheap externals which were fine... for awhile. Now I'm ready to step up, I'm thinking RNP, or Grace if I can swing it. My point is, when it's time for the next level of gear, I just know it. And in the meantime, I can rest assured I've squeezed every last ounce of usefulness out of my old shit.
Click to expand...
Yup thats my thing too!You never know a peice of gear till you learn what you don't like about it! :)
 
giraffe said:
90% of the cash is spent on the last 10% of the quality
(or so they say)

but yea. pre's make less difference than say, mics.
Click to expand...

Just like race cars!
 
i agree with the comments above about the room coming alive..
 
Todzilla said:
BGump,

Yeah man, it just may be that my recording skill set is not sufficiently advanced to reveal those diffs. I've been recording semi-professionally since the early 70s, but the more I do it, the more difficult getting the perfect sound seems.

I guess the point of my post is that mics, rooms, monitors and technique make a far greater difference in my sound than pre's, compression and cabling ever have.

But hey, that's just me...
Click to expand...


Who knows just exactly what percentage of difference high-end pres make ....Who Knows?

Yer statement about it getting more and more difficult to get the 'perfect sound' should tell you something. Perhaps your ears are further advanced than you'd like to think.

In you track comparison, did it take you LONGER to get the sound with the 'boutiquey' gear than it did with your regular rig? Perhaps you simply have not heard a piece of gear that fits what you like to do stylewise. API's, though one of the best sounds ever made, are not necessarily the magic bullet for everthing.

Your second link didnt work for me so I cant comment on it....but your first link did. I thought the song was interesting....The bass was way way too low-mid loud and covered up the vocal clarity. The keys werent balanced in the soundfield and the drums were kinda flat...Still a cool sound and song. I didnt hear the gear getting in the way though. Usually with a dense mix done with a lot of cheaper gear, I can really hear where its a gear problem and not simply a matter of taste with a mix. I didnt hear that with your tracks made on boutique gear.

Usually, the BIG difference is what you dont hear and what you dont have to work around in order to get what you want to hear.
 
the room
Click to expand...

ding ding ding! we have a winner.

i've found that the extra added sizzle/sparkle/whatever of high-end preamps aren't really noticeable unless you have a room with proper acoustics...i myself have used the brent averill 1073 units in a great room on a number of instruments and with several pristine mics, and i can tell that there IS a huge difference, but only when the entire recording chain is up to snuff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top