junplugged
Taking the slow road
chessrock said:
Nice, there's a plus for that pre right there. if you can get that kind of service out of a company.
Nice, there's a plus for that pre right there. if you can get that kind of service out of a company.
M
mixsit
Well-known member
One small feature I've found very convenient on my old Symetrix 202 is the seperate balanced and unbalanced outputs. I know there are plenty of work-arounds but I think I'd miss a 1/4" out for monitoring.
Hmm...MP-2NV.
I wish.
Wayne
Hmm...MP-2NV.
I wish.
Wayne
C
chessrock
Banned
junplugged said:
Most of the smaller pro audio companies will provide that kind of service. They won't be in business for long if they don't . . . although it does seem that Mark is particularly on the ball.
tubedude
New member
The RNP has 2 outs on each channel.
H
Henri Devill
New member
tubedude said:
Would that be Balanced and Unbalanaced on those outs?
Don
M
mixsit
Well-known member
tubedude said:
Ah, yes. The main and the insert-out.
Thanks for the bump.
wayne
S
shackrock
New member
to continue...
hmm well alright...this is a good start for me..
let me ask another question though.
right now i'm using my behringer 802a for preamps....
just to be sure, i will hear a NOTICABLE difference in that mixer's preamps and a real preamp (audiobuddy/dmp3/rnp/etc.etc.)...RIGHT?
going straight to delta 44.
hmm well alright...this is a good start for me..
let me ask another question though.
right now i'm using my behringer 802a for preamps....
just to be sure, i will hear a NOTICABLE difference in that mixer's preamps and a real preamp (audiobuddy/dmp3/rnp/etc.etc.)...RIGHT?
going straight to delta 44.
Middleman
Professional Amateur
In a word, yes. Less noise and overall improved quality. Depending on your mic of course.
O
ozraves
New member
Re: to continue...
ok, it all depends on what you mean by noticeable. the rnp is going to be better about 99 times out of 100. the others are closer to the behringer so you're not going to see the kind of improvement you'd imagine.
if you can't get it done with the behringer then there is little point in even upgrading. you should stick with your behringer until you've maxed it out for all its worth.
as far as the behringer quality, here's a friend's song with vocals and bass tracked through a little behringer mixer:
steve
www.piemusic.com
shackrock said:
ok, it all depends on what you mean by noticeable. the rnp is going to be better about 99 times out of 100. the others are closer to the behringer so you're not going to see the kind of improvement you'd imagine.
if you can't get it done with the behringer then there is little point in even upgrading. you should stick with your behringer until you've maxed it out for all its worth.
as far as the behringer quality, here's a friend's song with vocals and bass tracked through a little behringer mixer:
steve
www.piemusic.com
S
shackrock
New member
hmmm...ok.
the reason i'm saying this is really because my final mixes of songs always sound sooooooo "RAW" or "DRY" or "UNMASTERED"...
even when i add my own eqing, or ozone, or anything else like that - it still sounds pretty "raw" to me. The only thing that i can do which i am a little pleased with is simply putting the "BBE sonic maximizer" on a little bit..it makes it sound more "commerical" or brighter/warmer at the same time.
i hate to just simply turn that on, cuz i dont even know what its doing. so i figured i'd try to figure out what the problem was. i'm thinking it has a little bit to do with pre's - cuz that would help get my vox, gutiars, drums a lot warmer right?
i also noticed that recording my drum tracks on a 4track vs. going straight to my delta 44 yields really different results... any thoughts there?
the reason i'm saying this is really because my final mixes of songs always sound sooooooo "RAW" or "DRY" or "UNMASTERED"...
even when i add my own eqing, or ozone, or anything else like that - it still sounds pretty "raw" to me. The only thing that i can do which i am a little pleased with is simply putting the "BBE sonic maximizer" on a little bit..it makes it sound more "commerical" or brighter/warmer at the same time.
i hate to just simply turn that on, cuz i dont even know what its doing. so i figured i'd try to figure out what the problem was. i'm thinking it has a little bit to do with pre's - cuz that would help get my vox, gutiars, drums a lot warmer right?
i also noticed that recording my drum tracks on a 4track vs. going straight to my delta 44 yields really different results... any thoughts there?
C
chessrock
Banned
It's going to be a combination of things. Better pres might give you a 1-2% improvement over what you've got. Better reverb might get you another 3-4% improvement. Better eq (Wave's Masters bundle Linear EQ kicks much ass) might even get you another 2-3% of the way there. Practice and knowlege will likely account for another 50-60% over time. . . so eventually the small chunks of improvement will add up to much more polished-sounding mixes. The frustrating thing is knowing that it probably isn't a matter of any "one thing."
Middleman
Professional Amateur
shackrock
The DMP3 delivers a warmer sound over the Behringer, not so thin and harsh sounding. But Chessrock is right; it’s a combination of things especially understanding each instruments sound range as well as the vocal. The 3 biggest changes which have moved me away from bad recordings towards better sounding recordings are understanding EQ, knowing when two instruments or the voice are competing for the same sonic space and buying a good multi effects device for vocal tracks. I am still struggling with production and the low end sound in my recordings.
Just out of curiosity, tell me about your monitors.
The pres will deliver a fuller sound but hearing the difference is irrelevant without accurate monitors. When I got some accurate speakers I began hearing things that I had not heard and my mixes became better as a result.
Did the DMP3 radically change my sound, no? It did improve the sound of my vocals and delivered more frequencies to the tracks which gave me more choices when I mix around the sounds of other instruments.
The DMP3 delivers a warmer sound over the Behringer, not so thin and harsh sounding. But Chessrock is right; it’s a combination of things especially understanding each instruments sound range as well as the vocal. The 3 biggest changes which have moved me away from bad recordings towards better sounding recordings are understanding EQ, knowing when two instruments or the voice are competing for the same sonic space and buying a good multi effects device for vocal tracks. I am still struggling with production and the low end sound in my recordings.
Just out of curiosity, tell me about your monitors.
The pres will deliver a fuller sound but hearing the difference is irrelevant without accurate monitors. When I got some accurate speakers I began hearing things that I had not heard and my mixes became better as a result.
Did the DMP3 radically change my sound, no? It did improve the sound of my vocals and delivered more frequencies to the tracks which gave me more choices when I mix around the sounds of other instruments.
MrZekeMan
New member
tubedude,tubedude said:
How do you compare the RNP to your Sytek?
Taylor
M
mixsit
Well-known member
chessrock said:
I think this might be a pretty good analogy except the 50-60% might even be understated. (Assuming we're rulling out the importance of song and performance.)
I've been getting some fairly nice finished projects built on basic Mackie pres (not the "pro") and the Symetrix, so I've been draging my feet in this area. On the other hand, I simply may not know what I've been missing.
I would place my gains in quality have come from better mics, room improvements, lexicons, and I feel a jump going from analog/hardware mixing on the 8-buss to Sonar. But the tools are there, much of it has to be 'what to do where and why' issues.
I know damned well not all my equipment purchases have been..err, wise, and good quality building blocks are never a waste however.
Cheers
Wayne
O
ozraves
New member
shackrock said:
well, as i said, if you can't get a good sound out of the behringer, then don't waste your money. instead, invest your time in learning the craft.
i'd suggest that you look at buying mark gifford's excellent cd-rom on home recording. check it out:
www.pomona1.com
steve
www.piemusic.com
tubedude
New member
I have been screaming the virtues of mics and pre's here forever.
Someone said that getting good pre's would bump you up 2%. That is totally incorrect as my experience has been at least a 50% improvement in overall mix clarity.
I have songs that were tracked using entirely Mackie preamps, except bass which was DI'ed through the slave on a Mesa Rectifier head (great way to get a cool bass sound by the way)... I re-tracked the entire songs (4 layered heavy guitar parts, clean doubled guitars, bass, vocals) through all RNP channels. The difference was night and day and was immediatly 10 miles closer to pro sounding and they damn near mixed themselves, with a little hi-pass and some compression here and there.
The difference between an SM57 through a Mackie (or heaven forbid- a Behringer-) and say my Sennheiser 441 through the RNP is eaxactly what most people here would differentiate between normal HR and pro sounding tracks.
Its my belief that the mics and pre's get you 90% of the way there (provided the source is good and you can place mics) not 5%, and the rest is just skillful voodoo you pull out of your ass wherever you need it.
I HIGHLY suggest looking around for Charles Dyes walk through of the mixing of a song... he goes all the way as to letting you download the actual tracks and showing you exactly what was done to every single one of them, all the way down to the minute plug-in tweak and exact levels and all that stuff. The best deal on the net right now. Period.
Someone said that getting good pre's would bump you up 2%. That is totally incorrect as my experience has been at least a 50% improvement in overall mix clarity.
I have songs that were tracked using entirely Mackie preamps, except bass which was DI'ed through the slave on a Mesa Rectifier head (great way to get a cool bass sound by the way)... I re-tracked the entire songs (4 layered heavy guitar parts, clean doubled guitars, bass, vocals) through all RNP channels. The difference was night and day and was immediatly 10 miles closer to pro sounding and they damn near mixed themselves, with a little hi-pass and some compression here and there.
The difference between an SM57 through a Mackie (or heaven forbid- a Behringer-) and say my Sennheiser 441 through the RNP is eaxactly what most people here would differentiate between normal HR and pro sounding tracks.
Its my belief that the mics and pre's get you 90% of the way there (provided the source is good and you can place mics) not 5%, and the rest is just skillful voodoo you pull out of your ass wherever you need it.
I HIGHLY suggest looking around for Charles Dyes walk through of the mixing of a song... he goes all the way as to letting you download the actual tracks and showing you exactly what was done to every single one of them, all the way down to the minute plug-in tweak and exact levels and all that stuff. The best deal on the net right now. Period.
tubedude
New member
Keep in mind the source, too...
Your Crate amp --> crate speaker --> SM57 --> cheap cable --> Behringer pre --> cheap cable --> soundblaster signal chain wont have the same kind of punch that my Mesa Rectifier --> Vintage 30's --> Mogami Cable --> RNP --> Mogami cable --> Delta 1010 has. It starts all the way at having new strings before recording, then on to the quality of guitar electronics, then to the quality and lenght of your guitar cable. Then your amp, and if its a tube head, the kind of shape the tubes are in, then on to the speakers. You see the idea. My signal is pristine up until the converters. I dont think the Delta 1010 coverters are the best, but they are certainly better than a lot of them, inlcuding the other DElta series converters. I'll remedy this in a few months though.
My tracks sound really really good right now, and I am very happy with the results and the difference in sound the RNP made all by itself over the Mackies. It also makes a good bass DI, dont forget to include that when you are talking prices and value.
The RNP is has not been beat for the price by anyone else at this point, and passing on it because it is $100 more than something else would be a shame. Sell one of those SM57's if you have to. Give blood. Sell sperm. Whatever. Dont waster your money, though.
Peace.
Your Crate amp --> crate speaker --> SM57 --> cheap cable --> Behringer pre --> cheap cable --> soundblaster signal chain wont have the same kind of punch that my Mesa Rectifier --> Vintage 30's --> Mogami Cable --> RNP --> Mogami cable --> Delta 1010 has. It starts all the way at having new strings before recording, then on to the quality of guitar electronics, then to the quality and lenght of your guitar cable. Then your amp, and if its a tube head, the kind of shape the tubes are in, then on to the speakers. You see the idea. My signal is pristine up until the converters. I dont think the Delta 1010 coverters are the best, but they are certainly better than a lot of them, inlcuding the other DElta series converters. I'll remedy this in a few months though.
My tracks sound really really good right now, and I am very happy with the results and the difference in sound the RNP made all by itself over the Mackies. It also makes a good bass DI, dont forget to include that when you are talking prices and value.
The RNP is has not been beat for the price by anyone else at this point, and passing on it because it is $100 more than something else would be a shame. Sell one of those SM57's if you have to. Give blood. Sell sperm. Whatever. Dont waster your money, though.
Peace.
M
mixsit
Well-known member
Wow. But then why not. This was exactly the kind of jump I got with a few RNC's vs...whatever else we had around. Real eye openers.
Interesting post Tubedude.
Interesting post Tubedude.
tubedude
New member
I linked up the Charles Dye stuff in the mixing forum if anyone is interested. Great stuff.
C
chessrock
Banned
tubedude said:
Try and keep in mind the context of the thread. Our friend Shackrock is pondering the merits of one budget preamp versus another -- a very modest step up.
You bring up a good point that I don't think has been touched on much. There does seem to be a good deal of merit to the idea of dynamic and/or ribbon mics being much more fussy as to what you are plugging them in to. A lot of it has to do with the whole loading issue, and the fact that most dynamics use transformers at their output.
I can see where a quality pre can make or break the sound of an sm57 and/or the 441. Not so much of an issue, though, when dealing with most modern condensers. Perhaps a good rule to keep in mind for those who must rely on their Mackies and the like is stick to transformerless condensers for the time being. What you plug them in to will become much less an issue.
The flip side to this equation, or course, is the fact that the quality of your mic will become much more important (as will the sound of your room, invariably).
Always a catch. Most of us here I am assuming have got some decent condenser mics lying around, though, so all I am assuming is not lost.