Vocal Pre's

[Myriad_Rocker]

FMR touts the RNP as transparent....it says that if you want to hear the voice and not the pre, choose this pre.

Well, what if I want some coloring from the pre?

Here's the low down...I'm going for full blown rock vocals. I'm talking Aerosmith, Nickelback, you know...radio rock vocals.

I've been looking at the Joe Meek stuff and I've heard good things about it.

And to be honest, I don't know what the hell I'm doing...But I'm sure willing to learn.

 

[chessrock]

Well, for starters ... you don't actually sing in to the mic pre.

That's an important one to understand before you go any further.

Scratch that ... I suppose you could sing in to a mic pre, but it's going to wind up being a very weak signal, and I wouldn't particularly recommend it.

What I would highly recommend would be some sort of "transducer," ... otherwise known as a "microphone."

 

[Myriad_Rocker]

Well, for starters ... you don't actually sing in to the mic pre.

That's an important one to understand before you go any further.

Scratch that ... I suppose you could sing in to a mic pre, but it's going to wind up being a very weak signal, and I wouldn't particularly recommend it.

What I would highly recommend would be some sort of "transducer," ... otherwise known as a "microphone."

Um...I'm aware of this...I have a few mics already. If I didn't, I wouldn't be asking about pre's.

 

[chessrock]

I'm not entirely sure why so many people, all of a sudden, are all after this specific use stuff. One guy wants a "rap" mic pre. Some other guy was even talking about how a certain A/D converter was too "rock" sounding for him. That's some classic stuff.

Anyway, I don't really know what you want a mic pre to do for you. Maybe some sort of tube design that distorts if you crank it? Maybe an API or something that saturates a little?

I dunno, but this mid-level stuff you're talking about is mostly just plain 'ol gain. Nothing too exciting ... takes a mic up to line level.

 

[Myriad_Rocker]

I'm not entirely sure why so many people, all of a sudden, are all after this specific use stuff. One guy wants a "rap" mic pre. Some other guy was even talking about how a certain A/D converter was too "rock" sounding for him. That's some classic stuff.

Why? All of a sudden? I doubt it's a "trend" or anything. To answer the why....well, because. That's what I want. Why does it matter? I'm just looking for good leads on what to look for...is there something wrong with that?

Anyway, I don't really know what you want a mic pre to do for you. Maybe some sort of tube design that distorts if you crank it? Maybe an API or something that saturates a little?

I dunno, but this mid-level stuff you're talking about is mostly just plain 'ol gain. Nothing too exciting ... takes a mic up to line level.

Can you explain what you mean by "this mid-level stuff you're talking about" and how it's mostly just "plain 'ol gain," because I'm not sure I know what you mean.

 

[hasbeen]

How much do you wanna spend?

 

[sbenak1@mac.com]

I have an ART Studio V3 that I like for some things. It's a tube pre, and if you clip it, it give a nice warm tube distortion. It can be a little noisy, but I use a compressor/expander on the front end that takes care of most of the problems. I've listened to the Eureka channel strip eq/pre/comp (solid state) and it's much better overall - much more transparent quiet, but it's $500 for a single channel. Steep, but worth it, if you can swing the $$ and you don't want colored sound. For $100, the ART will help, but you will need something to help you get rid of the noise if you crank the output. Don't bother with the limiting functions, IMO. I only use the "warm" (guitar) and "neutral" settings(vocal). When I've used the other setting, it's too much color for what I want, but it might work for some applications.

 

[xstatic]

Personally, unless you are going to spend around $1k or up, I would go with something that is meant to be more of a cleaner signal. My experience with cheaper preamps is that when they start trying to change the sound it ends up not being a good thing. At least with a decent fairly transparent preamp you have the option to process later with much more success.

As far as preamps for specific types of things.... This is common practice amongst experienced engineers. Certain preamps just do different things to different mics that can be very pleasent. This does not mean that mic selection is not important. Mic selection is still more important (at least to me). But overlooking the advantages of different preamps is a pretty silly mistake to me. Every part of your signal chain changes how the end results will come out. Sometimes certain pairings seem to work really nicely. I am always surprised at how much I like the sound of a Nemann TLM 103 through an Avalon 737. I like the two together more than just one or the other paired up with most equally qualified equipment. They jsut seem to play nice to me

I agree with Chessrock that the word color gets thrown around a little too loosely, but it does impart some sort of intent. Also, to a person that is used to cheap Mackie, Behringer and Soundcraft preamps, a "clean" preamp may seem very colored. Thats mostly because they have yet to hear what their signal chain actually sounds like until they hear it like that. I have 96 channels of incredibly clean gain here at my studio. But my "colored" Chandler gets just as much airtime

That is extremely silly in my opinion though to classify converters by genre

 

[Myriad_Rocker]

I want to say money isn't an object...but it is. I suppose I can spend about $500...maybe a little more. And I'm open to used gear.

Like I said, though...I was looking at the JoeMeek stuff. Specifically the OneQ. And judging by suggestions around here, I've come up with a list of possibles. If I could get opinions on these or maybe some to add to my list, that would be great. I don't know if it matters, but keep in mind that I'm going for a rock vocal.

Also, I saw a studio projects tube pre on musician's friend....any good?

JoeMeek OneQ
DMP-3
RNP

 

[fenix]

i gotta side with chessrock on this. the mid level stuff is just plain ole gain.


I just got a great river single channel preamp. it's NOT plain ole gain.

 

[chessrock]

I want to say money isn't an object...but it is. I suppose I can spend about $500...maybe a little more. And I'm open to used gear.[/B]

You might like a Groove Tubes brick. There does seem to be sort of a propensity towards tube gear amongst the rock community in general, I suppose. And the brick's good in that price range.

Seriously, though, it's not you that I'm picking on specifically. It's just the questions I see a lot on the board lately, in general. It seems to be a general trend for people to ask what kind of mic pre -- even converter -- to get for a particular genre of music. When, to me, it isn't really about that.

It's kind of like asking "What size shoe should I buy for a formal party?"

Or "What's the best toaster to buy for wheat bread as opposed to rye?"

"What's a good color shirt to wear for doing yard work?"

I'm still waiting for someone to ask what kind of accoustic treatment they should get for doing country/western music. Actually, when you think of it, it really does make more sense to tailor accoustic treatment to music genre than it would a mic pre (i.e. more and larger bass traps for hip-hop if using subwoofers for monitoring ... more low-mid absorption for rock / pop, etc.) .

 

[Myriad_Rocker]

I don't get the phrase mid-level is plaind old gain? Explain?

 

[chessrock]

I don't get the phrase mid-level is plaind old gain? Explain?

It's because of the rain in Spain.


Alright, what it means is that, among the options listed, and actually among most of the options in that price bracket ... you have mostly stuff that will amplify a mic signal to a line level. That's the function of the mic pre, and that's what it does. If you were looking for something that imparts a sound or has some sort of mojo, then you might look elsewhere -- API, DW Fearn, Brent Averil Neve, etc.

The Joemeek will give you a sound, but it isn't going to come from the mic pre section.

 

[Myriad_Rocker]

So you're saying that it doesn't matter in that price point....only that it gives me a good clean signal?

 

[tmix]

You might like a Groove Tubes brick. There does seem to be sort of a propensity towards tube gear amongst the rock community in general, I suppose. And the brick's good in that price range.

Seriously, though, it's not you that I'm picking on specifically. It's just the questions I see a lot on the board lately, in general. It seems to be a general trend for people to ask what kind of mic pre -- even converter -- to get for a particular genre of music. When, to me, it isn't really about that.

.

I think that if a certain piece of gear imparts a type of sound to something that is contradictory to the sound you are trying to accomplish , then it is important to avoid that.Just like mics that are overly bright you wont want on sibelant sources.
I was the one that metioned the converter whose analogue output / input circuitry colored the sound too much. It is made by Universal Audio who tends to make things that lend a certain "sound" that is deemed desirable by those of the rock genre, much like your suggestion for the Brick pre that seems to impart something to the sound. The converters performance was being compare to some others and ther was comments on how different one unit sounded compared to another with the same source material played through it.

Sure you can probably use anything of good quality and work out the sound, but why not buy stuff that naturally lends the sound you are looking for. I would buy an instrument that sounded contrary to what I was looking for.

Yeah I agree that a lot of the questions people ask may seem naive and a lot of marketing hype about toilet paper for rock and roll behinds, may go a little overboard, but some of the sonic distinction is legit.

Tom

 

[Myriad_Rocker]

I think that if a certain piece of gear imparts a type of sound to something that is contradictory to the sound you are trying to accomplish , then it is important to avoid that.Just like mics that are overly bright you wont want on sibelant sources.
I was the one that metioned the converter whose analogue output / input circuitry colored the sound too much. It is made by Universal Audio who tends to make things that lend a certain "sound" that is deemed desirable by those of the rock genre, much like your suggestion for the Brick pre that seems to impart something to the sound. The converters performance was being compare to some others and ther was comments on how different one unit sounded compared to another with the same source material played through it.

Sure you can probably use anything of good quality and work out the sound, but why not buy stuff that naturally lends the sound you are looking for. I would buy an instrument that sounded contrary to what I was looking for.

Yeah I agree that a lot of the questions people ask may seem naive and a lot of marketing hype about toilet paper for rock and roll behinds, may go a little overboard, but some of the sonic distinction is legit.

Tom

So you are suggesting I consider something by Universal Audio?

 

[tmix]

I am saying that many studios use the Universal Audios stuff to achieve a particular sound that is deemed important for Hard / Dense "wall of sound" kind of rock.
The bad thing is their stuff is probably out of your price range. The same with API / Manley and others like them.

To be fair to Chessrock,(not that he needs me to) most of what will color the sound is what happens dynamically, circuitrywise and EQ wise, after the plain old amplification of the mic signal. Tube preamps start to color the audio after it gets pushed to a certain limit (at least those designed that way) as will the channel strip type that has compression and or EQ added.

What are you currently using to record?

Tom

 

[Myriad_Rocker]

I'm using an MXL V67G into a PreSonus TubePre and then line in into my sound card.

I get a clean signal...no audiable noise really...but then again, I need some new monitors (which I have the money for and will purchase as soon as I decide between the Tannoy Reveals or the Wharedale's). When listening back, though...there's just some sort of "sparkle" that's missing....I can't pin point it.

*sigh* I just don't know what to get. There are so many options. I definately want the most bang for my buck. I'm seriously a total n00b at recording. Even though I've learned so much this past year, I'm still no where near where I need to be. I've mostly only learned about mixing and mastering...and still have lots and lots more to learn.

 

[chessrock]

I think that if a certain piece of gear imparts a type of sound to something that is contradictory to the sound you are trying to accomplish , then it is important to avoid that.Just like mics that are overly bright you wont want on sibelant sources.

Absolutely. If you have a sibilant voice, don't use a mic that exaggerates sibilance. The point I'm trying to make is that sibilant vocalists are not unique to a particular music genre ... or even a group of music genres. They're everywhere.

When I record a sibilant vocalist, I'll tend to gravitate towards an Electrovoice RE-20, for example. I do this regardless of what kind of music is being sung, spoken or rapped. I don't think to myself: "Oh, that's a voiceover mic," or "that's a kick drum mic," or that's an "R&B mic." I just know it's a mic that works really well with sibilant vocalists. End of story.

Same goes with mic pres. You have to consider the source ... what it sounds like and what is going to match well with it. I know, for instance, that I like the way dynamic mics behave with a mic pre that has a transformer input, for example. Now I happen to use dynamics on all sorts of instruments and in all sorts of situations ... from blues to polka.

For that reason, I like to have some pres on hand with trannies at the input. Never did it even cross my mind to think something like: "Yea, but that's only going to work for the metal and the blues guys. What about the Jazz guys?"

I just don't think that way. And you shouldn't think that way. No one with half a brain larger than a pea should think that way. Have I made my point yet? The fact that some do think that way, frankly, astonishes me. But then again, Bush was re-elected by a majority of the voters in the last election, so I guess nothing really surprizes me that much any more.

 

[formerlyfzfile]

My humble two cents...........

This is the way I've come to understand the "pre thing" through my experiences.

I am a hobbiest and have a limited budget.

I invested in one decent pre so far...... a Universal Audio 2108.
It has a decsent range of character and is great for drums and cabs and keyboard DI'd into it.
I do find it hard to get a really good vocal sound out of it, although it can be done, but its distortion characteristics on vox are usually not so pleasing.

I do have other pres...... a DBX 286a and a Tascam M30 mixing board.

Should I get get another pre????? Probably.

The 286a is almost always too "brown" sounding (dark/veiled) in a bad way for most things and the UA is just a pain in the ass for vox sometimes... although it rocks on instruments.
The m30 has great pres and pretty good EQ but no phantom power.

HOWEVER ........ it is aways the case that no matter which pre I use, it only changes the tone (relatively) slightly.

I get MUCH MUCH more tonal variation from mic selection.

So .... I've been investing in more mics.

Bang for buck I get a much broader pallet of tonal color choices and can almost always get the sound I need by changing mics as opposed to pres (even though I'm limited to 3 choices).

So my advice would tend to follow and perhaps expand upon that already given ........ invest an a good clean pre ..... an RNP or maybe the Brick (which I think you probably will notice some difference over you Presonus) and get a bunch more mics.

-mike