VTB-1 vs. Avalon 737

scrubs said:
Off topic:

Wow! Love both those artists. Tragic about Elliott. A great loss to the music community. Condor Ave. still chokes me up.

And NMH...can't say enough. I wish he would get around to making another album, 'cuz my copy of Aeroplane is just about worn out.

Anyway, good point, john.

Happy recording.
Click to expand...

... yeah... elliott... i had dinner with larry crane last night and we talked about him quite a bit... you said it, quite a loss.
aeroplane could very well be the last neutral milk record... i think he's done... brilliant stuff, and shit, that came out in what? '98?
sorry... don't mean to hijack the thread... back to your regularly scheduled preamp discussion ;)
 
sdelsolray said:
If I can't hear the difference, I guess it doesn't matter. Does it?
Click to expand...

This is very true. My reply here is directed at no specific individual at all (disclaimer).

The point to me is that if you can't hear the difference, than your preamps certainly aren't the limiting factor. Your ears are.

High end gear is not necessary to make a good recording. There are many other much more important factors. Yes this is a home recording board. Yes the Avalon is out of most "home recording" budgets. However, I know of plenty of home recording environments where a great deal of money is spent. Also, I am not the one pushing the Avalon on here, nor who brought this comparison to the board. I am not saying run out and buy the Avalon. I personally think that the 737 is overpriced compared to the influx of cool boutique quality gear available now adays.

I purely wanted to point out that the differences between the two units go far beyond what a test file shows. Personally, I don't want to add any "grain" to my digital setup. Possibly as an effect on a certain track, but not as an attempt to "warm" up the sound of digital. Lack of warmth does not come from digital recordings, but more from lack of experience or improper technique. My clients are continually surpised at how "warm" a digital recording can sound with proper technique and a killer front end.

My theory is that digital in and of itself is not "Cold". I will still always LOVE the sound of 2" tape. Consider though that studios that can typically afford 2" also have a host of other advantages that directly affect an albums tonal quality. Not the least of which typically includes a good engineer with good experience. The whole "digital revolution" has really brought a lot of inexperienced engineers to the scene with some pretty cheap nasty setups. This in my opinion certainly can contribute to the influx of "cold" and "stale" sounding recordings.

All that aside, I still find the VTB-1 to be an excellent unit at it's price point. I also think the Avalon (even viewing it as overpriced) is a good value. It is a quality piece of gear, but it also brings the shiny "hollywood effect" with it. I can't tell you how many clients want to see the Avalon in a studio because it was the only shiny and expensive piece of gear they saw at Guitar Center. Most have never knowingly heard it, but it's the name they know.
 
There is no comparison with those files.. the Avalon sounds WAY better in my opinion. It just sounds so much clearer and fuller. The VTB-1 seemed to add something in the midrange that I didn't like. It was also grainier.
 
There is definetly an audible difference.

What I also tried was loading it in Sonar, and tried adding compression and eq. Try eqing the two tracks. Clip 003 really was much more workable for a lack of a better term. It just responded way more to any changes you added. And as was mentioned before, multiply that audible difference, plus how it responds to being mixed, times a bunch of tracks, and there won't be any comparisson.
 
what I would like to hear is, accumilated 24 tracks of the chinese crap vs accumilated 24 tracks of the avalon.

I think you would hear a hell of a difference there.
 
xstatic said:
My theory is that digital in and of itself is not "Cold". I will still always LOVE the sound of 2" tape. Consider though that studios that can typically afford 2" also have a host of other advantages that directly affect an albums tonal quality. Not the least of which typically includes a good engineer with good experience. The whole "digital revolution" has really brought a lot of inexperienced engineers to the scene with some pretty cheap nasty setups. This in my opinion certainly can contribute to the influx of "cold" and "stale" sounding recordings.

All that aside, I still find the VTB-1 to be an excellent unit at it's price point. I also think the Avalon (even viewing it as overpriced) is a good value. It is a quality piece of gear, but it also brings the shiny "hollywood effect" with it. I can't tell you how many clients want to see the Avalon in a studio because it was the only shiny and expensive piece of gear they saw at Guitar Center. Most have never knowingly heard it, but it's the name they know.
Click to expand...

very well said. although it's fun to discuss such things this really is a somewhat ridiculous comparison. my only point was that with "inexpensive" pre's, mic's, and a/d converters (which many home recordists own), that a discrete circuit pre like the vtb-1 seems to sound better to my ears than the "inexpensive" chip based pre's out there. that may be a more valid comparison, but that's just me, of course. the whole digital vs analog, "warm" vs "sterile" thang is obviously also a matter of opinion. yes, a lot of inexperienced engineers, who also may be recording inexperienced artists, blame digital for their recordings not sounding musical. there are too many variables to comment on. nevertheless, there are some VERY experienced engineers who feel that digital does sound a bit sterile, while others love it. there is no right or wrong. i was simply trying to give some first hand experience to the person who started this thread to possibly help him out.
so keep on making the best music you can with whatever you have. it is valuable to make informed decisions when spending hard earned cash, but comparing a vtb-1 to a high end avalon pre, is kinda silly. they both have a place with different people, and their needs and financial situation.
peace - jv
 
I guess I have always just been a believer in comparing apples to apples......instead of apples to watermelons.
 
scrubs said:
Please do post your impressions of the VTB-1 after you get a chance to test it out.
Click to expand...

I got my VTB-1 tonight, for ~$90 on ebay. Compared to my old Samson mixer's preamps, this thing is ridiculously better. No noise, thick sound when the tube is set to mid, it's amazing. I'm using a GA GXL2200 mic, which gets a lot of bad reviews, but my setup does sound accurate, finally.
 
xstatic said:
I guess I have always just been a believer in comparing apples to apples......instead of apples to watermelons.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, but sometimes it's also good to compare apples to watermelons just to get a perspective on just how good the apples have become. To me, the fact that something as nice as the VTB1 can be had for a little more than $120.00 is amazing.
 
billisa said:
I agree with this, but sometimes it's also good to compare apples to watermelons just to get a perspective on just how good the apples have become. To me, the fact that something as nice as the VTB1 can be had for a little more than $120.00 is amazing.
Click to expand...

i guess that's a valid point as well... as long as we all take the hype with a grain of salt. one thing with the cheaper stuff is also wondering how long it will last. i am very happy with my vtb-1's in my humble little home studio that records no one but me, but i do wonder how they would fare in a busy studio with lots of use over time. i have a cheap little behringer board that i use only for headphone monitoring. it just sits on my desk, never moves, and does it's job fine. i also run a showcase at a club that has a new (cheap)behringer board that sees music 7 nights a week, with different bands coming in messing with it. in a couple months that board has lost 2 channels and developed a hum. you get my drift... you do get what you pay for most of the time, with exceptions.
so far the vtb-1 seems to be an amazing value. it's a very useful tool, and my personal favorite of all the pre's under $200 (and i got'em in mint condition for $75). shit, i got an oktava 319 new for $49, and an maudi audiophile 24/96 card for another $100. i'm amazed that for less than $300 i have a mic/pre/card signal chain that sounds this good. i think it's awesome that musicians with little money can buy gear that does sound pretty good, and record at home.
yeah :D - jv
 
"Chinese Crap"?

Lay off the Chinese, you idgit. They consistently build to American specs (including choice of parts). The same thing would be churned out in America with the same specs/parts.
 
That's a good point. Sometimes it is useful to compare two completely different things. What is also important though is the way things are compared and even more importantly, how that comparison applies to real life. I think the VTB-1 fills a great niche and is definately a bargain given what you get out of it compared to what you pay for it. The test CD's are actually a pretty cool tool, but in the real world are very limited in their uses.

First off, when you listen to one of those CD's, what you are listening on are definately a factor in how "accurate" or "useful" the test is. If your monitors aren't capable of reproducing tiny intricate nuances and emotion, then that greatly evens the playing field between the different tests.

Secondly, a solo'ed track done with different preamps is really only partly useful in showing just how much a preamp is really capable of. T me it is much more important how a preamp sounds once that track is placed in a mix. How does it handle EQ? How much smearing is there in the extreme frequencies? Those things are often overlooked when people choose equipment. Thats why so many people ( I am one of them) reccomend testing everything you can in your own working environment. Sometime when you get a really good mix going, go through and solo all your tracks one at a time. More often than not the solo'ed track may not sound quite like what you thought, but in the mix is exactly what is needed. Preamps are even more complicated. With a solo'ed signal they may sound much more similar to another than you originally thought. However in the mix, the preamp can really help a track find a space, energy, and light of it's own. I believe that this is the reason that so many people seem to overlook just how much a preamp cna really change things. I think they go down to their local mega music store and use the same mic to test all the different preamps. The results to them sound pretty close so they fail to see what the nicer preamp really is capable of.

I haven't even strated talking about how a lot of the nicer preamps sound so different with different mics. A lot of preamps out there sound so different because they are more accurate and are more capable of really reproducing the differences between the different mics where a cheaper preamp may kind make each different mic sound a little more similar. I also haven't talked about how good preamps can react so differently with different settings, and different gain stages. There are so many things to test that the only real way to test them is in your own environment and really putting a piece of equipment through it's paces.

Thats one of the really nice things about a shop like Mercenary. They don't just hook up a piece of equipment, listen for a second, and then turn around and "endorse" it to the general public. They ruggedly test things. They try to find what a piece of equipoment is NOT good for. They use it how "you" might use it. To me, knowing what a piece of equipment won't do well tells me just as much about it as what it will do well. I hope some of that made sense:)
 
xstatic said:
That's a good point. Sometimes it is useful to compare two completely different things. What is also important though is the way things are compared and even more importantly, how that comparison applies to real life. I think the VTB-1 fills a great niche and is definately a bargain given what you get out of it compared to what you pay for it. The test CD's are actually a pretty cool tool, but in the real world are very limited in their uses.

First off, when you listen to one of those CD's, what you are listening on are definately a factor in how "accurate" or "useful" the test is. If your monitors aren't capable of reproducing tiny intricate nuances and emotion, then that greatly evens the playing field between the different tests.

Secondly, a solo'ed track done with different preamps is really only partly useful in showing just how much a preamp is really capable of. T me it is much more important how a preamp sounds once that track is placed in a mix. How does it handle EQ? How much smearing is there in the extreme frequencies? Those things are often overlooked when people choose equipment. Thats why so many people ( I am one of them) reccomend testing everything you can in your own working environment. Sometime when you get a really good mix going, go through and solo all your tracks one at a time. More often than not the solo'ed track may not sound quite like what you thought, but in the mix is exactly what is needed. Preamps are even more complicated. With a solo'ed signal they may sound much more similar to another than you originally thought. However in the mix, the preamp can really help a track find a space, energy, and light of it's own. I believe that this is the reason that so many people seem to overlook just how much a preamp cna really change things. I think they go down to their local mega music store and use the same mic to test all the different preamps. The results to them sound pretty close so they fail to see what the nicer preamp really is capable of.

I haven't even strated talking about how a lot of the nicer preamps sound so different with different mics. A lot of preamps out there sound so different because they are more accurate and are more capable of really reproducing the differences between the different mics where a cheaper preamp may kind make each different mic sound a little more similar. I also haven't talked about how good preamps can react so differently with different settings, and different gain stages. There are so many things to test that the only real way to test them is in your own environment and really putting a piece of equipment through it's paces.

Thats one of the really nice things about a shop like Mercenary. They don't just hook up a piece of equipment, listen for a second, and then turn around and "endorse" it to the general public. They ruggedly test things. They try to find what a piece of equipoment is NOT good for. They use it how "you" might use it. To me, knowing what a piece of equipment won't do well tells me just as much about it as what it will do well. I hope some of that made sense:)
Click to expand...

all good points... seems like we're all on the same page here... except maybe the killjoy who told the guy who started this thread to quit recording and take up basketweaving unless he had a bigger chunk of money to spend on gear... bad attitude.
we're all just stating the obvious, that you can't really compare high end stuff to budget stuff by listening to an mp3 of a couple tracks. there are way more variables than that... with skill and talent pretty big on the list. you have stated many of the variables very well, and we could discuss this ad nauseum... but i think we've covered it pretty well.
peace - jv
 
I hear a big difference in these two tracks. The Avalon is way smoother and more detailed, IMO.
 
I find better mics and pres fit into a mix much better....less eq...and they seem to "take" effects better...no mention of what mic was used in the clips..big thing about mic pres is the voltage they run on and the power they consume...big boy solid state pres (API, Neve etc..) generally run at 30 or more volts comapred to the 9 or 12 volt wall warts that power the little guys, so they have tons more headroom and can handle transients much better which is the clarity without harshness we associate with these things we can't afford :)....as it was stated here before it's like comparing a Beetle to a Porsche..both get the job done and at times the Beetle is what you want but you can't compare it to a Porsche...also, the Avalon is a channel strip with EQ and Compression so, without knowing how it was set up it is hard to compare..I had the good fortune to engineer a piano overdub for a jazzy tune...the chain was an AKG C24 thru a pair of API 312's..the Piano was a Chickering Grand (when added up this chain costs as much as my house!)...to 24/44.1 bit digital..hearing it was it was like watching Davinci sculpt..Stunning...made it hard to come home to my basement home studio but I did decide to get a kit and build some 312 clones...take a while to save up the dough...

Ray
 
rsolinski said:
big boy solid state pres (API, Neve etc..) generally run at 30 or more volts comapred to the 9 or 12 volt wall warts that power the little guys, so they have tons more headroom and can handle transients much better which is the clarity without harshness we associate with these things we can't afford
Click to expand...

Good point. I'd like to know more about "why" the better stuff IS better. Not just the subjective "it sounds better".
 
leddy said:
Good point. I'd like to know more about "why" the better stuff IS better. Not just the subjective "it sounds better".
Click to expand...

I wonder if in some cases very affordable and more precision gear overlap and sonic differences are more subtle. But then as the situation gets more complex or difficult, the direct or the additive effect of using lesser quality gear results in a noticeably lesser product.

Under certain circumstances, a budget Nikon SLR using a given lens will take a picture indistinguishable from their top of the line F5. But then there are lots of instances when the budget SLR simply won't be up to the job.

The thing is, in the hands of a pro, most of the time, the pictures coming out of that budget piece of gear will look stunningly good.

My own opinion is that with something like the VTB1, under fairly average circumstances, if you can't make an excellent recording, it's your fault, and an Avalon probably wouldn't make it "better". A Nikon F5 simply cannot make a poorly composed and executed photo "better".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top