O
omtayslick
New member
Don't pick at the scabs, this thread was on its way to its peaceful reasting place.
Too late!
Too late!
Bob Ross
Your god hates me
While your challenge seems a noble and perhaps well-reasoned position to take, it reminds me of George Massenburg's explanation of why he doesn't care about double-blind ABX tests for studio equipment...it was something to the effect of "we're paid to make decisions based on emotional responses and gut instinct, and moreover, we're paid to make those decisions quickly." (I'm paraphrasing.)
iow, it almost doesn't matter to a recording engineer working in the trenches whether or not they can use "electrical, mechanical and / or musical terms" to defend their choice of microphone or mic preamp (or to defend their belief whether one or the other has a greater impact on tone), what matters is that they can do whatever it takes to get the sound that compliments the artist quickly and reliably. If that means they have to rely on analogy or parable, so be it. Unless you're taking an EE final exam, the ends justify the means.
That would be my contention too, both because A) the magnitude of possible distortions (good, bad, or undetectable) a mic is capable of imparting greatly exceeds those of a preamplifier; and B) ime (here comes the parable/anecdote part) the recordings I made with AKG 451Bs and Neumann U-87s into a Mackie CR-1604 sound a buttload better than the ones I made with Shure 545SDs and Brush Acousticels into an Ampex 351.
MichaelJoly
Banned
Hey Bob, good point. And I agree with GM and you wholeheartedly.
As the question of "mic or preamp" is a perennial favorite, and comes up with regularity, I was engaging in that bad habit of mine to be an agent provocateur - because the folks who ask "which is more important, mic or preamp?" are not recording engineers working quickly in the trenches. They are home recordists trying to parse their way through an ever-increasing glut of toy gear and uninformed anonymous opinion about it. There are so few real-world, experienced audio engineers available to provide personal mentoring to them - the way it was when you and I were coming up.
So when I posit a challenge - yes, drawn from my background training and practice as an analog audio equipment design engineer, I'm trying to raise the bar and challenge folks to talk the talk of a real audio engineer - Bill Putnam style - and not take the easy way out with automobile metaphors (engine or tranny?). Cheers and Happy New Year!
Last edited:
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
Well, Michael, I'm probably famous for the analogy thing, and technically, you have probably forgotten more than I will ever know about mic tech. This stands out in my mind, though. The mic is in front of the preamp in the signal chain. The preamp can't amplify or color something that isn't there. It can't add anything except noise and distortion (called "color" when we like it) to the signal. The mic provides every bit of acoustic data that the rest of the signal chain will process. In other words, garbage in-garbage out.
That said, in the real world, my experience indicates that a cheap but well made mic with a really good preamp tends to produce a more usable signal than a great mic into a cheap preamp. My ears tell me that I would rather have an SM57 into an Avalon than a Neumann into a Behringer mixer. The preamp doesn't determine what's in the signal, but it can sure add a bunch of garbage, and take away a lot of detail.
I'm afraid that drives those of us without big time technical knowledge to analogy.-Richie
That said, in the real world, my experience indicates that a cheap but well made mic with a really good preamp tends to produce a more usable signal than a great mic into a cheap preamp. My ears tell me that I would rather have an SM57 into an Avalon than a Neumann into a Behringer mixer. The preamp doesn't determine what's in the signal, but it can sure add a bunch of garbage, and take away a lot of detail.
I'm afraid that drives those of us without big time technical knowledge to analogy.-Richie
Fishmed
Well-known member
+1 I highly agree with your post.
I have come to the conclusion in the past that when you have pocket full of cash and looking to make a purchase, the mic pre is more important as stated above, but when it comes time to actually record something, selecting the right mic is more critical for the source. If you bought a nice mic pre to begin with, then it really does not matter much which mic you throw at it, giving you the freedom to choose the best option.
M
moresound
Loud Sun Studios
Come on now!!!
Everyone knows that it's actually the cable that's most important.
Everyone knows that it's actually the cable that's most important.
O
omtayslick
New member
Come on now!!!
Everyone knows that it's actually the cable that's most important.
No wonder everything I record sounds so bad. I thought it was the mic clip!
M
moresound
Loud Sun Studios
MichaelJoly
Banned
So you see...
...no one can tell me why the preamp is more important than the mic - without resorting to an answer based on their (singular) personal experience which is conveyed as a parable, metaphor or analogy. Just not very convincing.
I'll repeat - the microphone is orders of - quantifiable - magnitude more important than the preamp because...
A preamp is simply an amplifier that can be measured in two dimensions, not three, and most importantly - does not inspire human energy transformation (idea / breath / exhalation into sound). A microphone is more human-like (as an energy transducer) than a simple energy amplifier - a dumb preamp. Cheers. M
...no one can tell me why the preamp is more important than the mic - without resorting to an answer based on their (singular) personal experience which is conveyed as a parable, metaphor or analogy. Just not very convincing.
I'll repeat - the microphone is orders of - quantifiable - magnitude more important than the preamp because...
- it operates in a room, subject to room nodes
- it is an imperfect energy transformation device (acoustical to elecrical) and imparts artifacts
- it can be placed anywhere in three dimensions in relationship to the source
- it exhibits non-linear energy transformation in multiple dimensions
- it is not simply a two dimensional device (amplitude vs frequency)...
- ...but rather a device which has three dimensional pick up characteristics
- the microphone is an object which is addresed directly by the talent (as a the focus of expression)
- the microphone is an iconic object of reverence inspiring awe, focus and expression from the artist
- the microphone embodies subjective ideas of what sound energy transformation should be
A preamp is simply an amplifier that can be measured in two dimensions, not three, and most importantly - does not inspire human energy transformation (idea / breath / exhalation into sound). A microphone is more human-like (as an energy transducer) than a simple energy amplifier - a dumb preamp. Cheers. M
Middleman
Professional Amateur
Let's settle this once and for all.
Under $1000 the preamp is more important than the mic.
Over $1000 the mic is more important than the preamp out to infinity.
Under $1000 the preamp is more important than the mic.
Over $1000 the mic is more important than the preamp out to infinity.
MichaelJoly
Banned
Wrong. Price has no bearing - the cheapest mic can render an order of magnitude more effect than the most expensive preamp, because of the reasons I note above.
Middleman
Professional Amateur
We have officially established that you have no sense of humor.
MichaelJoly
Banned
Yes, I am serious about microphones and analog audio engineering - and have a robust and diverse sense of humor.
But when it comes to this stuff I try to be rigorous and discuss the topic at hand using a combination of electronic, acoustic, mechanical and musical terms and leave the joking around to Luis C.K.
But when it comes to this stuff I try to be rigorous and discuss the topic at hand using a combination of electronic, acoustic, mechanical and musical terms and leave the joking around to Luis C.K.
M
moresound
Loud Sun Studios
Oh yes Louie.
Villain S Deeds
Member
I say mic, just for the simple fact that it's closer to the source.
wheelema
Boner-obo
Compelling.
Steenamaroo
...
LOL.
The signal chain is as strong as its weakest link.......
Unless it's a mic vs preamp debate apparently.
The signal chain is as strong as its weakest link.......
Unless it's a mic vs preamp debate apparently.
PRHunt
I void warranties
Which is why, in my simplistic view of the audio world, the most important elements in the audio chain are the transducers - the mic and the loudspeakers.
Paul
Steenamaroo
...
I can see the merit in this debate. It's worth understanding but I still maintain that neither of them matter compared to the environment, instruments and musicians.
I'd sell everything I've got for a portastudio, 4 57s and a never ending run of fantastic bands.
Well, maybe an sm7b too!
I'd sell everything I've got for a portastudio, 4 57s and a never ending run of fantastic bands.
Well, maybe an sm7b too!
Fishmed
Well-known member
I can see the merit in this debate. It's worth understanding but I still maintain that neither of them matter compared to the environment, instruments and musicians.
I'd sell everything I've got for a portastudio, 4 57s and a never ending run of fantastic bands.
Well, maybe an sm7b too!
I believe with this debate, everything else is considered equal.
I usually record other people, so I am more interested in the quality of sound that I capture.
It is up to my client for the song, performance, instrument choice, etc.