Yeah and I do. Hell, even Mutt Lange's used SSL preamps on vocals.
In fact I know people who have numerous gold records who don't even give preamp choice a second thought when tracking. They grab whatever's in arm's reach, plug in a mic and go.
As usual, real life trumps gearslutz by a long shot. What I've seen, with my own eyes is that preamp selection takes very little, if any, precedence over mic selection and location. As a session musician, I've been in tons of sessions and watched as they get ready to track vocals and never once has anyone said to change pres. If they don't have the sound they want, they'll get a different mic. If they still don't have the sound they want, they'll start moving the talent around the mic or trying different axis, etc. and sooner or later they nail what it is they're looking for. Never once has anyone said, "Grab the Aurora audio pre because I think this PreSonus isn't cutting it."
I mention that because one session I was on, they were using the Aurora Audio GTQ-2 as a DI for my synths and had a vocalist on a PreSonus. They did that because the PreSonus didn't have a DI in and the Aurora did so I plugged direct into the Aurora. The producer on that session has had 20 top ten hits over the past 30 years. You'd think if it was important he would have said, "Put the keys on a DI into the PreSonus and put the Vocals on the Aurora". Yet he didn't. And he was able to nail his sound with no problem.
Regards,
Frank
Not hard to believe at all.If you have a great Mic selection,you can vary mics and position to obtain the flavor quicker than pres.Although there is a difference in pres too,maybe more now than in previous years,which can give you even more choices also.
Actually I agree with what you are saying! All those factors do have a much more obvious impact on the sound. But- preamp is a way to hedge your bets, and to pick a flavor. I think we can agree on that.
__________________ I'd do cartwheels in your honor
Actually I agree with what you are saying! All those factors do have a much more obvious impact on the sound. But- preamp is a way to hedge your bets, and to pick a flavor. I think we can agree on that.
Only thing is the best pre designs are 30-40yrs old.And sometimes the originals sound better than the reissued.
I have a couple pres built by Desert Island Audio that are ba183 boards out of a Neve 80 Series.You can go to their site and see them.Nothing else touches them for LV or AG.
I have a BAE 1023,and a Chandler Ltd 1(with original Neve guts) that come close.
I have an old 30 channel Trident Trimix with all transformer pres,and they sound great on certain sources,but night and day from any of the Neve stuff.
Then I have a UA8110 that has some variable settings that can sound totally clean up to Neve-ish.
But my point is,I don't care who says what,I know what they do or don't do.That is all that matters.Let your ears be your guide.
Yeah of course. I did a vocal session today. For lead I tried the Shadow Hills Gama... even between the 3 settings on the pre (Nickel, Discrete, Steel), there were three different sounds. Especially a big difference between Nickel/Steel and Discrete. I ended up going with an API preamp with the gain fully open because again, it had a different sound, and I liked it more. Saying you can't hear preamps is like saying you are not qualified for a key part of the job.
Indeed. Even if all someone has is one pre and one mic, this piece of advice will get them very far and they still be capable of making a fantastic recording.
Regards,
Frank
__________________
My equipment: A Commodore 64, 2 1541 Disk Drives, Dr T's Music Studio and a Casiotone CT-460.
Never listen to opinions regarding gear. For every 50 nobodies on Gearslutz that say a piece of gear doesn't sound good enough to cut it, I know at least one somebody who is cutting it in NYC with that piece of gear.
Indeed. Even if all someone has is one pre and one mic, this piece of advice will get them very far and they still be capable of making a fantastic recording.
Regards,
Frank
If you are mixing live you use the pres on whatever board you are using and figure out a way to make them work.Typically you can use a bunch of sm57s and sm58s and get the job done fine.
The same goes in the studio.If you have a good ear,you can make "less" work for you.But there are circumstances when you need more sonic richness,if you will.
When it comes to getting a rich sounding vocal,acoustic piano, acoustic guitar,or even cymbals,if I were to use a mackie pre they can sound a little hollow or nasal compared to a Neve or any class "a" pre.It is the low to low mid area,and the harsher high end that are apparent.
And naturally some genres lend themselves to being less critical in this area than others also.
When it comes to getting a rich sounding vocal,acoustic piano, acoustic guitar,or even cymbals,if I were to use a mackie pre they can sound a little hollow or nasal compared to a Neve or any class "a" pre.
Do you hear that in SOS test ? There are a Mackie and a Neve.
Do you hear that in SOS test ? There are a Mackie and a Neve.
Like I said a couple posts ago.It doesn't matter.My ears are the judge,in my environment,with my sources.And non of those pres are my sources,for my own reasons.
Both this tests does not ensure the consistency of the source. See my reply to the second one.
Moreover the first one is not blind.
So you think the pre amp has to be flat,where do to get that from?That makes no sense.They should all be tuned to the exact same freq response?Says who?
So you think the pre amp has to be flat,where do to get that from?That makes no sense.They should all be tuned to the exact same freq response?Says who?
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
They are flat ! All preamp manufacturers claim so. And indeed they are, except when one is out of its specifications.
The attached picture is a screenshot from a shoot-out of a Fearn VT-2 and the preamps of an RME Fireface. They are both fed by the same mic pair (Beyer M 130) through an active splitter. The splitter has no gain and the mics are ribbons, which required maximum gain from the Fearn. The white and red spectrum lines from both tracks superposed near perfectly.
Would love to see some waterfall plots of those two! That's very impressive!
You're correct, most manufacturers wont really allow more than -0.1dB of a drop at the 20hz or 20Khz pole. This means the real frequency and phase shift is happening much higher, and certainly well outside of the response of a ribbon (and our ears). It's 2012, distortion figures of 0.01% (Roughly -40dB?) are the norm.
__________________ Why don't you just knock it off with them negative waves?
They are flat ! All preamp manufacturers claim so. And indeed they are, except when one is out of its specifications.
The attached picture this is a screenshot from a shoot-out of a Fearn VT-2 and the preamps of an RME Fireface. They are both fed by the same mic pair (Beyer M 130) through an active splitter. The splitter has no gain and the mics are ribbons, which required maximum gain from the Fearn. The white and red spectrum lines from both tracks superposed near perfectly.
How can different pres exude different tonal qualities if they are tuned to have an identical frequency response?
What about this from Mackie-
1. A mic preamp should be able to protect itself from destructive external forces.
2. A mic preamp should not be prone to Radio Frequency Interference (RFI).
3. A mic preamp's response should not vary with different mic cable impedance loads.
4. A mic preamp should be accurate, sound good, and have very low noise and wide bandwidth at any gain level.
Many high-end outboard mic preamps achieve Goals 3 & 4, but lack protection and good RFI shielding. Conventional mixer preamps often meet Goals 1 and 2 at the expense of good sound.
A microphone's frequency response (and thus how it sounds) is a function of the load presented to it. That load is the impedance characteristic of the mic preamp it's connected to. If a mic preamp isn't designed right, it will actually sound different depending on the impedance of the microphone and the cable load.
From SOS-
With mic preamps, spoken-word tests and simple vocal recording often reveal a lot about the tonal signature of a circuit, and in a comparison test with one of my own relatively transparent-sounding preamps, the Pre 73 came across as having a very obvious character. It exhibits a strong and confident-sounding mid-range, very smooth highs and a generally ‘rounded’, slightly compressed-sounding tonality, that I found reminiscent of some tube mics and tube preamps. The Focusrite ISA 110 that I reviewed a few months ago had something of a similar tonal leaning, which I attribute to the use of transformers in the audio path, although much depends on the characteristics of the particular transformer employed and the circuitry that surrounds it.
Would love to see some waterfall plots of those two! That's very impressive!
You're correct, most manufacturers wont really allow more than -0.1dB of a drop at the 20hz or 20Khz pole. This means the real frequency and phase shift is happening much higher, and certainly well outside of the response of a ribbon (and our ears). It's 2012, distortion figures of 0.01% (Roughly -40dB?) are the norm.
Is is possible that peak and rms can play into the perceived sound of a preamp?That and distortion of course.
This is from Millenia-
All microphone preamplifiers exhibit unique coloration to a lesser or greater degree. In audio electronics, there is no such thing as a straight wire with gain. Further, because of the differences between each preamp’s unique loading and gain characteristics, any microphone will respond differently when matched to different preamps. With the seemingly infinite combination of mics, preamps, and source material, it’s in the engineer’s best interest to continually review and experiment with variations and technique.
We can argue that accuracy is the critical measure of mic preamps. And in many applications, such as when recording the acoustic environment of a symphony orchestra, absolute accuracy is crucial. But the question must be asked: "by who’s definition or opinion of accuracy?" Ultimately, every engineer must answer this question on their own.
Is is possible that peak and rms can play into the perceived sound of a preamp?That and distortion of course.
This is from Millenia-
All microphone preamplifiers exhibit unique coloration to a lesser or greater degree. In audio electronics, there is no such thing as a straight wire with gain. Further, because of the differences between each preamp’s unique loading and gain characteristics, any microphone will respond differently when matched to different preamps. With the seemingly infinite combination of mics, preamps, and source material, it’s in the engineer’s best interest to continually review and experiment with variations and technique.
We can argue that accuracy is the critical measure of mic preamps. And in many applications, such as when recording the acoustic environment of a symphony orchestra, absolute accuracy is crucial. But the question must be asked: "by who’s definition or opinion of accuracy?" Ultimately, every engineer must answer this question on their own.
They would say that, they sell pre-amps. And the fact is that the BBC made better ways to measure distortion and most companies could but don't want to have to show and weight how perceivable that distortion is. MP3's have a 70% THD, which I imagine is more than a Fuzz Face. It's a complex thing and industry avoids it for fear of painting their products in an inferior light. It's much easier talk about subjectivity and mojo and naively paint pictures of electrical engineers in the 50's painting an artistic canvas of gain with tubes and transformers. It's marketing.
I admitted I heard a difference and I would not have an ideal monitoring enviroment (or golden ears, or even silver ears). But these pre-amps should all be full band, and should all have very low distortion. The nature of the distortion and the bands they effect (eg: transformers distorting the low end) is another thing. So we can all agree that a "Flat transparent" pre is more than obtainable, else these pre-amp tests would have been black and white, but that there are subtleties.
They are flat ! All preamp manufacturers claim so. And indeed they are, except when one is out of its specifications.
The attached picture this is a screenshot from a shoot-out of a Fearn VT-2 and the preamps of an RME Fireface. They are both fed by the same mic pair (Beyer M 130) through an active splitter. The splitter has no gain and the mics are ribbons, which required maximum gain from the Fearn. The white and red spectrum lines from both tracks superposed near perfectly.
The problem with that is that the preamps you preforms the test on does not see the impedance of the mic, the only see the splitter.
This is not a problem at all for comparing two preamps. It is not a test of how they perform on the M 130 but how they perform on the same mic, which here is the combination of the M 130 and the splitter. Both preamps see the same impedance at both ouputs of the splitter (LA Audio MS 424).
I totally get you. There's no explanation and to be honest the best advice I can give you is to go with it.
Who cares if there's no difference between the SSL and the ART. In fact, who cares if the ART is better than the SSL and can be proven to be so? (Hypothetically).
The bottom line is that if YOU think the SSL is the best, regardless of fact and why, in the end I think it's the best for you from a mental standpoint. What I mean is that if you're happy and content you will focus on making music.
I don't care if there are tools better than the ones I've chosen. I chose them because I think they're the best. It's always good to go with your gut reaction because you'll be happier. I'm not in this to convince you that another pre is as good or better than the SSL because in the end it's near impossible I think to convince anyone from their opinion on something. If I succeeded and got you to change your mind, there will always be this nagging feeling of "What if" in the back of your mind and it'll always bother you.
Who cares what's best. In fact, who cares if you choose the SSL because you like the way it looks! If you're confident with your decision no matter the reason you chose it, you'll be happy and you'll have confidence in working with that gear.
I came to this conclusion after A/Bing tons of gear and rarely ever coming to any conclusions. In fact, often when I consistently chose gear B as the better, a half hour later I'd start consistently choosing gear A! In the end I could care less because if I have to A/B over and over and can't make consistent decisions, then it doesn't matter. Instead I buy gear based on the sound, the look or even the perceived reputation of the gear or manufacturer. Who cares? This was cemented further in my mind after having a great conversation with a well known gear designer / manufacturer who said to me that he felt the differences between gear from different manufacturers was slight and a lot more subtle than people say. I told him I was struggling during A/B tests and he said I wasn't crazy. He's lurked on Gearslutz and it fascinates him how people describe differences in gear as if it's night and day, when as a designer himself feels that the differences are very subtle.
In the end, you'll do great work because you'll be happy with the gear you're working with. I'd say get the SSL and who cares about anything else. When you turn on the lights in your studio and see the SSL logo and it makes you smile, then any work after that will probably be good work.
And that's what matters most.
Regards,
Frank
Simply a great post. If the gear that you like hightens your mood and in any way translates into a better experience making music - go for it.
Some will say the "sexy design", or dancing LED meters count for nothing. Perhaps just knowing there is a tube in that mic gets you stoked or feeling better. Better take ? Maybe so. If it works, why not.
Cdlt
__________________ Enfin... tout le monde a une Rolex. Si à cinquante ans, on n'a pas une Rolex, on a quand même raté sa vie !"
- Jacques Séguéla -
The "Dumbo's Feather" benefits are great, but then why do we get all these jokesters talking about the huge sonic impact of their $5Kbuck preamp compared to the old $4.2Kbuck preamp that they used to think sounded so excellent but they now realize was hardly better than two tin cans tied together with string. And that those of us who can't hear any difference at all are tin-eared blockheads.
The "Dumbo's Feather" benefits are great, but then why do we get all these jokesters talking about the huge sonic impact of their $5Kbuck preamp compared to the old $4.2Kbuck preamp that they used to think sounded so excellent but they now realize was hardly better than two tin cans tied together with string. And that those of us who can't hear any difference at all are tin-eared blockheads.
Ok,all you tin eared blockheads.A mix is the sum of all things.Some people can't hear the difference,and their mixes show it.All pres are not the same,but there are many that do sound similar enough to not be able to pick them out in a blind test.But maybe in the context of a mix you would.Example-I tried to like what I was getting from a GR NV,but it was not going to sit in the mix.Switched to the Neve ba183,problem solved.Not saying I couldn't maybe shoot out mics for an hr,but it was easy to flip to a different pre without leaving my seat.I got rid of the GR,never looked back.I have a Chandler Ltd 1 with all original Neve parts,and a BAE 1023,are they identical sounding?Depends on the source and how you are using the eq.You learn the differences in real situations,making decisions based on what you feel will make them work in a mix.The only real way to know is thru experience.
But for the record,I ditched all things 500.Others may like them,but I never really liked anything better than my Trident console pres even.
New Reply 
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
