John Hardy M-1

[Rev. Robb]

Can anyone with real world experience please explain to me what the M-1 sounds like.

[Rev. Robb]

Thanks for the reply. I realize that it is difficult to explain in words what something sounds like, but a descriptive explanation can yield results.

[gevermil]

A very classy preamp
john rice says it best
Id sure like to fill the rest of my 4 channel rack

[ImJohn]

I'd say it's in the area of clean, acurate and detailed without being sterile, clinical or boring sounding.

I think it has a touch of subtle color but it's not a pre you can 'push' to get more color/distortion out of it. (it just gives you more gain of the same thing it gave you at lower gain)

And it's contruction and design are second to none in my humble opinion.

I own 4 channels of Hardy M-1 and I will NEVER part with them!

[magellan]

Originally Posted by ImJohn

I'd say it's in the area of clean, acurate and detailed without being sterile, clinical or boring sounding.

good description. i use my M-1's routinely, especially on vocals, stringed instruments, and drum overheads.

[channelcat]

Originally Posted by ImJohn

I'd say it's in the area of clean, acurate and detailed without being sterile, clinical or boring sounding.

I think it has a touch of subtle color but it's not a pre you can 'push' to get more color/distortion out of it. (it just gives you more gain of the same thing it gave you at lower gain)

And it's contruction and design are second to none in my humble opinion.

I own 4 channels of Hardy M-1 and I will NEVER part with them!

Excellent description; I share your sentiments. I have a 4-ch. M-1 "deluxe" (w/ options), and use them on just about everything. The other great thing about the M-1 is that you can start with the frame and as many modules as you can afford at the time, and then add more as your budget allows, which is what I did.

Stu

[toomanyorgans]

People often use the adjectives "fast" and "slow" to describe microphone preamps.... in reference to how they respond to transients. Therein contains a portion of the "colour" people describe in microphone preamps, along with the actual sound of the transformers, tube or discrete amp stages etc. I would describe the Hardy M1's as "fast".... they tend to leave transients uncorrupted, making them ideal for the above mentioned sources, any situation where a clean representation of the sound is desired. As reference i would call API's "slow" in that they tend to colour and smear transient response - WHICH CAN BE EQUALLY VALUABLE. A Hardy on a vocalist will make it sound like they are singing into your ear. A Hardy on a Snare drum will make it sound like its right by your ear - OUCH, better send it through an API....

I have a 4 channel m1 with full options and find it VERY useful.

[jcool]

they are great. John is a great guy as well.

the preamps are all you need, given that you don't intend to intentionally screw up the sound on the way in. they are much more quiet that the preamps in my 002 and sound leagues beyond the RNP's that I shouldn't have bought.
these preamps are all I use now.

As far as the preamps resulting in a "close" sound . . . yes, if the microphone is close to something. In comparing the 002 preamps to the RNPs to the John Hardys, I noticed for the first time that a sense of distance can be captured by some preamps and not by others. The John Hardys did.

[jcool]

oh yes, I have two deluxe channels and two with no output transformers.

[Rev. Robb]

Originally Posted by toomanyorgans

As reference i would call API's "slow" in that they tend to colour and smear transient response - WHICH CAN BE EQUALLY VALUABLE. A Hardy on a vocalist will make it sound like they are singing into your ear. A Hardy on a Snare drum will make it sound like its right by your ear - OUCH, better send it through an API....

Excellent description! This is helpful information...

[Rev. Robb]

Originally Posted by jcool

oh yes, I have two deluxe channels and two with no output transformers.

Sonically, what is the difference?

[Tone Weaver]

I also have a pair of M1s with no out put trannys, & I will never part with them.I have been thinking of having John install the out put trannys, is there that much difference between the two?
Thanks
Lance

[jcool]

the output transformers.
just kidding.
well yes . . .

I have tried both preamps with a number of differen microphones and have heard no difference.
I thought I was hearing something, but I was most likely lying to myself--either way, it has been extremely close in all tests.
I'll do more tests, maybe this afternoon, and let you know.

[Tone Weaver]

Thanks Jcool
This also seems to be Mr Hardys opinion as well.

[gevermil]

Originally Posted by toomanyorgans

People often use the adjectives "fast" and "slow" to describe microphone preamps.... in reference to how they respond to transients. Therein contains a portion of the "colour" people describe in microphone preamps, along with the actual sound of the transformers, tube or discrete amp stages etc. I would describe the Hardy M1's as "fast".... they tend to leave transients uncorrupted, making them ideal for the above mentioned sources, any situation where a clean representation of the sound is desired. As reference i would call API's "slow" in that they tend to colour and smear transient response - WHICH CAN BE EQUALLY VALUABLE. A Hardy on a vocalist will make it sound like they are singing into your ear. A Hardy on a Snare drum will make it sound like its right by your ear - OUCH, better send it through an API....

I have a 4 channel m1 with full options and find it VERY useful.

This is a good discripton

[jcool]

what I'm driving . . .
'90 thunderbird with 303,000 miles. yikes.

I knew this this would come up and I don't have much experience in this area.
I am using the converters in the 002 for ad and da conversion (which I have heard is either good or great or terrible).
I'd really like to upgrade in this area if it does in fact allow me to hear things better.
I HAVE used the apogee ad16x but can't determine anything from that because the performance I was recording was terrible.

I'm thinking the lavry blue for AD and the Benchmark for the DA . . .
anyone with experience?

[Daedalus77]

While I like the above description, I'm not sure I'd call APIs "slow"—in fact they (and their BAE 312 counterparts) seem to me quite "fast" (I can't quote you the slew rates, but that's my subjective experience), especially in comparison to Neves (classics and clones) or Telefunkens (classics and clones), and others.

APIs to my ears do a great job of preserving transients (albeit with some color), which is why they're everyone's go-to piece or pre-amp kit for drums, yes?

The Hardy (from my very limited experience with one) is simply magnificent in its clarity (and perhaps "quickness" is part of that), nonetheless.

YMMV.

[Jeraz]

I had one up until a few months ago...I traded it for an API A2D (you can read about that and how I think it sounds here: DAV vs. John Hardy )

You can also visit my page here: CloudStreetsMusic, scroll down to "Soundchecks!", and hear a ADL-600/ John Hardy Comparison with "average" mics (a pair of RODE NT5s).

Best,

Mark

PS: APIs are not slow, and do not smear transients. They use a different op amp than the JH (but are still fast), have a ballsy mid, great trannys, and in the case of the A2D, you can get a nice range of sounds from clean to colored...and even approach the rich kind of sound of the a great tube pre by careful use of the 2:1 transformer tap, the pad, and the digital gain controls (which allow you to drive the bejesus out of the pres, which have gobs of headroom, without clipping your DAW inputs).

[paterno]

Originally Posted by Daedalus77

APIs to my ears do a great job of preserving transients (albeit with some color), which is why they're everyone's go-to piece or pre-amp kit for drums, yes?

Not me. I prefer Chandler LTD's , Neves, and Chandler TG pre's for drum applications...

The Hardy's are great pre's, and if given the choice between a Hardy and an API, I'd choose the Hardy. Great on vocals, acoustic guitars, and piano especially. I feel they are similar in 'size' to an API, but the Hardy has a better sounding transient response, to me. And they are worth the wait if you need to order one...

Cheers,
John

[Daedalus77]

Well, whatever Mr. Paterno says, I'd have to agree with.

I'm going to hang on to my APIs, but I confess I've been counting the days until Mr. Hardy finishes his 500 form version of the Twin-Servo.

[paterno]

Originally Posted by Daedalus77

Well, whatever Mr. Paterno says, I'd have to agree with.

I'm going to hang on to my APIs, but I confess I've been counting the days until Mr. Hardy finishes his 500 form version of the Twin-Servo.

thanks for the kind words. I may have given the impression that I do not like API, and that is not the case. I think they are great in all the applications I mentioned above re: the Hardy's. I will add that I really like API pre's on toms especially...

Cheers,
John

[Kris]

M-1s - transparent(ish) with lotsa magic mojo

[FunkFaker]

I use the M1 in a VO studio, almost exclusively with a U87. The sound is full and detailed, no muddiness but the right amount of mid-range 'upfrontness'. Great for the spoken word, both male and female!

Haven't had the chance to use it on anything else, but I imagine anything captured to be very clean and outlined with some nice mids.

hope this helps!

tommy

[Analogeezer]

I had a two channel unit, sent it back in to add another two channels....that kind of says a lot right there.

I find the sound to be very clear and present, with no harshness whatsoever, but at the same time it's got a sense of "heft" to the sound.

It's not a "straight wire with gain" type of sound, more like straight wire with gain, then add a touch of cojones to it...

FWIW all four of my channels have the output transformers, so I don't know what the transformerless ones sound like.

I find they sound good on virtually everything, and with any mic. If I had to cut my collection down to just one pre it would be the Hardy because it works well with "troublesome sources" and just sounds plain great on great sources.

In addition to my M-1, I've got a MP-2NV, a True Systems P2, and a pair of Brent Averill racked Calrecs.

The Hardy's get used more or less more than the other pres put together, sometimes if I want something really clean with no added ju ju I'll use the P2, and the MP-2NV works on a couple of singers I record the best (and is great on drums), and the Calrecs do some special things that none of the others do...

But the M-1 just works all the time, not matter what the source of the context.

Analogeezer