dirt cheap preamp

music321 · 10th January 2008

has anyone seen this? what are your thoughts?

Microphone preamplifiers - can *YOU* hear the difference? (with audio)

Joram · 10th January 2008

I did the test and I'm afraid that most contenders of the test did not listen very well. Yes, it's sounds a bit arrogant. However, when you listen to the audio examples you hear a clear difference in quality of the s's and in the ambience of the recording room. According to me these two elements are vital for a high quality pre-amp. This has not so much to do with taste but with phase-shift. In this test the most expensive pre-amp is technicaly superior and that's what you should expect.

hemmick reef · 10th January 2008

They all sounded similar to me (over the internet), but maybe once they're sitting in your studio rack and the gain is increased, the difference will be noticed?

Still it is a bit disconcerting if you are about to blow a load of money on a preamp. I have a Groove Tubes The Brick preamp which cost me around £300. I had to listen very carefully to noticed the difference when comparing it to my Edirol DA2496 soundcard preamps. The difference was there but not so profound as I had expected - more clarity when turning up the gain on the GT, the edirols sounded less clean - but I did have to listen hard.

Spending £1000 on a preamp I would expect it to be much more noticable - that mythical larger than life sound - maybe that description is a bit over rated?

8th_note · 11th January 2008

Check out The Listening Sessions.

There's quite a bit of difference between the sound of preamps. It's up to each individual to determine if the more expensive ones are worth it but you can definitely hear the difference.

A LaMere · 11th January 2008

I'm someone who has to do his own "shootouts" and really compare things to figure out which I like the best... which pre's fit "the sound I hear in my head"...

I'll go ahead and say for me... and if done properly, there really is a large, large difference between different pre types... Honestly, the difference is even more magnified when working with multiple tracks.

I truly believe that in order to figure out answers about pre's sometimes you actually have to track with them... and that's usually when you realize their value..

Sharkus · 11th January 2008

Yeah, it sucks that a cheap pre and an expensive pre both sound similar over the net. I just upgraded from presonus cheapies to API/ Purple pres. There really is only a slight difference between the two in my recordings. The difference I notice is the good pres are hot nice tracks that fit easily with other tracks and hold their clarity when stacked with others. The presonus blue tube tracks are OK, but they get muddy quick in a mix and I have to plug ins the piss out of them to get anything decent. The API tracks sound better without any plugs than the presonus does with eq/verb/comp/etc...

Sharkus

idrinkalot · 11th January 2008

having to eq/verb/comp one and do nothing to the other is only a slight difference?

aussie_techie · 11th January 2008

i listened to this awhile ago, is there is difference there certainly is, to me the UA sounded the best with the behringer sounding the worst. but is the difference big just from listening to that, well i have to say no i thought it was very close, im not currently in the best monitoring environment either so everything is a bit smeared. that said ive never heard a huge difference between pres, (still sometimes big enough) not as huge as between different mics and different mic positions anyway, the performance is usually different enough to make judging pres hard. that said i find the real value in higher end pre is when you start getting bigger track counts, you notice it when you start to track wit the pres and when you mix the song. a good pre will also retain alot for detail and have alot less noise. when you track with better pres those tracks seem to stand out more and remain clear. alot of it does have to do with compounding the phase problems in cheaper designs.

oh i also wouldnt be sure the behringer didnt cost anymore than $5 to make so it it being at the bottom of the pile is probably correct.

Sharkus · 11th January 2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by idrinkalot

having to eq/verb/comp one and do nothing to the other is only a slight difference?

I am probably a bad example because my point of view is coming from a one man band that has to save very hard to buy gear to get me closer to a goal. The new pres sound Great, but the recordings are similar. I gave up getting a new Martin guitar so I could get two channels of good pres. I know what a difference a new Martin would have made, but the pres... a bit more subtle I guess.
If I can make the cheap pres sound good with plugs,
is it really nessesary for a DIY recording artist to have great pres???

My answer. YES thumbsupthumbsup

The time it takes to get crappy pres to sound good sucks the life out of the creativity and workflow that it takes to pump out the "hits".

Plus the tracks do stack so nice. You can hear everything even on a track thats barely audible.

I'll get that Martin someday.

tINY · 11th January 2008

I picked them right - still liked the $5 one for both of those takes (the close up one by a bigger margin).

-tINY

10th January 2008	#1
music321 Gear Head Joined: Jan 2008 Posts: 32 Thread Starter	dirt cheap preamp has anyone seen this? what are your thoughts? Microphone preamplifiers - can YOU hear the difference? (with audio)

11th January 2008	#4
8th_note Lives for gear Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 625	Check out The Listening Sessions. There's quite a bit of difference between the sound of preamps. It's up to each individual to determine if the more expensive ones are worth it but you can definitely hear the difference. __________________ http://www.myspace.com/mudsharkstudios

11th January 2008	#5
A LaMere Lives for gear Joined: Dec 2005 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 1,146	I'm someone who has to do his own "shootouts" and really compare things to figure out which I like the best... which pre's fit "the sound I hear in my head"... I'll go ahead and say for me... and if done properly, there really is a large, large difference between different pre types... Honestly, the difference is even more magnified when working with multiple tracks. I truly believe that in order to figure out answers about pre's sometimes you actually have to track with them... and that's usually when you realize their value.. __________________ www.myspace.com/aaronlamere

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Cranberry Cables Dirt Cheap	BudgetMC	So much gear, so little time!	97	2nd February 2008 08:46 PM
8 dirt cheap pre's in a 1 u rack.....	XLR2XLR	Low End Theory	9	23rd June 2007 08:08 PM

10th January 2008	#2
Joram Lives for gear Joined: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Posts: 919	I did the test and I'm afraid that most contenders of the test did not listen very well. Yes, it's sounds a bit arrogant. However, when you listen to the audio examples you hear a clear difference in quality of the s's and in the ambience of the recording room. According to me these two elements are vital for a high quality pre-amp. This has not so much to do with taste but with phase-shift. In this test the most expensive pre-amp is technicaly superior and that's what you should expect.

10th January 2008	#3
hemmick reef Gear addict Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 337	They all sounded similar to me (over the internet), but maybe once they're sitting in your studio rack and the gain is increased, the difference will be noticed? Still it is a bit disconcerting if you are about to blow a load of money on a preamp. I have a Groove Tubes The Brick preamp which cost me around £300. I had to listen very carefully to noticed the difference when comparing it to my Edirol DA2496 soundcard preamps. The difference was there but not so profound as I had expected - more clarity when turning up the gain on the GT, the edirols sounded less clean - but I did have to listen hard. Spending £1000 on a preamp I would expect it to be much more noticable - that mythical larger than life sound - maybe that description is a bit over rated?

11th January 2008	#6
Sharkus Gear nut Joined: Dec 2007 Location: PA, USA Posts: 128	Yeah, it sucks that a cheap pre and an expensive pre both sound similar over the net. I just upgraded from presonus cheapies to API/ Purple pres. There really is only a slight difference between the two in my recordings. The difference I notice is the good pres are hot nice tracks that fit easily with other tracks and hold their clarity when stacked with others. The presonus blue tube tracks are OK, but they get muddy quick in a mix and I have to plug ins the piss out of them to get anything decent. The API tracks sound better without any plugs than the presonus does with eq/verb/comp/etc... Sharkus

11th January 2008	#7
idrinkalot Gear maniac Joined: Dec 2007 Posts: 260	having to eq/verb/comp one and do nothing to the other is only a slight difference?

11th January 2008	#8
aussie_techie Lives for gear Joined: Jan 2004 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 2,709	i listened to this awhile ago, is there is difference there certainly is, to me the UA sounded the best with the behringer sounding the worst. but is the difference big just from listening to that, well i have to say no i thought it was very close, im not currently in the best monitoring environment either so everything is a bit smeared. that said ive never heard a huge difference between pres, (still sometimes big enough) not as huge as between different mics and different mic positions anyway, the performance is usually different enough to make judging pres hard. that said i find the real value in higher end pre is when you start getting bigger track counts, you notice it when you start to track wit the pres and when you mix the song. a good pre will also retain alot for detail and have alot less noise. when you track with better pres those tracks seem to stand out more and remain clear. alot of it does have to do with compounding the phase problems in cheaper designs. oh i also wouldnt be sure the behringer didnt cost anymore than $5 to make so it it being at the bottom of the pile is probably correct.

11th January 2008	#10
tINY Gear Guru Joined: Jul 2004 Location: Orygun Posts: 10,233	I picked them right - still liked the $5 one for both of those takes (the close up one by a bigger margin). -tINY