Bought the RNP - Do people tend to blow things out of proportion here a lot??

[Joe T10]

So I took the leap and bought the FMR Audio RNP as an upgrade to my Focusrite Voicemaster. After reading through reams and reams of posts about great preamps for $500 I opted for the RNP and I have to say that I am really surprised what I have found.

I had read a lot of slatting of the Voicemaster here and (despite the fact that I actually felt that I managed to get some decent vocals from it) I decided to get a no frills pre that simply captured a good quality signal that was pleasing to the 'auld ear drums.

I set up some tests this evening with the RNP and the VM (only the preamp, none of the VM extras were used.) I have to say that I was really surprised to hear that the difference between the 2 was not that huge at all and in fact at times I prefered the sound of the VM which seemed to have a bit more presence. The VM did at times sound a little honky though in some instances and seemed to bring out sibilance a but more but I was happy with both the RNP and the VM after the comparisons.

Many people will probably read this as an amateur rambling on about 2 awful preamps but, although I am not some master engineer, I thankfully have a decent pair of ears and an lack of interest in liking a piece of kit just because it is supposed to be better and I have to say that those who would completely write off the VM and big up the RNP to high heavens is either being really, really critical or simply jumping on the bandwagon.

I plan on doing some further tests this week but so far found that vocal recordings from both the RNP and VM are certainly not a million miles apart.

Do many hear think that at tome people tend to get carried away and simply follow what everyone else says? I have spent a lot of time recently in the comparisons part of the forum and I have grown increasingly surprised by the amount of high end gear that I don't like and the amount of low end gear that I think sounds great. That is not to say that I am being ignorant and naive as there is obviously A LOT of high end gear which is just sublime but I am pleased to say that my confidence in recording has improved as I have learnt to ignore the hype and let my ears make the decisions for me.

I hope this post doesn't come across as arrogant or pretentious, I just thought I'd share my opinions after having bought the RNP which for the record I don't regret buying as I still have a lot of testing to do.

[mobius.media]

Originally Posted by Joe T10

I have grown increasingly surprised by the amount of high end gear that I don't like and the amount of low end gear that I think sounds great. That is not to say that I am being ignorant and naive as there is obviously A LOT of high end gear which is just sublime but I am pleased to say that my confidence in recording has improved as I have learnt to ignore the hype and let my ears make the decisions for me.

That's good. It just means you're developing your ears and experience. Plenty of great gear costs peanuts, and plenty of great gear costs a fortune.

The thing with those two pres you mentioned is neither is really meant to be a 'color' pre, so it's kind of natural to expect them to be similar.

[cavern]

to answer your 1st question..
yes a lot of people here get carried away and follow the flock.
the world is after all 90%sheep and 10%sheppard.

having said that, the rnp is a good pre as well as a lot of other pre's out there but the differences are never night and day unless you compare an API to a cassette pre.
however a good singer or player that can actually sing or handle the instrument and proper gain structure will have much more of an effect.

[Joe T10]

When compared side by side the RNP and VM definitely both coloured the sound but then I compared them to some cheap pre I bought a long long time ago and it was evident that actually the RNP and VM are quite well balanced in terms of their transparency.

Once again, I am not saying that either is some holy grail of cheap preamps, I was just really surprised by how the "hideous" VM stood up to the initial tests.

[onespecial]

trust your own ears more than strangers mouths (or typings, in this case)
right?
i used the FMR RNC because of all the praise and was not impressed.
just the way it goes.. i guess

[PEImatrix]

I know this sounds as boring as hell but... your room matters sooooo much.

IMO for rock vocals, an SM57 through a GAP pre in a good room is gonna sound better than a really expensive mic through a really expensive preamp and comp in a bad room. I know this, cause I've been there/done that.

Even the "silver bullet" mic the SM7 gives odd results in a bad room.

[Joe T10]

When recording vocals I go for a dead sound in terms of the room and add the ambience later. IMO unless you have an incredible sounding room then you get much better results adding space and depth in post. never actually tried the sm57 for vocals but then again I am not exactly rocky.

[Unclenny]

Folks hereabouts do tend to 'pile on' with some gear.

But, some gear.....FMR products being on that list.....deserves a lot of good press.

Originally Posted by Joe T10

.......I am not exactly rocky.

Yo, Adrian........

[Harvey Gerst]

The -3 dB down point of the RNP is 300,000 Hz!!! It's dead flat out to 200 kHz. The -3 dB down point is a forced roll off. The D.I. on the RNP is fantastic on bass, unlike anything I've ever heard.

I'm very happy with ours, and it sits very nicely in our studio - next to our Great River MP2NV and our SST-1 Origin. Maybe you're expecting a big difference in sound, but it's not about just that.

[rty5150]

while i am fairly familiar with the FF platinum stuff, i am not as familiar with the FMR RNP(i own the RNC and love the pair i have). i do own a sytek and can definitely speak of the difference. the FF platinum stuff is honky and less 3D. while not a bad pre, i wouldn't consider it great. if all i had was the FF, i would rock the piss out of it. i have since moved up the ladder to FF isa428, which is in a totally different league than the platinum. that being said, the isa is one of the last pres i reach for.

i will agree that some gear on this site is a flavor of the month and i have fallen victim to some of them, but i can attest to some of them being great pieces:
v67g
v69me
RNC
CL 7602's
apex 460
SM7B.
dbx 160x's
dbx 166's
adam A7's

in the grand scheme, i am glad i went with the crowd on these as most had already done the leg work on this stuff and kept me from making ART tube MP, AKG C3000B style purchases again.
over hyped? maybe. blown out of proportion? naw.

[rty5150]

Originally Posted by Harvey Gerst

Maybe you're expecting a big difference in sound, but it's not about just that.

true that harvey!

[TwardyLikeTank]

Originally Posted by Harvey Gerst

The -3 dB down point of the RNP is 300,000 Hz!!! It's dead flat out to 200 kHz.

Really? this is the same "people can hear around 20Hz - 20,000Hz" sort of Hz were talking about?

[Darm]

Originally Posted by Joe T10

So I took the leap and bought the FMR Audio RNP as an upgrade to my Focusrite Voicemaster. After reading through reams and reams of posts about great preamps for $500 I opted for the RNP and I have to say that I am really surprised what I have found.

I had read a lot of slatting of the Voicemaster here and (despite the fact that I actually felt that I managed to get some decent vocals from it) I decided to get a no frills pre that simply captured a good quality signal that was pleasing to the 'auld ear drums.

I set up some tests this evening with the RNP and the VM (only the preamp, none of the VM extras were used.) I have to say that I was really surprised to hear that the difference between the 2 was not that huge at all and in fact at times I prefered the sound of the VM which seemed to have a bit more presence. The VM did at times sound a little honky though in some instances and seemed to bring out sibilance a but more but I was happy with both the RNP and the VM after the comparisons.

Many people will probably read this as an amateur rambling on about 2 awful preamps but, although I am not some master engineer, I thankfully have a decent pair of ears and an lack of interest in liking a piece of kit just because it is supposed to be better and I have to say that those who would completely write off the VM and big up the RNP to high heavens is either being really, really critical or simply jumping on the bandwagon.

I plan on doing some further tests this week but so far found that vocal recordings from both the RNP and VM are certainly not a million miles apart.

Do many hear think that at tome people tend to get carried away and simply follow what everyone else says? I have spent a lot of time recently in the comparisons part of the forum and I have grown increasingly surprised by the amount of high end gear that I don't like and the amount of low end gear that I think sounds great. That is not to say that I am being ignorant and naive as there is obviously A LOT of high end gear which is just sublime but I am pleased to say that my confidence in recording has improved as I have learnt to ignore the hype and let my ears make the decisions for me.

I hope this post doesn't come across as arrogant or pretentious, I just thought I'd share my opinions after having bought the RNP which for the record I don't regret buying as I still have a lot of testing to do.

Did you test it ut with mics that require a lot of gain (sm7b?), that's where I find a lot of cheaper pres start giving hiss.
Have you tried overloading both? (like when you are not expecting a singer to sing a really loud note, and suddenly it goes- that's where the pre's headroom can really save the take, but where the cheap pre will just distort)?

[hopeless_opus]

I think as you work with them more and refine "how" you hear things you'll start to hear what a nicer pre like the RNP (and on up) brings to the table. A/B'ing solo'd tracks isn't going to tell the whole story.

Once you start stacking, processing, mixing tracks, you'll start to hear a greater difference. Transients will be less smeared, the imaging will be more 3-d, and your tracks will sound more defined in the stereo image.

That's not to say that the VM is a necessarily bad pre (despite what ppl on here might say), but I think overtime you'll appreciate what "better" gear can do. Then you'll join the rest of us on the endless gear lust journey...

[hopeless_opus]

Ironically, I just happened upon this from another thread. Watch from about about 26:30 in.

Mic preamp reviews. Black Lion Audio, FMR Audio and True Systems | Ronan's Recording Show

[Harvey Gerst]

Originally Posted by TwardyLikeTank

Really? this is the same "people can hear around 20Hz - 20,000Hz" sort of Hz were talking about?

There's a lot more to it than just that. Transients are basically a function of high frequency response. Wider bandwidth lets those transients come through unchanged.

[Joe T10]

I suppose I was expecting to hear a real step up in the sound quality when I moved to the RNP but like you have all said, that just isn't the way it works most of the time. Though in saying that, my mate came round with an old Joemeek VC preamp and I ran another test with that up against the RNP and VM and the Joemeek was pretty awful in comparison, with the Joe EQ engaged it was pretty horrendous and would only really suit if you were going for a Lo-Fi sound IMO. It was how I had imagined the difference between the RNP and VM would have been.

So far my conclusion is that the RNP does seem to have a nice, pretty neutral and very usable sound and actually the VM isn't as bad as many people insisted it was- certainly no Neve but not a million miles behind the RNP.

Like I said I will be doing a load more testing this week and as I get to grips with the RNP I will post up what I have found just in case there is anyone out there as equally dull as myself

[David C.]

I can't tell anything from solo tracks. A friggin' ART cheap-o can sound fine soloed. But where they go to hell is when stacking tracks. I've not tried that many pre's but of the ones I've owned and used enough to know, my Avalon 737, Grace 101, RNP and GAP pre-73 will stack bunches of parts just fine and easy to mix. Start doing that with Mackies or ARTs and consonants will start crunching on backup vox and smearing galore. I've not tried your other pre, but track a boat load of tracks through the RNP and go to mix and it will be easy to do and plenty of space for each one and again, that's where crap pre's fall down hard. I think most of the shoot out comparisons are crap as they don't tell me a thing. Track a whole rhythm section through the same pre and vox and especially backup vox and there will be the truth to what the device can do.

[dkelley]

Originally Posted by Joe T10

So I took the leap and bought the FMR Audio RNP as an upgrade to my Focusrite Voicemaster. After reading through reams and reams of posts about great preamps for $500 I opted for the RNP and I have to say that I am really surprised what I have found.

I had read a lot of slatting of the Voicemaster here and (despite the fact that I actually felt that I managed to get some decent vocals from it) I decided to get a no frills pre that simply captured a good quality signal that was pleasing to the 'auld ear drums.

I set up some tests this evening with the RNP and the VM (only the preamp, none of the VM extras were used.) I have to say that I was really surprised to hear that the difference between the 2 was not that huge at all and in fact at times I prefered the sound of the VM which seemed to have a bit more presence. The VM did at times sound a little honky though in some instances and seemed to bring out sibilance a but more but I was happy with both the RNP and the VM after the comparisons.

Many people will probably read this as an amateur rambling on about 2 awful preamps but, although I am not some master engineer, I thankfully have a decent pair of ears and an lack of interest in liking a piece of kit just because it is supposed to be better and I have to say that those who would completely write off the VM and big up the RNP to high heavens is either being really, really critical or simply jumping on the bandwagon.

I plan on doing some further tests this week but so far found that vocal recordings from both the RNP and VM are certainly not a million miles apart.

Do many hear think that at tome people tend to get carried away and simply follow what everyone else says? I have spent a lot of time recently in the comparisons part of the forum and I have grown increasingly surprised by the amount of high end gear that I don't like and the amount of low end gear that I think sounds great. That is not to say that I am being ignorant and naive as there is obviously A LOT of high end gear which is just sublime but I am pleased to say that my confidence in recording has improved as I have learnt to ignore the hype and let my ears make the decisions for me.

I hope this post doesn't come across as arrogant or pretentious, I just thought I'd share my opinions after having bought the RNP which for the record I don't regret buying as I still have a lot of testing to do.

I could have told you that would happen :-)

the RNP is a very accurate, pure, and single-purpose preamp. it does one thing well - amplifying mics.

same with the focusrite platinum gear. Despite what people say. I quite like the focusrite stuff for some things. I find it slightly more scooped sounding than the rnp, but there is a place for that. And I've done some great vocal recording with a trackmaster pro when they first came out.

I would never have bought an rnp - very expensive for what you get.

Preamps are vital and when pushed they do things differently and when used on dozens of tracks the overall tone of a preamp is additive of course so you will hear it more obviously.

but overall, the focusrite platinum stuff ain't bad at all. People hate on it - but it's very very clean, very very quiet, very full range, very dynamic. It just happens to be very slightly less "present" sounding (slightly less mids I would summarize it as).

the RNP isn't my favorite preamp at all. It's excellent, just really uninteresting. for the same money I would have bought something else.

sorry that you discovered this the hard way.

and I'm sure people here disagree with me or chalk it up to your ears not knowing what to listen for yet. That is, of course, true to a point. And the focusrite platinum pres don't sound as great to me when used on dozens of bed tracks for example. however that is only still a very very subtle complaint about them. edit: "on a desert island with no other options" I would happily do full albums with either the rnp or the focusrite platinum series. Nothing wrong with either. They're both quieter, lower distortion and more musical sounding to my ears than cheap preamps from some other companies like behringer. And even then I would be able to work just fine with those.

I honestly find that what you get from truly great preamps takes some pretty formidable supporting equipment to notice, and pretty complex recordings with lots of tracks using the same preamp. And you also get more variation and interesting musicality (sometimes at the expense of accuracy) with certain more elite preamps. It's all a matter of taste.

I would never have suggested to get an RNP to upgrade from a focusrite. that subtle warmth is just too damned subtle. there are much more dramatic changes from other preamps that cost around the same range as a new RNP. And in that case it's not about being better or more accurate, it's about having a preamp that intentionally produces different sounds at the turn of a dial to give you something musical to play with in your tracking stage. like the various tube/ss preamps where you can dial in different tones (hell even the mpa gold does that and gives you a ton more variation in tone than the rnp - but spend a few hundred and you get into some pretty great territory!)

edit: as a matter of perspective - you found the VM more present than the rnp. so it likely sounds different from the trackmaster I have experience with. My concepts might still be appropriate though LoL even if my particular findings were opposite to yours :-)

cheers,
Don

[fossaree]

Originally Posted by hopeless_opus

Ironically, I just happened upon this from another thread. Watch from about about 26:30 in.

Mic preamp reviews. Black Lion Audio, FMR Audio and True Systems | Ronan's Recording Show

great link thumbsup

[dkelley]

re: the p-solo comparison review: +1, I totally agree.

the p-solo is incredible. again though, it's so subtle until you're doing large scale commercial work in a really great monitoring environment.

[dustyreels]

To the OP... The best thing about your situation is that you now have 3 channels of preamp that you feel confident in working with. In my set up I have 2 grace m101s, a mpa with mullard tubes, and the 4 stock pres in my 003. Would I like more pres? Of course. Am I held back in any way for the type of work I do? Absolutely not.

[TurboJets]

To the OP I would ask, what are you using as a DAW interface? One factor that could possibly be an issue is the quality of ADAC you're using because low quality conversion can effect what you're hearing in capture and on playback. For instance, Harvey mentioned quality of transient detail is an important consideration when evaluating mic pre's, and if poor ADAC prevents you from hearing those qualities, it becomes soemthing you might want to look at that.

[Joe T10]

I am using a Delta 1010, another piece of equipment that many people here seem to dislike but I have used it for years and have never had any issues whatsoever when I take material to professional studios to add further tracks, mix etc...

I would guess that people might think that if I have been using a 1010 and VM then I must suck or have awful ears but I have actually gone back to re-record vocals that were tracked in a professional studio using high end gear because they sounded a bit dead and lifeless. My father always said that you make the most of the tools you have and I feel reassured now that I must be doing something right if I am using such crap gear and getting decent results! Woo hoo for gear that people say sucks!

Undoubtedly if I was tracking the full song through this gear then cracks would show but for laying down some vocals or a bit of acoustic guitar it seems to do the job just fine, in fact I think it can do it quite well.

Thanks for people's feedback, great forum.

[dysenterygary]

When I first bought my RNC it was my first outboard compressor and I was very impressed. Then I compared it to my new Pro Vla II and it didn't seem as impressive anymore but it is still "really nice". I know I'm talking compressors and you're talking preamps, but I think you'll be able to find a use out of your RNP. If not just sell it and try something else. For a neutral sound the modded DMP3's are pretty hot right now over in that thread. Might want to check it out.

[hello people]

Originally Posted by Joe T10

So I took the leap and bought the FMR Audio RNP as an upgrade to my Focusrite Voicemaster. After reading through reams and reams of posts about great preamps for $500 I opted for the RNP and I have to say that I am really surprised what I have found.

I had read a lot of slatting of the Voicemaster here and (despite the fact that I actually felt that I managed to get some decent vocals from it) I decided to get a no frills pre that simply captured a good quality signal that was pleasing to the 'auld ear drums.

I set up some tests this evening with the RNP and the VM (only the preamp, none of the VM extras were used.) I have to say that I was really surprised to hear that the difference between the 2 was not that huge at all and in fact at times I prefered the sound of the VM which seemed to have a bit more presence. The VM did at times sound a little honky though in some instances and seemed to bring out sibilance a but more but I was happy with both the RNP and the VM after the comparisons.

Many people will probably read this as an amateur rambling on about 2 awful preamps but, although I am not some master engineer, I thankfully have a decent pair of ears and an lack of interest in liking a piece of kit just because it is supposed to be better and I have to say that those who would completely write off the VM and big up the RNP to high heavens is either being really, really critical or simply jumping on the bandwagon.

I plan on doing some further tests this week but so far found that vocal recordings from both the RNP and VM are certainly not a million miles apart.

Do many hear think that at tome people tend to get carried away and simply follow what everyone else says? I have spent a lot of time recently in the comparisons part of the forum and I have grown increasingly surprised by the amount of high end gear that I don't like and the amount of low end gear that I think sounds great. That is not to say that I am being ignorant and naive as there is obviously A LOT of high end gear which is just sublime but I am pleased to say that my confidence in recording has improved as I have learnt to ignore the hype and let my ears make the decisions for me.

I hope this post doesn't come across as arrogant or pretentious, I just thought I'd share my opinions after having bought the RNP which for the record I don't regret buying as I still have a lot of testing to do.

This is the first rule of preamp club....all these wacky dudes talking about different shades of brown colour in the top 1.8% of the lower mid range...and all that craziness...you see...all these dudes are basically trainspotters...or they liked to collect blue biros or rocks with eyes or something when they were kids....they have huge problems. They always forget that preamps help record stuff and when you record John Smith with a preamp...it still sounds like John Smith...be careful...there's a lot of complete losers out there who are stuck in that 1.8% region of the lower mid range or some such range...and you'd be a crazy and dangerous nutjob to ever question their beliefs...they need that 1.8% region to move around in. That's their spot. They love it there. They need it. Nobody knows that 1.8% like they do...they have a special relationship with it...they can see what you can't see and hear what you can't hear. Be very careful of these weirdos.

[dfahb44]

You bought a preamp expecting a huge difference, that was the first mistake. Preamp's are probably one of the last things you want to upgrade. Source, Room, Mics, and Monitoring will make a MUCH bigger impact. Conversion and Preamps are the last things you want to upgrade, (minus cables of course )


Right now for preamps, all you need to really worry about is noise, and if it has enough juice for your mics. Too much "low mids" or "doesn't stack well"? We're audio engineers here, use some o'that EQ.

[mtl777]

Originally Posted by Harvey Gerst

The -3 dB down point of the RNP is 300,000 Hz!!! It's dead flat out to 200 kHz. The -3 dB down point is a forced roll off. The D.I. on the RNP is fantastic on bass, unlike anything I've ever heard.

I'm very happy with ours, and it sits very nicely in our studio - next to our Great River MP2NV and our SST-1 Origin. Maybe you're expecting a big difference in sound, but it's not about just that.

How do you like the DI of the RNP on synth sources, compared to, say, Great River MP2NV or Aurora Audio GTQ2?

[Michael_Joly]

Originally Posted by dfahb44

You bought a preamp expecting a huge difference, that was the first mistake. Preamp's are probably one of the last things you want to upgrade...

How true. So few voices of reason heard on this point.

Room, source and mic are orders of magnitude more important than preamp choice. This can be proven objectively.

I challenge anyone to make a case that the preamp is more important the mic - oh, and please use real engineering arguments pulled from the domains of acoustical, electronic or musical terminology and not metaphor or parable if you choose to take up the challenge.

[joelpatterson]

"Pre-amps will get you through times of no mics, better than mics will get you through times of no preamps."

(That's actually a motto slightly corrupted from my days of reading the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers comic books... I think it was a comparison of the utilities of dope vis-avis money...? )