What do you mean "fast" preamp?

[mequaz]

Ive done a search and i have heard many people make comments about a preamp being fast. I know what they mean because i have heard some high quality pre's versus whats in the mackie mixer.....BIG Diffierence. But tech what does "fast" mean? Are they talking about the op-amps? I mean i do understand that by fast they mean the response to transiets. And can somebody give some examples of some "fast" pres under 1000.

im looking at upgrading to a grace m101, FMR RNP, BLA Auteur, Eureka, or a focusrite ISA one. so if anyone has any info on which of these is "fast" enough for rap vocals.

[nosebleedaudio]

Originally Posted by mequaz

Ive done a search and i have heard many people make comments about a preamp being fast. I know what they mean because i have heard some high quality pre's versus whats in the mackie mixer.....BIG Diffierence. But tech what does "fast" mean? Are they talking about the op-amps? I mean i do understand that by fast they mean the response to transiets. And can somebody give some examples of some "fast" pres under 1000.

im looking at upgrading to a grace m101, FMR RNP, BLA Auteur, Eureka, or a focusrite ISA one. so if anyone has any info on which of these is "fast" enough for rap vocals.

Speed...
Higher Slew Rate..
It's all relative...

[kafka]

Originally Posted by nosebleedaudio

Speed...
Higher Slew Rate..
It's all relative...

Generally, this means they have detailed high frequency and transient response.

[Silent Sound]

I would call the Grace m101 and the BLA Auteur fast preamps. The FMR RNP is also pretty fast when compared to many preamps, but not as fast as the Grace or the BLA. As for the Eureka and the ISA One, I don't have enough experience with them to say for sure, but if I recall correctly, they're around the same as the RNP. There are ways to measure the speed of a preamp, but I'm just throwing out my opinion based on what I've heard. The numbers could be way off, but that's my perception.

[Enlightened Hand]

Originally Posted by mequaz

Ive done a search and i have heard many people make comments about a preamp being fast. I know what they mean because i have heard some high quality pre's versus whats in the mackie mixer.....BIG Diffierence. But tech what does "fast" mean? Are they talking about the op-amps? I mean i do understand that by fast they mean the response to transiets. And can somebody give some examples of some "fast" pres under 1000.

Most of the time when you hear that term used it's bull. It means nothing more than something that's repeated by a lot of people and sounds good to say. More specifically though it's a loose reference to the circuit's ability to respond to transients quickly. Perhaps even more telling is that when that idea of "speed" is presented it has more to do with the listener's perception of how detailed and how much of a sense of impact transients come across with while using whatever piece of gear than any measurement.

...im looking at upgrading to a grace m101, FMR RNP, BLA Auteur, Eureka, or a focusrite ISA one. so if anyone has any info on which of these is "fast" enough for rap vocals.

Any preamp is "fast enough" for any vocal. It's not useful to think in terms of "speed" when evaluating the general quality of a preamp used for recording music. "Rap" vocals are just vocals like anything else. What does tend to happen is that with many transformer coupled input and/or output preamp designs an extra sense of impact and low to low mid frequency "weight" is added to whatever signal passes through. That is usually regarded as pleasing to the ear and "musical". You might, after all is said and done, be looking for that.

I have used, like and respect all the preamps in that bunch that you've listed but of the crew the one that would give the most "oomph" would be the ISA and it's even more subtle than something like a Pre-73 or API 512 or whatever.

[dkelley]

Originally Posted by Enlightened Hand

Most of the time when you hear that term used it's bull. It means nothing more than something that's repeated by a lot of people and sounds good to say. More specifically though it's a loose reference to the circuit's ability to respond to transients quickly. Perhaps even more telling is that when that idea of "speed" is presented it has more to do with the listener's perception of how detailed and how much of a sense of impact transients come across with while using whatever piece of gear than any measurement.

Any preamp is "fast enough" for any vocal. It's not useful to think in terms of "speed" when evaluating the general quality of a preamp used for recording music. "Rap" vocals are just vocals like anything else. What does tend to happen is that with many transformer coupled input and/or output preamp designs an extra sense of impact and low to low mid frequency "weight" is added to whatever signal passes through. That is usually regarded as pleasing to the ear and "musical". You might, after all is said and done, be looking for that.

I have used, like and respect all the preamps in that bunch that you've listed but of the crew the one that would give the most "oomph" would be the ISA and it's even more subtle than something like a Pre-73 or API 512 or whatever.

this is 100% true. "fast" typically is a characterization people give when they hear something that reveals minute HF details very well, or which may eve simply be just a little bit brighter than a comparative product.

It DOES have real world meaning if discussing transient response, although transient response isn't that easy to hear nor is the transient response of anything but your speakers going to be really audible without some pretty careful a/b testing imho.

It's a real thing that does really exist, but the term is misused in almost every example I read about on GS.

When I was setting up my home-made 1176 compressors for the first time I had to analyze the output at several locations of the circuit on a oscilloscope. Doing this showed me the actual transient response, decay rate and so on of not only how the compressor worked, but also just the fundamental performance of the audio itself without the compression active.

That was very revealing, a few years back. Which is why I have ever-since put so little importance on misnomers like transient response being "fast" or "slow" in user reviews. Instead I focus most of the audible significance between competing products on the following MUCH more audible properties:

- frequency response plots (not just bandwidth limits which are almost consistently amazing) and audible balance of that response

- gain before clipping

- type of circuit that would clip (in the case of a preamp for example... like will it be even harmonic, odd, how quickly does it go from mild saturation into severe clipping)

- noise figures (rarely important though as they're mostly pretty amazing)

And then the features of the thing, how those features work/sound, and so on.

slew rate, transient response, and the type of conversion going on are so low on my list of "slightly audible specs at their worst extremes" that I pretty much disregard them.

They're fun to talk about, and I hate seeing manufacturers blatantly lie about them, but aside from that there are much more important audible specs to focus upon imho.

the grace is super clean, noise free to very high gain, intensively forgettably neutral, and doesn't seem to change it's tone through it's entire operating functionality. Compare that to a gap pre-73 which changes it's tone, distortion, saturation, and noise figures dramatically through it's control range and even through the level of the output from your microphone and you get two extremely different devices.

So when people describe the grace as fast (which I have no doubt it actually is with regard to the actual transient response.... seeing as how well engineered a product it is), I believe most people are really describing a very high performance AND SUPER CLEAN device. Because it's so clean and so low noise and so neutral, what you notice are the subtle HF things that get eaten up by other products. Is it transient response differences you're hearing? imho for the most part, no.... I feel it's more to do with frequency response, non-linearity of sound through the other product's dynamic range, and noise figures.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by mequaz

so if anyone has any info on which of these is "fast" enough for rap vocals.

Seems like a bit of a contradiction to me. Fast, detailed, and revealing is not what I'd reach for on a rap vocal. Phat, gooey, thick and glued is what I'd be reaching for - Neve or a Neve sounding emulation.

A classic often sought out and emulated combo for rap vocals is the U87 into a 1073/84. Anything but "fast" imo. But maybe you're after something unique.

Pretty much any of those pre's will work fine. Is it what you're after? Only you can answer.

[mequaz]

Originally Posted by dkelley

this is 100% true. "fast" typically is a characterization people give when they hear something that reveals minute HF details very well, or which may eve simply be just a little bit brighter than a comparative product.

It DOES have real world meaning if discussing transient response, although transient response isn't that easy to hear nor is the transient response of anything but your speakers going to be really audible without some pretty careful a/b testing imho.

It's a real thing that does really exist, but the term is misused in almost every example I read about on GS.

When I was setting up my home-made 1176 compressors for the first time I had to analyze the output at several locations of the circuit on a oscilloscope. Doing this showed me the actual transient response, decay rate and so on of not only how the compressor worked, but also just the fundamental performance of the audio itself without the compression active.

That was very revealing, a few years back. Which is why I have ever-since put so little importance on misnomers like transient response being "fast" or "slow" in user reviews. Instead I focus most of the audible significance between competing products on the following MUCH more audible properties:

- frequency response plots (not just bandwidth limits which are almost consistently amazing) and audible balance of that response

- gain before clipping

- type of circuit that would clip (in the case of a preamp for example... like will it be even harmonic, odd, how quickly does it go from mild saturation into severe clipping)

- noise figures (rarely important though as they're mostly pretty amazing)

And then the features of the thing, how those features work/sound, and so on.

slew rate, transient response, and the type of conversion going on are so low on my list of "slightly audible specs at their worst extremes" that I pretty much disregard them.

They're fun to talk about, and I hate seeing manufacturers blatantly lie about them, but aside from that there are much more important audible specs to focus upon imho.

the grace is super clean, noise free to very high gain, intensively forgettably neutral, and doesn't seem to change it's tone through it's entire operating functionality. Compare that to a gap pre-73 which changes it's tone, distortion, saturation, and noise figures dramatically through it's control range and even through the level of the output from your microphone and you get two extremely different devices.

So when people describe the grace as fast (which I have no doubt it actually is with regard to the actual transient response.... seeing as how well engineered a product it is), I believe most people are really describing a very high performance AND SUPER CLEAN device. Because it's so clean and so low noise and so neutral, what you notice are the subtle HF things that get eaten up by other products. Is it transient response differences you're hearing? imho for the most part, no.... I feel it's more to do with frequency response, non-linearity of sound through the other product's dynamic range, and noise figures.

What your saying def makes a lot of sense, its the HF detail that makes me think a preamp is "fast". I had a GAP pre-73 and it was great. Im not gonna sit here and but i have also heard my voice thru a UA 610, avalon, and a chandler limited and i must say that i the pre-73 didnt get my raw vocal up to those pres. Im not knocking it tho its just i noticed that and i always hear ppl say: the mod will make it "fast", or mod it and the transient response will be quicker. But your right, its that HF detail and "focus" is the word i wanna use. Its like those other pres gave the raw vocal a very clear cut focus. Thanks everybody for the preamp education tho. Im def down to learn.