Pacifica or Great River

[Dean Roddey]

I like the formfactor of the GR more as it's a desktop unit, but Dave Pearlman has been recommending me the pacifica for the tm1 I just bought, so I'm still having doubts.

The TM-1 sounds really nice thorugh either the Pacifica or Great River. The GR with some nice input gain and the TM-1 on cardiod sounds really nice on vocals.

[nicolasmasset]

Originally Posted by AllBread

I've been loving my Great River for a couple of years and my Pacifica is showing up next Monday or Tuesday. I'll try to get some clips up of the two on guitar next weekend.

Could you perhaps post some vocal clips? That would be even sweeter! (for me anyways). Vocals are my main concern, I'm running my guitars through software amps, so micing up a guitar is not that important atm.

I found some great pacifica/gr guitar samples, but so little vocal samples comparing the two :( I'd really love to get a grip of the characteristics of the pacifica.

Originally Posted by Dean Roddey

The TM-1 sounds really nice thorugh either the Pacifica or Great River. The GR with some nice input gain and the TM-1 on cardiod sounds really nice on vocals.

I've been reading this often, that the pacifica is "nicer" on vocals, and the gr "nicer" on electric guitars.. Dammit I want sweet vocals! But I need to hear them first!

EDIT: You know what? Come to think of it: the pre that impressed me the most was the ma5 on these samples. I really wanted to get the ma5 after hearing those, especially since they're done with the same tm1 mic I have. But the GR just had that tad bit better/focused bottom end/mid. And the ma5 didn't have a DI, which I really need for my gibson. Does anybody know if you could get that ma5 airiness out of the GR with the settings that Nathan mentioned?
I think that would sell me. Rich bottom and mids, and that air.

[chrispick]

Man, I think that, short of test driving for yourself, you're really at the place where you just flip a coin, then get the pre.

Online samples can give you some clue to mic and pre characteristics, but they don't take into account your engineering skills, room treatment, patience and diligence in getting the most from your gear -- and these component factors can heavily determine your outcome. And you don't really know the variance and effect these factors played on the online samples you hear.

The best you can hope to glean from these shoot-outs, I think, are some ballpark notions. Specifics? Forget about it.

Pacifica, MA5, Great River -- all of these should be more than suitable from a technical perspective for your uses.

[AllBread]

Agreed. You could probably buy any of them and never look back. I'm not tracking any vocals this week and the only thing that an A/B test with my singing would reveal is that I'm an awful singer. That being said, I have used my GR on almost every vocal I've recorded at my house for two years and it always shines. If any of the pres on your list make or break your vocal track then the pre won't be the problem.

[Dean Roddey]

I actually did a voice over type test for a friend of mine a month ago or so, but I just tossed it before I saw this thread or I would have posted you a link to it. He was thinking about the TM-1 for his voice over work, so I went through the P-1 and GR via the TM-1 with each pattern and cut combination. I probably should have kept that around for times such as this. Oh well....

[nicolasmasset]

Yeah, you're totally right. After this weekend, I'm going to stop whining and enjoy whichever pre I pick, promise!

Originally Posted by chrispick

Man, I think that, short of test driving for yourself, you're really at the place where you just flip a coin, then get the pre.

Online samples can give you some clue to mic and pre characteristics, but they don't take into account your engineering skills, room treatment, patience and diligence in getting the most from your gear -- and these component factors can heavily determine your outcome. And you don't really know the variance and effect these factors played on the online samples you hear.

The best you can hope to glean from these shoot-outs, I think, are some ballpark notions. Specifics? Forget about it.

Pacifica, MA5, Great River -- all of these should be more than suitable from a technical perspective for your uses.

[pan60]

i have both pres and love both.
the Great River really shiny on bottom, the mids are not push but is in no way lacking in clarity, very nice and very smooth on top.
the P-1 is not as flattering to me on the bottom but is in no way lacking on bottom,
the upper mids are pushed forward ( not scooped ), this will let vocals ( as well as other sources ), set nicely on top of a mix, like a bubble on water: )~
the highs as well as the mids are very smooth and buttery.
i personally own, use, and love both of these pres and as mentioned their is no way you can go wrong, they are both amazing.
my tastes dose lean more to the P-1 for the majority of what i want for my, taste.


now check this out!
you have a couple of the greatest guys out their when it comes to product support, and service, they will both go way beyond for their customers, they are both passionate about and love audio!

one cool thing about the 500 format is we has some awesome boutique manufacturers building for the format, guys that love what they do and stand behind what they make!

you win no matter: )~

be warned, this is a very very addictive club!

[nicolasmasset]

Originally Posted by pan60

the upper mids are pushed forward ( not scooped ), this will let vocals ( as well as other sources ), set nicely on top of a mix, like a bubble on water: )~

I've got another newbie question here: will I be able to get the GR sitting ontop of that mix too, but by using some eq?

[NathanEldred]

Originally Posted by nicolasmasset

I've got another newbie question here: will I be able to get the GR sitting ontop of that mix too, but by using some eq?

You can EQ just about any signal path into submission. With a quality EQ, it's not the end of the world. It's not always optimum to do that, the goal most engineers have is to get the microphone in particular to match the voice very well. It's THE most important aspect of the signal path. Then for the preamp to match (complement) the voice/mic combo. Just my personal experience, but even with an extensive mic locker and preamp collection, I think even just a little EQ is inevitable (who cares if we have to cut a little 2.5khz or boost a little 150hz? EQ can sometimes do things that no mic locker or mic technique can provide), especially if the engineer or client is picky about small changes. How many people on this forum can honestly say they don't EQ their vocals even just touch, especially in a rock or pop context?

[pan60]

Originally Posted by NathanEldred

You can EQ just about any signal path into submission. With a quality EQ, it's not the end of the world. It's not always optimum to do that, the goal most engineers have is to get the microphone in particular to match the voice very well. It's THE most important aspect of the signal path. Then for the preamp to match (complement) the voice/mic combo. Just my personal experience, but even with an extensive mic locker and preamp collection, I think even just a little EQ is inevitable (who cares if we have to cut a little 2.5khz or boost a little 150hz? EQ can sometimes do things that no mic locker or mic technique can provide), especially if the engineer or client is picky about small changes. How many people on this forum can honestly say they don't EQ their vocals even just touch, especially in a rock or pop context?

dido
i do not really try not to use EQ much, and has Nathan mentioned i choose mic, and mics positions to better get thing were you want.
remember not every studio ( particularly in the past ), has had multiple pres in a given studio.
most studios used what ever was in the console.
the choice in mics,
position,
a bit of EQ,
somme compression,
and no issue.

the are both awesome pres!

using the same mentality you can as easily push something down.

[youngmain]

Originally Posted by LA VERDAD

I have owned GR preamps, Pacifica, and the API A2D. Out of the three choices here, I wouldn't pick the GR. I just didn't get it. On electric guitars it was pretty cool. But I need something more than that. I am not saying that it isn't a decent pre. But out of the three choices. I would go with API A2D, then the pacifica, then the GR.

This was my experience with these preamps..

You simply didn't get it says it all.

[youngmain]

Your right, probably didn't beat the competition but nor do I believe the competition beat it out because you are talking about very subjective sonic differences that at the end of the day are left up to the "TESTER" to decide whats best for him/her self. I agree with you: Make good music and the rest is just about what colors you prefer when painting.

[79_Limited]

The P-1 sounds like a good one to go for. Anyone know of a good source to pick up one?

[Jonathan Starr]

Better do the only safe and conservative thing- get both!

[pan60]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Starr

Better do the only safe and conservative thing- get both!

[barryjohns]

Unless you have to have a stereo unit, get a Lunchbox, Great River 500 and the P1, while your at it, the API 512c, you'll find yourself going for the API more often I bet.

[AllBread]

I'm spending the first day with my Pacifica so here are some first impressions - I'll post more after I spend sometime and, as always, these thoughs might change with more familiarity. It definitely lacks detail compaired to the Great River (and pretty much all my other pres) but the trade off is in the "butter" factor which it has in spades. They both sound great on electric guitar. I was just A/Bing until I realized that I was wasting time A/Bing and should probably just pick one and play. I can't get into the pad sound at all on the Pacifica - it takes a kind of fuzzy sounding pre without a lot of detailed (compaired to others I have - GR, Grace, ATI) and adds more fuzz and takes away more detail. I guess that when the time comes that you'll want to do that, you'll know. I recorded vocals last night through it at a live show but it was a mellow sing with a 58 so the Pacifica wasn't the best choice. Violin DI sounded great. More to come.

[FadersmakmeHappy]

Originally Posted by chrispick

Hey all.

My first question here:

I'm torn between purchasing an A-Designs Pacifica or a Great River MP-2NV. Can't afford both. I've heard audio samples from both, and found both to sound impressive.

Some context: I'm an instrumentalist/composer for tv content. Due to most budgets, I usually track and mix at home in my project-sized studio. The only pres I have are a Presonus Eureka (cleanish, utilitarian, decent enough) and a UA 6176 (good for dark coloring, love it on DI bass). I'd like to add a single, good versatile pre with punch and clarity (particularly to track all kinds of electric guitar) to balance things out.

So, I'm asking you to lend your mix engineer experience to help out a small-timer.

Pacifica or GR MP-2NV?

What say you?

I have both pre amps. I prefer the Pacifica for most vocals and clean guitars and the great river on dirty guitars. They are both great preamps. I think the Pacifica is a bit more "creamy" and Great River a little more dark in color.

I also love the Chandler Germanium on dirty guitars as well as the the Neve 1073. For acoustic guitar piano, clean electric, and vocals the Millenium is just georgous and my favorite "modern" pre.