Another Budget pre vs. High-end pre shootout

DeeDrive · 8th October 2006, 10:59 PM

Inspired by some of the other budget vs. high end pre shoot outs that have taken place here, I thought I'd give it a shot. Here are two files, one with a fairly low end preamp and one with a high dollar unit.

The clips are the same take, just recorded through 2 different pres. No EQ, compression, or any of that. Let the guessing begin.

fuzzface777 · 8th October 2006, 11:14 PM

Well with one track it is hard. I pick number 2, fuller, nicer to listen to .......

bogeyeater · 8th October 2006, 11:23 PM

i'm a cloth eared fek but i can't hear much difference myself.

malekmusic · 9th October 2006, 03:57 AM

2 sounds better to me

orksnork · 9th October 2006, 04:04 AM

listening through headphones...they sound remarkably similar if not identical...

Switchcraft · 9th October 2006, 04:49 AM

I been foo'ed

Sounds Great · 9th October 2006, 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeeDrive

The clips are the same take, just recorded through 2 different pres.

How did you do this?

Brian Middleton · 9th October 2006, 07:17 PM

Um, guys, try loading these files into your DAW, time-aligning them, reversing polarity on one and summing to mono....and you will see (and hear) that your leg is being pulled.

(Kudos to bogeyeater and orksnork for hearing it right away.)

Sounds Great · 9th October 2006, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Middleton

Um, guys, try loading these files into your DAW, time-aligning them, reversing polarity on one and summing to mono....and you will see (and hear) that your leg is being pulled.

(Kudos to bogeyeater and orksnork for hearing it right away.)

Interesting. He said it was one take.

Does that mean one microphone into two preamps?

blaugruen7 · 9th October 2006, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sounds Great

Interesting. He said it was one take.

Does that mean one microphone into two preamps?

you can split a microphone into two preamps.

and? is it one identical soundfile?

TragikRemix · 9th October 2006, 08:37 PM

on my laptop speakers (makes eveerything sound crappy)

they are close, but 2 is a tad richer and has some more punchiness to it on the chord changes.

Brian Middleton · 9th October 2006, 08:44 PM

Well, here is what the resulting soundfile looks like when Guitar1.wav and Guitar2.wav are time-aligned, phase-inverted and summed to mono:

I can bump this file up 120dB with trim plugs and still get absolutely zero response on the output meter.

So I don't know where that extra richness and punchiness are coming from, but it would not appear to be coming from any difference between the two sound files.

Maybe somebody else could repeat my experiment and see if they get different results...?

DeeDrive · 9th October 2006, 09:14 PM

Alright, it seems some people are catching on, so I'll come clean.

With all the high-end vs. cheap gear shootouts going on, I was curious how much of what people were hearing was all in their heads, and how much difference was actually there.

The 2 files are exactly the same. I chopped a little white space from the beginning and end of the 2nd file to discourage people from noticing the 2 files were exacting the same length, and hoping no one would think to time align them and flip the phase of one and see them cancel out.

Call it a dirty trick, a prank, or an experiment in psychology, I just found it interesting to hear what people came up with when trying to hear a difference that wasn't there. And for some reason the 2nd one always sounded better...maybe some people following the crowd, or maybe some more profound psychological reason...

Thanks for putting up with me, sorry if I confused anyone, hopefully I didn't discourage anyone from buying a high end pre. (there really would be a difference if I had used one).

allencollins · 9th October 2006, 09:15 PM

Is this a test??
or a trick??

Tom Foolery??

I can't hear a difference
My spectrum analyzer says the same thing...............

dreamsongs · 9th October 2006, 09:26 PM

Well...

I didn't hear any difference but thanks for telling me what I already knew...

jeronimo · 9th October 2006, 09:30 PM

I think this is ridiculous!!!

DeeDrive · 9th October 2006, 09:31 PM

I see some people have already chosen to edit their posts. Come on...it's all for fun. There's a lot of audiophile nuts who listen to the same thing through "magic wires" with crystals on their speakers and say they hear a difference.

"Expectation bias" I believe I heard it called once.

Sounds Great · 9th October 2006, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeeDrive

Alright, it seems some people are catching on, so I'll come clean.

thenoiseflower · 9th October 2006, 10:09 PM

This is stupid, like there would never be a difference.....

Ibvee · 9th October 2006, 11:02 PM

This is nice!

I must admit,
Because some people said they heard a difference, I did my very best to hear it (in my not ideal listening space), and after a while I thought that there even might be a little difference between the 2, and yes, the 2nd would be the best

Nice, wich preamp and mic was it?

DeeDrive · 10th October 2006, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibvee

This is nice!

I must admit,
Because some people said they heard a difference, I did my very best to hear it (in my not ideal listening space), and after a while I thought that there even might be a little difference between the 2, and yes, the 2nd would be the best

Nice, wich preamp and mic was it?

I actually just pulled this track from a Pro Tools session on my hard drive, but I believe the chain was: AT4050 --> ART preamp --> Manley Vari-mu --> RME ADI-2 to Pro Tools.

Yes, I know ART and then a vari-mu...kinda odd, but the ART was only pre available at the time.

Sharp11 · 10th October 2006, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeeDrive

I actually just pulled this track from a Pro Tools session on my hard drive, but I believe the chain was: AT4050 --> ART preamp --> Manley Vari-mu --> RME ADI-2 to Pro Tools.

Yes, I know ART and then a vari-mu...kinda odd, but the ART was only pre available at the time.

The problem with this is, in your zeal to prove a point, you "led the witness" so to speak by stating (lying really) the two files were recorded by different pre's, one high end and one low.

People trusted you and tried their best to come up with an answer to fit your criteria; still, and what I find interesting is, you were found out

What you should've said was "here are two files, can you hear a difference?"

Ed

DeeDrive · 10th October 2006, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharp11

The problem with this is, in your zeal to prove a point, you "led the witness" so to speak by stating (lying really) the two files were recorded by different pre's, one high end and one low.

People trusted you and tried their best to come up with an answer to fit your criteria; still, and what I find interesting is, you were found out

What you should've said was "here are two files, can you hear a difference?"

Ed

You're correct, i did lie to prove a point. The point being that even with no difference to hear, people still found a reason to hear a difference. This is the whole point. Whether they were trying to hear something, wanted to hear something, or just trying to sound intelligent, my point was that people will hear things that aren't there one way or the other.

I knew some people would figure it out, some people would say "wow, these sound the same" (being honest), and some people would try to say there was a difference. If you look at how many people read the thread vs. how many replied, you'll see most people listened, and chose not to respond. Something I would probably do if I could hear no difference between the 2 files. But I knew some people would think they heard a difference.

Brian Middleton · 10th October 2006, 02:40 AM

On the one hand, yeah, this was sort of akin to entrapment....on the other hand, the thing that entrapment undeniably proves is a willingness to commit the crime. This is not an acceptable way to do business in a court of law, but in the court of audio opinion it doesn't seem so far out of line to me.

Point proven: we hear what we expect to hear (full disclosure--I too preferred #2 on the first hearing; it was only after going back to #1 and being unable to confirm the difference that I decided to check out the files).

Perhaps we should just let it serve as a reminder to take our own opinions with a grain of salt.

quincyg · 10th October 2006, 03:46 AM

interesting thread. i am listening through my crappy imac speaker and my mind definitely played tricks on me given what information was presented. i listened to #1 and though oh yeah that sounds nice and full, punchy, i wish i could get my guitar to sound that good/play that well. so my my expectation was that #1 would be hard to beat. then i heard #2 and thought, sounds thinner, a little too bright. i went back and forth a few times and thought i heard a difference.

so what do i believe? is it nice and warm and punchy or too bright? i just don't know what to believe anymore

i guess you could call it a sonic illusion. i wonder if there is a sight with sonic illusions out there.

nice work deedrive or are you really ceedrive???

Argonaut · 10th October 2006, 04:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeeDrive

Call it a dirty trick, or an experiment in psychology

I'll call it a dirty trick, thank you. I just can't believe that someone would be so bold as to conduct A Scientific Experiment on the Internet.

Oh yeah, I thought the second one sounded better, too.

max cooper · 10th October 2006, 04:24 AM

2 has a virus in it.

buchiach · 10th October 2006, 04:23 PM

1 sounds better

fuzzface777 · 13th October 2006, 10:26 PM

well that is funny, but it also proves another thing to me..... don't waste your time listening to peoples so called tests

Trancetones · 13th October 2006, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeeDrive

I see some people have already chosen to edit their posts. Come on...it's all for fun. There's a lot of audiophile nuts who listen to the same thing through "magic wires" with crystals on their speakers and say they hear a difference.

I used to do this but now all my crystals are being used in my time travel machine.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
12 high end pre-amps	demel	High end	37	13th September 2006 11:38 AM
Will a average Pre degrade quality of a High end Pre?	rids	Low End Theory	16	9th August 2006 02:48 AM
first high end pre	mindseye	High end	70	25th July 2006 04:45 PM
high end pre for vocals/reggae	ardy77	High end	5	14th January 2006 01:19 AM
Need Help Choosing High End Pre!	chrisrulesmore	High end	30	16th July 2005 10:42 PM

8th October 2006, 11:23 PM	#3
bogeyeater Gear maniac Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 268	i'm a cloth eared fek but i can't hear much difference myself. __________________ "I can only tell you that if you get the whole lot of minims crotchets and quavers mixed up together it is like an atomic xplosion cheers cheers cheers." 'There's only an 'o' between pop and poop.' 'Recorded by champs, mixed by chimps, mastered by chumps'

9th October 2006, 04:49 AM	#6
Switchcraft Lives for gear Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Philly Posts: 967	I been foo'ed __________________ my hands work mad good http://www.ONE-76.com

9th October 2006, 09:14 PM	#13
DeeDrive Lives for gear Join Date: May 2005 Location: Hillsboro, OR Posts: 894	Alright, it seems some people are catching on, so I'll come clean. With all the high-end vs. cheap gear shootouts going on, I was curious how much of what people were hearing was all in their heads, and how much difference was actually there. The 2 files are exactly the same. I chopped a little white space from the beginning and end of the 2nd file to discourage people from noticing the 2 files were exacting the same length, and hoping no one would think to time align them and flip the phase of one and see them cancel out. Call it a dirty trick, a prank, or an experiment in psychology, I just found it interesting to hear what people came up with when trying to hear a difference that wasn't there. And for some reason the 2nd one always sounded better...maybe some people following the crowd, or maybe some more profound psychological reason... Thanks for putting up with me, sorry if I confused anyone, hopefully I didn't discourage anyone from buying a high end pre. (there really would be a difference if I had used one). __________________ There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't. Jonaspark Mobile Recording: http://www.jonaspark.com http://www.myspace.com/mattdistad http://www.myspace.com/froghollowdaycamp

9th October 2006, 09:26 PM	#15
dreamsongs Lives for gear Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: FL Posts: 1,418	Well... I didn't hear any difference but thanks for telling me what I already knew... __________________ Dreamsongs BMI Dreamsongs Productions Dreamsongs Publishing BMI Dreamsongs LLC " The dream don't come any closer on it's own, you have to go after it "

8th October 2006, 11:14 PM	#2
fuzzface777 Lives for gear Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 888	Well with one track it is hard. I pick number 2, fuller, nicer to listen to .......

9th October 2006, 03:57 AM	#4
malekmusic Gear nut Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Germany, Duesseldorf Posts: 100	2 sounds better to me

9th October 2006, 04:04 AM	#5
orksnork Lives for gear Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: long island, ny Posts: 741	listening through headphones...they sound remarkably similar if not identical...

9th October 2006, 07:17 PM	#8
Brian Middleton Gear addict Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Dorchester, Mass., USA Posts: 332	Um, guys, try loading these files into your DAW, time-aligning them, reversing polarity on one and summing to mono....and you will see (and hear) that your leg is being pulled. (Kudos to bogeyeater and orksnork for hearing it right away.)

9th October 2006, 08:37 PM	#11
TragikRemix Gear interested Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 11	on my laptop speakers (makes eveerything sound crappy) they are close, but 2 is a tad richer and has some more punchiness to it on the chord changes.

9th October 2006, 08:44 PM	#12
Brian Middleton Gear addict Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Dorchester, Mass., USA Posts: 332	Well, here is what the resulting soundfile looks like when Guitar1.wav and Guitar2.wav are time-aligned, phase-inverted and summed to mono: I can bump this file up 120dB with trim plugs and still get absolutely zero response on the output meter. So I don't know where that extra richness and punchiness are coming from, but it would not appear to be coming from any difference between the two sound files. Maybe somebody else could repeat my experiment and see if they get different results...?

9th October 2006, 09:15 PM	#14
allencollins Lives for gear Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Singing Beach, MA Posts: 3,936	Is this a test?? or a trick?? Tom Foolery?? I can't hear a difference My spectrum analyzer says the same thing...............

9th October 2006, 09:30 PM	#16
jeronimo Lives for gear Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Salvador, BA - Brazil Posts: 2,532	I think this is ridiculous!!! __________________ Think Diferente! www.verticeestudio.com http://www.myspace.com/jelmet

9th October 2006, 09:31 PM	#17
DeeDrive Lives for gear Join Date: May 2005 Location: Hillsboro, OR Posts: 894	I see some people have already chosen to edit their posts. Come on...it's all for fun. There's a lot of audiophile nuts who listen to the same thing through "magic wires" with crystals on their speakers and say they hear a difference. "Expectation bias" I believe I heard it called once. __________________ There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't. Jonaspark Mobile Recording: http://www.jonaspark.com http://www.myspace.com/mattdistad http://www.myspace.com/froghollowdaycamp

9th October 2006, 10:09 PM	#19
thenoiseflower Lives for gear Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Boston Posts: 1,068	This is stupid, like there would never be a difference.....

9th October 2006, 11:02 PM	#20
Ibvee Gear addict Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 390	Nice! This is nice! I must admit, Because some people said they heard a difference, I did my very best to hear it (in my not ideal listening space), and after a while I thought that there even might be a little difference between the 2, and yes, the 2nd would be the best Nice, wich preamp and mic was it?

10th October 2006, 02:40 AM	#24
Brian Middleton Gear addict Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Dorchester, Mass., USA Posts: 332	On the one hand, yeah, this was sort of akin to entrapment....on the other hand, the thing that entrapment undeniably proves is a willingness to commit the crime. This is not an acceptable way to do business in a court of law, but in the court of audio opinion it doesn't seem so far out of line to me. Point proven: we hear what we expect to hear (full disclosure--I too preferred #2 on the first hearing; it was only after going back to #1 and being unable to confirm the difference that I decided to check out the files). Perhaps we should just let it serve as a reminder to take our own opinions with a grain of salt.

10th October 2006, 03:46 AM	#25
quincyg Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,417	interesting thread. i am listening through my crappy imac speaker and my mind definitely played tricks on me given what information was presented. i listened to #1 and though oh yeah that sounds nice and full, punchy, i wish i could get my guitar to sound that good/play that well. so my my expectation was that #1 would be hard to beat. then i heard #2 and thought, sounds thinner, a little too bright. i went back and forth a few times and thought i heard a difference. so what do i believe? is it nice and warm and punchy or too bright? i just don't know what to believe anymore i guess you could call it a sonic illusion. i wonder if there is a sight with sonic illusions out there. nice work deedrive or are you really ceedrive???

10th October 2006, 04:24 AM	#27
max cooper Lives for gear Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: tx Posts: 8,819	2 has a virus in it.

10th October 2006, 04:23 PM	#28
buchiach Gear interested Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: London Posts: 27	1 sounds better

13th October 2006, 10:26 PM	#29
fuzzface777 Lives for gear Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 888	well that is funny, but it also proves another thing to me..... don't waste your time listening to peoples so called tests