The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Millennia HV3 and Gordon mic preamps
Old 30th November 2005
  #61
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundog
the Milliennia sounds better in this shootout than it normally would ( I think ) for having used the direct out rather than the main out. Normally, I use a little EQ through the STT-1's main out which muddies the sound very very slightly and seems to increase the noise - The wonderful EQ and all round flexibility is what I kept it for.

For what I want, the superior clarity of the Gordon in revealing vocal articulation in multipart vocal pieces was what I was looking for. Also, try putting a bit of reverb on both clips and listen again for how they treat high frequency airiness.
If you would have used standalone HV-3 you would get those extra bits of airiness and HF shine, which are slightly missing in STT-1 HV3 circuit.
Using STT´s main out makes sense only when using its EQ/comp, since it generally makes the overall sound a bit more "muddy" and cannot be called pure HV-3 any more.
So again I think - standalone HV-3 vs. Gordon would be the right and most revealing test ...
But even in this test both sound quite similar. I would guess that standalone HV-3 would keep its nice full low end and add the extra HF spark and air. (but even this difference is VERY subtle, but is is definitely there - I tried and compared many times ...)

Thanks a lot for your great samples and effort :-)

PS: I will post AB samples Millennia vs. Pendulum MDP-1 very soon !
Old 30th November 2005
  #62
Lives for gear
 

Ivo, I guess I don't get it. We've talked this over a few times here and on 3DAudio... even with mp3 resolution the difference in those samples Soundog posted is obvious. To me, anyway. I think if you want to believe the HV-3 is the same as Gordon you are certainly free to do so. I've compared the two on my sources, and they were not the same to me. I did the same with Pendulum. I kept the Gordon.

So, do we know what we like, or do we like what we know?

Thanks Soundog, I know that's a chore to work up those samples. Maybe post the .wavs sometime?? BTW, I assume you used the 2 Mohm impedance on Gordon? I find a significant improvement in clarity with that, as opposed to the "standard" lower Z. I've been meaning to ask Grant if the Model 4/5 reverts to low impedance when using onboard phantom power -- the Model 2s I have do that, so I use battery or tube mics, until I can get a dedicated phantom power supply.

Steve
Old 30th November 2005
  #63
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
Steve, I am not saying these two samples sound the same to me, certainly not. As I already said (without knowing which is which), the first sample sounds slightly airier , the second one has more pronounced low end.
But the difference between both does not sound too dramatic to me.
(of course, these are just mp3s and all those "scientific" things ...)
But we are not giving any ultimate certificates to some units, we are just chatting about our immediate impressions about the given mp3 samples, aren´t we ?
Now I am going to take them to my studio to listen on B&W through Lavry DA

I am eager to hear more Gordon samples and if I found it is better than what I already have, I will certainly think of ordering it, because its background is very impressive.
Old 30th November 2005
  #64
Lives for gear
 
mr.gefell's Avatar
 

the diffrence was obvious ...listening via dac-one and ultrasone PROline 750
Old 30th November 2005
  #65
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek
But we are not giving any ultimate certificates to some units, we are just chatting about our immediate impressions about the given mp3 samples, aren´t we ?
Absolutely right my friend, this is not about solving world hunger! I wish we could all just have easy access to all the music equipment so we could pick what we like right in front of us, instead of having to chase and guess and hope for the best. My only interest in discussing any of these products is to spread the news of ways to enjoy music, and I know you already have many of those. thumbsup


Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.gefell
the diffrence was obvious ...
Yeah... but which one did you like?

Steve
Old 30th November 2005
  #66
Lives for gear
 
mr.gefell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by squeegybug



Yeah... but which one did you like?

Steve

actually i liked the millenia in this test. heh




Old 30th November 2005
  #67
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
So I cleared the path through the deep snow and went here:



I listened carefully and repeatedly to both samples. The listening resolution was of course uncomparably higher than through Koss-Porta headphones from my laptop as before.
The difference between these two samples is indeed obvious (I listened both on B&W and Sennheiser HD 650).
It is however very difficult to say which sample I like better (I try to forget which preamp is which), although again as in the very beginning, I tend to like sample two a slightly bit more.

The nature of both samples reminds me actually very much the story with DACS preamp, which I had been using for a long time. DACS carries a very similar describing adjectives as Gordon. After my SPL GoldMike, DACS was a grand sound quality leap. Then I got Millennia and compared it with DACS many times. DACS always sounded as if absolutely naked, "organically grown", as if someone gives you a present and just spreads it without a box and packing on the table. Compared to it, Millennia sounded always a little bit more "pleasant", or noble, served in a nice decent, yet transparent box.

I feel similar differences even here. While sample one has more openness in HF and maybe tiny bit more depth, sample two has a kind of pleasant round "decentness" which is pleasant to relaxed ears ... And as I already mentioned few times, a standalone HV-3 would most probably add those few missing grains of HF shine ...
(but all this is , of course, just a highly obsessed "gearslut" analysis. Both samples sound great and a normal person may not hear much difference between both)

Just my spontaneous impressions, nothing more ... I look forward to hearing to more such samples.
I must say I am absolutely not particular to any brand ... My only criteria is the SOUND. If some "Red Cow" company comes with something that sounds better than I already have, I will certainly have another "slutty" dream ....

As Steve said, it would be ideal to have all the equipment available for a personal try. But it is somehow not possible. Posting such samples is therefore a great thing, much more useful and descriptive than some lengthy talks and theoretical arguments. Because different people have different types of gear, it would be very nice if we could listen to more such samples. Something has been already posted, but it is very difficult to trace.
What about to create a new section like "Gear listening lounge" or something like this and to encourage people to keep posting some interesting samples and comparisons ?

What do you think, Jules ?
Old 30th November 2005
  #68
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by eligit
just curious about the other things that might have contributed to the basic sound...
Ok, the mic was an SE Gemini.
Old 30th November 2005
  #69
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek
If you would have used standalone HV-3 you would get those extra bits of airiness and HF shine
Ivo, you could well be right. Unfortunately I don't have an HV-3 so I can't prove that, but I thought that dot's ( Dan Richards ) Jazzooo recording of a piano using an HV-3 and an ADK CE was absolutely stunning.
Old 30th November 2005
  #70
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by squeegybug
Maybe post the .wavs sometime?? BTW, I assume you used the 2 Mohm impedance on Gordon? I find a significant improvement in clarity with that, as opposed to the "standard" lower Z
Steve, Yes - it was at the 2 MOhm setting. The mic was a tube mic so no phantom power was needed.

Wav files below. No problem at all.
Attached Files

Model4.wav (2.54 MB, 1242 views)

STT1.wav (2.54 MB, 1223 views)

Old 30th November 2005
  #71
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundog
Ivo, you could well be right. Unfortunately I don't have an HV-3 so I can't prove that
It was actually a bit unpleasant surprise for me to find that (after one year of using both). I thought that they are absolutely identical and just recently I was tweaking the ideal violin position for recording and by chance I reconnected from HV-3 to STT-1 and the sound was a bit different suddenly. I specially checked and carefully compared both few times and had to confirm that. I asked John LaGrou about that and he said, the although the basic HV-3 circuit is the same, the slight sound difference is due to extra circuits in STT-1.
The difference is rather subtle, nothing really big, but it is there and it reflects in better HF shine and openness of standalone HV-3
Old 30th November 2005
  #72
Quote:
Originally Posted by eligit
btw i was NOT challenging how good these things are. i just would like to hear it in use...and compared to other pres.
How about hearing it compared to 23 other preamps? On drums, bass, acoustic and electric guitar, piano and voice. Would that satisfy your curiosity?

The upcoming DVD-ROM from 3D will feature the Gordon in this lineup:

A-Designs MP-1
API 3124+
Buzz Audio MA 2.2
Chandler TG-2
Cranesong Flamingo
DACS Clear Blue
Daking 52270
DW Fearn VT-2
Focusrite 428
Forssell FetCode
Gordon Audio Mk IV
Great River MP-2NV
Groove Tubes ViPre
Lipinski L-408
Manley SLAM!
Mercury M72s
Millennia HV-3D
Neve 1-73
Pendulum MDP-1
Summit 2BA-221
TF Pro P2
Trident A-Range
True Precision 8
Universal 2-610


If you can't wait for the final version with all the liner notes (which will be pdf and available online anyway), I have 3 advance copies left over from AES that have the complete set of audio files on them. Contact me at [email protected] if you are interested. First come, first serve.

To whet your appetite, here's one picture, with the Gordons at lower right:





There are lots more pictures and comments in this thread:

http://www.3daudioinc.com/3db/showthread.php?t=6093
Old 30th November 2005
  #73
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
Just wanted to listen to those two samples again in the evening and imported them in Samplitude. Then I found what I somehow suspected: the second sample has few dB less volume in the same phrases ... Then it is of course tricky to make an AB comparison ...
I made a volume of both samples more balanced. Normalising was not enough, since the peaks are different in both samples. Now the overall volume in each phrase is more or less equal (I did it from mp3s since I did not have the later posted wavs with me, then exported to wavs)

Now I think that the comparison sounds a bit different with the balanced volume. What do you think ?

edit: (misplaced the samples, will re-post tomorrow)
Old 1st December 2005
  #74
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek
Now I think that the comparison sounds a bit different with the balanced volume. What do you think ?
What do I think ?

Ivo, I think you might have posted the same file twice by accident. You might wanna check it again.
Old 1st December 2005
  #75
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundog
What do I think ?

Ivo, I think you might have posted the same file twice by accident. You might wanna check it again.
Oh my ... that could happen during export from Samplitude, but I don´t know how ... Now it is deep night here and I will get to the studio only tomorrow ... Here I have nothing ... Sorry Will repost it tomorrow.
But the second sample had really a bit less volume ... (3-4dB in each phrase)
Old 1st December 2005
  #76
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek
So I cleared the path through the deep snow and went here:




What do you think, Jules ?

I think you ought to put those mics away before they collect all the dust in your room. Don't leave them out.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Old 1st December 2005
  #77
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek
Just wanted to listen to those two samples again in the evening and imported them in Samplitude. Then I found what I somehow suspected: the second sample has few dB less volume in the same phrases ... Then it is of course tricky to make an AB comparison ...
I made a volume of both samples more balanced. Normalising was not enough, since the peaks are different in both samples. Now the overall volume in each phrase is more or less equal (I did it from mp3s since I did not have the later posted wavs with me, then exported to wavs)

Now I think that the comparison sounds a bit different with the balanced volume. What do you think ?

edit: (misplaced the samples, will re-post tomorrow)
This is why these "comparisons" are sometimes misleading. The only way to have a matched performance is to either use a mic splitter (with it's associated colors), or to use a midi grand piano with the same piece played the same via computer. Then you have other things affecting the audio path like cables, converters, the mic selected, etc. Even if they are the same for both DUT's, masking is occuring.

If one wants to do a real comparison, rent them and skip the converters, pro tools, CD manufacturing, etc. Line 'um up and listen to the pre's, not the ancillary gear and processing. You will hear things that don't get to the CD stage.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Old 1st December 2005
  #78
Gear Addict
 

exactly jim

Just a rough guide to possible differences.Put those mics away indeed.Mics are the best invention yet for dust collection
Old 1st December 2005
  #79
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams
I think you ought to put those mics away before they collect all the dust in your room. Don't leave them out.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Don´t worry Jim The mics were just posting there for the short photo modelling and immediately rushed back to their closed sealed beds ! heh
Never would I let them out except for recording ...
Old 4th December 2005
  #80
khp
Gear Head
 
khp's Avatar
 

I liked the presence on the first sample better than the second before I read that the first was a Gordon and the second the Millenia.

Second time around I preferred the Model 4.
Old 4th December 2005
  #81
Gear Head
 

I listened to the wav files,the difference was obvious to me.I can describe it as the difference between watching a theatrical performance vs watching a movie,a difference in dimension and definition,most likely caused by the different way the two pres handled the hi-mids and hi frequencies.
Comparing a choir recording done with a nice pair of mics using these two pres would be a good a/b test.
Thanx Soundog for your time and effort.
Old 4th December 2005
  #82
Gear Addict
 

Beautiful analogy

thumbsup
Old 7th December 2005
  #83
Lives for gear
 

Sorry no HV3, but here are some samples of Gordon and Pendulum:

Pendulum_R84
Gordon_R84
Pendulum_RE20
Gordon_RE20

Details here.


Steve
Old 7th December 2005
  #84
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by squeegybug
Sorry no HV3, but here are some samples of Gordon and Pendulum:

Pendulum_R84
Gordon_R84
Pendulum_RE20
Gordon_RE20

Details here.


Steve
yeek, the gordon just captures more of the source. or at least that's what it sounds like to me.
Old 9th December 2005
  #85
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by eligit
yeek, the gordon just captures more of the source.
That's been my experience with it. It's big thumbsup

Steve
Old 9th December 2005
  #86
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by squeegybug
That's been my experience with it. It's big thumbsup

Steve

which pendulum pre was it?

those are all tube pres aren't they....
Old 9th December 2005
  #87
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by eligit
which pendulum pre was it?

those are all tube pres aren't they....
This was the Pendulum Quartet II and Gordon Model 2. Those clips were with the Q-II set to be the same as the MDP-1A, and yes they are tube preamps.

I usually don't cross-post threads, but had conversations going both places on these comparisons. So anyway, here's the background information I had also previously posted over on Lynn's 3DAudio board:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After I had thought I'd tossed all these clips -- was formatting some old drives and found these few rough mixes still alive. They are pretty basic, but may at least give some ideas, since there has been so much interest lately in these preamps. The samples are all the same, vocal+acoustic guitar.

Lowden O32 guitar is tracked through two coincident Avenson STO-2 mics, one going to Pendulum Quartet II and one to Gordon Model 2, using Belden cables. The guitar recordings were not the focus of these particular mixes, they are not matched too perfectly in level, and are not really worth examining too closely for critical differences. I just threw these little omni mics in front and didn't get a very good tone. But I worked with what I had, to have some background accompaniment, and the differences do affect the overall sound of the recordings. The mono tracks were copied and panned L-R, with a slight room ambience added, and a very small EQ cut around 200 Hz to get some of the room-boom out. No compression on these.

Vocals are separate takes, one preamp at a time. I used RE20 and R84, no HPF or pop filters, same distance, pretty similar performances. You can hear breath thumps and some pops, hey, that's part of the test :tongue: No EQ, no effects, no compression, just the bare recorded sounds. So of course they are dark and edgy and dry, all at the same time. No extra noise though, these preamps are both really quiet.

The Pendulum is configured to the equivalent MDP-1 settings -- input to the Full (Jensen) transformer with impedance at 1500 ohms, output to the direct send (bypassing the output xfmr).

Gordon is set at high impedance (2 Mohm).

Gains were pretty even at input, and I barely tweaked the tracks to balance the mixed volume within a reasonable match. As mentioned here and there, it's sometimes difficult to exactly match overall levels in A-B samples, given varying dynamic responses from different preamps.

Tracked and assembled in the Akai DPS24 mixer and recorder. The files are 24 bit 48 KHz, so kinda big, sorry. They may not be dramatically different enough to suit you... Gordon Instruments and Pendulum Audio are both really super quality products, so of course neither is going to sound terrible. My best respects to Grant and Greg for helping our music.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Steve
Old 22nd December 2005
  #88
Wow! I was following this thread when it started but hadn't been keeping up. Thanks for the clips. My lust for the Gordon continues.

The difference I heard is exactly as expected. More body, tonal richness, balance (less hi-fi, smiley EQ), and most of all channel "interconnectedness." I've appreciated these differences with the stereo gear from Ayre Acoustics against their MM990 based competitors, yielding similar results. Granted this was on the playback end but one only need listen to the obvious result of proper component matching and lack of negative feedback to hear what can happen.
Old 23rd December 2005
  #89
Lives for gear
 

If you're interested there are more Gordon samples, comparing to A Designs, on this thread:

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-end/52052-design-mp-2-fearn-pre.html


And some of just the Gordon at 2 different sample rates on this converter thread:

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-end/52593-44-vs-96-theory-practice.html


Steve
Old 17th January 2006
  #90
Gear Maniac
 

Number one was a clear winner to me--I picked blindly just now after a few repeats of alternating cuts. So...
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump