The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Which is the $85 pre and which is the $2200 pre? Condenser Microphones
Old 5th December 2008
  #181
Lives for gear
 
Chaellus's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnkenn View Post
Apparently, you missed it...I posted the dry files without any EQ...


great i just found the files...they both sound alot better than the processed ones still i preferd b overall it sounds better and has more depth and is 3demintional where i find A harsh 2D and flat but viewing the dry files made the listening better to my ears it doesnt sound as obvious as the processed files but i still could tell the diffrence either way it doesnt matter what you choose as long as what you choose you felt is right, i dont mind these tests but when some idiots (not refering to you) come in and say i dont know what im hearing or talking about or saying and questioning me is BS and what kills my enjoyment in these threads, lately its been that way..but oh well i did find the singer and the song very cool.
Old 5th December 2008
  #182
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnkenn View Post
I find it humorous that people are taking this so seriously...I never claimed this was scientific...So - I'm not trying to sway people one way or the other: You can like which ever one you want. I don't give a ****. For what it's worth, I don't use either of these pres - I (mistakenly) thought this would be interesting, but apparently it just pisses people off.
Yeah, you do need an ego to be an engineer, let alone a producer. Everything you do is a competition so it's easy to get defensive.

Which pre did You prefer Johnkenn?
Old 5th December 2008
  #183
Lives for gear
 
cavern's Avatar
 

i could tell the difference, i liked b better but i gotta say, my sister or anyone else buying this song wouldn't hear it once all the instruments were in, or care wich one it was if they liked the song. it would sell either way. makes you wonder.
Old 5th December 2008
  #184
Lives for gear
 

@Johnkenn
john i'll be straight.
frankly i think your voice would sound great thru anything.
cos you have a great voice imho.
i could record the great aretha thru a blinkin cassette dek mic pre n her
great voice would still come through.

some say dont record without a 2k mic pre.
i have a contra theory which i'll share. (my degrees in physics.).
physics is a weird beast.
i listen to lots of new songs these days and i often find they are too clinical
like a hospital. versus many of the 50's gold hits where you can hear
mic pre distortion on some songs.
thus i postulate that possibly the gods of physics are laughing at everyone
and their gear quests.

i'm a bit of a renegade cos i know the way physics laughs at us all.
my basic premise is...EVERYTHING HAS A SOUND.
even the lowliest mic pre.
ive recorded thru everything from mic pre's built into cassette n tape deks up
to hi end studio consoles. just loads of vocal traks over the years.
n i thus keep an open mind. cos i find i like some of the vocal traks
done with low end and some done with hi end gear.
and bottom lining it, i'm not sure the consumer cares as long as they like the song.

the reason i say this is years ago i took some of my ruff songs/demos to markets .
not to make money, but to get normal consumer feedback.
rather than AE's with megabuk studios n soffit monsters.
much to my surprise a song of mine that used nothing more than a cassette dek mic pre
(doubled the vocal trak..)
outsold by a mile songs done useing proper audio consoles.

ive even fooled gear head friends of mine by recording a vocal useing a mic pre in a cassette dek
versus a higher end pre. cos i cheat...lol.
i make sure i really condition the low end pre trak after recording.

now i know some gearheads will blast me n flame me.
so be it. but i can only recount my personal experiences.
for me ive actually found sometimes a cassette dek mic pre can sit in a song
rather nice if you double it n do triks to it.
now for the gearheads i'm not saying one SHOULD use such a low end pre.
all i'm suggesting is there are no rules. and one cant be definitive.

THUS...john for a giggle sometime run the following test.
plug a good old EV dynamic mic into a cassette dek mic pre.
take line out of cass dek into line in of a a art tube mp costing 30 buks.
then out of art to sound device line input to daw.
dont overload the cass dek mic pre input. n dont drive the art too hard.
then record your lovely voice. after recording go to town conditioning the trak.
lol...cheat like crazy, double the trak , condition it like nobodies business till you get it
right. I MEAN REALLY CHEAT USEING EQ N PLUG INS..lol.
n do likkle naughty triks like duplicateing the vocal trak n shifting //offsetting the
duplicate from the original. sometimes works for thickening depending on many factors like the
degree of offset n how eq is used.
now repeat with a high end mic pre. post the two results on GS and ask people to pick the one they like. lol.
its lotsa fun mate.
as i said , imho your voice will sound great thru either approach.
seriously try the shoot out with friends n even drag people off the street.
its lotsa fun n might give you an intersting perspective.

and for people that might flame me.
yes hi end mic pre's are nice.
but..as i said everything has a sound.
ITS THE BLINKIN LAWS OF PHYSICS..lol.
god bless.
Old 5th December 2008
  #185
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey View Post
There was a big difference.

However, to answer your question, you really need to try the pre more and in difference contexts, with difference sources and mics.


The short answer to the actual questions you've asked is parts, labor and marketing costs. It may also reflect the size of the company, the manufacturing process and manufacturing location.

Also when it comes to cheap gear, there can be QC issues. Just think about the Oktava MC012 mics that everyone loves. It's also with the caveat of buying them from a place that matches them or buying 4-6 to keep 2 after auditioning them all.

Who knows, maybe your cheap pre was the only one that was made right. Or, maybe it was made wrong and sounds better.


I think, however, that the real question is not why does the more expensive one cost more - that's easy to answer. The real question is how to you quantify the value of a better sound?

That's a very easy answer. After dealing with the fundamentals of the song and performance, optimizing sonics to match the songs and genre are of infinite value and importance. If it costs $5000 to get .00001% better you should absolutely spend the money unless you can't afford to.

You should not ever wast your time or anyone else's making a recording that's anything short of the best it can be.


It should be very clear that I'm not saying you need the most expensive gear, I'm saying you should always buy the best gear you can afford and use it as best you can. At some point you hit a level where improvements can only be made in fractions of a percent, but that stuff does add up.

So in a case where a given piece of gear sounds 1x better, but costs 10x as much, it's worth 10x as much. Is it worth 10x as much to you within the context of your budget? Maybe not, however out of the context of budget, yes it is worth it.


Since we're about to provoke someone to say "a great engineer can make a better record with crappy gear than a crappy engineer can make with great gear" (which is a horrible cliche which should never be said again is a false statement because it's begging the question in the proper sense of that term), I want to point out one way that "better" or "more expensive" gear will make you a better engineer.

My point will be based on the assumption that what "better" or "more expensive" really means is the gear that the engineer most believes in. So if someone is using a Chameleon 1073 and they think they're being held back by not having an original 1073, their engineering will improve if the buy the original 1073. Some may have to do with inherent qualities that the better gear has, but the most important reason to have the best gear that you believe in is so that when you make a bad recording you have to blame yourself and not the gear. It's that process of taking shifting responsibility for the sound from the gear to yourself that makes you a better engineer.

It can be much harder to do that with "lesser" gear.
Sorry Caffey. Didn't mean to use such a "horrible" cliche. Wow. get a grip. Should an engineer use every tool possible in his arsenal to achieve the best sound/mix? Duh. Anyone who claims a piece of gear is standing in the way of perfection will never be satisfied until they get it... , if they have what it takes to excel. No doubt it's a cop-out to say "well, I could have done a better job, but I don't have a good pre or comp or mic or mixer." The quest for excellence NEVER ends ; regardless of what you do , if you want to be great at it.


Good thing for many slutzsnobs that they own some good pieces of gear to feed their egos. In all honesty I think there are literally thousands of great "engineers" working in mere "project" studios who could EASILY make mixes that would run with and above the "elite" givin the same high end gear. There are simply only so many tricks to the trade. The only variables after knowledge and experience are gear and performance by the artist.
Old 5th December 2008
  #186
Lives for gear
 
cavern's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by manning1 View Post
@Johnkenn
john i'll be straight.
frankly i think your voice would sound great thru anything.
cos you have a great voice imho.
i could record the great aretha thru a blinkin cassette dek mic pre n her
great voice would still come through.

some say dont record without a 2k mic pre.
i have a contra theory which i'll share. (my degrees in physics.).
physics is a weird beast.
i listen to lots of new songs these days and i often find they are too clinical
like a hospital. versus many of the 50's gold hits where you can hear
mic pre distortion on some songs.
thus i postulate that possibly the gods of physics are laughing at everyone
and their gear quests.

i'm a bit of a renegade cos i know the way physics laughs at us all.
my basic premise is...EVERYTHING HAS A SOUND.
even the lowliest mic pre.
ive recorded thru everything from mic pre's built into cassette n tape deks up
to hi end studio consoles. just loads of vocal traks over the years.
n i thus keep an open mind. cos i find i like some of the vocal traks
done with low end and some done with hi end gear.
and bottom lining it, i'm not sure the consumer cares as long as they like the song.

the reason i say this is years ago i took some of my ruff songs/demos to markets .
not to make money, but to get normal consumer feedback.
rather than AE's with megabuk studios n soffit monsters.
much to my surprise a song of mine that used nothing more than a cassette dek mic pre
(doubled the vocal trak..)
outsold by a mile songs done useing proper audio consoles.

ive even fooled gear head friends of mine by recording a vocal useing a mic pre in a cassette dek
versus a higher end pre. cos i cheat...lol.
i make sure i really condition the low end pre trak after recording.

now i know some gearheads will blast me n flame me.
so be it. but i can only recount my personal experiences.
for me ive actually found sometimes a cassette dek mic pre can sit in a song
rather nice if you double it n do triks to it.
now for the gearheads i'm not saying one SHOULD use such a low end pre.
all i'm suggesting is there are no rules. and one cant be definitive.

THUS...john for a giggle sometime run the following test.
plug a good old EV dynamic mic into a cassette dek mic pre.
take line out of cass dek into line in of a a art tube mp costing 30 buks.
then out of art to sound device line input to daw.
dont overload the cass dek mic pre input. n dont drive the art too hard.
then record your lovely voice. after recording go to town conditioning the trak.
lol...cheat like crazy, double the trak , condition it like nobodies business till you get it
right. I MEAN REALLY CHEAT USEING EQ N PLUG INS..lol.
n do likkle naughty triks like duplicateing the vocal trak n shifting //offsetting the
duplicate from the original. sometimes works for thickening depending on many factors like the
degree of offset n how eq is used.
now repeat with a high end mic pre. post the two results on GS and ask people to pick the one they like. lol.
its lotsa fun mate.
as i said , imho your voice will sound great thru either approach.
seriously try the shoot out with friends n even drag people off the street.
its lotsa fun n might give you an intersting perspective.

and for people that might flame me.
yes hi end mic pre's are nice.
but..as i said everything has a sound.
ITS THE BLINKIN LAWS OF PHYSICS..lol.
god bless.
hey, i like your little songs. i find them refreshing. im so tire of a lot of this ****, that i hear nowadays on the radio in my car.i feel like im in a f***g germfree musical hospital.
Old 5th December 2008
  #187
Gear Maniac
 
Gearhero's Avatar
 

Wow man no need to get nasty. i am just trying to learn. i do track through great gear every chance i get. i am confused now by this blind test becuase so many reputable people on this site emphatically told me that cheap gear (esp the vtb1) sounds like crap and that a great pre is night and day. at the least they said if you are going to use a cheap pre you need to eq it to death before it will sit in the mix but with a greatat pre it will be so much easier to get the sound you want. how could so many people be wrong? people are really passionate about their pres and how much better they are than cheap pres. i am trying to understand what happened here that is all. are all those people who say cheap pres sound horrible wrong? i mean the vtb1 uses the same cheap components as behringer but John's track sounds great better than the expensive pre.
Old 5th December 2008
  #188
Lives for gear
 
cavern's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnkenn View Post
My "little songs"? Are you talking about MY "little songs"? Well then, I invite you not to listen...and then kiss my ASS.
no man, i like your song..i was reffering to manning1"s little songs..at the bottom of his post, he says "here's my little songs" and i listened to them. i was reffering to those songs and it was a compliment..

www.motagator.com/bmanning
Old 5th December 2008
  #189
Lives for gear
 
Chaellus's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gearhero View Post
i am confused now by this blind test becuase so many reputable people on this site emphatically told me that cheap gear (esp the vtb1) sounds like crap and that a great pre is night and day. at the least they said if you are going to use a cheap pre you need to eq it to death before it will sit in the mix but with a greatat pre it will be so much easier to get the sound you want. how could so many people be wrong? people are really passionate about their pres and how much better they are than cheap pres. i am trying to understand what happened here that is all. are all those people who say cheap pres sound horrible wrong? i mean the vtb1 uses the same cheap components as behringer but John's track sounds great better than the expensive pre.


to answer your question, they are not wrong at all matter of fact what you said in your desciption is exaclty what it is, cheaper pres need to be tweaked the hell out to get acceptable results were the higher quality one does fine on its own flat... my gut feeling of why alot of people choose A was because of the top end that and volume diffrence can make a person think that it costs more or sounds more exciting also if theyve never heard high quality equipment than thats another strike, it really takes experiance doing recording until you hear it kind of like hearing compression. im sure most of us when we first started out couldnt tell if a compressor was on or off the track, but as we grew as engineers our experinace and work has told us that hey i can hear the compressor pumping down on this or that the same with pres until you try both high end and low end quality pres its hard to make that assement. with pres its about sitting in the mix the depth of sound the clarity in the track even if its colored it will still cut thru which is what i mean by clarity as opposed to being muffled or tiny..those are the things i look out for in diffrenciating the quality of pres, like i said before once you are past low quality vs. high quality pres and look at high quality vs. high quality pres the issue than becomes what color of pre do i want in my sonic palette and which one suits the talent best for the performance at hand and thats all there is to it, all the pros on here that i saw posted choose B, it just means that those that didnt have more to experiance when listing for sounds.
Old 5th December 2008
  #190
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by cavern View Post
no man, i like your song..i was reffering to manning1"s little songs..at the bottom of his post, he says "here's my little songs" and i listened to them. i was reffering to those songs and it was a compliment..

www.motagator.com/bmanning
Sorry - I misread your post and replied like an asshole...When I re-read it, I deleted my post and posted the other one...Guess I didn't do it quick enough. I'm an asshole...
Old 5th December 2008
  #191
Lives for gear
 
cavern's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnkenn View Post
Sorry - I misread your post and replied like an asshole...When I re-read it, I deleted my post and posted the other one...Guess I didn't do it quick enough. I'm an asshole...
no problem man, i've done worse. heh
Old 5th December 2008
  #192
Gear Maniac
 
Gearhero's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaellus View Post
to answer your question, they are not wrong at all matter of fact what you said in your desciption is exaclty what it is, cheaper pres need to be tweaked the hell out to get acceptable results were the higher quality one does fine on its own flat... my gut feeling of why alot of people choose A was because of the top end that and volume diffrence can make a person think that it costs more or sounds more exciting also if theyve never heard high quality equipment than thats another strike, it really takes experiance doing recording until you hear it kind of like hearing compression. im sure most of us when we first started out couldnt tell if a compressor was on or off the track, but as we grew as engineers our experinace and work has told us that hey i can hear the compressor pumping down on this or that the same with pres until you try both high end and low end quality pres its hard to make that assement. with pres its about sitting in the mix the depth of sound the clarity in the track even if its colored it will still cut thru which is what i mean by clarity as opposed to being muffled or tiny..those are the things i look out for in diffrenciating the quality of pres, like i said before once you are past low quality vs. high quality pres and look at high quality vs. high quality pres the issue than becomes what color of pre do i want in my sonic palette and which one suits the talent best for the performance at hand and thats all there is to it, all the pros on here that i saw posted choose B, it just means that those that didnt have more to experiance when listing for sounds.
Cool, thanks for the advice. I seem to have no problem with hearing compression or differences in mics and speakers. I might have to invest in some low-end gear so I can train myself to hear the differences better and train myself on what is supposed to sound bad . I just can't believe that me and so many other people thought the bad pre sounded so good. I thought those pres were supposed to sound like ass not beat out a good pre.
Old 5th December 2008
  #193
Lives for gear
 

@cavern
cavern...cheers for your comments on the songs.
fyi. some technical info on those songs n mic pre's used.
the daft H lady song used all elite ultra hi end studio gear.
gear i could never afford if i saved for 300 years.lol.
i used a commercial studio. one of the few times i could afford one.
(btw tho its a song bout drugs, ive never done drugs..its just a daft song i wrote one day
cos i like to adopt different vocal personas n vocal styles in songs.
crooner one minute, heavy metal the next. lol. pm me and i'll give you a link
to an album that sells on the net done recently n some of my few hundred songs ive done.)
the other songs at motagator used either cassette dek mic pre or my diy mic pre i make for 20 buks.
(but i use ultra low noise transistors.).
cept the london town song that used original mackie pre's.
(which actually for me i dont like em too much.)

the main point is, what does one do if one is poor but also has primary responsibilities
for worrying bout elderly in ones family who have been dying, my situation.
answer, one compromises.

i would LOVE an audient console or a rack full of 500 format mic pre's or jlm audio pre's
or custom pre's by the talented jim williams. or weiss convertors.
or lavry or whatever.
but its never gonna happen in a million years cos of my family responsibilities.
so i just have fun with the gear hand life has dealt me.
cos for me its just fun.
i'm fully cogniscant there are hugely talented AE's on here that can blow me away.
like gherst n Ohlsson n so many others. n the folks in this thread with gear i can only dream of.

but what does one do if one is poor and wakes up every day with a burning desire
to write that 501'th song. one compromises.
all my songs use max about 2k of gear includeing
the daw computer.
if i remember on the motorshop song for example i had sold my nice senn 441's
n 421's to help family, so i used a speaker as a mic on the guiitar traks..lol.
out of an old pair of headphones. n cobbled together a crappy vocal mic out of an old
element i had lying around.
the dragons song i wrote to try n forget about the hurt and pain of loosing
another member of my family. had no money for gear.
the london town song was in reverence to my dad when i lost him. and the cycle of life itself.
if you listen closely to the vocal i was in tears cos i had just lost him
so i wrote the song in his honor.
even today i cant play it cos it brings too much emotion.
(i had also lost my grandparents earlier.)


john kenn has done me a huge favor actually. when i get a chance i'm gonna try the vtb1.
imho john you are a big talent.
merry xmas to all.
Old 5th December 2008
  #194
Gear Maniac
 
4blades's Avatar
 

Like A over B!
Old 5th December 2008
  #195
Quote:
Originally Posted by getarzan View Post
Sorry Caffey. Didn't mean to use such a "horrible" cliche. Wow. get a grip. Should an engineer use every tool possible in his arsenal to achieve the best sound/mix? Duh. Anyone who claims a piece of gear is standing in the way of perfection will never be satisfied until they get it... , if they have what it takes to excel. No doubt it's a cop-out to say "well, I could have done a better job, but I don't have a good pre or comp or mic or mixer." The quest for excellence NEVER ends ; regardless of what you do , if you want to be great at it.


Good thing for many slutzsnobs that they own some good pieces of gear to feed their egos. In all honesty I think there are literally thousands of great "engineers" working in mere "project" studios who could EASILY make mixes that would run with and above the "elite" givin the same high end gear. There are simply only so many tricks to the trade. The only variables after knowledge and experience are gear and performance by the artist.
The tricks of the trade are limitless.

I don't think there are thousands of engineers who could make mixes that could run with the elite whether they had the same gear or not. Most engineers have about a fifth of the experience now compared to someone who came up during the big studio system. There are very few people who've had any form of an apprenticeship as an engineer.

And, if you take someone out of their project studio and give them the same high end gear, you'll find that most people are a little overwhelmed. I can see it making an improvement, but people need to time really learn a piece of gear thoroughly.

If your underlying point is that a lot of the "elite" are "elite" because of opportunity, I wouldn't disagree with that.
Old 5th December 2008
  #196
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

I listened to the dry samples, after knowing which is which, and prefer A for this application. It seems a little bit bandwidth limited and slots in better and matches the guitar sounds better. Somehow B feels like an inferior performance, that it's somehow not in the pocket, and the words seem muttered at times. It needs more level or compression. No way to tell how much the pres themselves account for this versus all the other factors.

-R
Old 5th December 2008
  #197
Lives for gear
 
Soldier777c's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo View Post
Sample A doesn't play...
See what happens when you use an $85 mic pre. heh
Old 5th December 2008
  #198
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey View Post
The tricks of the trade are limitless.

I don't think there are thousands of engineers who could make mixes that could run with the elite whether they had the same gear or not. Most engineers have about a fifth of the experience now compared to someone who came up during the big studio system. There are very few people who've had any form of an apprenticeship as an engineer.

And, if you take someone out of their project studio and give them the same high end gear, you'll find that most people are a little overwhelmed. I can see it making an improvement, but people need to time really learn a piece of gear thoroughly.

If your underlying point is that a lot of the "elite" are "elite" because of opportunity, I wouldn't disagree with that.
Do you have any idea how many people in this world mix and record ? I'm not talking about 19 year olds and their pods,laptops,and interfaces. I'm speaking in terms of people who have worked with and experienced pro audio equipment over the years in varying degrees. (but has no famous clients) That includes the ones who got their start in audio because they knew someone who was already involved in the business or their own curiosity and creativeness led them to apprenticeship. There are THOUSANDS. Do you think Universal Audio and Manley advertise their pro audio gear to a secrete society of "special" engineers who solely possess the power to create great recordings? Let's face it, if you're looking at or seriously considering buying high end gear you probably have a pretty good grasp on what would justify spending the cash. So yeah , thousands. Does it take time to learn how to use any new piece of gear thoroughly? Yeah. I also think the learning curve for thousands of mixing enthusiasts worldwide would be small enough that they could handle it without being too overwhelmed. with a deep voice I'd say.."Pardon me son, you can set the controls on that RNC unit pretty well, but can you do the same on my $7000 Manley?" " Don't be scared now"

And finally, when I say "there are only so many tricks of the trade" I mean that the more experience you have recording and mixing , the less these methods seem like tricks. Trial and error lead you to the best ways and that's it. That's why some of the "vintage" gear we use is still sought after. It didn't go any further. The design was great. That new plug-in you've got doesn't cut it. As far as "mixing" goes ,... there I would agree the possibilities are infinite. Peace Mike. I don't know how I became a pro advocate for guys mixing without all the gear they ever wanted. I don't know a thing about you other than some of your comments sounded a bit arrogant. Some sounded intelligent though. I just wanted to point out that it's a big world and there are a lot of talented people who lack the resources to show their potential. By "elite" I mean talented and proven. Best wishes to you and all who love good gear!
Old 5th December 2008
  #199
Lives for gear
 
TheRealRoach's Avatar
Just out of curiosity, were the original samples pitch corrected?
Old 6th December 2008
  #200
Gear Nut
 

I am a nubee, but FWI

Dear JK,
I am very impressed!
Thank you for posting this comparison.
Yours,
ES
Old 6th December 2008
  #201
Lives for gear
 
Chaellus's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gearhero View Post
Cool, thanks for the advice. I seem to have no problem with hearing compression or differences in mics and speakers. I might have to invest in some low-end gear so I can train myself to hear the differences better and train myself on what is supposed to sound bad . I just can't believe that me and so many other people thought the bad pre sounded so good. I thought those pres were supposed to sound like ass not beat out a good pre.


in my opinion it didnt beat out B because i prefrered B when i heard it 10 seconds into the song but alot of people did go for A which in majority case yes it did beat out B but if you were givin A and used stacked tracks with it , id be willing to bet it sound like crap. Dont forget also that just because something isnt expensive doesnt necessarly make it crap, and like Mike said it really does take using a pre to its limits to really find out how it will sound qualitywise you will know without a doubt down the road if you stack tracks with it agianst other pres were discussing also how Mike described using it on many instruments mics etc.. there have been quite a few reputable people whove voiced their comments in here only to give their opinion on why B was better and what you really have to look for to tell apart diffrences but most of the posters on here respond back as "thats hogwash" Maybe a mediocre pre is ok for a project band but if you were givin a mulitplatinum artist would you say the same thing? or just be it a band that wants professional sound? there are places for each buti find that people shunning great advice is foolish, not directing this to you but those who have been closed minded.....in a way this thread has been a blessing to educate people but its also been a pain as well....oh well all you need to do is keep listining...and to make sure you rest your ears and listen agian...
Old 6th December 2008
  #202
Lives for gear
 
Chaellus's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by getarzan View Post

Peace Mike. I don't know how I became a pro advocate for guys mixing without all the gear they ever wanted. I don't know a thing about you other than some of your comments sounded a bit arrogant. Some sounded intelligent though. I just wanted to point out that it's a big world and there are a lot of talented people who lack the resources to show their potential. By "elite" I mean talented and proven. Best wishes to you and all who love good gear!

monsterislandstudios.com
Old 6th December 2008
  #203
Gear Addict
 
huarez's Avatar
 

B sounds much better to me.But very interresting how many like a better!
Old 6th December 2008
  #204
Lives for gear
 
fanriffic's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gearhero View Post
I think I was unfairly influenced by not knowing which pre was which before hand. IE listening blind biased my ability to properly analyze the sound.
...am i going mad?
Old 6th December 2008
  #205
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnkenn View Post
File A is a Studio Projects VTB-1
File B is the expensive pre

If anyone wants to know which expensive pre it is, just PM me. Actually, I do think A sounds better - definitely more open and not as crunchy in the top end. It's muddy in the bottom, where B is not, but in my subjective opinion, it sounds better. I'll post the dry files (in the mix) without any processing, although I'm not sure what conclusions can be drawn from that - no one would ever hear it that way in the real world. I guess to alleviate any fears that I doctored the result.
BTW - these were recorded at 30 db - certainly not pushing the input...
Studio Projects makes some great, inexpensive microphones for those on a budget. I wouldn't necessarily say that all $85 mic pres sound as good as the Studio Projects. Obviously, every little aspect of the chain is important as well. I would like to hear just the voice and nothing else for a future shootout. :-)
Old 6th December 2008
  #206
Gear Nut
 

I chose B as the better, but only after liking A more, and then realizing I like the Rode NT1-A and should probably change my opinion, because I'm usually wrong about these things.
Yeah, B definately.
Blue Bongo
Old 6th December 2008
  #207
Lives for gear
 

The budget minded market like Presonus, Mackie, etc. are getting better and closer to the expensive brands, so for those that don't have the money, I don't see anything wrong with using an $85 mic pre. Obviously, there will be some difference, but most pop oriented music is going to get compressed to the point where you can't tell the difference between a SM57 and an ELAM. So who cares? LOL...
Old 6th December 2008
  #208
Lives for gear
 
dannygold's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
The budget minded market like Presonus, Mackie, etc. are getting better and closer to the expensive brands, so for those that don't have the money, I don't see anything wrong with using an $85 mic pre. Obviously, there will be some difference, but most pop oriented music is going to get compressed to the point where you can't tell the difference between a SM57 and an ELAM. So who cares? LOL...
I'm not sure if you're talking about dynamics compression or lossy data compression, but either way I think you're very very wrong that a 57 and a Tube Mic would end up somehow sounding the same because of that process. Ditto mic pres. Esp if everything is tracked thru the same pre.
Old 6th December 2008
  #209
Gear Maniac
 
virtualsamana's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
The budget minded market like Presonus, Mackie, etc. are getting better and closer to the expensive brands
Agreed. No reason you can't make a pro record just as easily with a Presonus Firepod or a Mackie Onyx w/ firewire versus expensive converters and expensive clean pres. The difference now is so subtle that bias has so much more of an influence on our perception than the actual sonics of the gear. All hail the march of technology, the great equalizer.
Old 6th December 2008
  #210
Lives for gear
 

ive a feeling that within a couple of years due to knew chip technology //RnD
that the lines are gonna blur even more.
someone gave me as a present for helping them with a puter problem a toneport gx.
costs 50 buks. i dont like the control panel much , but its surprised me.
even has some mic pre models in it. as well as guitar ones.
the gx i feel is the portent of the future.
ie in a few years a teeny box crammed to the gills with all sortsa features.
sorta multi use. drum samples/instrument samples/guitar cabs/ mic pre models.
gonna be interesting time.
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
meldar produxshu / So much gear, so little time
8
themaidsroom / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
5
danchi / So much gear, so little time
6
kittonian / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
4

Forum Jump
Forum Jump