R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6   Go Down

Author Topic: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed  (Read 26808 times)

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: OK, no need to mess around...
« Reply #15 on: February 09, 2005, 07:46:30 pm »

I would add that whenever I used one of the 3 letter consoles (that starts with 'M,' or even the one-name one that starts with 'H') I hated the mic pre sound.  BUT, I hate to admit that I had a 3 letter stereo 1/2" that actually sounded good.  Made physical noises like a hay baler, and had the stupid light sensor for the tape engage which would flicker off and on depending on the ambient light, but it did take a good mix.  But man, did it need maintainence.
Logged

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: OK, no need to mess around...
« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2005, 09:00:33 am »

gtoledo3 wrote on Wed, 09 February 2005 00:08

...I don't think too many people have listened to those projects and thought "only if we didn't have to use that MCI 500 preamp on guitar!".   However, I am not one to take any validity away from someone's experience. It is all about what works for you, and makes your life easier.

Wwitman, don't you think that the advent of outboard pre use had a little more to do with the rise of "Sounds So Little"?



OK, so what clever names did everyone come up with for MCI, or, for that matter, for any other brands of gear?

For example, I always heard:

Much Crap Inside,   and

M--C--I------K--E--Y---....
Logged

Ozzy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2005, 01:46:57 pm »

Munchy, Crunchy and Intermittent, was how we used to referred to our MCI 24track recorder.
Logged

dcollins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2815
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #18 on: February 11, 2005, 02:23:21 am »

Austin Ince wrote on Thu, 10 February 2005 10:46

Munchy, Crunchy and Intermittent, was how we used to referred to our MCI 24track recorder.


"Many Channels Intermittent"
"May Cause Insanity"

DC

Ryan A. Mills

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 51
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #19 on: February 11, 2005, 10:57:41 am »

I was having this discussion with my partner last night when we were discussing the direction of the studio we manage. I really like this pre that we have here and I suggested that we buy a whole lot more channels of this particular brand of preamp and he looked at me like I was nuts. He's very much in favour of having many different "colours" on a recording. I'm not really sure how I feel about it. I guess it's nice to be able to create an assortment of different sounds, but is it "better" than using many of the same preamps?
Logged

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #20 on: February 11, 2005, 11:16:01 am »

Ryan A. Mills wrote on Fri, 11 February 2005 10:57

I was having this discussion with my partner last night when we were discussing the direction of the studio we manage. I really like this pre that we have here and I suggested that we buy a whole lot more channels of this particular brand of preamp and he looked at me like I was nuts. He's very much in favour of having many different "colours" on a recording. I'm not really sure how I feel about it. I guess it's nice to be able to create an assortment of different sounds, but is it "better" than using many of the same preamps?


Good question.  Of course, prior to the modern outboard mic pre era, almost all albums were done using the exact same mic pre on every instrument, every vocal, every thing.  There were certainly some excellent recordings made that way.  No one ever thought it needed to be different, and there were some great audio minds and ears working.

Today, it is common practice to use outboard pre's of much variation, almost exclusively.  Sometimes now, if I plug a mic into one of my consoles, rather than an  outboard, the artist, or someone associated with the session will ask why I am doing that, implying that I don't care about the particular sound in question.  That's come a long way from a few years ago!

I think it's great to be able to choose an API for drums, a 1073 for guitar, a DWFearn for bass, or whatever.  But is it really better?  I don't know...

I suspect it all really comes down to the song, the performance of the musicians/singers, the balancing ability of the engineer, and the vision of the producer, rather than the colour of the mic pre.


Terry
Logged

maxdimario

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3811
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #21 on: February 11, 2005, 02:09:35 pm »

I prefer the idea of having excellent general purpose preamps and placing the emphasis on musical instruments and mic choice.

It makes for a more realistic sound space, and forces you to alter the sounds at the physical level, which is more interesting.

of course a mic pre with too much of a sound will make the whole recording sound limited.

if you like colored preamps ( fuzzy, un-maintained, cheap) then you absolutely have to have more than one to compensate for the shortcomings.

one for bass sounds, one for midrange lead sounds, one for smooth high freq. etc..

I think recording music can get over-complicated and over-rated sometimes.
It should be about capturing a great performance, possibly with the whole group playing, at first.

My favourite records were made in a relatively short time with not too much equipment.

maybe different preamps are better used for sweetening and overdubbing, once you already have a structure to work into, as you may have trouble finding space for additional instruments once the foundation is there.
Logged

wwittman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7712
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #22 on: February 11, 2005, 06:35:31 pm »

>>I think it's great to be able to choose an API for drums, a 1073 for guitar, a DWFearn for bass, or whatever. But is it really better? I don't know...


I've said many times, I not only think it's not "better".
I think it's actually worse.

Logged
William Wittman
Producer/Engineer
(Cyndi Lauper, Joan Osborne, The Fixx, The Outfield, Hooters...)

Andy Simpson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 714
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #23 on: February 11, 2005, 06:44:50 pm »

Also worth bearing in mind that alot of great old recordings were made with no Q/sweep EQ (not required to fix all the problems of using multiple different pre's)....just hi and low shelf.

Maxdimario - why not go one better and have 1 mic for all sources? That gives even more realistic sound space by the same logic. Very effective, but not many engineers are open-minded enough to try it (even considering logically that 1 mic works great for a whole orchestra).

I like to use the same ears for hearing everything (non-linear, limited bandwidth, easily saturated parabolic transducers though they are - and they're even less robust than a ribbon mic Wink).

Andy
Logged

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #24 on: February 11, 2005, 08:37:44 pm »

andy_simpson wrote on Fri, 11 February 2005 18:44

Also worth bearing in mind that a lot of great old recordings were made with no Q/sweep EQ (not required to fix all the problems of using multiple different pre's)....just hi and low shelf.....why not go one better and have 1 mic for all sources? That gives even more realistic sound space by the same logic...



Good points Andy!

The EQ thing is very true.  I have 2 channels of EMI mic pre/EQ/comp from the board in Abbey Road 2 on which The B's recorded many of their songs.  All of the EQ there is simple shelving, without very many frequency selections.  Humans seem to always do everything to death until they reach a point of absurdity, losing sight of the simple goals of quality (the Audio Peter Principle?)

As for the one mic situation, I often come close to that.  I don't think I've ever used JUST one mic for a complete song recording (especially since when tracking more than one is usually required) but after tracking, I very often just keep moving around the one 47, or whatever, to almost every instrument.  Same mic pre, equaliser, compressor (if any).   It does give a consistency of quality which I like.

In a similar vein, on the ZZ Top Eliminator album we almost used only one guitar (there were two of the same brand, same pickup) and did use only one amp, one mic, for ALL guitars on the entire album.  The differences were made at the source by the player.
Logged

Lee Flier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 320
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #25 on: February 11, 2005, 08:50:29 pm »

I went through a really brief period of checking out different preamps for different stuff... now I am back to the "old skool"... just give me the most transparent, open, high gain, high headroom headroom pre I can get my hands on and I'll use it for the whole damn record.  If I want to color the sound I'll do it with mic selection and placement, or the source itself.  I particularly am fed up with pres that seem to narrow the sound stage.  A lot of pres that masquerade as "vintage reissues" do that, and I'm sorry but the vintage console channels they claim to emulate, did not do that.

i dig music

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 557
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #26 on: February 11, 2005, 11:07:10 pm »

some thoughts in this thread brought me back to this.

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/mv/msg/1435/0/0/7 26/?SQ=89d22ef50a3741aa67499af57201164f
Logged
R. Steele

Andy Simpson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 714
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #27 on: February 12, 2005, 02:33:04 pm »

47 on everything.....but of course!
I'm thinking that the B's would've used a 47 for the drum overhead if they weren't so concerned about SPL regulations.....
Wink

Btw, Terry, what kind of EMI channel strips, and how much use do they get - how would you describe the sound?

Andy

47 into 1176 - doesn't work on what?
Logged

wwittman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7712
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #28 on: February 12, 2005, 03:27:13 pm »

EXACTLY, Terry,

I often do exactly that same thing... after the basic tracks are done, just move the one mic around.. same pre, same compressor, just adjust and go.

More and more for me, it's a Gefell.
Logged
William Wittman
Producer/Engineer
(Cyndi Lauper, Joan Osborne, The Fixx, The Outfield, Hooters...)

Arf! Mastering

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 889
Re: The Outboard Mic Pre Thread...Renamed
« Reply #29 on: February 12, 2005, 04:06:20 pm »

wwittman wrote on Sat, 12 February 2005 20:27



More and more for me, it's a Gefell.



Care to say which Gefell?
Logged
“A working class hero is something to be,
Keep you doped with religion and sex and T.V.”
John Lennon

"Large signals can actually be counterproductive.  If I scream at you over the phone, you don’t hear me better. If I shine a bright light in your eyes, you don’t see better.”
Dr. C.T. Rubin, biomechanical engineer
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6   Go Up