Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[malice]

Tim Halligan wrote on Thu, 20 October 2005 13:23

malice wrote on Thu, 20 October 2005 03:55 Philip Shaw Bova wrote on Wed, 19 October 2005 20:51 www.sageelectronics.com Sage ???? wait a minute, the name remind me of some desk I used a long time ago ... malice Malice, Are you thinking of Saje? They made a clone of the 4000E SSL, called the ULN-2, IIRC, and had a clever total recall live theatre board called Memory, again IIRC... They made some other consoles...but I don't know much about those... They were a French company, so I'm not surprised that you'd remember the name... Do they still exist?

I don't think they do. I remember the ULN-2. They were not bad at all ...

With Publison, Saje must be the only french audio designer I can remember


malice

[maxdimario]

Well I wouldn't buy a pre based solely on MP3's

but If I heard one that sounded particularly great in an IDENTICAL situation compared to the standard well-known pres, I'd seriously enquire.

I think you can tell the difference by comparing..Just not ALL of it.

[brandondrury]

Thank you all for you input.  I talked with Fletcher on the phone yesterday ( I still have a headache from it) and you guys have pretty confirmed what he said.   I just had to ask the questions in a different way to find some useful point of reference when trying to logically make sense of all the posts on this forum.

Fletcher seamed to re-enforce the idea that we are all trying to capture great music onto a repeatable medium.  We can use whatever tools that work best for this.  I've never been pissed because a carpenter wasn't using Craftsmen.  I just want my wooden thing built well.  In some ways, the talks on this forum imply that you need this or that to get the great sounds.  Personally, realizing that I can/should get great results with a Mackie puts the blame back on the engineer.  I find that motivating, personally.


I think the idea that emotions can't be conveyed through MP3 is complete bullshit, though.  Don't get me wrong, you will not get a total audiophile experience through MP3s that the producer intended.  However, a great song will remain unphased through the inferior mp3 technology.  I can't count the number of times I've had goosebumps on these terrible computer speakers with mp3s.  

I guess, in the end, goosebumps is all I'm going for.  So in that case, preamps are not the answer.  At least not yet.  I have bigger fish to fry.  

Just from re-reading this thread, the following points can be made:
a)The difference that different preamps can make is too subtle for the mp3 format in most cases.
b)The right mic placement with one preamp may or may not be the best mic placement with another preamp.
c)Room and mic placement are MUCH MORE IMPORTANT
d)Preamps sound different at different settings

Quote:

While you're comparing high-end preamps via MP3, you might as well book a test-drive comparison of a Porsche against a Ferrari in your local Pub's car-park... Justin

BINGO.  This is exactly what I wanted to hear.  The speed limit on the interstate hear in Missouri is 70mph.  So, why on earth do I need a car that goes 200mph when legally I can only go 70?  Even if I feel slightly wild, I may go 100mph.  But hell, my 8 year old Civic will do that.  People buy Porsche's because they can, because they want to show off, or because it's cool.  At this point in the game, it's ridiculous for me to buy a preamp because I can, because I want to show off, or because it's cool.  I'm driving a car that runs like shit right now (going back to our supercar analogy), so I need to car that reliably gets me to 70 everyday.  Does that make sense?

I was hoping that pro mic pres would be the endless orgasm fountain of youth mecca oasis.  Back to the drawing board.  I'll find a new way of taking over the world.

Brandon

[djui5]

Porshe's suck. Ferraris are the way to go Or that Bugatti 16/4 Veyron.

great points have been made on this thread

[copperx]

brandondrury wrote on Thu, 20 October 2005 21:04

So, why on earth do I need a car that goes 200mph when legally I can only go 70?

It's not about max SPEED, it's about ACCELERATION. How much
seconds does it take to go from 0 to 60 ... you're evaluating cars with the wrong parameters IMO.

The same goes with preamps. Its hard (but not impossible) to compare different preamp sounds in isolation on a single track. The difference is NOT SUBTLE when you sum several tracks with good preamps. Say, for example, the Mackie VLZ preamps are known to be harsh on the high-end and unfocused. Record a guitar track with the Mackie. Record the same performance with a Great River. Audition both tracks ... you will find a very very subtle difference if you're using a high-end monitoring system. NOW ... sum 24+ tracks recorded through the Mackie and sum 24+ tracks through the GR. NOT a subtle difference, my friend. Once you go high-end, the differences become just a thing of taste, not of quality in most occasions.

[Dingo]

A preamp manufacturer posting shootout audio files would be very suspect at best, even if they were WAV files.

I have often managed to get very usable, sometimes even "real nice" sounds from budget end preamps. Hell, I even got a rather respectable take using a B*hringer Ultra Wank Pro once.

On the other hand, I know I can make a 1073 sound like uber shite. No problem. During my lifetime I have managed to desecrate the glory of many great pres to create a sound that can be be described as "uuughhhhhhh......" Those were the days  

Taking a competitior's product and making it sound inferior when it's in the comany's financial interest to do so would not only be an extremely biaised comparison, it's also very bad form.

Your Mileage May Not Vary

D.

[maxdimario]

I think in identical situations the fundamental differences between pres are noteable even in MP3
of course the difference between a soundcraft pre and a soundtracks isn't going to be very much.

the difference between a d.w. fearn and a neve transistor will..

the difference between a V72 and a 672 will...

also if you're using an sm58 close mic'ed on an electric guitar it may be more difficult to judge than a u47 on drum overhead or on a string quartet.

it is much easier to make evaluations in the context of a mix, of course, because you have a contrast available.

[danickstr]

I have found Lynn Fuston's examples to be helpful.  Although I don't know why I am defending him, I paid to be a VIP to hear stuff (which I can hear anyway it seems) and am still listed as a nonVIP.  No doubt its cause I am a non-deity guy.  (just kidding of course for those humorless sots of you who might think otherwise)

[vernier]

I'm listening to an mp3 right now, Beatles "Rain", and hearing tubes galore. Even when converted to low-res digital, the original gear shines through.

[7minAbs]

Quote:

I think hearing a preamp on a solo instrument is taking it out of context somewhat. Isn't hearing what it would sound like in a mix what's really important?

Taking the liberty to chime in, I totally agree. I am probably not as talented an engineer as alot of you (more an artist/musician) but recently I rediscovered this all over again. I layed a scratch vocal track through what I thought was the weakest link in the producer's rig. I was even more dismayed when I heard how brittle it sounded but then I took it home and layed some additional instrumentation and was so surprised at the presence of the track, and how well it sat in the mix.
Without digressing too much, I have always applied this principle to buying guitar amps. I only purchase from places owned by people I know, who let me live with the amp for a week or so...take it to rehearse/record.
So I think preamp shootouts are a waste of time. There are too many factors involved.

my .02

[Roland Storch]

brandondrury wrote on Wed, 19 October 2005 08:47

It just occured to me that I've never seen a preamp company that posted mp3s comparing their box with a competitor's preamp. I know the listening room or whatever has their tests, but why don't manufacturers demonstrate the difference? Please don't use the argument that mp3s are shit.  I know they are shit, but you can still tell a great recording from a piece of shit recording in the mp3 format.   Brandon

Regardless if MP3 or 24/96 file. What would you expect in a comparison made from manufacturer A comparing his product with one of manufacturer B?
Could you imagine manufacturer A says the similar or even cheaper product of manufacturer B is better?

I guess the comparison is useless.

A whole different story is if the comparison is done by somebody with economical independence. By somebody people know how he works. By somebody you can trust.

I dare do say, comparisons made from manufacturers are really useless.

[Kurt Foster]

The best anyone can hope for in a comparison / shootout scenario, is a ballpark estimation of what the products perform like, given a particular set of circumstances.

As one who has performed and posted many pre amp and microphone comparisons in conjunction with reviews I have written, I believe the concept is problematic and flawed on a number of levels.  Recording is not an exact science and I personally don't think anyone should place too much faith in such a test. The acronym "YMMV" always applies. A side by side comparison is useful to give the listener an idea of what happened when I used the pieces but to expect the exact same results in any other situation is not realistic. Side by side comparisons can demonstrate the respective pieces capabilities, performance wise but it shouldn't be thought of as a universal procedure for choosing the best gear. One thing I have discovered from a lot of comparing is one persons poison can be anothers candy. Something I really hate could be what another person loves . Something I can get good results from can be a major POS to another person.

Methodology varies from person to person. How I place a mic or dial up a pre amp will be different from how another person would do it, even given the same situation. A sound I dial up may sit wonderfully in one of my mixes but it could really suck in one of your mixes ... it has happened!  The instrument used can make a huge difference and if it's a vocal you are recording well then, all consistency is out the window.  There's no way even the best singer is going to perform a piece the same twice.

In the case of a mic test, placement is critical and very hard to duplicate between "mic a" and "mic b". Fractions of an inch can make large differences and replicating a mics placement is at best a crap shoot, even when a person is very  careful.

All I have ever intended when posting audio clips for comparison is to allow the listener to hear for themselves what I did with the gear. This allows them to get a handle on whether or not they want to invest the time and effort in order to investigate that particular piece further. It is always my hope that people will get their own hands on a piece and give it a run for the money themselves before they lay down their hard earned cash. I shudder at the idea that any one would make a purchase based solely on an audio clip comparison I or anyone else had recorded.

[brandondrury]

The whole idea for me behind buying pro gear is getting a tool that allows me to raise my rates.  I can only raise my rates when my quality goes up significantly.  I didn't feel like I could justify a rate increase based on what different preamps did for me.  

In the end, I guess it's an issue of your weakest link.  It's mostly about mixing to me.  A one dB volume difference on this or that seams to make a much bigger difference than what preamp I used on a given track.

Brandon

[Dave Peck]

[/quote]

I was hoping that pro mic pres would be the endless orgasm fountain of youth mecca oasis.  

[/quote]

How vivid!

But no, you're thinking of high-end speaker cable. Common mistake

[Bubblepuppy]

Go to the Site MP3 Tech and read....
MP3's have very limited Bandwidth.
If you were going to buy ARTWork why chose the painting wearing Sunglasses...