API vs 1073 on distorted guitars

[Lasse Lammert]

Ok, this one if for the people with trained ears and a really good monitor situation.

I compared the API 3124+ Preamp to the BAE 1073MP (on 300Ω and 1200Ω settings)...
It's certainly not a night and day difference, but it's there for sure, especially if you listen to the unprocessed guitars solo'd....There are raw wav files of the guitars as well as the mix with the backing and some compression on the 2Bus in this folder:

API vs 1073

Chain: PRS Custom24 with Bare Knuckle Aftermath Pickup -> Marshall Guv'Nor -> 1978 Marshall JMP -> Bogner Uberkab, v30 mic'd with single sm57 -> Preamp -> Apogee AD16X

 

[Trevoire520]

I have been drinking, but have downloaded the files and will listen tomorrow!

 

[lolzgreg]

1200 ohm 1073's sound more choked to me and less open compared to the 300 ohm variant of the same preamp. I actually prefer the 1073 vs the API in this case because of the "cackle" in the tone is a bit subdued and rounded with the 300 ohm 1073.

 

[Lasse Lammert]

That is exactly how I'm hearing it.
Try using ozones matching EQ to SEE the difference you're talking about.
The 300 setting looks identical to the API, except for a medium Q dip in te highs around 13k, the 1200 looks identical up until around 3-4k where a smooth even shelf/roll-off occurs.

Of course the sound I a preamp is much more than the frequency response (dynamic behaviour etc), but it's interesting to see nonetheless

 

[Mago]

Wow pretty interesting!
I'm mostly hearing differences in the lower mids (I guess that's the "choked" stuff Greg is talking about).
Not sure how much I hear in the high mids and highs, due to the concert and booze yesterday, but I'll fire it up again tomorrow.
API sounds the most open out of the 3 I think

 

[~BURNY~]

I like the 300 ohm better too for the same reason Greg mentioned.
That how I prefer my cheap GA Pre-73 dlx on distorted guitars (makes me think they kind of got it right lol)

Have you compared them on a percussive instrument yet?

 

[Mikaël-ange]

I'm more a neve/neve like than API guy so pretty obvious for me: neve all the way

But don't misunderstand me, API is stellar but:
-I prefer neve color
-API pre tend to be the go to/magical pre that everyone want to have/have on heavy oriented music so I prefer not to use same color as everyone
-I use the eq a lot (1073 and 1081)

 

[Charles J]

I'm more a neve/neve like than API guy so pretty obvious for me: neve all the way

But don't misunderstand me, API is stellar but:
-I prefer neve color
-API pre tend to be the go to/magical pre that everyone want to have/have on heavy oriented music so I prefer not to use same color as everyone
-I use the eq a lot (1073 and 1081)

Agreed on ALL counts. I'm a Neve guy as well but I LOVE me some API.

First thing I also noticed was the 300ohm Neve sounded SUPER close to the API.

Still think I prefer the API as I can tell it'd sit in a mix the best.

The 1200ohm version sounded exactly as our CL7602 does. BIG, but a bit tubby.

Gonna have to play with my OHM switch more!!!

<3,
Charles

 

[Empathy]

Pretty interesting when you look at it on a price-per-channel perspective. A 1073 is what, two to three times the cost per channel than a 312?

 

[Lasse Lammert]

The API would be about 70% the price of the 1073 per channel (at least here in Germany), but that's a flawed comparison, since you can't just divide the price of the API by four for the price per channel, since you're paying only one psu for four channels of API.
So if you take that into account it'll be about the same price in the end.

Plus, I think there's not really a "better" in this comparison....and on a vocal track the results might be entirely different again.

what I found primarily interesting was the difference between the impedance settings, I preferred the 300Z, although it's a big no-no to match impedances....and the sm57 has about 310Z....recommended mic pre input impedance would be about 1200Z or more.
Yes, the 300 setting was a bit softer in volume (had to raise the output knob a little), but to me OT sounds smoother and a bit less messy in the highs than the 1200 setting.

 

[rispsira]

thank you for this comparison Lasse. Very interesting. In this case specifically i liked the API the least but there are other times when i listen to comparisons and i preferred API so maybe you cant just come to a conclusion without a context (what youre trying to achieve and record). Nonetheless this remains very valuable to anyone whos curious about thes micpres!
Also i didnt expect such a difference in sound between the different ohmage settings, but thats no surprise as technically im still a noob on many concepts haha.

Thanks again!

 

[Emdprodukt]

I prefer the 300ohm setting over the 1200. It's tighter and smoother as far as I can tell. API sounds less colored and cleaner. Dig both, wouldn't mind having a neve channel

 

[arv_foh]

I prefer the 1073, it's more "full" sounding and a little bit chunkier than the API

 

[MetalWorks]

Im listening on crappy headphones at work at the 1200 1073 sounds more choked as mentioned in the stand alone sounds.

The 300 1073 and the API both sound bigger but the 1073 sounds slighty harder or tighter for lack of better words.

In the Mix I think the 1073 had more upper mid bite standing out.

The API seems to sit in the mix where as the 300 1073 has a little edge on it.

The 1200 1073 seems to tame that edge a bit in the mix compared to the 300.

Thats what my abused ears hear

 

[kronk_1985]

to me i'd rather be given the API tracks cos they seemed to sit alot better. So there would be less moves to get to the finish line. Neve 300 and API sounded pretty similar. 1200 had a lot more low end information coming through that could be useful to sculpt i guess.