Preamps n shit (everybody come in)

006

Member
Jan 10, 2005
8,952
0
36
So, I have this friend, let's say his name is Joe (and no, my friend is not me, but I'd rather keep him anonymous as he is a member of this board), who has been chatting with me over AIM for a while now and most of our chats consist of his questions regarding the real differences in preamps and such.

From what I gather, he spends quite a bit of time at a site called The Listening Room or something like that that apparently does a ton of shootouts on things from mics to preamps to other audio equipment.

Basically we have discussed, from his questions, why an API 512c would be more desirable than say...an Alesis 26i/o's preamps. He has shown me one shootout where they used an Alesis 26i/o and an Onyx pre from a Mackie unit (maybe 800R? I dunno the details) both recording a dance beat through monitors. Sonically they appear to be pretty much identical. So that begs the question, is the Onyx really better? Why is it better?

He is aware, and I have pointed out as well, that you cannot make an accurate judgement from single mono files and that once you start layering them the better (i.e. more expensive) preamp will shine. Basically, track a whole project with both and you will see why the expensive one is...expensive, lol. He feels, though, that if one mono file shows they are sonically the same, as far as he can tell, then why would it matter if there were 1 or 8? I said the minute difference(s) from one get multiplied every time you add a track of it.

We both agree that, for the most part (read: don't take this too literally), most prosumer grade preamps can be eq'ed to sound like one another. Sure there will be some things that you aren't able to match precisely, but...it's generally all the same if you tweak it a little. But when you start getting into $800+ per channel, that's where you can hear where your money is going. An API preamp (for example) is expensive and desirable for a reason, anybody who has worked with them will tell you they rock. I have worked with them, love them - my dream front-end is API.

I tried explaining that when you have a quality preamp, you spend less time tweaking the source in post to get it where you want. But his argument is, save some money and just spend more time tweaking. If you are doing production full-time, you usually want to spend much less time working. So I can see that from a bedroom standpoint, sure - but not in the pro realm. There is a reason why pros buy the expensive shit. Not because it says API on the outside, but because API makes some killer shit and makes life easier from the get-go. If the preamps in a Behringer really were as good as a Neve unit I'm sure pros would for the Behringer....but it's not true and basically it just so happens that the best shit costs money - go figure.

There's also brand name bias, which to some degree is true I'm sure. But these companies have become synonomous with quality for a reason. I can't remember ever seeing a Neumann advertisement that was actually made by Neumann. So it's not like the bigger companies spend money on advertising. It's word of mouth mainly. The pro audio market is so specialized that advertising wouldn't really make sense, IMO. So it can't be that, right? ;) Personally I go by experience first if possible, then user ratings and such. If somebody says "X preamp sounds so good" then I'll want to check it out. If it's $50/channel...I'll be skeptical, but not rule it out. If I use it and it sucks..well there you go. It's $50/fucking channel, what did I expect?

There have been a lot more questions and answers from me on the subject but quite frankly I'm tired of trying to remember right now. So...anybody that wants to explain in detail what it is that makes things like Great River, API, Vintech, etc. so much better than prosumer grade (e.g. Alesis, Saffire, etc.) - please post it here. This could also prove very useful for others as I'm sure there are plenty of people who have wondered this as well. I can't explain the technical aspect of it, all I have to go by is my experience working with top-shelf units and working with prosumer units.

~006

P.S. I'm stoned right now so forgive any crazy sentences or anything.
 
I just skimmed over the post quickly (I'll read it properly later), but I think EQ-ing preamps to sound a like is only part of the battle. I'm not sure how linear the preamps will work with different frequency content, so that is likely to change depending on the input. Also other factors such as harmonic saturation etc which is going to differ between different preamps (leaving some pre's more suitable to some applications than others). Also factors such as transient response are likely to differ between units.
 
\m/ dude, for just skimming those are some good points :) Keep 'em coming.
 
I'll only say that if we're talking about tweaking time and money spent your best bet is to get the source right.

For example:

shit + api + Apogee = a great representation of shit, which you have to mix with perfume and finally you end up with shit.

mesa halfstack + the right tone + the right position + Presonus = a slightly degraded representation of the right tone, which you can enhance and end up with a great tone.

Now, once you've got the basic equipment responsible for the source then naturally you'd want to capture that source in the best way possible, and good preamps and conversio will make a difference.
 
I just wanna disagree that you can "eq" preamps to sound like one another - the differences between preamps are more than just the eq curve, there's how they respond to different frequencies (a certain nonlinearity) as well as grit/grain that cheaper ones can impart. However, I'm having a tough time exactly seeing a point/question to your post, Mike :lol:

And big +1 to Shadow Walker
 
Basically I'm trying to get more answers for this guy because I can't give him technical reasons. And, as I stated it's very generally speaking about the eq thing. In no way would I personally ever do it or try to pawn it off as something that should be done.

~006
 
I would say that it depends also on how you set and use your preamp...
I think that those kind of preamps are supposed to be pretty much linear within a certain threshold, so until you don't really start to rise the input (getting non linearities and harmonic distortion), the most important difference could really be the overall frequency response (apart from things like signal-to-noise ratio, which are obviously important too, in order to judge the quality of a gear)...
 
What you are tracking is the most crucial part. For example samplerates above 44,1/48khz (CD/DVD) are pretty much useless in rock/metal, because they are usually yberprocessed and cramped so full, that it really doesnt matter if you can't hear every little nyance and the bleed from singers headphones that is happening on the tracks. But when it comes to something like folk music, singer songwriter stuff, jazz or classical music, where there is a lot of air and dynamics in the songs, the higher rates are almost nessecary. Also if you are tracking triggers along the drumkit, you can pretty much use the cheapest 8 channel preamp you can find for the triggers, because its just tik tik tik and nothing else.

But I have also noticed that that some of the cheaper preamps just don't have enough gain. For example Presonus Firepod has only like 40dB of gain on the first 4 channels, but only 20 dB on the rest (if I read the frontpanel correctly), when Avalons have 62dB, API has 65dB and even my 700€ SPL Track One has like 65dB of clean preamp gain and additional 28 dB makeup gain + 50dB of EQ gain, and you should do something with the source if you really need all that gain. But 20dB and sometimes even 40dB is just too little. Also the extra controls on the cheaper models are usually a lot worse, they might not even have a highpass filter (tho, neither doesnt API 512C...), which is pretty lame as it can give you even 20 dB more headroom in worse case scenarios like singers swallowing the microphone. Also the signal to noise ratio might not be the best on the market on the cheaper units...
 
:lol::lol:

Knowing Joe personally, I'd just like to mention he doesn't spend a lot of time at The Listening Sessions, but was just bringing it up as an example of "non-boutique" brands getting huge praise from a group that specializes in doing shootouts.
I think there's lots of gear out there that sounds better than the "standard," but remains unknown and unused because it's a small company, buyers are being influenced by brand name, or whatever.

I find the audio crowd to, in general, be a very conservative bunch stuck in their ways. (Think of all the people who still, and in the recent past STRONGLY advocate analog over digital). It seems over time the audio community is becoming more "lenient" (maybe because, for example, amp sims are getting better) and accepting, but it's still rather conservative. A lot of great gear doesn't get the praise it deserves simply because of entrenched traditions, and brand name.
I remember the days where I used to post at Harmony-Central very often, and the big "to-do" at the time was how tubes were way better than solid state amps. IMO, it's all about finding the sound that works--not using the "best" or "highest-fidelity" gear. I LOVE the old school death metal sound, and getting that sound is one of my goals for my own recordings. But guess what? My cheap-ass Boss HM-2 is far better at achieving that sound than any tube amp. This is a fairly silly argument, as it's incredibly obvious, but the point is, what matters is getting the sound you need, not using the "best" gear.

I don't have a lot of experience with gear, but from some recording experience, and lots and lots of research on audio and gear, I'd say the most important aspect of your mixes is the source (player and instrument and amp etc.), then the mic/placement, then the processing (EQ/compression, etc.), then the preamps, then the converters. Not that's it's gospel, but I've read that conversion is practically a perfected technology at this point, and cheap converters these days are WAY better than cheap converters of the past. I've also heard that "two things that will make a huge difference in your sound is getting good converters and a good clock." I, personally, don't have the experience first-hand with the gear to know.

I did LSD-Studios' RME vs API shootout last night. The RME track was 1 dB quieter than the API track, so I accounted for that. I think a lot of people in the shootout thread didn't realize this when they said "there's a clear difference" between the preamps. After accounting for volume, I randomized the order of the two tracks in my DAW, so I wouldn't know which track was which, and I listened. The two tracks were barely different. However, one track seemed SLIGHTLY more like it had a "blanket" draped over it. Thus, I guessed that one was the RME. It turned out to be the API. I was surprised to discover I preferred the RME (not that the differences were huge). Now, I know I'm just one person, (and one person, compared to an entire thread of people saying the API was way better), but I doubt many people in the thread accounted for volume, and did the test blind. Maybe the SLIGHTLY brighter RME would wind up being harsher in a mix than the API, but I don't see why you couldn't fix this with EQ (which to me, is way more practical than spending lots of money on API pres).

I often hear that shootouts mean very little, because it's a single file, as opposed to a full mix. I suppose the idea is that when you layer a cheap pre on top of a cheap pre, "anomalies" add up and it's tough to mix. Somehow expensive pres are immune to this? I don't see how. Anomalies in expensive pres will add up to. And "color" of these hi-end pres will certainly add up and possibly that could make things tough to mix. People often say "the differences really add up in the mix," yet I don't really see how, or understand this argument. Can anyone enlighten me?

Cheap pres are designed to be transparent, and I believe that there is little difference between them. I believe they are all designed very similarly, and while they may sound a tiny bit different, I think those differences can generally be made up for with EQ. Like I said, I think the differences are pretty small in these pro-sumer pres. But even when get to the expensive pres, I don't really have any evidence that the difference is extremely noticeable (and the price difference certainly is).

I'm not trying to diss anyone, and maybe I have strange opinions (afterall, I have fairly limited gear experience), but frankly, I believe there's a lot of "placebo" "snake oil" stuff going on in people's gear impressions, and often such effects are subconsciously based on brand and preconceptions based on word of mouth. My brother, who designs speakers for a company in LA, often mentions this "snake oil" opinion to me when we talk about gear.

I'm just one person, but these are my impressions, even if some are unrelated to the thread. Also important to note is that I'm not a pro. So a lot of what I say is coming from the point of view of trying to save money. If I had tons of money, sure, maybe I'd buy really expensive gear, just to do shootouts with cheap gear and see which really sounds better. Or maybe if API is just a bit better than the RME pre, the huge price difference wouldn't be any object to me, and it would be "worth it" to buy the API. The Law of Diminishing Returns definitely applies in audio, and it's a huge factor for the pro-sumer, IMHO.

:p
 
I’m surprised that transients haven’t been brought up in this? Usually cheaper pres will not respond as well to attacks as quick as a higher end pre, this is the crispness level or transparency. However there are a lot of “high end” pres that don’t respond quickly, by design , and they call this “coloration”.

To tell you the truth I wouldn’t put my hat on just one pre, you need several to pick from when you start layering your mix. To look at it another way, for a painter (Bob Ross) you don't paint your happy little clouds with the same brush you use to make your gay little meadows or regal mountains. Your AD/DA conversion is your canvas, the clock is how steady you hold your brush. They all work together to bring joy to all...

Yea seriously though, there is a lot of snake oil out there. Im starting to build my own pres from kits, talk about a head spinning experience on what op amps go well with what input and output transformers. And the site I think “Joe” is talking about is the thelisteningsessions.com

This is a great chart on coloration

http://www.thelisteningsessions.com/micpregraph.htm

Hope this dosent turn into a gearsluty thread. HAHA.. If it sounds good it sounds good.....
 
I often hear that shootouts mean very little, because it's a single file, as opposed to a full mix. I suppose the idea is that when you layer a cheap pre on top of a cheap pre, "anomalies" add up and it's tough to mix. Somehow expensive pres are immune to this? I don't see how. Anomalies in expensive pres will add up to.

No. With a cheap pre, you will have a higher baseline noise floor. When you add many tracks together, the noise floor will constantly increase in volume, and at some point it will be unbearable. With a better quality pre, this noise floor will be lower, thus you can add more tracks before it becomes unusable.