Old 09-17-2013, 03:21 AM   #81
Cosmic
Human being with feelings
 
Cosmic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Online
Posts: 4,643
Default

Thats a great post reno thanks.

I realized yesterday that I've been forgetting to turn off my goldfishes filter the last week or two.Them little bastards are all over my last couple of tracks!
__________________
it aint worth a bop,if it dont got that pop
Cosmic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 05:32 AM   #82
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

I think a lot of the disagreements of gear here are conditional.

It's harder to really quantify a great preamp without a really good room and really good monitoring. I think - in a great room with a great source - it would be rather easy to hear the difference between an Audiobox and a $2000 Grace preamp or similar, on say, on drum overheads... with the same mics.

Where it gets confused is people assuming that means the budget pre sounds "bad", when often they don't. They just don't - comparatively speaking - sound as good in those situations. That doesn't mean they're unusable.

I think many of the contrary opinions are from people who have either never heard that, or don't have a reference to that, or limit their idea of quality to recording samplers and things, which can sound good through anything. On the other hand, if you're micing an orchestra or other really dynamic live sources, I think it would be pretty easy to hear the differences between a good pre and a great pre... as relates to transient response, clarity, clean gain, etc, etc.

Like I implied before, you can just plug in an acoustic electric DI into my M101 - with no DI box, directly into the instrument input - and immediately hear a difference, from just about any budget sound card type device. It's not me (engineer dude looking to validate my investment) saying that, it's the person playing the DI guitar saying that. It's not that the budget device sounds bad, it doesn't. You'd only notice the difference if you compare them... but once you hear it better, you'd obviously choose to record it better.

And, for whatever reason, where those differences seem to more show up do seem to be mostly (not only) in the midrange. It's mostly the midrange that annoys and grates on us to some degree, not so much the highs and the lows.

Last edited by Lawrence; 09-17-2013 at 05:41 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 05:48 AM   #83
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

Anyway, back on topic.

Harshness - in home or self produced recordings - seems to more often be in vocals, not so much in the overall music. It's more rare to hear really smooth and even (frequency wise) and "full bodied" vocal mixes because in many cases we're forced up closer to the mic due to poor acoustics and we have to "fix" that in post with EQ (and de-essers) which is always a trade off.

Like Karbo said, "if" you have the acoustic space and the technique, all it should really need is a little nip and tuck. Air - the atmosphere - adds a little dynamic compression, if you have a good distance.

Unfortunately, most of us don't have the luxury of being Frank Sinatra, being 24-36" from a great mic on a great soundstage, with a great preamp gained way up ... so we never get to hear ourselves recorded that way. Suffice to say, recording Streisand in a little vocal booth with acoustic foam would be a crime.

Last edited by Lawrence; 09-17-2013 at 06:05 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 06:26 AM   #84
kindafishy
Human being with feelings
 
kindafishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Like I implied before, you can just plug in an acoustic electric DI into my M101 - with no DI box, directly into the instrument input - and immediately hear a difference, from just about any budget sound card type device. It's not me (engineer dude looking to validate my investment) saying that, it's the person playing the DI guitar saying that. It's not that the budget device sounds bad, it doesn't. You'd only notice the difference if you compare them... but once you hear it better, you'd obviously choose to record it better.
Hey Lawrence, I have a stupid question for you, and I think it's still within the realm of 'being related to this thread'.

Anyway, as stupid as the question is, how does one connect the M101 to a computer in such a way that nothing else is colouring the sound (I ask because the answer is likely not to connect it through the mbox somehow since that will affect the signal - it's probably also not to hook it up to a soundblaster).
kindafishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 06:56 AM   #85
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,902
Default

Quote:
Like Karbo said, "if" you have the acoustic space and the technique, all it should really need is a little nip and tuck. Air - the atmosphere - adds a little dynamic compression, if you have a good distance.
I must say without trying to tout room acoustics too much, that before I had the room under control, any and all micing decisions were based on techniques to avoid the room issues. So the choice/placement wasn't dictated by the song's needs, it was dictated by acoustic conditions I was faced with. IMHO this is a very important distinction to understand.

Now that I have the room in good shape, my micing choices are purely creative because I don't have to worry about the room mucking that up any longer. I can't stress enough how much difference it makes to use mikes creatively vs using them to dodge acoustic bullets.

You simply can't have both at the same time thus what I call "room funk" ends up on every track which, then results in trying to get pee out of a swimming pool in post.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.

Last edited by karbomusic; 09-17-2013 at 07:14 AM.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 07:20 AM   #86
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kindafishy View Post
Anyway, as stupid as the question is, how does one connect the M101 to a computer in such a way that nothing else is colouring the sound (I ask because the answer is likely not to connect it through the mbox somehow since that will affect the signal - it's probably also not to hook it up to a soundblaster).
You use a standalone converter. Most people with outboard preamps also have dedicated converters, they typically don't push those signals through another preamp circuit to convert it. What comes out of a standalone preamp should be what gets recorded.

In my case, I have the 2408's converters (8 analog in) and I also have a stereo pair of Lavry Blue converters that I typically dedicate to whatever happens to be (subjectively) the most critical source, vocals, whatever. I wish I had 8 Lavry Blue but they cost too much... so a stereo pair was my reasonable limit. It's also my master studio clock now, since my master clock croaked.

Obviously, if you're using a USB audio card that doesn't have digital inputs, it's harder to use a standalone converter so you use the line in on that device as the converter. With my old original MBox I'd probably find a way to use the S/PDIF input.

Last edited by Lawrence; 09-17-2013 at 07:25 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 07:34 AM   #87
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beatbybit View Post
NS10 or not - i totally agree with this.

btw. have you ever heard/seen the modified NS10, where the white speaker had a few cm "long" extender ring?
Never heard of that. Thanks
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 07:36 AM   #88
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
I must say without trying to tout room acoustics too much, that before I had the room under control, any and all micing decisions were based on techniques to avoid the room issues. So the choice/placement wasn't dictated by the song's needs, it was dictated by acoustic conditions I was faced with. IMHO this is a very important distinction to understand.
I'm still in that position.

No matter what I do I can't make the rather low ceilings (or small size) of my studio space expand so there is always a compromise there. All I can really do is reduce bad reflections and do my best in post, I can't create a "great tracking space" there. To avoid that I'd have to use another room in my house more suitable for that, which isn't feasible... so I make do.

It becomes much more problematic with really loud and dynamic singers. Crooners and balladeers, not so much. But great (loud) singers still resonate through the dampening treatment because the space is frankly, too small... so I still have to reduce those micing distances for vocals.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 07:40 AM   #89
kindafishy
Human being with feelings
 
kindafishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Obviously, if you're using a USB audio card that doesn't have digital inputs, it's harder to use a standalone converter so you use the line in on that device as the converter. With my old original MBox I'd probably find a way to use the S/PDIF input.
Thanks Lawrence. I've always wondered about this. It is strangely hard to find this information on the net since the most popular option (even at the hardcore hobbyist level) is an all in one device, and those who know how to go beyond this 'just know' and don't really discuss it.

For this last bit that I just quoted above, wouldn't this subject the signal to circuit quality/preamp quality of the USB device? I would think that one would want to by pass that completely.

This is the subject of a bit of my confusion, I suppose. I don't see why someone would want to go pristine pres -> fast track pro.

If I want to purchase a top quality DI/Preamp, then I would think that I would want a pristine converter. My immediate thought on this (due to popular opinion and reputation) would be an RME device. Keeping with USB, this leads to the babyface, which is said to contain top quality preamps anyway, so we're back to an all in one box...

Unless the point here is that you end up with Grace pres and RME pres, and you're in happy, happy land...
kindafishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 07:50 AM   #90
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,902
Default

Quote:
No matter what I do I can't make the rather low ceilings (or small size) of my studio space expand so there is always a compromise there. All I can really do is reduce bad reflections and do my best in post, I can't create a "great tracking space" there. To avoid that I'd have to use another room in my house more suitable for that, which isn't feasible... so I make do.
I was blessed with a near non-correctable room. 14x11x8 which almost a square and too short to easily correct. So, I decided to deaden the shit out of it comparatively as it was my only choice barring major construction.

In other words I cringed and dropped about 2k (that really hurt) on GIK panels of varying sizes and spent two weeks with waterfall plots (for nodes/rings) and walking around clapping (flutter echoes) placing them all over the place until I got as close as I could. I purchased 22 of them and 18 ended up in that room. When I first had it completed some people felt uncomfortable due to the reduced localization.

I removed a few to open it back up a smidge, some more trial and error placement tests. Its not ideal but its 10,000% better than it was. I can mic an amp 8 feet away now and it sound great where before that would have been a nightmare. If I need more ambience I can crack the door open a little but either way, I don't even think about the room much anymore.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 08:03 AM   #91
Smurf
Human being with feelings
 
Smurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
He sure did. He came in. Listened to it and put it off to the side and didn't use it.

Solved
CLASSIC!!!

And don't ya love all the arm chair engineers that just graduated Audio School having SO much real world experience?
__________________
Yep's First 3 Years in PDF's
HP Z600 w/3GHz 12 Core, 48GB Memory, nVidia Quadro 5800, 240GB SSD OS drive, 3 480GB SSD Sample/Storage drives, 18TB External Storage, Dual 27" Monitors
Smurf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 08:09 AM   #92
beatbybit
Human being with feelings
 
beatbybit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Hungary
Posts: 3,129
Default

just one more thing about the NS10 - iirc many engineers covered the tweeters with paper tissue. they said becasue it sounds too harsh. :I
__________________
panda in the desert
beatbybit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 08:16 AM   #93
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beatbybit View Post
just one more thing about the NS10 - iirc many engineers covered the tweeters with paper tissue. they said becasue it sounds too harsh. :I
My poll of that came out as I expected, about 50/50. Half still using them regularly and the other half owning them and not using them. But they all owned a pair.

Like Kenny says, it's a subjective and personal thing. If the result is good, nobody cares.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 08:22 AM   #94
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

P.S. Re: USB / FW cards and all that...

I don't want to be misunderstood about that. There is nothing audibly bad about those devices for their intended purpose, but they're really limited. If you have a mic pre attached to your audio card on a USB device it's usually the case that you can't insert things on it... you can't put a comp or EQ behind it, etc, etc.

So keeping those things separate is (imo) a good bit more flexible.

You can't apply outboard compression on the way in if your mic pre is attached to your audio card, unless that card also has send/return circuits on them, which most don't seem to.

When those things are seperated you can build your "input chain" at will, stack things on the input as necessary. I can't use any of my outboard comps with my VSL 44 mic pres because it doesn't have inserts?
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 08:25 AM   #95
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smurf View Post
CLASSIC!!!

And don't ya love all the arm chair engineers that just graduated Audio School having SO much real world experience?
Yeah. The internet has leveled the field and many of my peers (people doing this for 25+ years) have grown tired of it.

I have no issue discussing recording and production with people with much less experience but it does become bothersome to argue with people who have never tried what I've tried or ever done 70+ hour work weeks on large format analog consoles telling me how those things sound.

I understand it comes off elitist but isn't that the point. Shouldn't we learn from people with more experience rather than try to figure this all out on our own?
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 08:29 AM   #96
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post

You can't apply outboard compression on the way in if your mic pre is attached to your audio card, unless that card also has send/return circuits on them, which most don't seem to.
IMHO, the mic preamps built into an audio interface should be a last resort. They were built for economics. Not for sonic quality.

I have a cheap Tascam unit that I use just for my tutorials and I tried to use it for voiceover and I couldn't. It was that bad. Luckily the A/D conversion in it wasn't as bad so I don't have to patch my Aurora in.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 08:33 AM   #97
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

The other thing about some expensive pres that some overlook is function.

You can't say - in the right hands - that a class A preamp with it's own compressor and EQ can't arguably "sound better". Of course it can, because you don't get all that on a budget preamp. You'd be lucky to get a hi-pass switch.

I'm talking real analog EQ and compression on the mic pre, not a couple of synth edit plugs in post.

My DBX has a tube mic pre and a tube compressor, with EQ, all in one unit, each section of which can operate independently or together. I paid (at the time) $700 for it. Worth every penny.

Last edited by Lawrence; 09-17-2013 at 08:42 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 08:44 AM   #98
kindafishy
Human being with feelings
 
kindafishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
IMHO, the mic preamps built into an audio interface should be a last resort. They were built for economics. Not for sonic quality.
Would you maintain that statement if you are speaking of an interface like the babyface? This is by no means an 'economic' option. Does this get lumped in with 'last resort'?

Not being argumentative. Looking for strong and experienced opinions.
kindafishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 08:50 AM   #99
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

I think he's talking simple economics. The logic goes like this...

1. If you believe that not all preamps circuits are created equally as relates to clarity, frequency response, noise, shielding, crosstalk, etc, etc, ... then...

2. Logic and economics would sort of dictate that if you can get 8 for $250 they won't be of "super high" quality... comparatively speaking. That of course doesn't necessarily make them (contextually) unusable... it kinda depends on who's listening... and what you're doing.

"If" you believe #1 to be true. Some people don't.

Of course, RME makes great gear and it's not exactly at the lowest end of the scale.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 08:57 AM   #100
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kindafishy View Post
Would you maintain that statement if you are speaking of an interface like the babyface? This is by no means an 'economic' option. Does this get lumped in with 'last resort'?

Not being argumentative. Looking for strong and experienced opinions.
I'd consider those top of the line of that type. I have similar in my UFX. I certainly wouldn't stop using them due to this thread. OTOH, once I picked up my 710d and my ADL600 I use the ones my UFX much less but that shouldn't be taken as a negative because RME pres are damn good and still occasionally use them.

Make music and don't worry about it until is upgrade time or something, I think the two should be separated IE... Making music and worrying about the gear should occupy different spots on one's calendar.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:00 AM   #101
kindafishy
Human being with feelings
 
kindafishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,779
Default

Thanks Lawrence. Can you possibly address my question in post #89 a little more directly, please? Specifically as it pertains to limiting the signal quality by patching a top quality pre into a low quality USB interface (and would it make a difference if going into a high quality interface).

This thread has taken some interesting turns!
kindafishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:04 AM   #102
kindafishy
Human being with feelings
 
kindafishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
I'd consider those top of the line of that type. I have similar in my UFX. I certainly wouldn't stop using them due to this thread. OTOH, once I picked up my 710d and my ADL600 I use the ones my UFX much less but that shouldn't be taken as a negative because RME pres are damn good and still occasionally use them.

Make music and don't worry about it until is upgrade time or something, I think the two should be separated IE... Making music and worrying about the gear should occupy different spots on one's calendar.
Cheers, Karbo. Upgrade time is coming for me in spring 2014, so I'm trying to work out options now.
kindafishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:04 AM   #103
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kindafishy View Post
Would you maintain that statement if you are speaking of an interface like the babyface? This is by no means an 'economic' option. Does this get lumped in with 'last resort'?

Not being argumentative. Looking for strong and experienced opinions.
If you want an experienced opinion, you won't get one form me as I've never tried this unit.

At $750, it's probably not as bad as my Tascam unit which was $125.

And I've heard great things about RME's stuff. But this unit does a lot for that price. Take away those two mic preamps and the unit is still worth about $500. So that's about $125 per mic preamp.

Almost every preamp I own was about 1k per preamp. I think the cheapest would be my APIs which were $2800 for 4 or about $675 each.

Now price isn't everything but I question the physical size of the babyface as well. Can two great preamps fit in that little unit? Maybe.

But again, the unit does so much that I have to question the designers focus. If you look at the Chandler TG2, it is obvious what the designer was making. A great mic preamp rather than an all-in-one unit.

But I've never tried it. I'm sure it's pretty good. But I don't think it was meant for people like me. I already have a dedicated A/D convertor and all of the other bells and whistles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kindafishy View Post

This is by no means an 'economic' option.
I don't know if I agree with you here. This thing is a really good A/D convertor, computer interface and 2 mic preamps built into one unit. For $750, that is a good economic option IMHO.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:04 AM   #104
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Making music and worrying about the gear should occupy different spots on one's calendar.
It really should. It often can't be though (without some time management) because everyone (literally) is an engineer now.

There was a time when musicians showed up at the studio and let the engineer worry about all that stuff. But if you're doing it all, you're responsible for it all, and (i guess) when you have a perfectionist personality like so many good musicians do, it's unavoidable... once you also wear that hat.

In 1970 musicians just paid other people to worry about that stuff.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:13 AM   #105
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post

Make music and don't worry about it until is upgrade time or something, I think the two should be separated IE... Making music and worrying about the gear should occupy different spots on one's calendar.
Absolutely. And these threads always seem to go there where someone is about to accuse me of telling people they shouldn't make music on lesser gear.

Absolutely not. Job one is to write and record with what you have. Your craft should be 25X more important than improving your gear. If you're excited about recording your music, hit record. Don't let anything I'm saying dissuade you.

The great artists create. They don't wait til they have all the right gear. In fact, the better you get at creating something worth hearing, gear won't be an issue. You'll get it or get to use it.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:14 AM   #106
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,902
Default

Quote:
In 1970 musicians just paid other people to worry about that stuff.
Take me back!

More seriously, I have no choice, if I'm in gear mode, anything I create blows donuts. I purposely have to make sure I know which one I'm in when working. It's part of the curse of being the player and the engineer as you stated but after a couple decades I at least feel like I have a handle on it now.

There used to be a time I'd get inspired to record something and end up spending two days playing with gear and recording nothing. Those days are pretty much over now but having the gear admittedly helps.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.

Last edited by karbomusic; 09-17-2013 at 09:34 AM.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:15 AM   #107
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kindafishy View Post
Thanks Lawrence. Can you possibly address my question in post #89 a little more directly, please? Specifically as it pertains to limiting the signal quality by patching a top quality pre into a low quality USB interface (and would it make a difference if going into a high quality interface).

This thread has taken some interesting turns!
I am certainly no expert, but a general rule of thumb with audio signals is to not introduce anything unnecessary into a signal and (for certain) running the output of one mic preamp into another mic preamp before the converter is something unnecessary and potentially "probably not optimal"... unless of course you have no other choice and then, obviously, it is very necessary as a purely practical matter.

But (afaik) nobody would really do that unless they simply had no other choice. Great audio engineers (of which I certainly am not ) are known for safeguarding the purity / quality of their audio signals. Going through 2 mic pres seems to be a little contrary to that general idea.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:19 AM   #108
Reno.thestraws
Human being with feelings
 
Reno.thestraws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 9,753
Default

If we pick 50 songs from youtube right now at random. Will anyone be able to say if :

Vocals were record on great preamp?
Vocals were compressed before the box?
Mixing was OTB?
Drums were recorded in a great room? (drums are real acoustics drums)


For each song?

Gear and engineer is one entity. The guy who worked 20 years on a SSL console with high end outboard gear will never get good result in a DAW with a babyface, a DAW and plug-ins.

The guy who worked for 10 years exclusively ITB with cheap gear will never get good result on a SSL console with high end outboard.

It's just a matter of habits

I drive my car with manual transmission since 10 years now, take me in an automatic transmission car and I will be a danger on the road. Nevertheless, automatic transmission are "easier".
Reno.thestraws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:20 AM   #109
Andy Hamm
Human being with feelings
 
Andy Hamm's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,371
Default

For what it's worth:

A friend of mine, who I believe is on this forum, bought a Neumann and a Baby Face. Last time I was at his place He had replaced the Baby Face with what I believe (from looking at their site) is the Fireface UCX. Not sure why He did this, but He is fairly picky about his gear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
If you want an experienced opinion, you won't get one form me as I've never tried this unit.

At $750, it's probably not as bad as my Tascam unit which was $125.

And I've heard great things about RME's stuff. But this unit does a lot for that price. Take away those two mic preamps and the unit is still worth about $500. So that's about $125 per mic preamp.

Almost every preamp I own was about 1k per preamp. I think the cheapest would be my APIs which were $2800 for 4 or about $675 each.

Now price isn't everything but I question the physical size of the babyface as well. Can two great preamps fit in that little unit? Maybe.

But again, the unit does so much that I have to question the designers focus. If you look at the Chandler TG2, it is obvious what the designer was making. A great mic preamp rather than an all-in-one unit.

But I've never tried it. I'm sure it's pretty good. But I don't think it was meant for people like me. I already have a dedicated A/D convertor and all of the other bells and whistles.



I don't know if I agree with you here. This thing is a really good A/D convertor, computer interface and 2 mic preamps built into one unit. For $750, that is a good economic option IMHO.
Andy Hamm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:20 AM   #110
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kindafishy View Post
Thanks Lawrence. Can you possibly address my question in post #89 a little more directly, please? Specifically as it pertains to limiting the signal quality by patching a top quality pre into a low quality USB interface (and would it make a difference if going into a high quality interface).

This thread has taken some interesting turns!
Mic preamps deal with low level signal. So it is important that you bring that level up to line level in a high quality way. Once you're up to line level, no more gain will be added so patching into your less than stellar interface won't be harmful. As long as you use the line inputs. Not the mic preamps again.

The limitation now is that you're using the A/D conversion in your cheaper unit which isn't great, but should still be quite usable.

I've worked with many artists using great mic preamps into Digi 002 or 003 and have gotten stellar results. I don't like to knock the great work of high end A/D conversion but I would worry about that last.

A great mic pre (around 1k) and a great mic (around 1k for vocals) should yield a great sound even with a modest interface. I would then look at outboard compressors and outboards EQs before worrying about your conversion.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:24 AM   #111
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,425
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reno.thestraws View Post

The guy who worked for 10 years exclusively ITB with cheap gear will never get good result on a SSL console with high end outboard.
Not sure why you say this. You're making it sound like high end gear and budget gear are different but equal.

They're not. It might take a while for the ITB guy to readjust to using high end gear but he will make better records. I recorded with crappy gear for years before getting to work on a Neve. I din't get worse. I had to change how I did things but it was always for the better.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:25 AM   #112
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reno.thestraws View Post
If we pick 50 songs from youtube right now at random. Will anyone be able to say if :
If YouTube is the measuring stick, nope.

But go to your local record store and find me a world class and stellar jazz album recorded with $25 per channel preamps. That may be a little more difficult.

To your point, that's what causes these discussion, the measuring stick. Measure against the best, not just the most common, and it all becomes a bit more clear.

Context is everything. Nobody needs to spend more than a few hundred dollars to make decent sounding music for their enjoyment but taking that and pretending it's of the same quality as the best - with their measuring stick of quality being a good bit higher than YouTube - is ... well... something else entirely.

I'm happy where I am, and I didn't spend a ton of money. I don't have to pretend my systems and gear are equal to Massenburg's to be happy with it.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:26 AM   #113
beatbybit
Human being with feelings
 
beatbybit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Hungary
Posts: 3,129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Going through 2 mic pres seems to be a little contrary to that general idea.
not sure if its a bad idea to boost the gain of a good but realtively quiet pre with something like FetHead, for eg. and thats sort of 2x mic pre, right?

imo a good ribbon mic can get rid of fair amounth of harshness (compared to cheap LDCs, etc) - but they need a good and loud pre
__________________
panda in the desert
beatbybit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:38 AM   #114
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,902
Default

Quote:
Vocals were record on great preamp?
Vocals were compressed before the box?
Mixing was OTB?
Drums were recorded in a great room? (drums are real acoustics drums)
That's not why I record or why I do it they way I do. My job is to hear and cover all the bases as I am doing it. My concern has never been will someone know or care which pre I used, that's for me to care about because what is really important is the sum of the parts and I'm responsible for the those parts and what they add up to.

Though it sounds and feels good, I've always thought the above was basically and respectfully a completely meaningless question.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:42 AM   #115
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,513
Default

@BeatyBit: I was talking more about sending a stand alone mic pre output into a USB mic pre, as opposed to just using the line input.

The former serves no real purpose but to (potentially, not necessarily) change the signal in some way.

Anyway, here's a very simple equation...

Great Talent + Great Gear = "Best Case" Result.

It's really not up to guys buying expensive gear to prove they need it. The burden is more on those who claim otherwise to prove (repeatedly, not with 1 in 10,000 case exceptions) that they can do the same thing as the best of them - extremely high, not just good, sonic quality - without it.

I've yet to see that... well, except in sample based dance music maybe... where "acoustic" doesn't have much meaning.

Last edited by Lawrence; 09-17-2013 at 09:47 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:42 AM   #116
Reno.thestraws
Human being with feelings
 
Reno.thestraws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 9,753
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
Not sure why you say this. You're making it sound like high end gear and budget gear are different but equal.

They're not. It might take a while for the ITB guy to readjust to using high end gear but he will make better records. I recorded with crappy gear for years before getting to work on a Neve. I din't get worse. I had to change how I did things but it was always for the better.
Generation gap. How many folks working in home studio would be able to just PATCH 20 outboard gear in a SSL console with a Protools?

I don't say it's impossible, but a lot of home studist had learned to work with a "digital workflow" and have never seen any hardware gear. So it's difficult to re-learn everything.

My opinion is: Make things with what you have. Experience and practicing is the most important.
Reno.thestraws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:48 AM   #117
Reno.thestraws
Human being with feelings
 
Reno.thestraws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 9,753
Default

Quote:
But go to your local record store and find me a world class and stellar jazz album recorded with $25 per channel preamps. That may be a little more difficult.
Re ask me the same question in ten years. Things change, we are at the cross of two era.

15 years ago, the photographer of my local newspaper told me that his job could never be replaced... And now pics are shoot with an iphone 4.

Edit : not sure that my local record store will be still open in ten years... :S

Last edited by Reno.thestraws; 09-17-2013 at 09:58 AM.
Reno.thestraws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:52 AM   #118
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beatbybit View Post
imo a good ribbon mic can get rid of fair amounth of harshness (compared to cheap LDCs, etc) - but they need a good and loud pre
Had an acoustic track that was just too high-end sounding; it was great but just too clear/pristine for the song... EQ isn't fixing it. Was recorded with two SDCs and my Taylor. Hmm... lets think about this...

So, I retracked last night but replaced the Taylor with a Martin but the Martin with new strings is a different kind of bright so changed the mics to an AT4050 and the other to an $80.00 Apex ribbon but...ran the ribbon into a high-end pre due to the low gain of the ribbon and its tendency to not play well impedance wise. The pre has switchable impedance settings and like 70 dB of gain. One of the reasons I got it was for situations just like this; hearing what pre in that respect is/should be irrelevant to the end-listener.

That fixed it and no tweaking needed in the DAW. Different ways to do different things but wanted to note that doing lots of work upfront makes things easier later. There's nothing I need to do with that track in post other than add a very small amount of compression, levels/pan.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.

Last edited by karbomusic; 09-17-2013 at 10:10 AM.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:52 AM   #119
Panic
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 989
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
...which, then results in trying to get pee out of a swimming pool in post.
Brilliant!
Panic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2013, 09:55 AM   #120
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,902
Default

Quote:
It's really not up to guys buying expensive gear to prove they need it.
And don't go anywhere close to the music store until you feel confident the purchase will fix a problem. Don't buy it via shotgun approach unless you're a collector or something.

As much as I like good gear, if there is one thing I recommend against is blindly buying good gear.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.