So today, I finally got a chance to compare all my mics pres. Digi 002 bla mod, Mackie Onyx 800r, SCA N72(2), SCA A12 (4), and SCA J99 (2).

The sad realization is the variances between each pre is so slight it doesn't make much of a difference. SO here I am asking myself why on earth did I think the SCA pres would make a significant difference. I don't know maybe the mackie onyx pres are just pretty darn good for what they cost.

Let me put it this way, I can hear a difference but between them but I wouldn't say any of them are better than the other.

Ill post some clips tomorrow. Kick, snare, overheads, acoustic, and E bass.

I'm going through the same thing myself, wondering why I am not blown away by the difference between the RNP in comparison to my Mbox or Digi002 preamps. There is a subtle difference, but there are days when I can hear it and days that I can't. The RNP has a lot more gain and headroom, but I think the Mbox preamps sound fine. I guess that's why I'm not an audio engineer.

Still thinking of selling everything but 2 mics and the Mbox.....

I look forward to hearing your clips.

bilco

HI,

I can see where you think that.. BUT the key is record alot of tracks with the nice preamps and then listen to them all in context. Then record with the digi and hear the difference. I think the effect is very noticbale when you put all the nice pre channels together.

But I have 2 UA preamps and I could tell a big diffrence then the mackie pres I had.

Jason

Couple of things before you bemoan the salient difference factors..

1. Differences are subtle, and will be much more pronounced on some sources than on others.

2. There will be a universe of difference between anything Mackie and an API or ADesigns...the RNP should fare well on acoustic sources, the SCAs on percussive sources, and the Mbox as a doorstop.

3. The effects of preamp differences often do not appear until you have 10 or more tracks...then if one cannot hear substantial differences between systems, one needs to learn what to listen for or really look at the monitoring chain.

4. There are a few pres that immediately jump out and BEG to be noticed - None of those are listed in the 1st two posts...

Just my opinion.

What mics and monitors were you using to do the test? I think the source-mic-preamp marriage combine to makes the difference...and it helps to have monitors good enough to reproduce those differences.

...but that said, before my most recent studio project started up, we'd rewired the patch bay and when I went through to check the patches, I had to run signal through every one of our preamps from budget to high dollar (there's a list of them in my studio journal), including console pres. I had whatever dynamic handheld I grabbed (Beta57 IIRC) and even just doing a quick "do I have signal flow?" spoken word test (preamp name, test 1 2 check check..."), even through many dozens of feet of copper wire, connection points, and analog console circuitry, I thought the difference between all of our pres was immediately noticeable, with some being greater than others.

The mic matters a LOT in the "test".

Using cheap preamps, as an example, I used condenser mics for EVERYTHING...dynamics were hideous sounding. With nice preamps...I now use them probably equally. They'll make more diff on dynamics.

However--I still think it's a subtlety compared with say, micX versus micY.

I had a post a while back discussing the concept that the preamp made more difference with sources that required the most gain.

BUT

I think you should look at your converters monitors and room if you cant hear the difference.

ALL of my preamps sound drastically different from each other.

stcikers, how are you doing the comparisons? What's the chain of equipment? How are you getting from the pres into the 002?

What kind of DA are you using? What kind of monitors? Do you have decent cables?

He's right.The differences are very minor and not worth the time of debate.
It's rare that people admit to this because no-one wants to admit they blew all their cash on preamps that sound almost the same.
It's like buying the same mic over and over.

You would be better off buying some valve based preamps as they actually would sound different to your other ones.

remember Dots article on the step up in preamps I believe he said to make sure you get better than what you have..otherwise it isn't worth it.

quote:

Originally posted by Estatic23:
He's right.The differences are very minor and not worth the time of debate.
It's rare that people admit to this because no-one wants to admit they blew all their cash on preamps that sound almost the same.
It's like buying the same mic over and over.

Strongly disagree. There is a big difference between preamps & converters, you just have to know what to listen to.
I don't know about SCA pres, I've never used them, but I don't even need side by side comparison to hear the difference between Digi pres & converters and good quality units. It's that obvious.
Quality of source is one thing, quality of recording is a totally different department. A lot of people expect to get higher quality of source with better recording equipment.

I wasn't implying there's not a difference, for the record. There certainly is...but, I think one needs to put it in perspective. A home studio might have an Sm58 and a 4033. Obvious difference in sound. Hand them a U87. King obvious again. When I went from a DMP3 to a Great River...not so much. Not that I don't hear a difference...but in that case it wasn't wholely positive. I'm just a clean recording dude. Once the Millenia came around here, the DMP3 went quickly.

Both preamps and converters are...well...better is better, but it's not on the same scale as things most people are more familiar with...not like different instruments...

My advice? Try a bunch of mics. Do some recordings with them...see if you don't hear an overall improvement. If you don't? Just sell'em....use the Mackie, which I've also not used, but I understand they did quite well with those Onyx series pres. In fact, I think PeteG now uses them for his drums--save the 4 channels of Focusrite Red he uses for overheads, kick, and snare top. If they're better than the DPS24 pres (which he used before), you're gonna have to spend a bunch of dough to imporve on it---unless you want the "color".

As a side note a few reasons why good pres & converters matter:

Better dynamics
Takes compression a lot better
Takes EQ way a lot better
Wider image
Smoother & nicer sound overall, especially low & top end. Smoother hi-mids, less harsh ssh & ss.

Need I go on?


Stickers
My advice - record & mix a whole song & see if you notice any difference, if you don't - there really must be something wrong with your setup.

Not that this is the case at all, but I do know that differences between what can and cannot be heard is drastic from person to person. The capability to "hear" is important too. The scale of importance in acquiring new and better gear is subjective to your ears. If you can't hear it, then what's the point? Maybe you never will hear it. Your montoring chain, your room, and your converters have already been mentioned. But if you cannot hear the difference between a Neve type clone and an Onyx preamp, then in all honesty you should stick to making music instead of recording or mixing it. I'm not trying to be a smart ass, just realistic.

Maybe your ears arent developed enough for critical listening applications? How long have you been mixing music? It's taken me years to get a sound grasp (pun!) on what people mean by 'color' and 'warmth', etc...

Lastly, how you are using this great gear is of tantamount importance. In the hands of someone that doesn't understand proper gain staging or how to set a proper level a preamp like a Great River MP series will not sound any better than a Behringer preamp. Again, I'm not implying this is the case with your setup, just postulating on why you aren't hearing these things.

The absolute proof of what I'm saying is every studio in the world... If what you are saying is true, then every studio would be chocked full of these pieces of crap



Make sense?

I'm looking forward to hearing the clips. I've never heard SCA pres or the Onyx.

When I found the Listening Sessions I was blown away by how much audible difference there is between some preamps. I knew it was the case with microphones but I didn't expect the readily audible difference in frequency response between different high end pres. I've felt for some time that the difference in "quality" is overshadowed by non-flat frequency response in high end preamps. If all your pres are good quality and pretty flat then I wouldn't expect to hear a huge difference.

Stickers, I think that all of the pres you've got are pretty good. Even your digi has upgraded pres from BLA so you don't have anything that sucks. If you had a Mackie VLZ board on hand I think you would hear much more of a difference.

But speaking of the Mackie VLZ, one of my earlier projects still stands out as an excellent sounding doom metal record. I did the whole thing with a Mackie VLZ and Presonus BlueTube preamps. If you listen to the opinions on the forums there's no way that this record could have sounded decent but it did. In the scheme of things your pres are just a fairly small part of the overall sound.

You're in a good position now. You've got a solid group of preamps and you can record your heart out without having to worry that your preamps will hold you back.

I didn't say I couldn't hear difference.

I just think they are all very comparable in that none of them sound bad.

D6 on kick, 57 on snare, sm81s as overheads, sm81 on acoustic, countryman DI for bass.

I made my mic cables. I've compared them to other mic cables they are fine.

I used line in 5 and 6 for my sca stuff, lightpipe for the onyxs,

I have an 002 with the bla treak mod. And i'm mainly using sony 7506s for listening back.

quote:

And i'm mainly using sony 7506s for listening back.

NICE!

k please don't blast me for these clips. Im not a very good musician. ill post which is which mic pre on monday night

Overheads:

http://www.jetrecording.com/oh1.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/oh2.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/oh3.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/oh4.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/oh5.mp3

Kick

http://www.jetrecording.com/kick1.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/kick2.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/kick3.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/kick4.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/kick5.mp3

Snare:

http://www.jetrecording.com/snare1.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/snare2.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/snare3.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/snare4.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/snare5.mp3

Acoustic:

http://www.jetrecording.com/ac1.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/ac2.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/ac3.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/ac4.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/ac5.mp3

Bass:

http://www.jetrecording.com/bass1.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/bass2.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/bass3.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/bass4.mp3
http://www.jetrecording.com/bass5.mp3

The snare is a little louder on the left side for the Overheads.

Nice clips. I can definately hear a difference between them, whether good or bad I don't know either??? I think deciding on which pres you like takes a lot of experimentation. Maybe some guys that have used them for years and years can tell which ones will work best but at least for me, I wouldn't know. Using them and doing lots of tracking and mixes would be the only way I could probably form an opinion on which ones I liked.