During the last days i checked out the ListeningSessions once again, because i'm still searching for a new preamp.

I am surprised that the differences between cheap and expensive preamps are that big. Yes big, not to say HUGE.
There is immediately the "expensive" impression, that comes from all of the GreatRivers, APIs, Manleys,...

Because i can hear the difference that clearly even on my laptop with an awful frequency response, i have developed a theory about the definition of "pro-sound": it doesn't lie in the frequency response.
Everything lies in the transients.
The Yamaha NS10 monitors seem to support that. An awful frequency response, but very good transient reproduction.

I the examples can clearly hear the clean transients from the more expensive preamps, while the cheaper ones seem to smear them and therefore the signal loses definition.

I can't believe this is just random, because i checked also all the mic-examples, and there i can hear the same: the cheap, in the treble hyped chinese mics, simply have no clean transients (who says Rode sounds good, should pay attention to the transients).
Therefore, the more expensive mics don't need hyped treble, to sound clean, or to give an impression of a clean sound.
BTW: IMO extremely well among the cheaper mics perform the Oktavas. I would rate this the only really good mic among the cheap ones, by judging the transients.

And this theory simply makes sense: if such a transient smearing mic is feed into a Behringer or VLZ preamp, the result can not sound clean, no matter how the frequency range is tweaked with EQs.
Now with that in mind, listen again to the examples and tell me, if there is any definition of a B1 that is fed into a VLZ?
And then compare the definition of a B1 recorded with a good preamp. Don't judge the "sound", the freuqency response, just listen to the transients.

But judging this way i've found some surprises among the listening examples:
the highly acclaimed RNP has a weak transient performance (although it's frequency rsponse makes for a good sound).
And then compare the RNP to the Speck 5.0. Now this i call clean transients! One of the great surprises and imo the best preamp in that price range in the field.

RNP's definition is better than from the VTB-1, which smears a lot, but much worse than from the GreatRiver, API, Manley Slam and the other "big boys".

I also find the TAMPA quite disappointing. The smeared transients are definately not completely restored by the digital harmonic phase alignment "circuit" and it's transient definition lies even below the RNP (but above the AudioBuddy, VLZ and VTB-1).



But what extrmely surprised me, is the definition of the transients the HHB Radius 40 produces.
Sadly i could find no vocal examples from this unit.
I immediately searched the net for this unit and somehwere i read, that HHB has changed it's name and the Ivory comes from the same company? But for example the Ivory examples don't have such clean transients. The Ivory is much worse than the Radius 40.

Also the Joemeeks perform extremely well on the transients in this examples. Sadly the VC3 seems to have a strange frequency response and the hihats simply sound awful. But the transients are clean and present.


Ofcourse all this is just my humble personal opinion and i want to share this experience and open a discussion about it.

No opinions?

I do agree wwih you that transients and transient response are great factors in determining a mic pre performance. I will disagree with you by saying that it should be the major factor in determining which mic pre to use/buy. If you are going for the absolute pure sound of everything then yes, you are correct. If you are going for what is pleasing to the ear then, no I can't agree with you. Frequency response, matched with transient response matched with the ability to weigh these two factrs against each other leads to the "PRO-sound".

Example:
When tracking, using your definition I should always reach for a U295 and a Manley/Great River/API mic pre. Some voices/instruments sound better a with a touch of smear.
This is why a Royer 121 sounds so meaty with definition on a guitar cab. The ribbon sort of "slops around" and gets a nice warm "brown" tone. It just depends on what the individual track/instrument needs in order to stand out/sound great.

Mercury and Summit Audio Mic Pres (I love em both) tend to not have the greatest transient response, but that in no way will make me dismiss them from a palette.

As a side note, do you record only digitally? Tape has a touch of smear to it (Damn laws of gravity and magnetics) but tracking to it sounds pretty darn nice.

I also understand that smear is a cumulative issue and once you capture a sound you can't undo the bad.

Remember recording isn't an exact science no matter how hard people try to make it one. It is a subjective art form that encompasses and drives other art forms.

Sometimes you can be rewarded for a random act of dumbness in the studio.