Mics and Pres to Die For-

Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:04 am

Wow...that is one of the most arrogant and ignorant statements I've seen in quite some time. I won't even jump in about the insult to Zilla, he can handle himself. But I have to tell you, it's always easier to sit here and tell people that there's no difference without any proof.

I question your integrity and your ability to hear if you in fact believe that there are no differences in mic pres or amplifiers in general. The fact is, there are MEASURABLE differences - as in ~SCIENTIFIC~ it's not a matter of opinion.

You can read the output of amps or preamps actually validating the output of electrons and see that one piece differs from another. This is so simple to do, I bet even you could do it. Simply split your favorite mic to 2 different pres. Level match them as closely as possible. If you flip the phase, according to you, al you will hear is the noise differential. This is in fact quite UNTRUE.

So, instead of insulting members of this board and others all over the world citing only a debate held by a magazine reviewer and a forum regular poster, why don't you try to bring some science and knowledge to the table? You'll come off looking less like a jackass and more like an intelligent informed person.

Just my $.02

Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:47 pm

goran wrote:

....But there is no difference between audio-power-amps.
(This has been tested many times and there were never any differences)

No there can be no differences between mic preamps (valves included).
The only factor (and of course very important) is noise....

Goran- If you don't understand the basic principles of logic, it's a bad idea to apply them to science.

You start out with a statement that (tacitly) makes three universal assertions about audio-power-amps: EVERY listener will be unable to distinguish between ANY pair of audio amps playing ANY program material. It is physically impossible to actually prove this. The best you can ever do is show that SOME listeners were unable to distinguish between SOME pairs of audio amps playing CERTAIN program materials. Now, if the experiments are large and careful enough, it is possible that they would make the universal statement plausible, but they can never offer conclusive proof. (On the other hand, all it takes is one listener with "golden ears" and your assertion is garbage.)

So you start with a rather vast overstatement and then compound it by extrapolating the results to (a) a different kind of amplifier which handles (b) completely different types of program material (raw uncompressed mic inputs). You then insult people who disagree with your conclusions.

Bad logic, bad science, bad manners: you've hit the trifecta.

Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:25 pm

BobRogers wrote:

You start out with a statement that (tacitly) makes three universal assertions about audio-power-amps: EVERY listener will be unable to distinguish between ANY pair of audio amps playing ANY program material. It is physically impossible to actually prove this. The best you can ever do is show that SOME listeners were unable to distinguish between SOME pairs of audio amps playing CERTAIN program materials. Now, if the experiments are large and careful enough, it is possible that they would make the universal statement plausible, but they can never offer conclusive proof. (On the other hand, all it takes is one listener with "golden ears" and your assertion is garbage.)

So you start with a rather vast overstatement and then compound it by extrapolating the results to (a) a different kind of amplifier which handles (b) completely different types of program material (raw uncompressed mic inputs). You then insult people who disagree with your conclusions.

Being a statistician and statistical consultant by profession (only a location recordist as a hobby), I can offer complete concurrence with everything Bob states above.

BTW, were you aware all microphones are identical, too? Laughing

Mike

Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 10:53 pm

I'm actually enjoying this wacky turn of events. WHO is this goran person, really? Someone in disguise yanking our collective chain? (As usual, there's no information at all listed on this new user's profile....no website, no contact info, nada.)

Seems like someone with such a definitive, sweeping opinion on such a major topic would have a few credentials under his/her belt to back up such amazing claims.

Let's have it, Goran, what puts YOU in a position to make statements like this, with little more than "I forget exactly when, but I remember reading a survey about it all...."

Who knew we could have been building everything we need with parts off the shelf at Radio Shack, eh????

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 12:29 pm

gee....all I hear now is crickets and tumbleweeds.....What happened to our "Authority" on this subject???

It was looking to be SOOOO much fun. Crying or Very sad

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 2:00 pm

And he ( ? ) claims to be from Sweden as well. I´d like to a have a few words with the person eye to eye. It might be only a troll though.

Gunnar

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 6:29 pm

I am not sure why everybody is getting excited. None of Goran's posts contain insulting language. He is just expressing a contrary opinion based on his own experiences. The style in which his argument [in english] is presented may be flawed and offend rules for good reasoning, but is not personally insulting.

Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 6:45 am

It would be easy to test.

1.)
You choose 1 mic and 2 mic preamps (a Behringer and another high end one).

2.)
You record something from a speaker (so you can repeat it) first with the first amp then with the second mic preamp.

3.)
Now we have two files.

4.)
Let people download these files and decide.

5.)
If the test is to be conclusive everything has to be done very (very) properly. Please cosult an audio professional.

If you remember I said in my first post that threre was no difference between "well constructed" poweramps. I was not sure about mic preamps.
But I don't believe in such differences. I don't think that there could be any interactions with the mic. But maybe with a transformer coupled one (no !).

It would be very fun indeed if there was.

Then you have to publish this in JAES.

/Göran Sweden
( Göran in Sweden = George : a fighter for the truth) Wink

Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 1:06 pm

goran wrote:

It would be easy to test.

Absolutely false. You cannot prove the non-existence of an effect. Sorry, but that is, scientifically, the end of the discussion. Anything else is just jibberish or (misinformed) opinion.

Mike

Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 6:23 am

hughesmr,

I was hoping for a positive result.

/Göran Sweden

Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:30 am

goran wrote:

...choose 1 mic and 2 mic preamps...record something from a speaker (so you can repeat it).

In developing the recording system for Straight Ahead Records, I performed tests just as you described. Positioning and gain levels where carefully maintained. I can report to you that almost every change we made created a detectable difference in the recorded files. Differences which a group of engineers could reliably and repeatably identify in blind tests.

goran wrote:

( Göran in Sweden = George : a fighter for the truth)

Now, I might have an agenda or I might not. I could be lying or I might be telling the truth. It would appear that your truth is that there is no difference between "quality" mic-pre's, but I don't think your truth is worth fighting over.

Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:50 am

goran wrote:

hughesmr,
I was hoping for a positive result.
/Göran Sweden

Your assertion is that there is no effect. A positive test result would disprove your claim.

Time for you to read up on principles of experimental and scinetific logic. You seem to be mightily confused on the subject.

Mike

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 5:58 am

Zilla,

First of all my intention has never been to insult You or Any other in this forum.

Secondly maybe my truth should be: That there is no difference between "transparent" mic-pre's and not "quality" mic-pre's.

If I would believe your testing (wich i can do) I think the explanation may be that the constructors "build in" some "sound tweeks" i the mic preamps.

(Just as they do including transformers into mics. Now I don't know why some of these transformers do have to color the sound but if you really want to of course it can be done. )

I think it is would be easy to build a fully transparent (straight wire) mic preamp.

/Goran Sweden

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 1:18 pm

goran wrote:

Zilla,

First of all my intention has never been to insult You or Any other in this forum.

Re-read my previous post, I had not taken offense. However, the reason that you are getting negative responses is that your claim comes across as rather tiresome. To the experienced engineer who uses these devices day in and day out, the differences are OBVIOUS.

goran wrote:

..maybe my truth should be: That there is no difference between "transparent" mic-pre's and not "quality" mic-pre's.

There is no audio device that can be claimed to be transparent in any absolute sense. But for the sake of discussion, let's make the assumption that a Millenia Media and a GML mic pre can be considered "transparent". Compare the two and guess what?... you will find the character of sonic reproduction differs. One is not necessarily better than the other, just different.

goran wrote:

I think it is would be easy to build a fully transparent (straight wire) mic preamp.

Then build one and prove it! You will find your presumption is naive.

...sigh, this is getting tiresome again...

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:15 pm

The amount of internet bandwidth taken up by discussions of the sound of mic preamps has always astonished me. They seem to attract more comments than the sound of microphones.

This topic sponsored by: