Mic channel strips around $500.00

Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2005 2:25 pm

Are you sure you weren't using the Mix Output on the M80 or whatever Presonus you used? I would almost send you my MP20 so you could hear a working one....

Gitchoo a Brick sometime to check out too. Whether borrowed or bought. Surely even you could use an extra utility pre somewhere? If nothing else you could use it as a DI or for your talkback mic or something. One great use is the "guitar thru" jack to plug a guitar straight in, and then run a cable from the "thru" jack to the amp input. I don't see a lot of other pres doing this for some reason. It makes it easier to get a track of DI and a track of miked amp without going through a separate splitter.

Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2005 3:07 pm

Kurt Foster wrote:

I think that the pres in most small mixers and the budget pres are all much better than the ones offered in the past. The RNP and PreSonus are perfect examples of this ... they are IMO close, but no cigar. I feel these types of pres all have more in common, than not ... and I lump them all together. To me they are like a car that can't make a left turn. Can you get from here to there with it? Sure ... but you may need to drive in a circle if you need to make a left turn.

Perhaps the difference in how we all view these questions is the crux or the matter. I see things in very sharp contrast, black and white with very few shades of gray while perhaps some of you prefer to mull over the finer points. That's why I bang out mixes in 3 hours while other take 3 days and why I use processing while tracking and other want to wait until mix to make the decisions. Of course, I think my approach is the correct one.

I do not think that any of the pre amps mentioned here are really terrible. I do think that all pre amps that (1) do not have super adequate power supplies and (2) are built using surface mount technology and miniaturization, tend to lack sonic punch, headroom and the ability to handle phase and bass propagation issues. If you like that sort of thing, the RNP and PreSonus type pres are the ticket for you.

Additionally, I like pres that use transformers and circuits that add texture and a sonic signature because I mostly produce Blues, Country and Rock "POP" music and because I grew up listening to records made with that kind of stuff, so of course I have been "conditioned" to think that's what sounds good.

So all the sonics aside and to get the thread back on topic, there is still one issue I have with the PreSonus pres in general that is a deal breaker. I am not sure what causes it and when I asked the guys at PreSonus about it, they could not explain it either. This is the inability of the PreSounus pres in some scenarios, to drive inputs much past -12db (digital scale) when operating at +4 pro levels. At that level the strain on the pre was very obvious. For it to be clean sounding, levels of -17 dB were more in line. I find this to be unusable IMO ... All my other pres can hit 0dB without breaking up and I like to track hitting peaks of about -6dB (digital scale). This keeps me from having to "normalize" tracks or boost volume on every channel on the DAW, which in turn keeps my system running clean. When a DAW has to boost volume across 24 or more channels at mix, your asking the processor to do a lot of extra math which in turn has its cost, usually resulting in mixes that can be ragged and harsh sounding with a loss of dimension and depth.

Kurt------I recieved my Presonus a couple of days ago,and Im happy with it for the time being-------seeing as how Im new to recording Im learning on a week to week bases,please dont get me wrong----I feel that some of my recordings deserve merit,and I feel Ive done a good job with what I have at hand,but Im sure that in time,Ill see what youre talking about,and I can bet you that before the year is up-----I will own a Seb!-it may be a single channel----but by George---Ill have one! Thumbs Up

Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2005 3:17 pm

Quote:

Are you sure you weren't using the Mix Output on the M80 or whatever Presonus you used? I would almost send you my MP20 so you could hear a working one....

Thanks, that's nice of you. You asked that before I think and I forgot to reply ... Yes, it was an M80. No I wasn't coming out of the mix outputs ... I had all 8 pres patched to the inputs of my Alesis AI3's ... I also checked to make sure I didn't have the buss switches engaged as I heard that could suck gain.

Quote:

Gitchoo a Brick sometime to check out too. Whether borrowed or bought. Surely even you could use an extra utility pre somewhere?

I don't believe in "utility pres". It's either good or bad ... (remember no gray areas?). But "The Brick" looks to be made of the "stuff" I would categorize as a "real mic pre" and as such, has peaked my interest. Especially because I am hard pressed for something to recommend to people who can't afford Neves or APIs. I will be trying to get one from GT to review as soon as I get the HM-1 mic review finished. I think I am getting a Sebaton "Thorax" soon as well ...

Quote:

One great use is the "guitar thru" jack to plug a guitar straight in, and then run a cable from the "thru" jack to the amp input. I don't see a lot of other pres doing this for some reason. It makes it easier to get a track of DI and a track of miked amp without going through a separate splitter.

I'm the first to say it's not the only approach but I always make decisions as I track. I am lazy and I hate having to wade through all of that stuff when I mix. So I make the calls as I record. Later if I hate it I re record the song. It is very common for me to do a pre production demo before I record something "for real". Sometimes I get lucky and the demo ends up as a "keeper". So if I want an amp sound I use an amp. If I want a direct sound I go direct, but I almost never do both (on electric guitar. Bass at times can be a different story).

Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 4:22 pm

Reading through the posts its hard to believe one can "hear" the difference in the endpoint of a single preamp on a vocal in a mix on someones home or car system. People are listening hapipily to MP3 and other "bastardized" versions of meticulously recorded music. Audio snobbery is alive and well...........

I would suggest the end user of any recording could not hear the difference between a $4000 pre amp and a Joe Meek on a vocal on an Ipod.......or in the car. People just don't concentrate soley on music enough. Its background music even when played through an MP3 player.

So really are engineers engineering for each other? Or are the studios hurting so bad that they have to claim certain expensive brands in order to entice big pocket customers....Is it a mine is bigger than yours thing even though we get to same place?

As well If as I read here it may take weeks or months to hear and be "spoiled" by the "difference" between spending hundreds or thousands of dollars...well I don't think a listener will spend weeks listining to the end result and come to the same conclusionsr.....I'm beginning to think the analogy is more like a Rolex vs Timex...They both keep excellent time in todays day and age......although the Rolex uses old technology....and both speak to the owners taste and how they want to "appear" to others. Pick a side.

I do agree with a previous post..in that its really all about performance and musical content rather than technically aural perfection. Many engineers do not think in those terms though so they deserve a pass I suppose.......But still many 20 and 30 year old recordings still sound great , even when compared much of today's work...

Today's recordings (home and studio) sound great...and yes for thousands of dollars more you can probably hear the gnat fart on the floor of the sound booth....but do you really need too?

Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 12:53 am

kingfrog wrote:

Reading through the posts its hard to believe one can "hear" the difference in the endpoint of a single preamp on a vocal in a mix on someones home or car system. People are listening hapipily to MP3 and other "bastardized" versions of meticulously recorded music. Audio snobbery is alive and well...........

I would suggest the end user of any recording could not hear the difference between a $4000 pre amp and a Joe Meek on a vocal on an Ipod.......or in the car. People just don't concentrate soley on music enough. Its background music even when played through an MP3 player.

So really are engineers engineering for each other? Or are the studios hurting so bad that they have to claim certain expensive brands in order to entice big pocket customers....Is it a mine is bigger than yours thing even though we get to same place?

As well If as I read here it may take weeks or months to hear and be "spoiled" by the "difference" between spending hundreds or thousands of dollars...well I don't think a listener will spend weeks listining to the end result and come to the same conclusionsr.....I'm beginning to think the analogy is more like a Rolex vs Timex...They both keep excellent time in todays day and age......although the Rolex uses old technology....and both speak to the owners taste and how they want to "appear" to others. Pick a side.

I do agree with a previous post..in that its really all about performance and musical content rather than technically aural perfection. Many engineers do not think in those terms though so they deserve a pass I suppose.......But still many 20 and 30 year old recordings still sound great , even when compared much of today's work...

Today's recordings (home and studio) sound great...and yes for thousands of dollars more you can probably hear the gnat fart on the floor of the sound booth....but do you really need too?

Ok

Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:24 pm

Quote:

Reading through the posts its hard to believe one can "hear" the difference in the endpoint of a single preamp on a vocal in a mix on someones home or car system. People are listening hapipily to MP3 and other "bastardized" versions of meticulously recorded music. Audio snobbery is alive and well...........

I would suggest the end user of any recording could not hear the difference between a $4000 pre amp and a Joe Meek on a vocal on an Ipod.......or in the car. People just don't concentrate soley on music enough. Its background music even when played through an MP3 player.

You've missed the point entirely!

I don't give a rats ass what some punk with an I-Pod thinks of the vocal track or any other track for that matter. As you said he probably won't notice anyway.

When I record I attempt to capture the best sound possible. The only people I'm attempting to please are the artist and myself. If that sound requires a $2000 pre then thats what it takes. I don't record for the lowest common denominator (MP3) if you wish to go right ahead but don't call those who attempt to capture fine audio, snobs. Quality audio recorded with highend mic's and pre's will sound good on anything from Wilsons and Krells all the way down to the lowly I-Pod. If we follow your logic and record only for the masses (MP3's and car stereo) it would sound like crap on a quality system and what's the point in that.

They can't tell the difference, suppose everyone took that approach to their job? What if McDonalds sold horse meat as hamburger because you couldn't tell the difference. Would you like that?

Clearly great sound is a matter of taste. If a $500 pre does it for you so be it, just don't tell us that high quality audio isn't something we should aspire to.

Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 2:09 am

Quote:

When I record I attempt to capture the best sound possible. The only people I'm attempting to please are the artist and myself. If that sound requires a $2000 pre then thats what it takes.

Yes we differ here. I don't believe any audio source requires a $2000 pre. In fact I find it odd that many of the oldest expensive sought after "vintage" pres have specs that are noisier than todays prosumer pres....I guess "vintage " noise is good noise. Its marketing, flavor of the day and many buy into it. People seem to quote price spent with their gear as well..I find that incredably snobbish. When people say you cant get a good sound with less than $1000 preamps there is elitism going on. Thats simply not true. Perhaps on paper, in theory, but thats as far as it goes for me.

Quote:

learly great sound is a matter of taste. If a $500 pre does it for you so be it, just don't tell us that high quality audio isn't something we should aspire to.

I agree there. High quality audio is something we should aspire to I just don't believe it it's result is always directly related to gear price, That road never ends once you get on it.

I do know People like to appear exclusive Price is the great seperator all walks of society....I happen to think audio is one of those areas. As price goes up the returns are largely diminished.......except for those who pay the piper. and Of couse they are going to feel a part of some exclusive club. and swear they can hear the subtities in a mix......and wonder how they ever lived without it.....Human nature.

I record young bands in club bands and original material. I charge them $600 or so for a CD, mastering, and artwork. $200 for vocals.

ITs not much an hour for me but I enjoy the process and the kids get a CD to sell at gigs and are always happy with the final result. They cannot afford to pay $50 an hour to record through $2500 pre amps and compressors on a full Protools set up. There are many fairly priced tools available to make a quiet, transparent, punchy CD.

I don't do it exclusively as my living because Im on the road a lot but there seems to be no end to the people who want the service I offer. I don't have to advertise. I can do this because I dont have the big expenses and "floating studio" with all the latest and greatest gear, Those studios are falling by the wayside and many have gone out of business. No thanks. I have no competition and the guys and gals get a good bang for the buck...If and when one gets a deal, the recod company will re record them...perhaps in your studio!

Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 4:05 pm

Quote:

many of the oldest expensive sought after "vintage" pres have specs that are noisier than todays prosumer pres....

First, specs aren't everything. There a numerous ways to measure things and you cannot trust a manufacturer to be completely honest in this regard. They will always opt to publish specs that appear to be the better. Use your ears.

Second, there's more to it than noise. Really anything that has a S/N better than 120dB is pretty good. There are many pres that are several dB nosier than their counterparts but that still "sound better". Use your ears.

Quote:

Its marketing, flavor of the day and many buy into it.

I agree ... but I think that applies more to the lower and middle ground, than to the high end. Once you are in the high end of manufacturing, you are providing product to a much more dicerning clientele that is capable of hearing the differences. These end users are much more likely and able to notice shortfalls and will scream "bullsh*t" much sooner than the average untrained home recordist.

Quote:

When people say you cant get a good sound with less than $1000 preamps there is elitism going on .... I find that incredibly snobbish.

That is a very unenlightened point of view that smacks of envy and jealousy. Judging from your remarks later in your post I have to arrive to the conclusion that your primary objective in saying these things is to attempt to justify your not having better gear and to try to convince others you can provide comparable services to them for less money.

It is apparent to anyone who knows the subject (or at least to me) that you are completely ignorant of many of the issues involved.

There are pres available for under $1000 that do very well. Cost aside, there are different things that all combine to make a good pre amp ... power supply is primary. There is no way around this. This is from Fletcher in a previous post he made. I copied it off and have been quoting it quite often (sometimes in abridged forms) to help explain the problems with cheap gear. He is talking primarily about small mixers but it applies to all mic pres as well.

Fletcher wrote:

The stuff like Ghosts and Mackies don't have the headroom nor phase response with insufficient power supplies to deliver proper current on demand to form a proper bass wave or pass a transient.

Quote:

I do know People like to appear exclusive Price is the great seperator all walks of society....I happen to think audio is one of those areas. As price goes up the returns are largely diminished.......except for those who pay the piper. and Of couse they are going to feel a part of some exclusive club.

Again this seems to me to be more envy and jealousy than anything else. Am I better person by nature of the fact that I have a lot of very good gear? I doubt that you would think so if you met me in person. My cloths are generally pretty old and worn. My sneakers are usually very beat and often have rips and holes in them. I often need a hair cut and my teeth aren't as good as they could be. If I weren't so fat, you might think I was a crank or crack addict if you met me on the street. I drive a 12 year old car. But I own a lot of nice gear. These are choices we all have to make. The ones I have made are for recording gear, because these are the tools of my trade. Priorities, plain and simple.

I agree that "As price goes up the returns are largely diminished". A pre that costs twice as much as another cannot be expected to perform twice as well. Sometimes the last 10% of "quality" can run the cost up 200 or 300%. That's the nature of things. No one said the world was fair.

Quote:

I record young bands in club bands and original material. I charge them $600 or so for a CD, mastering, and artwork. $200 for vocals..... don't do it exclusively as my living because Im on the road a lot but there seems to be no end to the people who want the service I offer. I don't have to advertise. I can do this because I dont have the big expenses and "floating studio" with all the latest and greatest gear, Those studios are falling by the wayside and many have gone out of business. No thanks.

Gee, I wonder why those studios are all closing? Could it be that "scab studios" are undercutting them by providing inferior services at a lower cost? Could it be because of this the record labels are cutting budgets for artists to record?

40 years ago when the musicians union had power over the industry, a guy like yourself would find himself in an alley with a couple of broken kneecaps. The only problem with your approach is it never ends. What goes around, comes around. Sooner or later, it will be you that is on the receiving end. Then you will be the one squealing like a pig.

BTW, I provide recording services, remote and at my home studio starting at $20 per hour. When I had my commercial room in SF, I used to offer a 4 song demo pacakage for $300. I provided a 2" tape for the clients use and I multi tracked basics and overdubs, mixed and mastered the project in 6 hours.

I have very good mics, pre amps and compressors and a decent monitoring system. I now offer 72 track DAW and years of experience and background in music and recording. I do well even at those prices. You do not have to cheap out on your tools to turn a profit. In fact I think that is one of the most unimaginative business approaches, along with looking at labor. Instead of looking at bringing down the bottom line, which in the end only short changes the client and yourself, look to ways to increase the value of the product and services you provide. Part of this for myself has been to be more selective about the clients I choose. I submit that perhaps someone who isn't will to bear the expense of quality recording, shouldn't be recording in the first place or at the least, is not someone I would want to be involved with.

Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 5:36 pm

Kurt, In my brief time here on this forum I realize you are a respected and knowlegable poster. Every forum has its "stars." However I post in the Budget gear portion of your forum and am an advocate for those who feel slighted because they cannot afford the elite gear. But hey, I totally understand how someone who bought a $5000 watch feels at seeing another with a slightly less great $200 clone.

I am neither jealous nor envious as you describe because I have a choice. I can afford the best gear and choose not to purchase it. Big difference. I have friends with the top gear and those with lesser gear than my own. I have heard it all and feel there is a lot of hair splitting in the audio recording world anyway as evidanced by your next quote.

Quote:

I agree that "As price goes up the returns are largely diminished". A pre that costs twice as much as another cannot be expected to perform twice as well. Sometimes the last 10% of "quality" can run the cost up 200 or 300%. That's the nature of things. No one said the world was fair.

I apologize for my attack on your sensabilities but I do not feel 10% more "quality" is worth 2-300% more money. I am sure I'm not alone in that arena. Those who need the bleeding edge are free to bleed the cash for the 10% result. I do not feel its a neccesary requirement to make a great CD. But thats just me. ..or is it? MAny big time high quality Studios are closing....theres your best evidance.

Quote:

Gee, I wonder why those studios are all closing? Could it be that "scab studios" are undercutting them by providing inferior services at a lower cost? Could it be because of this the record labels are cutting budgets for artists to record?

40 years ago when the musicians union had power over the industry, a guy like yourself would find himself in an alley with a couple of broken kneecaps. The only problem with your approach is it never ends. What goes around, comes around. Sooner or later, it will be you that is on the receiving end. Then you will be the one squealing like a pig.

As you said................. "no one said the world is fair."

I'm not sure how to respond to this veiled attack and insult except to say we live in a capitalistic society where people make their own quality vs cost choices. Even Record labels. Perhaps they also feel 10% more quality is not worth 100-200% more on any level and as with many products. And maybe the real target of your agnst should be those very unions who ultimately failed to protect you and protected the incompetant instead . Perhaps thats why they are gone... You sound abit like the sad buggy whip makers at the invention of the automobile.

Quote:

You do not have to cheap out on your tools to turn a profit.

Then why aren't KIAs as reliable as Toyotas? Many products don't subscribe to your logic. I'll tell you why. Because they cater to a different market segment.as do I

Quote:

In fact I think that is one of the most unimaginative business approaches, along with looking at labor. Instead of looking at bringing down the bottom line, which in the end only short changes the client and yourself, look to ways to increase the value of the product and services you provide. Part of this for myself has been to be more selective about the clients I choose. I submit that perhaps someone who isn't will to bear the expense of quality recording, shouldn't be recording in the first place or at the least, is not someone I would want to be involved with.

..Now that smacks of the very elitism and snobbism,,, that you so take offense of being accused of!!!!. I'll take all of them in my "less than optimim quality" Studio.

I'm guessing by your own words the poor musicians should have NO options except for the very best. Thats sad indeed....and a touch elitist as well

This is where there is a huge gap in our rational. Im am not in the sole business of recording. I do it on the side as a service for those who cannot afford the very best. I get all my work by referral and have more than I can handle in my spare time. These are the very people you claim you don't want to be involved with anyway, In fact, I do not cater to nor do I want to attract clients who want to see the words "Pro Tools" or Neve on my gear list. No more than I want a woman who has to have a real Gucci bag. You can have all that work. I'm not competing with you at all......

But alas, the end result is that those artists will sell the same number of CDs regardless of what studio gear they are recorded with and make more profit for themselves. Yes the low rent Artists who willing accept a 20% less quality nevertheless sell the same amount of end product to their fans and therein lies the bug in your bonnet I suppose. Blame the manufacturers of great prosumer gear...not the endusers.

It is a good thing for thousands of poor struggling musicians you are not deciding who should or should not be looking to record or produce a CD. That reeks of elitism and probably should be posted in the Pro Gear thread where you can drool all over each others gear and the prices you paid for it.

By your skewed logic we should all be driving Mercedes Benzes or Toyotas because they are of better quality and those who cannot do so should be taking the bus..........Well I'm happy to drive a Ford in a world of BMWs....and I do not think I m missing anything....nor am I alone in that thought. What I have learned in this life is people who have or aspire to the very best believe everyone should think the same way...Many are content and comfortable in their mediocracy..and that my friend is not a sin. ...Hyndai sells a lot of cars to happy new car owners........and they go to the same places on the same roads as well.

Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 6:03 pm

Thanks for the measured response to my very provocative comments. I cannot tell you how refreshing it is to deal with someone who addresses the issues instead of the personalities. I have gained a new found respect for the person that originated it.

I do not disagree with anything you have said other that a Toyota is more reliable than a Ford I have a 92 Ford "Exploder" with almost 200,000 miles on it that looks and runs like new.

.. and

Kurt Foster wrote:

In fact I think that is one of the most unimaginative business approaches, along with looking at labor. Instead of looking at bringing down the bottom line, which in the end only short changes the client and yourself, look to ways to increase the value of the product and services you provide. Part of this for myself has been to be more selective about the clients I choose. I submit that perhaps someone who isn't will to bear the expense of quality recording, shouldn't be recording in the first place or at the least, is not someone I would want to be involved with.

Quote:

..Now that smacks of the very elitism and snobbism,,, that you so take offense of being acussed of!!!!. I'll take all of them in my low quality studio.

I'm guessing by your own words the poor musicians should have NO options except for the very best. Thats sad indeed....and a touch elitist as well .

I don't look at that as being "elitist", instead as as being "selective" or "discriminating". As with my personal relationships, I prefer to choose, not be chosen.

I do not object at all to the concept of inexpensive gear being used by the financially challenged. In fact, those are my origins as well. That's why I feel I am qualified to speak to the issue. What I do object to strenuously is the idea that there is no advantage to the high end or the idea that in the budget or mid priced choices there is a significant difference. The improvement in quality kicks in at a certain threshold, where adequate power supplies and serviceable designs are attainable.

In the best of worlds, everyone would have access to the means of production but as you point out, we live in a free market capitalistic society.

Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 6:28 pm

Quote:

I do not disagree with anything you have said other that a Toyota is more reliable than a Ford I have a 92 Ford "Exploder" with almost 200,000 miles on it that looks and runs like new.

I too am a happy Ford Explorer owner . I personaly owned both Fords and Toyotas and cannot attest to the Toyota as being more reliable but here is the argument:

It's all about perception (and in Toyota's evidant successful case history of reliability). People by nature pay up to "percieved" value sometimes before real value.

Perception in Audio is far more subjective and thus harder for me to to gage on a price /performance ratio.

In any case I truly enjoy reading your informative posts and I do respect if not always agree with some of your opinionsl.

Perhaps as the gap continues to close between "pro" and "prosumer" gear, the argument will be more focused towards technique and content rather than audio perceptions.

I read a post where someone claimed it took weeks to hear the difference with his new $2000 pre amp and how now he could not live without the piece. This was especially eye opening for me.

In any case we both drive Fords..............

Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 6:45 pm

Quote:

Perhaps as the gap continues to close between "pro" and "prosumer" gear, the argument will be more focused towards technique and content rather than audio perceptions.

I read a post where someone claimed it took weeks to hear the difference with his new $2000 pre amp and how now he could not live without the piece. This was especially eye opening for me.

I agree that discussion of technique and content would be far more productive, especially in the budget forums where the interested parties would have much more to gain from it.

I also agree with the post you mention, that sometimes the improvement one gets from a great mic or pre becomes more noticeable as more hours of use are logged. This is because the user has a chance to see how differently things sit in the mix or combine in relation to the other elements. If they are experiencing a good pre for the first time, they may need to educate their ears a bit before they come to recognize the differences.

It is because of these factors that the manufactures of what I so fondly call "rack crap", can exploit the market and get away with it.

Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 8:08 pm

From what Ive read-----------kurt and king both own Fords----------now doesnt that beat all? Shocked

Ive been turning wrenches on Fords for about 25yrs (Dealerships) Thumbs Up

(certified,licensed,wall plaxs,the hole 9 yrds!).
Its good to know that not everybody takes to the cruel side when comments are made about recording gear (high end and low)---I could say alot more----but I feel i havent earned my strips yet in the recording bizz.
Anyway---------------------------------Hey Kurt---------------what do you think about trading a Seb---or maybe a Manley---------for work on youre Explorer? Laughing

By the way------I drive a 72 GMC P/U---------shes my "baby" Thumbs Up