1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

Recording drums Tube prees before or after?

Discussion in 'Drums' started by Frankie8, Mar 8, 2006.

  1. Frankie8

    Frankie8 Guest

    im recording drums 8 tracks into logic 7.
    what is the difference of bouncing every channel thru a singel mic pre
    after they were recorded vs recording every track with its own mic pre?
    im going thru a digimax 96 thru a 2408 mk2.
    ive been using my peavey vmp 2 tube pre for the overheads two mk 12
    and an mp 20 for kick and snare.
    i know im going into an existing mic pre on the digimax but i try not to overload an distort it.thanks for reading Frankie 8
  2. RemyRAD

    RemyRAD Guest

    Frankie, I think you're misguided? You purchase a microphone for the sound it produces, not to modify it just for modifications sake.

    Yes you can use omnidirectional microphones for drum overheads. Omnidirectional microphones are still directional as you want them to be on axis to the sound source but they do take up more ambience and therefore can't be cool to use if the acoustics of the environment warrant it.

    There is really no good reason to plug a microphone preamplifier into another microphone preamplifier. Plug it into a line input. I mean plugging a microphone preamplifier into another microphone preamplifier is like gay sex. It will not make a baby no matter how hard you try but you may get something you don't want. Yeachhh

    You can take a previously recorded track and double it back through another preamplifier for the color that preamplifier produces if that's what you desire. When I mix somebody else's recordings that were made within a cheap console, I will generally not mix within the computer but will feed the tracks back through my Neve desk to warm up the sound and for the color that the console produces. If the tracks already sound good, I may elect to mix within the computer and not go through the old analog desk. It varies with every job. You do something for the sound it produces not because you like playing with toys. But that is fun and educational as well.

    Gimme' back my teddy bear!
    Ms. Remy Ann David
  3. Frankie8

    Frankie8 Guest

    have you been drinking?i dont think you understand the questions...?
    first of all the microphone questions...you dont find it being a valid point
    to ask about the omni capsuls?the omni spread differs depending on mics
    and actual user comments would be prefered thanks.
    i also happen to be a fan of the mk 12 and own three,so to me it would
    be of great importance to know if the actual difference between modified
    and original!

    when it comes to the pre amp questions pre or post...i think its more important how something sound then if you would consider it kosher!
  4. pr0gr4m

    pr0gr4m Well-Known Member

    Actually, have YOU been drinking? Ms Remy makes some very good points.

    There is a huge difference. OK.. A mic pre is used to bring a microphone's signal up to a level so that it can be recorded. So, one would normally only use a mic preamp prior to recording because...well...that's what it's for. There's no need to use 2 preamps.

    As for the differences, think of this...Instead of amplifying the signal that came directly from the mic, by bouncing the track through another preamp you are amplifying not only the the sound of the mic but also the sound of the original mic pre, the audio interface from both the input into Logic and the outputs of it. Not to mention you are trying to amplify a signal that has already been amplified.

    With what you want to do, you've got an audio signal going into a mic, going into one preamp, into your computer and being recorded. Then you want to ouput that recorded audio into a different preamp and re-record it? That will likely sound entirely different from just recording through the preamp.

    Like Remy said, if you are doing this for some sort of effect, then perhaps it's worth it, but there is a huge difference between recording with a preamp and bouncing tracks through a preamp.
  5. Frankie8

    Frankie8 Guest

    (Like Remy said, if you are doing this for some sort of effect, then perhaps it's worth it, but there is a huge difference between recording with a preamp and bouncing tracks through a preamp)

    Great!so maybe you could tell me what the huge difference is!
    i mean...that was my question,wasnt it...?

    also...the digimax doesnt have a way to bypass the pres,so with the volume all the way down im hoping to be close to line level.
    and the difference on track between using the pres on the digimax versus
    a class A tube amp is a big difference!im trying to use what i got here!
    the point of my question is......are you ready........................................
    do i need one good preamp............or do i need 8.....because.......
  6. saemskin

    saemskin Active Member

    it will probably sound like ass for 2 reasons:

    -you are ADDA'ing more than necessary. Once it gets in the box, leave it there, you're just going to degrade the signal.

    -the first preamplification comes with noise floor that is "fixed" once you record it in your DAW. You are only amplifying said nose floor by going out to another stage of amplification. Coupled with the signal degradation is where I come up with the stereo summation = ass.
    The gear you're working with is not meant for the old In-Out. Remy was right about the gay sex thing methinks.

  7. I would say try it? It's not like you have anything to lose. If you have the stuff, why don't you perform the experiment yourself instead of asking for a hypothetical answer from people who don't even have the same gear as you? If you want my opinion...it will sound like $*^t. If you record the sound "close to line level" just for the converters, you're STILL going to have to amplify that signal to bring it up to your desired level. I have a feeling the sound will be really squishy and compressed. Then you have to deal with latency of the DAW and converters. You'd have to realign the track after it was "reamped", which is not fun. To answer your question. You need 8 good preamps and 8 good converters if that's what you want to have recorded "correctly".
  8. pr0gr4m

    pr0gr4m Well-Known Member

    I did tell you what the difference is you retard. It's just that you don't understand enough about the process that you couldn't figure it out from what I said. So I'll spell it out for you. If you use the mic pre at recording, you are amplifying only the microphone's signal. There is also a "sound" that you will get with some mic/preamp combinations. They will sound great together.

    If you use it after you've already recorded the material, then your amplifying everything that was used in the signal path from your microphone to your outputs. You will most likely be introducing a lot more noise into your recordings because each device the signal travels through is likely to add some noise. And if your record as you say, very quietly, you are making your signal volume much quieter and closer to the noise floor and amplifying it to a usable level would also be amplifying the noise. You are going to lose any of the mic/preamp audio sweetness because the mic's signal has just gone through 4 other devices and will most likely sound entirely different from the way it would if it was going direct.
  9. Frankie8

    Frankie8 Guest

    ok,try to understand this..microphone-tube pre-digimax
    im getting a much louder and slightly comressed sound using the tube pre compared to using the digimax pres.im not reamping the signal!
    the problem is that the digimax doesnt have a way to bypass the pres!
    only the lt version has that,thats why i got the pres set to zero on the digimax.but i know i doesnt mean its bypassing the pres.
    im not hearing any input distortion though.
    your qoute:
    "If you use it after you've already recorded the material, then your amplifying everything that was used in the signal path from your microphone to your outputs."makes sense though!

Share This Page