Originally posted by Davedog:
Already cored apples vs. peeled oranges???

I havent heard it YET...(i know i will soon) ...., is it any better than one of those Ranes,or the Sound Projects,or the Symetrix(I doubt that!)Is it better than an ART MPA? It is certainly a different topology....better? I'll have the peeled orange.

Dave, Bring your Art down here when you visit and we can compare it..

I like my RNP. I would also like to have some of the pre amps recommended by Kurt and A.G.

I have no strong feelings against Kurt or anyone else if they don't like the RNP. I appreciate his advice on such things. When I first visited this site and read his posts, I knew he was an opinionated SOB. I am also married to one, and I love her very much [even more than Kurt!]

I hope Kurt finds some use for this product and would be interested to hear Davedog's opinions as well.

I do still envy Doublehelix if he is able to buy API pre amp, I know they're top notch. I am new to recording and, due to circumstances of experience and budget, must make sensible purchases. How many around here were fortunate to start out with something as good as the RNP?

Just got back from doing some tracking:

-Female vocalist FET 47/Vintech 1073/UREI 1176
-Acoustic guitar 451/UA 610/Valley People 610
-Drum OHs Shure KSM 32s/Sebatron 2000e/RNC
-Snare 57/RNP/RNC
-Kick Beta 52/RNP/Valley People 610
-Keys DI/Studio Projects VTB-1
-lotsa other mics thru Crappie SR 24/4

Sounded pretty good. David

Kurt

I have absolutely no doubt that you will state honestly your opinion of any piece of gear that you try... in review or BB discussion.

I find it a little problematic however that you include comments to the effect that users who like the RNP, or ANY piece of gear, are not actually hearing the difference that they claim they are hearing but are instead deluded by the money they spent and feel that they have to " validate their own purchase decisions" or that they "don't know any better".

The implication is that because you do not hear the quality that others hear in the RNP that it does not exist and those that say that it does are deluded or recording hacks.

We all hear differently. Stating your opinion about what you hear is one thing, insulting others for their's is another.

I expect trash talk from any internet source but i also expect more moderate commentary from a moderator.

cheers,
greg

Greg,
For the record, what I said was ...

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
"I can't say why people want to defend the RNP so staunchly, perhaps they need to validate their own purchase decisions, perhaps they are concerned that clients will not perceive the RNP as a "pro" piece of gear, some are protecting their business interests and some perhaps, simply don't know any better. I have noticed that many people appear to think "brighter is better"... I personally like a warmer darker sound, especially with digital recorders."

When you say;

"comments to the effect"

.... you are drawing a conclusion and then using that conclusion to place words in my mouth. Far from saying those things you attribute to me, I was venturing a guess as to why there is so much resistance to the concept that the RNP is not all it's cracked up to be. Note the use of the word “perhaps” in every sentence. Please stay with exactly what I said if you are going to quote me. This is the old technique of "if you don't like the message, kill the messenger" and I see it as nothing short of a personal attack on me.

You add

" ....
The implication is that because you do not hear the quality that others hear in the RNP that it does not exist and those that say that it does are deluded or recording hacks. ... "

You said that, not me. In reply to your last comment, I will say that I have a very good monitoring system here with Tannoy DMT 12's, NS10M's, and Yamaha MSP10's and Auratones and Hafler P3000 power amps.

I have also been in the music business professionally for 35 years and I have many international recording credits with my work currently available in Tower and Virgin Records as well as at Amazon.com. So I would hope that perhaps it is possible my ears may be a little more well trained than the "average bear". But in no way was I eluding that anyone is a "hack" or “deluded” as you have insinuated, nor did I intend to insult anyone.

I expect trash talk from any internet source but i also expect more moderate commentary from a moderator.

This last comment from you is nothing less than a personal attack on me. I am not here to live up to your expectations of what a moderator should be and just because I am a moderator, does not mean I am not allowed to draw conclusions for myself or have an opinion. I find that people resort to this tactic when they run out of valid arguments on the subject at hand. This is also the kind of thing that I personally object to on the BB. While I respect you right to voice your opinion, you do not have a right to place words in my mouth and then attempt to use that to attack me on a personal level. Just because I am a moderator and you are not, doesn't mean that you have a lower standard of conduct to adhere to.. we should all use good manners when we post here.

While I reserve my final judgment, there are a number of things I don't care for about the RNP. It is electronically balanced, forgoing the use of transformers, like the Sytek and Mackie pres.

Don't forget the Millennia, Grace, Earthworks, etc preamps that are out there...the more transparent preamps tend not to use transformers.

It does not make acoustic guitars sound huge like a Neve, Sebatron or a Great River MP-NV does.

Does it claim to?

I do admit that I have an attitude about it because of the constant hyperbole from FMR saying it is “as good as mic pres many times it's cost” and how they try to insinuate that there is a "buzz" about the piece because it is so great. Well Idon't think so.

Where did FMR say that? I can't find those words anywhere on their website. They did say "We believe that the RNP is a good addition to any studio looking for an exceptionally clear, transparent sounding mic pre-amp, i.e. if you want to hear the artist's voice, drum, cymbal, bass, etc., not the pre-amp." Which sounds like what you had to say about it, except you see that as a negative thing.

Headroom coupled to sound that is thin, bright, harsh and with no balls is not a good thing.

It may sound thin, bright, and harsh in comparison to the relatively warm stuff you're used to, but to people looking for transparenty, it may not sound thin, bright or harsh (obviously, it doesn't to a lot of people). Those same people who like transparent preamps may think that the stuff you like sounds muddy, dark and dull with no clarity. Who's to disagree with them if that's how they perceive things?

The last thing I have always brought up is, the RNP has been out for a while now. Why aren't we hearing of guys like Roger Nichols (who recommends a Rane for a cheap pre) using or recommending it?

You mean why aren't we hearing of Roger Nichols specifically using or recommending it? There are plenty of people recommending or using it. Plenty of people who I'd trust for recommendations more than Roger Nichols.

Why aren't we seeing it in use on remotes instead of the Presonus M80?

Probably because they're not in as convenient a form factor as the M80...sure, you could rack four of them in the same space, but you'd need four power outlets which is certainly not convenient. Plus, the M80 has that nice summing amp built into it for monitoring. And it's been around for a lot longer. In any case, it's the Millennia and Grace stuff I typically hear about people using for remotes more than anything else...

Why aren’t we seeing them in the big dollar rooms? Could it be that it’s ‘cause they aren’t all that and a bag of chips too?

Just because something does or doesn't appear in a "big dollar" room doesn't mean anything. Most big-dollar rooms only use big-dollar equipment...perception is everything, isn't it? That certainly doesn't say anything about their quality. You love the Sebatron and JMP stuff, why aren't we seeing those in the big-dollar rooms? For that matter, are you sure that the FMR, Sebatron, and JMP stuff isn't appearing in big-dollar rooms as we speak? (I honestly don't know.)

[quote}Far from saying those things you attribute to me, I was venturing a guess as to why there is so much resistance to the concept that the RNP is not all it's cracked up to be. Note the use of the word “perhaps” in every sentence. Please stay with exactly what I said if you are going to quote me. This is the old technique of if you don't like the message, kill the messenger and I see it as nothing short of a personal attack on me.

Kurt, don't look at is as a personal attack, look at is at constructive criticism. That's how it came across to me. It may not be the case, but it really does seem that you don't seem open to the idea that others may really find the RNP to be a great preamp. You may see it as a personal attack on you, but it really reads like you're launching a personal attack on everyone who likes the RNP. You give a number of reasons why people may defend the RNP suggesting that they may now know any better, may be doing it to save face, or because they think a bright preamp is a better preamp, but never suggest that perhaps some people just like it more. You even refer to the people who claim that what you've shown in your comparisons may not show the true colors of what the RNP is. They are, to an extent...they show what the RNP is in your studio, with your C4's, on your Martin, placed by you...but that certainly doesn't show what the true colors of the RNP can be. As helpful as comparisons can be, the only real way to find out how good any piece of gear is is to use it and try to get the most out of it. I would certainly not draw any real conclusions based on how the preamp sounds with one microphone or pair of microphones, and especially not a pair of C4's...sublte differences between preamps tend to be much more noticeable with dynamic microphones than condensers, for instance, at least in my opinion. There are so many variables involved that you really can't put too much weight on one comparison. I'm not trying to be a "detractor".

I am not here to live up to your expectations of what a moderator should be and just because I am a moderator, does not mean I am not allowed to draw conclusions for myself or have an opinion.

I don't think anyone else said that. I think he was just questioning why you'd speculate on why people defend the RNP so staunchly and assume that they do so for reasons other than because it sounds better to them. I don't think that anyone doubts what your opinion on the RNP is. You nailed it on the head when you said "I personally like a warmer darker sound, especially with digital recorders". Based on your reviews and comments on other preamps I would have guessed your reaction to the RNP would have been what it is. But I don't understand why you seem so determined to convince everyone that it's not worth the price it sells for, or why you wouldn't recommend it to anyone, or why you'd assume that those who defend it most likely do so because they "need to validate their own purchase decisions, perhaps they are concerned that clients will not perceive the RNP as a "pro" piece of gear, some are protecting their business interests and some perhaps, simply don't know any better".

-Duardo

Greg, I think you took a cheap shot at Kurt and are incorrect at the same time. My experience has taught me that he is quite right about many people being quite deluded with gear they purchase. The marketing hype and internet buzz not only makes some people buy gear they have no clue about, but also makes them believe things about gear they buy that are not true. Long before many wankers used or even knew about separate preamps, the Mackie was touted as the greatest sounding preamp you get for your money with a free mixer thrown in. The quality and design of that preamp has only gotten better but it is now bashed by many that have not heard or used it. It was Mackie that raised the quality and feature bar that everyone in the business making gear had to jump up to meet. Be it the RNP or just about anything else, there is really very, very, few things that live up to the buzz, the hype or is as good as most say it is.

You are right that people do hear differently. Kurt is also right that many people don't have the education, experience or monitoring to hear what they are really hearing but are fooled and hear what they think they should be hearing. Spending money on a new gear purchase to upgrade or replace other gear can give someone unrealistic high expectations that what they bought is really going to make a significant difference but it often does not work that way. It's a hard blow to the ego to admit they and you were wrong or that you really are not getting the results that you thought and expected to get.

If you got a RNP and like it or believe that it makes a night and day difference over the Mackie, then good for you. I hope that you are happy and it brings you joy as well as better recordings however marginal that difference may really be. But at the same time what that tells me is that you and others don't really know and/or have not yet experienced what a true difference there is in night and day when describing gear.

Duardo,
The Mellinia I have here is the Origin STT-1 and it does indeed use switchable transformer in the input path. While the RNP advertising may not claim that it will make an acoustic guitar sound huge like a Neve, Sebatron or a Great River MP-NV does, that is a benchmark I choose to use as a comparison.
As far as my comments regarding things said at the FMR site, I cruised over there and took a look and it appears they have changed some of the things they used to have there. They no longer claim that there is a “buzz at RO” about the RNP and they are also not claiming that it is better than pre amps many times its cost any longer.

Regarding user recommendations, what I am alluding to is, why aren’t we hearing of seasoned pros using the RNP? If it is a good as some think it is why isn’t it seeing more use. Pros don’t care if something is inexpensive or not.. they use anything that sounds good.. the Presonus (which BTW is not a fave of mine either) gets a lot of press from sound companies and other pro engineers as a good affordable utilitarian pre amp for use on live remotes and to fill in the gaps in a studio where the pre amp selection is limited.. I don’t hear these people say they are using the RNP. While these same big dollar rooms aren’t using the JLMs and Sebatron pres yet (the operative word being yet) it’s important to note Sebatron and JLM have just become available in the past year or so the US market (that I know of). I predict that they will become more entrenched as word gets out and engineers learn of them. Boutique dealers who don’t have access to these product lines have a problem with this and in an attempt to nip it in the bud, regularly send detractors here to attack any positive remarks in an effort to preserve there place in the market.

Anytime someone goes off topic and starts raising an issue with someone else’s comments by attempting to put a particular spin on it or “interpreting” their remarks, I take issue ... and if this is done in a negative way then I perceive it as a personal attack. The best way to avoid this scenario is to allow peoples comments to stand as they are and let others draw their own conclusions as to what was said.

In short, I do not think the RNP is a piece of sh*t. I think it is better than many of the less expensive pres available but I don’t feel it is a marked improvement over a Mackie pre and I think it is overpriced for what it is. For someone who is in a situation where they don’t already have a small mixer and needs a stand alone pre for a DAW the RNP can fill the bill, albeit at a premium price. If you like it, that’s fine with me.

Greg,I used to have a row of LED's of different colors,installed on an extension to the console.There was a great big old style knb under it.It was hooked through a battery and a small rheostat.When the little wanker bands would come in to hear some roughs of their work someone would always poiunt at the monitors and say something about how it does not sound quite right.At this point I would flip the BIG SWITCH and crank up THE BIG KNOB,lighting up three or four LEDs and say to em..."Doesnt THAT sound better...!" Ya know, it always did.

The point being, a tremendous amount of talk and hype about a product can get people to buy into the 'sound' before they even hear it.And there are several studies to prove this.This doesnt mean anyone is wrong in what they hear, but theres probably more than a few relatively inexperienced end users of certain pieces of gear that would swear on their Granny's apron that they are the best sounding things since Christmas Dinner.The media is a powerful thing and what a lot of people dont understand, is as moderators we have a certain amount of persuasive power that has to be handled a bit differently than just anyone posting on this BB.If every moderator went behind closed doors and decided as a group to hype and recommend heavily, a certain piece of gear, that company's bottom line would look pretty good in a few weeks.You may think this is bunk and we're just people like anyone else, but the truth is we're a robotic clan of highly trained aliens come do......>>>>whut?!

of course not...?..>>>
Sorry......We do have to be careful in this position and especially with the newer people.

And Uncle Kurt, bless his pointed ears, has a lot of experience and doesnt sit on a fence for anything.Aint it kinda refreshing to know someones not gonna ever lie to you about anything??!! So chill and enjoy.peace.

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
Duardo,
The Mellinia I have here is the Origin STT-1 and it does indeed use switchable transformer in the input path. While the RNP advertising may not claim that it will make an acoustic guitar sound huge like a Neve, Sebatron or a Great River MP-NV does, that is a benchmark I choose to use as a comparison.
As far as my comments regarding things said at the FMR site, I cruised over there and took a look and it appears they have changed some of the things they used to have there. They no longer claim that there is a “buzz at RO” about the RNP and they are also not claiming that it is better than pre amps many times its cost any longer.

Regarding user recommendations, what I am alluding to is, why aren’t we hearing of seasoned pros using the RNP? If it is a good as some think it is why isn’t it seeing more use. Pros don’t care if something is inexpensive or not.. they use anything that sounds good.. the Presonus (which BTW is not a fave of mine either) gets a lot of press from sound companies and other pro engineers as a good affordable utilitarian pre amp for use on live remotes and to fill in the gaps in a studio where the pre amp selection is limited.. I don’t hear these people say they are using the RNP. While these same big dollar rooms aren’t using the JLMs and Sebatron pres yet (the operative word being yet) it’s important to note Sebatron and JLM have just become available in the past year or so the US market (that I know of). I predict that they will become more entrenched as word gets out and engineers learn of them. Boutique dealers who don’t have access to these product lines have a problem with this and in an attempt to nip it in the bud, regularly send detractors here to attack any positive remarks in an effort to preserve there place in the market.

Anytime someone goes off topic and starts raising an issue with someone else’s comments by attempting to put a particular spin on it or “interpreting” their remarks, I take issue ... and if this is done in a negative way then I perceive it as a personal attack. The best way to avoid this scenario is to allow peoples comments to stand as they are and let others draw their own conclusions as to what was said.

In short, I do not think the RNP is a piece of sh*t. I think it is better than many of the less expensive pres available but I don’t feel it is a marked improvement over a Mackie pre and I think it is overpriced for what it is. For someone who is in a situation where they don’t already have a small mixer and needs a stand alone pre for a DAW the RNP can fill the bill, albeit at a premium price. If you like it, that’s fine with me.

AWESOME REPLY, your right in the pocket here Kurt! AG, Davedog...
:tu:

Kurt and all,

I am not trying to start any wars here. I am not questioning your experience in the least. I am not questioning that if, in your opinion, a piece of gear does not sound good that you are stating that opinion for all the right reasons, to steer people from bad gear purchases and to help them with good ones. I have no adverse feelings concerning your opinions on the RNP, Sebatron, Great River, Behringer or Radio Shack. They are, after all, your opinions and we are all here to trade them and learn from them.

However, I have to be quite honest though and say that to add the word "perhaps" before a string of negatives does not, in this one person's opinion, relinquish you from all responsibility concerning what your comments imply.

You are quite correct, i was inferring content based on what you had said. I quoted your commentary in full in my first reply and not in my second. I had no intention of misquoting you and apologize if you feel i have twisted what you had said to mean something different.The fact is that, from my standpoint, i was not trying to silence your message, your message concerning how good any piece of gear is not a sore point for me whatsoever... i may disagree but as i stated earlier in the thread i cherish disagreement as much as agreement in the pursuit of art. It is the nature of passion that these differences arise.

My problem, as i have apparently quite uneloquently stated, was with all the extra implications that got transmitted along with your opinion on this matter. I will not belabour this point, i felt that your implications were rather clear when i read them... others may draw their own conclusions from reading the posts. I accept your statement that i have erred in my inferences at face value and i will let it rest there.

I will explain something though. While my moderate/moderator comment was not meant to be an 'attack' you are correct in thinking that it was directed at your comments. In my mind i take the 'moderate' in moderator pretty seriously. I feel that being a moderator is not at all the same as just being another member. You comments carry more weight simply by nature of the title. Should you curb your opinions because of this? Of course not, i appreciate your opinions and that of all the moderators here. I appreciate the time you take to help others with your experience. Please understand my sincerity in stating this.

But i guess i DO expect a moderator's comments to foster open discussion... and when i read your comments i felt rather strongly that they did quite the opposite, they appeared to dampen discussion, to 'close' the matter. I realize you said 'perhaps' but your list did not include "perhaps this is just one of those times that i am not hearing what others are hearing". By this i am not questioning your monitoring chain or your ears in the least. Sometimes people play me what they consider to be a brilliant piece of songwriting and i just don't get it... i don't 'hear' it.

My opinions on forum moderation are, of course, mine alone. Maybe i would not have this problem if they were called 'hosts', maybe i am overly tied to the semantics of such things. I stated my opinions in a way that was perhaps ;) overly inflammatory and by doing so i did that which i was accusing Kurt of. I stand by my meaning but i hope i have at least now clarified in a way that does not come across as an attack... that was never my intent.

rock on,
greg

Originally posted by AudioGaff:
Greg, I think you took a cheap shot at Kurt

wasnt too long ago you were doin the same thing (regarding Kurts Sebatron/JLM love affair)..its amazing what becoming a moderator has done to your edge!

Originally posted by AudioGaff:
...that tells me is that you and others don't really know and/or have not yet experienced what a true difference there is in night and day when describing gear.

No offense AG, but if you don't find there to be a *big* difference between a Mackie and something like an RNP, Grace or Sytek (i.e. one of the good mid-priced pre's), you really have to pay closer attention. It ain't subtle.

Just to be clear, I don't work for any of those manufacturers or anybody who sells thier products; I don't personally know any of those manufacturers nor do I have more than a passing acquaintance with anyone who sells any of their products; nor do I personally own any gear manufactured by those manufacturers. I have, however, used all of it at one time or another (as well as a lot of really, really expensive shit).

I'm not saying any of that mid-priced stuff is on my list of "ultimate gear", but make no mistake - they are serious tools (as opposed to the Mackie stuff, which can sometimes work OK, but generally just makes life difficult).

Folks,

This is turning into a "he said - she said" piece of crap. Which is a shame - because until recently it was a pretty nice thread.

Kurt said he hasn't finished yet - either his sampling of the RNP or formulating his opinions.

So why don't we give him a chance to bring us some new info - some new samples - and watch what happens next.

I would much prefer that to watching people begin bashing each other.

Rod

The marketing hype and internet buzz not only makes some people buy gear they have no clue about, but also makes them believe things about gear they buy that are not true.

Sure, that's true in some cases, but to imply that everyone who likes a certain product does so because of those reasons doesn't seem right.

Long before many wankers used or even knew about separate preamps, the Mackie was touted as the greatest sounding preamp you get for your money with a free mixer thrown in. The quality and design of that preamp has only gotten better but it is now bashed by many that have not heard or used it. It was Mackie that raised the quality and feature bar that everyone in the business making gear had to jump up to meet.

The market was very different ten years ago than it is now. There weren't nearly as many options in terms of low-priced microphones, preamps, et cetera on the market, and an "affordable" digital recorder was a $4000 ADAT. Times have changed, and as you said, Mackie raised the bar.

If you got a RNP and like it or believe that it makes a night and day difference over the Mackie, then good for you. I hope that you are happy and it brings you joy as well as better recordings however marginal that difference may really be. But at the same time what that tells me is that you and others don't really know and/or have not yet experienced what a true difference there is in night and day when describing gear.

Why does it have to be a "night and day" difference? Again, if you're looking at transparent preamps, why would you expect the difference to be night and day, as opposed to a different shade of daylight? Just yesterday I recall reading a thread on Gearslutz where both Dot and Ozraves recommended both the Sebatron and RNP, and Dot said specifically that they went well together because they're so different.

The Mellinia I have here is the Origin STT-1 and it does indeed use switchable transformer in the input path.

I know, but I was referring to their HV-3 preamps, which is what they're best known for.

While the RNP advertising may not claim that it will make an acoustic guitar sound huge like a Neve, Sebatron or a Great River MP-NV does, that is a benchmark I choose to use as a comparison.

That's not really a fair comparison. It's a valid comparison, sure, and is certainly a useful way to describe its sound, but judging its quality because it doesn't sound like preamps it's not supposed to sound like isn't a fair way to make a qualitative judgment about it.

As far as my comments regarding things said at the FMR site, I cruised over there and took a look and it appears they have changed some of the things they used to have there. They no longer claim that there is a “buzz at RO” about the RNP and they are also not claiming that it is better than pre amps many times its cost any longer.

While these same big dollar rooms aren’t using the JLMs and Sebatron pres yet (the operative word being yet) it’s important to note Sebatron and JLM have just become available in the past year or so the US market (that I know of).

Same with the RNP, right?

Boutique dealers who don’t have access to these product lines have a problem with this and in an attempt to nip it in the bud, regularly send detractors here to attack any positive remarks in an effort to preserve there place in the market.

Are you sure about this? Seems to be a bit accusatory in nature. One could argue that perhaps you don't like the RNP because FMR refused to send you one for review. I don't believe that that's the case...I know that the character of the RNP isn't the kind of character you like in a preamp...but why do you find it necessary to question everyone's motives?

I stated my opinions in a way that was perhaps overly inflammatory and by doing so i did that which i was accusing Kurt of. I stand by my meaning but i hope i have at least now clarified in a way that does not come across as an attack... that was never my intent.

Exactly, and I didn't see your statement as being inflammatory, or as being a personal attack on Kurt. And I don't take issue with Kurt not being a big fan of the RNP, which again certainly didn't come as a surprise, based on the type of sound I know he likes in a preamp and the kind of sound (or lack thereof) that the RNP has. What I do take issue with is his inference as to why people think that they like the sound of the RNP without allowing for the idea that it really is a good preamp that's just not to his liking. Even if that's not what he meant to say originally, it certainly did read that way.

-Duardo

Originally posted by Bloux:

Originally posted by AudioGaff:
Greg, I think you took a cheap shot at Kurt

wasnt too long ago you were doin the same thing (regarding Kurts Sebatron/JLM love affair)..its amazing what becoming a moderator has done to your edge! No, I didn't take a cheap shot at Kurt, what I did was to question what could easily be percived as conflict of interest and even that was more targeted at R.O. and Sebatron in general. I never attacked Kurt's skills, thoughts or ethics as a moderator. He and I don''t agree on many things. As far as my edge, I still have it. But I now choose to temper it with respect to my new title and it's responsability.

Did another night of beds (huh, interesting phrase, never thought about it before) with Sebatron, UA 2-610, RNP, Vintech 1073, SP VTB-1, and Mackie. I am loving the Vintech on my female singer's vox (it is the new kid on the block)!
My thinking is the RNP sounds better than the Mackie SR 24/4 and the VTB-1, but not as good as the Vintech, Sebatron, or UA 2-610. I think the RNP is a fine value- I don't plan on buying any MORE expensive "clean, transparent" type mic pres because the RNP fills that slot for me. The Sebatron is an excellent value- two channels of colored yet detailed pre with basic eq for under a grand. I find it is more detailed than the UA (which I love). The UA and the Sebatron have different character, both are great.
Bloux, what's up with your last comment? Was it an attempt to both trash AudioGaff AND create a rift between Kurt and AG? If so, I admire the economy of your trolling!
It is easy for me to see the difference between Duardo and Teleharmonic, who are both very thoughtful in their responses, and Bloux. David

No offense AG, but if you don't find there to be a *big* difference between a Mackie and something like an RNP, Grace or Sytek (i.e. one of the good mid-priced pre's), you really have to pay closer attention. It ain't subtle.

Well, I never said there wasn't a difference or that any difference wasn't subtle. And a big difference is subjective and completely dependant on your experience and what you compare. But to say that the RNP and Mackie is night and day difference is way out of line. They are more a like than different when compared to great gear that I am used to using and own. If that is the best you have and you can live with the results, then good for you. You can now at least say to everybody that your not using a Mackie which has to be one big reason why many people buy and like the RNP. But even the mid price and mid performance stuff is still closer to crap than it is great in my book. The mid price/performance stuff just like the china made mic has it's place, but not in my studio or on my tracks as long as I have other choices. But that also does not mean others can't use it and like it and be happy with it.

I would seriously like to suggest to close this thread as it no longer keeps adding value for people looking for advice on mic pres.

Kurt has (and continues to) invest some serious time and effort to give people here a means to form their own opinion on the RNP and other mic pres. Listen to the audio samples he posted, use your ears and draw your own conclusions !
Can you hear a difference ?
Yes ? Excellent ! Pick the one you like best.
No ? Also excellent ! Pick the one you like best (be it because of price, looks or else).

You disagree with Kurt's comments and conclusions ? Fine, but allow the man his opinion after all the work he put into it. Rather than trying to convince Kurt or others here that unit A is better than (or at least as good as) unit B just let it go and give appreciation for the honest effort that went into giving you some reasonably objective information (...the audio files) to form your own opinion.

I myself am looking forward to hearing some more examples comparing the RNP and e.g. the Sebatron.
... to form my own opinion. And I might just put both a Sebatron and an RNP on my shopping list for 2004 as I could use the variety that this combination appears to offer.

MisterBlue.

Originally posted by AudioGaff:
Well, I never said there wasn't a difference or that any difference wasn't subtle. And a big difference is subjective and completely dependant on your experience and what you compare. But to say that the RNP and Mackie is night and day difference is way out of line. They are more a like than different when compared to great gear that I am used to using and own. If that is the best you have and you can live with the results, then good for you. You can now at least say to everybody that your not using a Mackie which has to be one big reason why many people buy and like the RNP. But even the mid price and mid performance stuff is still closer to crap than it is great in my book. The mid price/performance stuff just like the china made mic has it's place, but not in my studio or on my tracks as long as I have other choices. But that also does not mean others can't use it and like it and be happy with it.

Hi Audiogaff,

I am coming at this from quite the opposite perspective. I am still developing my ears, skills and experience. I have recorded only with the cheaper stuff. I have had a great deal of fun, i have learned a lot and i have gotten quite a bit better (if i do say so myself). After hearing people chat up the RNP i got curious. A friend of mine had just purchased one so i asked if i could borrow it to record some guitar tracks on the project my band is working on. The recording went very well. All other things being equal (mic/guitar/guitar player/guitar amp) the tracks sounded better than others we had recorded,the bass end tended to 'melt' better into the mix while the high end retained the clarity and crunch of the tube guitar amp. My opinion was reinforced later when all the songs we recorded got mixed together and we listened back. I had forgotten which tracks had been recorded with the RNP and which were with the mackie, but kept liking the sound of the guitar more on certain songs. When i was reminded that those songs were recorded with the RNP i decided that it was worth the price of investing in my own.

I feel, from this other perspective, that my ability to hear a noticable improvement despite my experience is something worth noting. I do not need to justify my purchase of the RNP, i had already done that before i purchased it through what i heard. If i tell others my tale it is because i wish to give kudos to a product that has made a difference for me in the hopes that more such products will appear on the market for all to enjoy. Well, i'm not THAT altruistic... for ME to enjoy.

Now you say that other preamps will make even MORE of an improvement to my recordings...well, this does not dishearten me... on the contrary, i find the prospect rather exciting.

Besides, it solves a problem i have which is that i lie in bed at night and worry that i might wake up the next morning and NOT be able to find a piece of gear that i wish i could own. You see, i simply have so much money and so little gear that i wish to spend it on... your assistance in this matter is invaluable. :)

greg

Hey Duardo,

What's up with you only poking your head in on postings only to argue? You often seem to argue over things that are far from the main point or that just nit pick? I see you do this at Harmony Central as well. I for one get curious at your motives and why you only seem to participate in that way.

The marketing hype and internet buzz not only makes some people buy gear they have no clue about, but also makes them believe things about gear they buy that are not true.

Originally posted by Duardo:
Sure, that's true in some cases, but to imply that everyone who likes a certain product does so because of those reasons doesn't seem right.

Go back and Re-read that. I clearly said SOME people. If you going to nit-pick, get it right.

Long before many wankers used or even knew about separate preamps, the Mackie was touted as the greatest sounding preamp you get for your money with a free mixer thrown in. The quality and design of that preamp has only gotten better but it is now bashed by many that have not heard or used it. It was Mackie that raised the quality and feature bar that everyone in the business making gear had to jump up to meet.

Originally posted by Duardo:
The market was very different ten years ago than it is now. There weren't nearly as many options in terms of low-priced microphones, preamps, et cetera on the market, and an "affordable" digital recorder was a $4000 ADAT. Times have changed, and as you said, Mackie raised the bar.

Just because times have changed and there are more options for crap gear doesn't change where the Mackie rates. It is still the best deal for the money. What it does mean is that the Mackie is no longer popular anymore and the phoney buzz and marketing hype has died like it does for all products. There were still many crap products to choose from 10-years ago. If anything things have gotten worse as the market is now flooded with crap and it has become even easier to design and make crap to sell to the mass.

If you got a RNP and like it or believe that it makes a night and day difference over the Mackie, then good for you. I hope that you are happy and it brings you joy as well as better recordings however marginal that difference may really be. But at the same time what that tells me is that you and others don't really know and/or have not yet experienced what a true difference there is in night and day when describing gear.

Originally posted by Duardo:
Why does it have to be a "night and day" difference? Again, if you're looking at transparent preamps, why would you expect the difference to be night and day, as opposed to a different shade of daylight? Just yesterday I recall reading a thread on Gearslutz where both Dot and Ozraves recommended both the Sebatron and RNP, and Dot said specifically that they went well together because they're so different.

If you read and followed along, you would discover that it was not me that made the first reference to night and day between the Mackie and the RNP. I never said everything had to be night and day, but if you going to use that term, then do so within the context of how extreme night and day is.

Besides, it solves a problem i have which is that i lie in bed at night and worry that i might wake up the next morning and NOT be able to find a piece of gear that i wish i could own. You see, i simply have so much money and so little gear that i wish to spend it on... your assistance in this matter is invaluable.

Your points are taken, and I'm glad I can be of help. But you should know that I also lie in bed and often think the same thing. I too only have so much money to spend. I sacrafice much in my personal lifestyle to buy and have the gear that I have.

Originally posted by AudioGaff:
I too only have so much money to spend. I sacrafice much in my personal lifestyle to buy and have the gear that I have.

got it...

scratch... scratch
(the noise of me crossing expensive european bathroom soaps and coffee beans processed through the digestive tract of small south american beasts OFF my shopping list... dam i will miss that stuff!)

greg

Originally posted by teleharmonic:
scratch... scratch
(the noise of me crossing expensive european bathroom soaps and coffee beans processed through the digestive tract of small south american beasts OFF my shopping list...

I know Kopi Lewak is from Indonesia, with a variant in Vietnam . . . is there another variety from South America I don't know about?

Previously, I had said how we were 'used to' the sound of the Mackie . . . and perhaps that perpetuates its popularity ~ a more pervasive influence I was thinking of is the sound of the steel string guitar itself, electric and acoustic . . . if recording had been around three hundred years ago, you'd be hard pressed to find guitars in the repertoire; yet they seem to form the basis for more home studios than even digital keyboards and pianos. I wonder how retail outlets can always sell so many acoustic guitars around Christmas; it seems like the stores in western Canada have sold enough guitars to supply the developing world with instruments.

Yet guitar is one of my main instruments to record, and an incentive to record more.

I wonder how the instrument tempers our ears for a certain sound ~ we know different voices will prefer different mics; maybe different pres will prefer different guitars, strings, etc.

Maybe acoustic guitar is too detailed a sound, and we like preamps to 'simplify' the sound. Hmmm.

Steven

Originally posted by Perikoresis:
I know Kopi Lewak is from Indonesia, with a variant in Vietnam . . . is there another variety from South America I don't know about?

I am not sure. My butler used to buy it for me but i've had to downsize him.

I wonder how retail outlets can always sell so many acoustic guitars around Christmas

Easy... the kid asks for a drum kit... voila! Santa brought you this nice, small, quiet acoustic guitar instead dear...

maybe different pres will prefer different guitars, strings, etc.

I think that this IS the case... or at least that you will prefer a different pre based on the nature of the sound of the guitar.

greg

[ January 15, 2004, 01:43 PM: Message edited by: teleharmonic ]

Hey Duardo,

What's up with you only poking your head in on postings only to argue? You often seem to argue over things that are far from the main point or that just nit pick? I see you do this at Harmony Central as well. I for one get curious at your motives and why you only seem to participate in that way.

I don't know why I only "seem to" participate in that way, but that's certainly not the only way I participate. The main reason I may seem a bit argumentative here is because I don't agree with a lot of what has been said. In this case, it may not be the main topic...I've don't take issue with Kurt's opinion on the RNP, just with his other comments regarding people who do like the RNP. I do agree with Greg's statements and didn't feel like it was a personal attack on Kurt in any way, nor did I agree with your statement that he took a "cheap shot" at Kurt.

I just did a quick search on Harmony Central and only one of my ten most recent posts is really argumentative. I also looked at all of the threads I've posted to on this particular forum, and this is the only one where I've really been argumentative.

I have to admit that I'm curious as to what you think my motives might be?

Go back and Re-read that. I clearly said SOME people. If you going to nit-pick, get it right.

I was thinking more about Kurt's comments that Greg had originally taken issue with in this case than yours.

Just because times have changed and there are more options for crap gear doesn't change where the Mackie rates. It is still the best deal for the money. What it does mean is that the Mackie is no longer popular anymore and the phoney buzz and marketing hype has died like it does for all products.

I don't think I disagree with you, although at the time it came out I think it was clearly the best value for the money, and now there's a lot more to compete with. Mackie's also gone through several revisions of their preamps, and I'm actually quite interested in hearing the new Onyx preamps they just announced.

If you read and followed along, you would discover that it was not me that made the first reference to night and day between the Mackie and the RNP. I never said everything had to be night and day, but if you going to use that term, then do so within the context of how extreme night and day is.

Then I guess we don't disagree on that either. I wasn't trying to argue with you, I just wanted to point out that the difference between two preamps doesn't have to be night and day for one to be better than the other.

Sorry if I appear to only hang around to argue. That's certainly not the case. But I'm certainly not afraid to voice my opinion if I disagree with something, or if I see something posted that's not correct. And I'm certainly not out to make any personal attacks on everyone. I don't think that disagreeing with someone...even strongly...is the same as attacking them. But I guess I'm not one of those people who posts things like "Good point!" or "what HE said", and I tend to pipe in when I read something I disagree with, or a question that I can answer that doesn't appear to have been answered yet.

-Duardo

It's difficult to keep reading these...geez Louise! I looked at Great River site today, looked at API yesterday, John Hardy the day before.
Today while recording [with my RNP] I noticed that one channel was around 6 Db stronger than the other. I swapped everything around and found a Monster Prolink Studiolink interconnect to be the culprit. Let's gripe about Monster Cable!

I have a bunch of Neglex Quad cable and good connectors arriving soon and will learn to roll my own.

Sorry to change the subject!

I feel the RNP is far better than the "Crappy!"

Anything that is pluged into a Mackie is bound to sound like ass.

I think just recording a Fender Strat into a Twin with a SM57 marked a sparkling improvment to the crappy, when compared to the RNP.

The RNP is a great preamp. It may not be the particular flavour for some, but it is far better than the crappy. I wont ever plug into one again!

My 2 bits. :p:

Originally posted by John Thomas Milhorat:
I feel the RNP is far better than the "Crappy!"

Anything that is pluged into a Mackie is bound to sound like ass.

I think just recording a Fender Strat into a Twin with a SM57 marked a sparkling improvment to the crappy, when compared to the RNP.

The RNP is a great preamp. It may not be the particular flavour for some, but it is far better than the crappy. I wont ever plug into one again!

My 2 bits. :p:

John,
Have you listened to the comparison of the Mackie to the RNP I posted? Can you really say the RNP sounded better? I don't think it does..

Duardo,
In response to my comment, “Boutique dealers who don’t have access to these product lines have a problem with this and in an attempt to nip it in the bud, regularly send detractors here to attack any positive remarks in an effort to preserve there place in the market.” .... you replied,

Are you sure about this? Seems to be a bit accusatory in nature.

Yes, I am sure. One only has to look at all these threads and go ‘rounds on the RNP that I have been involved in here in the past two years and then go over to PSW and see what is being said there at the same time. Same players. To boot, one dealer has admitted in public (at RAP) that he had been the one to roadblock my getting a unit because he was worried that I wouldn’t give it a fair shake. While I accept his comment at face value, I feel there are other reasons, including I am a newcomer to this business of reviewing and I do not answer to the “good ol’ boys” club. These guys have had a lock on all the opinion disseminated on the net for years now and view me as a “loose cannon” outside their control and a usurper. The truth is, I am bad for their business. Look where all the controversy is centered. Around two products that this particular dealer does and doesn’t carry. I get slammed for saying the RNP isn’t all it’s cracked up to be (which he carries), and I get slammed for saying the Sebatron is a great value (which he doesn’t carry). Only those who are oblivious to the facts could ignore that. The two products are in direct competition with each other.

One could argue that perhaps you don't like the RNP because FMR refused to send you one for review. I don't believe that that's the case...

That is not the reason I don’t tout the RNP. I don’t chat it up for it for the reasons I cited previously. But you would be mistaken if you thought that FMR’s lack of response to me, while claiming there was a “buzz at RO” about it, did not piss me off. It did and I freely admit that. The same way that Sebatron not sending a unit to a certain dealer pisses him off. This dealer is currently saying many of the same things about Sebatron that I said about FMR. Funny, no one jumps on him (like they did with me) for making the same type of claims I did. At least Sebatron isn’t saying “Check the buzz on the vmp at such and such site”.

I know that the character of the RNP isn't the kind of character you like in a preamp...but why do you find it necessary to question everyone's motives?

I do not question motive. I make observations and voice them without candor. Sure, I could make my life a lot more comfortable and probably get to buddy up with the group of people that create all the conflict but then I would only be marching in step with the party line. I don’t play that game.

Some are claiming that the RNP is a great sounding pre amp of the “neutral” or “transparent” type ... and that I don’t like it because I have a preference for pres that add color. While it is true I like pres that “sound good”, this is not the reason I won’t jump on the RNP wagon. I love my Mellinia STT-1 Origin, which, even in the tube mode with the transformer kicked in, is extremely transparent. Check my review of the Millennia and listen to the example of it I have posted. I chat it “up” quite a bit. It is not that I don’t like transparent pres. I just think the RNP is a glorified Mackie type, sold at a premium price. I bet it costs about $20 bucks to make it. Someone is raking in a considerable profit on each unit sold all based on a very clever marketing blitz. That is my issue with the RNP. McQuilken is a very intelligent person.

So what I will do now is record a passage of acoustic guitar using a pair of matched AKG O.R.T.F. through the RNP and the Origin and post that so you all can hear the comparison. I will send AudioGaff a PM saying which is which and then lets hear from all of you which you think sounds better. That is the fairest thing I can think of.

[ January 15, 2004, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: Kurt Foster ]

Kurt do you have a nylon string acoustic guitar to try that RNP on?

Yon,
No, just my crappy 30 year old Martin D28, or as Davedog calls it my "Morton". :D

Kurt,

I am sorry, I have not heard your tests. I dont have the player needed to check them out.

I had 4 years with the 1604 and the SR 32, so I know all about what Mackie's sound is all about and I still differ with you that the RNP wins above and beyond the Mackie pres any day of the week.

I would enjoy hearing your examples though!

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
nikko,
In response to my comment, “Boutique dealers who don’t have access to these product lines have a problem with this and in an attempt to nip it in the bud, regularly send detractors here to attack any positive remarks in an effort to preserve there place in the market.” .... you replied...

No I didn't. That was somebody else.

In any event, I'm a little taken aback by what appears to be the attitude of several of the moderators here - i.e. that anyone who disagrees with the party line must be either a plant, deluded or ignorant. But I'm not interested in getting into a big battle over it because, to be honest, I don't really care that much.

Have you listened to the comparison of the Mackie to the RNP I posted? Can you really say the RNP sounded better? I don't think it does..

No, maybe it doesn't on those microphones. But have you compared the two preamps with an SM57, or any dynamic microphone? You may be surprised at the difference.

nikko,
In response to my comment, “Boutique dealers who don’t have access to these product lines have a problem with this and in an attempt to nip it in the bud, regularly send detractors here to attack any positive remarks in an effort to preserve there place in the market.” .... you replied,

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you sure about this? Seems to be a bit accusatory in nature.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, that was me.

To boot, one dealer has admitted in public (at RAP) that he had been the one to roadblock my getting a unit because he was worried that I wouldn’t give it a fair shake.

I can understand that. Not that I agree, but I can certainly understand that.

These guys have had a lock on all the opinion disseminated on the net for years now

I think that they have built a certain amount of credibility over the years, and maybe some people rely too heavily on their opinions, but they certainly don't have a lock...

I get slammed for saying the RNP isn’t all it’s cracked up to be (which he carries),

Actually, I think you got slammed for saying things about the RNP before you'd even heard it, based on assumptions...is that not right?

and I get slammed for saying the Sebatron is a great value (which he doesn’t carry).

I didn't see anyone slam you for saying the Sebatron is a great value. I must have missed it.

Only those who are oblivious to the facts could ignore that. The two products are in direct competition with each other.

They're two preamps, sure, but they're not necessarily in direct competition...they sound different, and as others have pointed out, complement each other nicely.

The same way that Sebatron not sending a unit to a certain dealer pisses him off. This dealer is currently saying many of the same things about Sebatron that I said about FMR. Funny, no one jumps on him (like they did with me) for making the same type of claims I did.

Actually, I think nobody's jumping on him because he's not second-guessing the sonic quality of the unit before he's heard it. He's second-guessing why he's been told he'd be sent a unit for review on several occasions, but hasn't received one yet. That's why I don't take issue with what he's said, at least.

At least Sebatron isn’t saying “Check the buzz on the vmp at such and such site”.

FMR aren't either, are they? At least not any more?

I do not question motive.

I'm sorry, I know this will sound confrontational, but if you weren't questioning motive in your post that Greg origianlly took issue with, what were you doing?

I bet it costs about $20 bucks to make it.

See, there you go again. Why would you say something like that? I bet the Grayhill switches alone cost about that much.

-Duardo

nikko,
Sorry, I was mistaken. That comment was made by Duardo. I have edited my post. K.

Originally posted by Duardo:

I bet it costs about $20 bucks to make it.

See, there you go again. Why would you say something like that? I bet the Grayhill switches alone cost about that much.

-Duardo

OK, I conced that point ... lets say it cost $40 bucks to make... K.

I just received a PM from someone I would like to share ...

.... “speculations about saving face, having business motives or not knowing any better effectively serve to pre-emptively dismiss commentary of a positive nature concerning how the things sounds .... Messages sent to me expressed that i was not alone in this feeling. This does mean that i am right, but i say it merely so that you know that others felt effected by the comments, enough to contact a stranger to express this feeling.”

This is in no way what I wish to do. I want to have an open and intelligent conversation on the merits and shortcomings of the RNP. So, I apologize if I have made anyone feel this way and I conceed that everyone doesn’t have an agenda when they present an argument in favor of the RNP.

I often react like this because the fact is, there have been these types of posts made, where people, sometimes under false screen names, have come on the BB and attempted to discredit me personally and discount my comments because of the vested interest I have mentioned. So I can be a bit sensitive.

I personally have issues with the marketing and hype of the RNP more than what it sounds like. I have said before and I will say again, it is not a piece of sh*t. But it also is not all that it is cracked up to be in the hyperbole used to advertise it. It does sound slightly different than the Mackie SR24 pres I compared it to but not so much different that a little high frequency tweak wouldn’t fix. I personally like the warmer sound of the Mackie pre (which BTW, I think is a bit too bright also). I can see the RNP being usfull in a situation where a good 2 channel utilitarian pre for a DAW is needed but if you have a Mackie or other modern small format console with mic pres, I think it would be redundant. But if you want a mic pre that “sounds good” then there are other things out there that do the job a lot better at the same price per channel.

man... where do you guys get these smilies?

c'mon Treena! this thread NEVER has to end!! we'll drive it all the way to mexico and drink margaritas!

except those of us who live in mexico... we're crashing on your floor...

Originally posted by Treena Foster:

Oh, I get it now. Took me long enough, it's beating a dead horse! Everytime Kurt uses those damn things they just erk the crap out of me, but when Treena does it I just say, oh - how cute!

So to summarize: The RNP is better than the Mackie with some thinking and believing there is a big difference and others thinking the difference is not so big, but with everybody in agreement that it is not in the great catagory of well known and used preamps but lies somewhere below in the mid performance group with where the sytek and presonous hang out. Now mabe we can close the thread?

As a moderator I must take exception to Nikko's sugestion that there is some kind of "party line" here at R.O. The FACT is this.We are all individuals as much as everyone who posts and visits here.We have differing opinions about many many aspects of this business.There is one thing that we DO agree on....and thats keeping the peace and enjoying this place.If keeping down the noise is the way we have to do it to accomplish that, then we are as one mind in this.And if you REALLY dont care all that much, Mr/Ms Nikko, then keep it to yourself.Throwing crap out in something that you "dont really care that much about" is rather self-indulgent IMNSHO.

Its like this and I say this with the hope that the soap boxes will be put away for another day and a more important issue.
Kurt likes gear that sounds a certain way. I agree that his choices are his and he makes these choices based on experience and training.
I,on the other hand, like all kinds of gear and I really like really clean and transparent pres because in MY opinion, it brings out the harmonic quality of the instrument and shows the mic placement better.Does this put us at loggerheads about stuff? NO...we get together every now and then and have a great time slagging off on gear,musical politics, and all kinds of things. It takes ALL Kinds.And for sure there are All Kinds here at RO.Which is a GREAT PLACE and I'm thankful for being a part of it.

BUT....If yer lookin fer a fight then jus back one a my bros into a corner....best watch yer step.....

In any event, I'm a little taken aback by what appears to be the attitude of several of the moderators here - i.e. that anyone who disagrees with the party line must be either a plant, deluded or ignorant.

You must not read many postings here at R.O. or you would know better. It is fact that there are many who are delueded and ignorant and I beleve that is one reason they come here over other places so that they learn the truth and therefore will no longer be ignorant and deluded.

If your really believe that and it bothers you that much, you are free to leave and/or start your own forum.

I think that Mark McQ (of FMR fame) had a sound in mind when he designed the RNMP. He wasn't going for a transparent path, unlike its cousin the RNC which is a pretty colourless compressor (and a really clever design, BTW). Whether you like that particular colour or not is completely up to you as a potential buyer/user.

Obviously, the particular colour of the RNMP doesn't do it for Kurt...big deal! It's you that matters....you spend your hard earned bux on this stuff, and you need to be impressed with the gear to be happy. I guess as a final comment to add here, you can't really tell much from a few MP3s of one source with, when you weren't even in the room to record it (how can you tell what's accurate and what isn't when you don't know what the source sounds like).

The fact that opinions are so polarized on the RNMP probably indicates that it's good gear (if it was crap, I think everyone would be saying so). Hell, folks feel the same way about SSL stuff...some love it, others despise it! Check it out for yourself, and make a truly informed decision.

Cheers,

Kris