Originally posted by nikko:
Well, I've heard stuff done with both the RNP and with the Grace and I can attest to the fact that both pre's can provide you with excellent results, wall-wart or not.

nikko,
In comparison to what? Have you used Neves or APIs ?? A Sebatron or a JLM??

I can get great results from a Mackie or a Phonic for that matter. I made recordings that hold up very well on a Fostex 450 mixer but that still doesn't make me wish I that I had great pres and mics when I did them. they could have been sooooo much better.

I submit that similar results can be accomplished using a Mackie pre.. so why go the extra expense of an outboard pre of the same op amp/ anemic power supply type? Just use the pres in your Mackie or Behringer.. it really is pretty much the same thing. There are a few design differences but the results will be difficult at best, to discern.

If someone is working in DAW and needs a couple of pres to get to line level, then it makes sense to look at the RNP. But if you already have a small format mixer, use those pres and save the dough until you can afford something that is really good!

Here's a guy who got some great results with a little Behringer mixer:

http://www.piemusic.com/sb/mad.html

A lot of it is talent. However, you're not going to hear a lot of differences between mics, if any for 90 percent of the mics you use, with a little Behringer mixer.

Steve
http://www.mojopie.com

I agree with Dave dog!SM7 SM7 SM7!!If you give Joe Chiccarelli a call I can bet my 62 jazz bass he will tell you some astonishing stories of how many major records have been saved with the SM7!

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
Have you used Neves or APIs ?? A Sebatron or a JLM??

Yes, yes, no, no. I've used a pretty wide variety of stuff at many price and quality levels - Neve, API, Millennia, Focusrite Red, Crane Song, Universal Audio, Summit, etc. (as well as cheap stuff like Mackie, Art Tube MP, HHB, dbx 300 and 500 series, etc.) I'm pretty sure I know the difference between shit and shinola.

I submit that similar results can be accomplished using a Mackie pre.. so why go the extra expense of an outboard pre of the same op amp/ anemic power supply type? Just use the pres in your Mackie or Behringer.. it really is pretty much the same thing. There are a few design differences but the results will be difficult at best, to discern.

To my ear, the sonic differences between a Mackie on one hand and a Grace or RNP on the other are in no way subtle.

If someone is working in DAW and needs a couple of pres to get to line level, then it makes sense to look at the RNP. But if you already have a small format mixer, use those pres and save the dough until you can afford something that is really good!

Anyone who would have trouble telling the difference between a Mackie and a Grace or RNP wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a Mackie and a Millennia or Great River either. Honestly. Don't take my word for it, though. Listen for yourself. If you can't find an RNP where you live, see if you can find a Grace. They seem to be a little more common. If you do the comparison, you'll see that a well-designed wall-wart pre can definately be a *big* improvement over the typical cheap home-studio fare. It's like a veil being lifted from the sound.

Thanks Steve, very helpful!

To put it briefly... to my ear, the Grace 101 and VMP2000e were slightly better than the RNP... I think I like the Grace 101 best, but would find the VMP2000e more usable for what I do (rock tunes, acoustic tunes)... the RNP was very good though, and REALLY outperformed my Tube MP... actually, interestingly, I disliked the acoustic guitar sound on that recording with the RNP... but the rest of it was very good...

I still don't know what route I'm going... for a frist preamp, I'll probably stray away from the Grace 101 for now, but pick one up when I have a bit more money (or something similiar but better?)... I haven't found the VMP2000e for $750, the cheapest I've found is $925...

At any rate, I really appreciate all of your help!

nikko,
i didn't mean to be insulting, sorry if it seemed that way to you. I was just wondering because most of the people who have raved about the RNP have not used really great pres.. I will take your advice and take a listen to a Grace 101. I am going to write the company to see if I can get a 101 and a 201 to review and record some comparisons. It will be interesting to see what the difference between the two of them is..

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
The RNP is reported to be an uncolored / “photo realistic type” of mic pre. The Mackie pres are the same thing. This is the least expensive type of pre to build because you don’t need transformers and discreet parts. OP AMPs are perfect for this kind of application. On paper, they look great ... but in use, uck! While some may think this is a great attribute, IMO, for most pop recordings, it isn't. For classical, yes this is a good thing but how many of us are recording a symphony orchestra? Or even classical quartet or guitar?

The FMR RNP actually is a colored pre. I'd say it's a tad less colored than the Great River MP-2NV.

I don't consider the Mackies to be photorealistic. I think of the Grace mic pres as photorealistic. Photorealism in painting to me is where the artist takes what is in the environment and makes it more real than real. Sometimes, the Grace sound can be too real.

Some pres can be spoken of in terms of Playboy. Playboy takes the girl next door archetype and makes her better than real. She doesn't possess any stretchmarks or smells or pimples. She's been beautified beyond the best she can do in the real world.

There are countless ways to use words to interpret the effect of a piece of gear on sound. However, I do try to be mindful of fairly interpreting my experience to readers in a way they can understand.

Steve
http://www.mojopie.com

[ November 11, 2003, 10:44 PM: Message edited by: ozraves ]

Originally posted by Death addeR:

... I haven't found the VMP2000e for $750, the cheapest I've found is $925...

The last time I checked, you could get a vmp 2000e, sans meters, for $750 directly from him. Keep in mind that there will be a customs tax of about $60.. at least that's what I had to pay..
The price may have gone up since I last checked so jump on it what ever it is because they ain't gonna get no cheaper..

Deathadder,
Nobody here has mentioned a Sytek MPX-4 mic pre. It doesn't use a wall wart, and I don't know much about electronics, so take my comments with a grain of salt. The damn thing sounds great, and is a bargain. I have had a couple of experienced engineers listen to the sound quality coming from this unit, and they are impressed to say the least. It is 4 channels, with two clean, and two channels that have a JFET (whatever the hell that is) which gives it a little different sound for mainly vocal use. You can pick them up from ebay for around $800 (only $200 per channel). Now I may get slammed for mentioning this unit, as it is probably not in the league of API's etc, but an engineer friend of mine that uses API's says it is a high quality unit that he would not hesitate to use. I hope to purchase a Sebatron 4000 someday when I get rich so that I will have 8 channels of pres, but until then, I'm a pretty happy camper. Good luck in your search. Check out this review.

http://www.mojopie.com/sytek.html

Rob

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
I was just wondering because most of the people who have raved about the RNP have not used really great pres..

Which is why they should not be lumped in with Mackie pres et al.

Most of the people who purchase an RNP have been using Mackies and rave because of the immediate and obvious increase in quality. The argument works both ways. If the difference is palpable to these users, whose ears may be less sensitive than more experienced users, then i attribute that to the fact that the pre reveals something to these users that they were not getting with a Mackie. Because of, or in spite of, the internal design.

I am not saying that means that these pres are of Great River quality. I can tell you that I personally have heard a greater improvement in quality between an RNP and Mackie preamps than i have heard between Neves i have had the pleasure of working with on a short term basis, and my RNP. I am not saying that the RNP was as good as the Neves. I am saying that the difference was more discernable in the first scenario than in the second.

Take this with a grain of salt as i am still very inexperienced, but i am addressing those on the forum who may be in the situation where even saving up for an RNP is difficult and are wondering if it will make a difference. I would say that it absolutely does. I would rather have the RNP today and record more with it than to continue recording with Mackies etc. Even if that means i have to wait that much longer before i can afford a pre in the next tier of quality.

The difference i hear with an RNP does translate into a greater level of 'excitement' when i record vocals with a dynamic mic. The Mackie, by comparison, sounds limp and lifeless.

Perhaps some day i will listen to vocals recorded through a dynamic mic and a Great River and say the same thing about the RNP but for today... baby steps. No sense in paying for gear that is better than your ability to appreciate it.
:)

"No sense in paying for gear that is better than your ability to appreciate it."

And then the typical response would be "Don't buy something you will end up selling later, because that's just not cost effective..."

I'd have to agree with whoever made the comment, sm57 great through RNP - for vocals I've tried that. I ussually use SM7 through API for the 'dynamic' type of thing.

I've never used a mackie, but yea I've used the outboard behringer pres (i think it was the ultragain mic2200). it was using an internal power supply, which if replaced with a better one can sound sorta decent in a funny-shit-out-of-luck way.

Originally posted by Rob Chittum:
Deathadder,
Nobody here has mentioned a Sytek MPX-4 mic pre.

I have also heard that this pre is a great value.

I have been told that they can be found cheaper on ebay than on the Sytek site... even though it is Sytek selling the new units on ebay... weird but true.

You can get this unit with 2 channels 'clean' and 2 channels 'coloured' or 4 channels 'clean' depending on your preference.

How is the Sytek constructed? Is it through the board or surface mount technology? Is it discreet parts or monolithic large scale integrated chips which can vary in consistency? These are basically the same pre found in Neotek consoles aren't they? Not my favorite board.. I worked on one at Music Annex in Menlo Park, CA for several weeks. Not a lot of headroom. And I just don't like neutral pres and eq’s. I don’t record classical music, I record Blues and Rock ‘n Roll! I want attitude. I want girth. I want color, balls.. I want a Neve or API or even an old MCI..

Through the board components can be serviced in the field by any competent tech, while surface mount products usually have to be returned to the manufacturer who for the most part will replace the whole board rather than repair it. These surface mount boards are usually produced in Asia/China. There are many issues I consider. Some political, some ecological, some technological, some aesthetic.

To me the deciding factor is if you pick up a used Neve, API etc you will always be able to sell it for what you paid for it. Same with Neumann and AKG mics.. Try that with a RNP Sytek, Mackie etc... not gonna happen. Don’t spend your money twice, or three times. If you love this business, if you have a passion for recording and playing, instead of thinking up excuses why you can’t afford something, think up excuses why you can’t afford not to get it! It really is all in how you look at it. Priorities. Stop spending money on beer and video games and invest in something that you can earn your money back with. It is an investment, not an expenditure.

If you are not passionate, then don’t waste time asking people about it. Because the real answer is, good sound costs money. Cheap stuff sounds like sh*t. Some of it sounds like better sh*t but it’s still sh*t. If you gotta record and you can’t afford a Neve or the like, then use a Mackie or a Behringer.. work on mic placement, playing and writing skills (that’s probably more important anyhow). Save your money until you can buy just one good mic or pre .. then start saving again. Buy another good piece. Be patient. “Good things come to those who wait.” You will get there. But you will never arrive if you waste your money on half assed “rack crap”.

Check out [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.proaudio…"]Pro Audio Marketplace[/]="http://www.proaudio…"]Pro Audio Marketplace[/]
It costs $25 a year to subscribe but there is a ton of used professional gear for sale there, a new issue every month. The prices are much better than what you typically see. It is also a great way to learn what all the really good pieces are. You will see stuff in there you never even knew existed..

I don't know anyone who has been out any big money on a Grace 101, Sytek MPX-4Aii or even an FMR RNP when sold. I've heard this argument repeatedly but the eBay numbers do not support it.

You can buy a new RNP for $475 on eBay. Last time I checked they were going for $425 used. Syteks seem to be able to sell on eBay for what Sytek is selling them for new. The lowest I've ever seen a Grace 101 sell for on eBay was around $495 or so.

Steve
http://www.mojopie.com

Steve,
In five years what will they be worth? If you pay $1500 for even an Averil 1272 package (which I don't much care for), in five years you will probably get that and whatever the inflation has added to the price. Vintage gear doesn't get less expensive. It doesn't depreciate. Vintage APIs and Neves will always be worth what you paid and perhaps even more. I have an original David Manley design EL OP, I paid $1800 for in '95. What do you think I could sell it for on E Bay??

And when you say you see them "going" for a price on EBay, is that the asking (reserve) price, or is that what they actually sell for? Do they sell for what the seller asks? A lot of new gear dealers blow that stuff out on EBay.. it's just not what could be called "investment grade" gear.

Get a Manley, get a Great River MP2NV. Even a Sebatron vmp 2000e has increased in value over the past few months. They were going for $750 when I first wrote the review. Now according to this thread, the asking is $950. That's an increase in value of almost 35% and it's worth it at twice the price.. (IMO) . What do you think someone could sell a two month old one for? More than what they paid for it I bet..

Originally posted by teleharmonic:
Most of the people who purchase an RNP have been using Mackies and rave because of the immediate and obvious increase in quality.

I have to question if there is really a difference or if it is a "placebo effect". I know if I had just spent as much on a pair of pres as I would on an entire 16 channel mixer, I sure would "want" to hear a difference. Our minds and ears can play tricks on us. I have never had an opportunity to compare a RNP with a Mackie or a Neve side by side, blind sample to blind sample.. I wish I had. I would like to do a comparison of a Mackie to a Sytek also. I probably stand a better chance of getting a Sytek though. I have a feeling they are all about the same thing.. I choose to err on the side of caution, so I remain skeptical. I have to keep in mind too, that I have heard people report that another budget pre (which will remain nameless) was better than a Mackie pre.. It wasn't so.. the thing sounded horrible IMO.

I saw an article in an audio magazine, in fact I think Ethan even posted a link to it, where a bunch of "studio pros" got together and compared the Mackie VLZ Pro pres to a bunch of high end stuff. The consensus was the Mackie pres were best. I think the RNP and the Sytek were included.. But I don't believe it. Because it is all soooo subjective. It all depends on what you like. It also adds up over tracks. You need to live with the things for months and do a bunch of projects with them and see how the all add up in mix downs.. That is why in addition to posting comparisons, I also put up entire songs tracked with different pres. So people can hear the cumulative effects over a number of tracks with a variety of sources.. .

My experience has been cheap gear sounds cheap. Perhaps it's placebo effect, perhaps there is something to it. I don't know at this point. I don't seem to be the only one who thinks this. Why are major label records made using only the best gear even at a time where they are all crying about how much money they are loosing? Why does Bob Rock carry a rack full of 1073 Neves instead of RNPs into a SSL equipped studio? How come Allan Sides doesn't buy a bunch of RNPs or Syteks for Ocean Way? Why doesn't Gary Paczosa use RNPs Mackies and Syteks?

All the major engineers and producers go for the great gear because good sounds are easier to dial into on it. They want to spend their time on musical challenges not the challenges of cheap gear, having to "squeeze" a good sound out of a piece of "grunt". The sweet spot you have to search for on your budget pre?? Well on a Neve, it's one whole sweet spot across the entire range of gain.

I think any mic sounds better through a good pre. I have no doubt that a Neve, or API or any number of pres sound better than an RNP or Sytek or any pre in that price range. Kurt, I respect your opinion very much, but I have to say that these things are very subjective, and I too would have trouble "stooping" to one of the budget pres if I ever had the cash to purchase a $1500+ per channel mic pre. I do not believe, however, that my positive experience with my Sytek is placebo effect (although that is an interesting concept). There's also the idea that people tend to boast whatever they are using as a way of feeling better about their purchase decision. If I sunk $1500 into a peice of equipment, it would mentally hurt me to have to admit that it sounds like shit. I can feel better about my purchase if I can convince others that it is the best thing out there. However, MY ears tell me that for $800, the Sytek gives me 4 channels of very clean and noticably much better sound from my mics vs. going through the stock pres on my Yamaha AW4416. If people have the money to spend on one fantastic pre, then by all means go with the best. But for the little guy out there that wants very good sound on a budget (which is what I Ass-ume most of the folks on this site are after) I think we discourage folks from good quality gear when we tell them, if you can't spend $5000 of some pres - well then just hang it up. There is good gear out there for a bargain - not API, but very good nonetheless. I have seen posts that say you have to have a Neumann U87i or you're just a hack. I personally would take my $500 Studio Projects T3 over a Neumann any day, because I can take the difference in the money I saved and buy another very good mic. It's all relative in this world where compressed MP3's are the standard sound source. So, with that - let the bashing begin! : ) I like the JoeMeek marketing slogan "If it sounds good, it is good!"

Rob

>>I like the JoeMeek marketing slogan "If it sounds good, it is good!"

YES! I couldn't agree more!!
:tu:

drbam

Steve Albini digs the Sytek MPX-4Aii and the FMR RNP.

Larry Seyer, who has won nine Grammys, owns a lot of RNPs. He says they remind him of some old RCA mic pres that he likes. http://www.larryseyer.com/awards.htm

BTW, the song, "Fly," was tracked through a Sytek as far as vocals and acoustic guitar. I think the mic on the lead vocal was a Blue Mouse. Here's the link: http://www.nowhereradio.com/artists/album.php?aid=1071&alid=-1

Originally posted by Rob Chittum:
I personally would take my $500 Studio Projects T3 over a Neumann any day, because I can take the difference in the money I saved and buy another very good mic. ..... I like the JoeMeek marketing slogan "If it sounds good, it is good!"
Rob

Well the slogan sounds good but i would not say the same for the product. perhaps Alan will do better with the name.. , one can only hope.

I have the C3 here and I have to say that it compares very well to the U87. It's not exactly the same but it is very good when you consider the $2600 difference in price.. I really like the C4s also.. so see, i don't bash all inexpensive gear. some of it is very good.. I have been using the C3 and C4s on my latest project over the U87 and AKG 451s and 460s..

Originally posted by ozraves:

Larry Seyer, who has won nine Grammys, owns a lot of RNPs. He says they remind him of some old RCA mic pres that he likes. http://www.larryseyer.com/awards.htm

Harvey Gerst says the same thing. That the RNP sounds a lot like the old RCAs.. so I have to wonder if it is a "photo realistic" as some seem to think. I still don't see 8 volts DC doing it though.. perhaps for a little gain, but for a lot it just doesn't sound like it would be that great.

This is the problem I have. So many varied opinions. Some like it, some don't .. I fear the only way I will ever know the truth is to hear one myself..

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
I have the C3 here and I have to say that it compares very well to the U87. It's not exactly the same but it is very good when you consider the $2600 difference in price.. I really like the C4s also.. so see, i don't bash all inexpensive gear. some of it is very good.. I have been using the C3 and C4s on my latest project over the U87 and AKG 451s and 460s..

So why is it so hard to believe that the RNP and Grace might be good units when so many people are telling you that they are?

I fear the only way I will ever know the truth is to hear one myself..

Absolutely.

ozraves,
This song "Fly" is the last thing that I heard before making my decision to purchase the Sytek. I have some stuff that I'm going to post in the next couple of weeks that I think show off the Sytek as well as the Studio Projects T3, but I want to get the artists approval to post it before I do it. Kurt, I wish you could get one to see what you think. If I didn't use mine daily, I would send mine to you to check out. Anyway, best wishes to all of you.

rob

Originally posted by Kurt:
I don't bash all inexpensive gear. some of it is very good.. I have been using the C3 and C4s on my latest project over the U87 and AKG 451s and 460s..

Originally posted by nikko:So why is it so hard to believe that the RNP and Grace might be good units when so many people are telling you that they are?

nikko,
Alan Hyatt sent me out a stack of Studio Projects gear for me to check out, to prove that his stuff was as good as he and others said it was. He stepped up to the plate and accepted the challenge, choosing not to hide anything. A real stand up thing to do. For the most part, it was as good as he said it was. I was very surprised but now I say it every time I get a chance. SP is putting out some great gear for the price. Now that I have heard it, I can happily endorse it!

The Sytek, if it is the same as what is in a Neotek console (and I understand it is) I have heard it. I don't like it. Too neutral, no balls. I can understand how others might like it but it's not my cuppa tea ... If it is something different, I would like to hear one. Anyone have a web addy where I can request one to compare and review??

The RNP, (I have been over this many times) My issue is the power supply, 8 volts DC is not enough. Construction techniques, surface mounted / robot stuffed, easily damaged, hard to service in the field and probably manufactured in Asia. The way the company markets them, FMR controls the product tightly and they don't make it easy to hear one, unless you purchase it. You almost have to mail order one to hear it. The whole thing smells fishy to me. If it was so great I would think they would want to get as many of them as possible, into the hands of dealers and independent reviewers, like Alan Hyatt, Joe Malone, Millennia, Audix and Sebatron do, instead of keeping the lid on them and only allowing a few select people (who appear to be dealers, advertisers or friends of the company) to review it. Doesn't that make you wonder what is up?? All that and a huge marketing push saying the thing is as good as many pres at many times the cost. Very ambiguous. When something appears to be too good to be true, it usually is.

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
The Sytek, if it is the same as what is in a Neotek console (and I understand it is) I have heard it.

I'm not entirely sure that's true.

I don't like it. Too neutral, no balls. I can understand how others might like it but it's not my cuppa tea ...

That's cool.

The RNP, (I have been over this many times) My issue is the power supply, 8 volts DC is not enough. Construction techniques, surface mounted / robot stuffed, easily damaged, hard to service in the field and probably manufactured in Asia.

Well, I think you're mistaken about a lot of that. All I know for certain is that it sounds good, and that it is a substantial improvement over your typical cheap mixer pres (as is the Grace 101).

I get the distinct impression that there is something more going on here though, as the RNP seems to be a particular sore spot for you (though you don't seem to have as big a problem with the Grace). In any event, I think I'd best exercise some discretion and say no more of it.

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
The Sytek, if it is the same as what is in a Neotek console (and I understand it is) I have heard it.

Buzzzt. The Sytek mabe based on the Neotek and could mabe be called a stripped down low cost version Neotek, but a true Neotek it is not.

For a true Neotek, you need the mic pre from the channel strip or the only rack mount product they made, the Neotek MicMAX which was a sort lived product. Somewhere around the time of the Elite series, the Neotek engineers challanged themselves to design and make the very best mic pre they were capable of. The result of that was the MicMAX which was a 2-channel transformerless updated no compromise Neotek mic pre design that offered the very best performance and design that they could achieve. The design was intended for use in the recording consoles using the best of every component they could find after painstaking testing. Of course this design turned out to have high cost, high current consumption, large layout and component size. This meant it could never be realisic to implement into the recording consoles as those are all the things that make a recording console very difficult to build, hard to make reliable, very oversized and completely cost ineffective.

As the owner of the MicMAX and former owner of two Neotek consoles, I can tell you it is even better sounding than the consoles as far as detail, transparentcy, dynamics, headroom, low noise and bandwidth. It is as good and often better than the John Hardy or the AMEK/Neve Purepath 9098 in my use and experience. It also included 70db gain, front pannel 3-choice impeadance selection, (10-years before anybody else had this) VU LED meters and LED gain readout.

nikko,
That's cool, I don't have a problem when people stay on topic and don't make it personal. My goal is to hopefully share some knowledge and you are right, I do have a very sore spot with the RNP. I will leave it at that. I have written a long disertation on the subject but I am reticent to post it. I don't really think most people care about my feelings on the subject. I will say there seem to be a lot of people who just show up out of the blue to push the RNP here and then dissappear once they've chatted it up. Sort of remindes me of a particular potted meat. I don't know, maybe I drive them off ??? :D

As far as the Grace 101 goes, I still don't know a lot about it. I don't know how much juice the wart pushes and I know nothing about the topology of it. I have asked a lot of people about the RNP and collected a lot of info about it. But I still don't know much about the Grace, other that they have an excellent pedigree. Still, it is a neutral approach.. Once again, not my cuppa tea.. I like color, I like balls ...yada yada blah blah blah.. (you've heard it). :roll:

I would be happy if RO were aimed more at the high end. There are already a lot of places where people can go to ask "What are the best monitors under $200?" Lots of that going on. But very few places that have a lot of talk about "pro" gear. The only place where people seem to be centered around what I consider to be good gear, is the tech pages and DIY guys. But that stuff is waaaay above my head. I know how to use good gear but I don't know how to build it. But I have to say, those folks seem to get it. You don't see them farting around building Mackie and FMR pres.. they try to copy APIs, MP2NV's, JLMs, Manleys and Neves.. Don't you ever wonder why that is?

Well, needless to say, I see the point in spending money towards preamps for a better or even different sound... thanks guys! ...however, a question did pop into my head concerning the original post... Is there any point in keeping my pseudo-large diaphragm mic (KSM32)? ... From what I've heard, small diaphragms are good for acoustic guitars and overheads, which is what my use would be... I tend to favor dynamic mics for my amps, and now for my voice as well ;) ... I was thinking, if I sell my KSM32 I could put that money towards getting 2 AKG 451B's (or maybe look into Studio Projects offerings)... Thanks a lot for any replies!

I recommend a pair of the Oktava MK012 small condensers for overheads and instruments. I think they are more versatile than the two you mention.

Steve
http://www.mojopie.com

if you want to talk mostly pro gear, and less of the prosumer gear, try gearslutz.com They seem to be a little more involved in the high end stuff.

Rob

Originally posted by Rob Chittum:
if you want to talk mostly pro gear, and less of the prosumer gear, try gearslutz.com They seem to be a little more involved in the high end stuff.

Rob

here's my take on the forums:

recording.org -- very eclectic;

harmony-central.com -- more eclectic than recording.org;

studioforums.com -- solidly mid level recording market;

gearslutz.com -- upper mid to higher level market;

prosoundweb.com -- it's the soap opera;

homerecording.com -- solidly low end market.

each forum or set of forums is its own little community. i like to post at all of them to find out what's going on.

steve
http://www.mojopie.com

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
I have to question if there is really a difference or if it is a "placebo effect". I know if I had just spent as much on a pair of pres as I would on an entire 16 channel mixer, I sure would "want" to hear a difference. Our minds and ears can play tricks on us.

HA! So there are those who agree with you and those who are fooling themselves! :)

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
...they try to copy APIs, MP2NV's, JLMs, Manleys and Neves.. Don't you ever wonder why that is?

...because they can't afford the real ones?

;)

I got a Sytek a few months back and I am not impressed. It has no headroom. It is a cleaner pre than the mackie or alesis boards but it has no pazaz at all. Very sterile. It has two of the burr brown chips as well but they make very little difference.The headroom is the big problem though.

And is it just me or does it seem that "Steve Albini digs" just about any piece of gear being discussed. It seems someone always pulls out his name no matter what brand is being discussed.

Originally posted by Death addeR:
Is there any point in keeping my pseudo-large diaphragm mic (KSM32)?

The KSM32 is a nice mic for what it is. It's quite neutral, and consequently quite versitile. I think you'd find plenty of use for it.

Thanks AudioGaff for that contribution. That was very informative. As you pointed out the Neotek is a very transparent, transformerless type of pre. That is not what gets me going and as I have said I have used Neoteks and I didn’t like them much. If the Sytek is a very stripped down, lower headroom version of a Neotek, I doubt that I would care much for it. But I reserve final judgment until I have a chance to use one.

Death addeR,
Yes I would keep the mic. You can never have too many mics. If you want a pair of small diaphragm condensers, I recommend the Studio Projects C4s.. they come as a matched pair with omni and cardioid capsules, foam pop filters and shock mounts in a hard carrying case for around $400 and they are wonderful for overhead on a drum set. They work well on acoustic guitars although they are not my favorite mic for that application.

Originally posted by Rob Chittum:
if you want to talk mostly pro gear, and less of the prosumer gear, try gearslutz.com They seem to be a little more involved in the high end stuff.

Rob

Yeah Rob but I am a moderator and the Editor of the Reviews here at RO .. . and I like it here just fine, thank you. I prefer to try to redirect the talk here, rather than to migrate to another BB. RO gets a lot more page views and has a lot more members too than most the others..

teleharmonic,
You raise some very good points. If I could borrow a RNP for a couple of weeks, I would be able to comment from experience and not from conclusion and conjecture.. which I freely admit I am doing. I wish it wasn’t so. But seeing as how I already own 15 channels of great mic pres, Neve / Amek, Millennia, Sebatron and JLMs, I don’t think I will be buying a RNP for the “privilege” of having heard one.

That being said, very few of the mic pres I recommend are $2000. The JLM is at $1900 currently but that is for 8 channels. These are transformer based, op amp type pres like that of a Focusrite Red or API design. They sound phenomenal and included in the package are limiters for each channel factory set to your specifications to avoid digital overs in whatever type of recorder you are using. 8 channels of RNP would cost $2000, have no transformers and IMO, would not be the same quality or include the limiters. So I leave it to you to decide which is the better value. To me it is obvious.

Enthusiast or pro, I would prefer to spend my time conquering musical challenges instead of overcoming the challenges my equipment might present. Value is value, no matter what level you work at and in all good conscious, I can’t recommend gear that I feel is inferior based solely on cost factor. Good gear costs, that's a fact. I have no control over that.

In response to your reply on the DIY folks, I think in the long run they have a lot more invested in the gear they build themselves, than we who simply purchase it do.. I believe they do it because they get a kick out of building the stuff and get a real sense of enjoyment tweaking the circuits, making modifications to the designs and knowing what’s “under the hood”. I have a ton of respect for those folks. They are what "engineering" is all about..

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
In response to your reply on the DIY folks, I think in the long run they have a lot more invested in the gear they build themselves, than we who simply purchase it do.. I believe they do it because they get a kick out of building the stuff and get a real sense of enjoyment tweaking the circuits, making modifications to the designs and knowing what’s “under the hood”. I have a ton of respect for those folks. They are what "engineering" is all about..

I am absolutely in agreement with you, my response about them not being able to afford the originals was pure cheekyness :) I have done some REALLY basic DIY (Re-amp box, little panasonic condenser mics)and it is highly gratifying. I would LOVE to be able to build myself i nice pre... some much to do so little time!

Keep the KSM 32..When you get a pre then you can judge..The Grace 101's work very nicely and not just for the cash.I don't think that you would like them though..as you've stated {by the pres you mentioned..addressed to the Moderator}Gots no "iron" LOL..But I've go two and they sit in racks with Great Rivers and GT Vipres ect.They get used for acoustic guits and the like..To the poster...As for "dynamic mics" if you can swing it check out ribbon mics..AEA R84 is a nice choice to look into..Good luck and have fun!

As always, thanks everyone... I think I will just stick with my KSM32 for a while... I haven't heard it through a good preamp yet, so it may work out better anyway...

I have another question if I may.. speaking of the color vs. transparency issue from the other thread, I've been listening to clips a lot this week, and not just from this thread... well, on some clips of the warmer pres I've noticed something... it sounds like the recordings, like acoustic guitars for example, are more towards the "back of the speaker" as far as sound... not in front of your face, but more distant... since there are many factors to recording, is this a normal thing for warmer/colored preamps? ... I assume it's partly because the sound of "warmth" takes up some of the musical space? ...perhaps my inexperience is showing here... at any rate, thanks again everyone... perhaps someday I'll have answers instead of questions :s:

[edit]
oh, and to my ear, I don't think it's the reverb that I'm hearing... though it might be...
[/edit]

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
[/qb]

Yeah Rob but I am a moderator and the Editor of the Reviews here at RO .. . and I like it here just fine, thank you. I prefer to try to redirect the talk here, rather than to migrate to another BB. RO gets a lot more page views and has a lot more members too than most the others..

Kurt,
I agree, and I can honestly say that I don't really use the other sites, because I fine this one to be the best. I understand your frustration with wanting to promote only the best gear (pronounced prohibitively expensive), but unfortunately we are not all able to enter that arena. I am just a guy trying to get the best sound for my basement studio. I have found a lot of bargains in the process of getting things set up, and just want to let those who can't afford the high end stuff about products that will get you close on a budget. I have been happy to see that you are open to things like the Studio Projects stuff, and understand that you don't like the Neotek pres. I have not heard them, but like my Sytek for the uncolored clarity it provides me for acoustic music. I have read your review of the Sebatron, and hope to own one someday when finances allow. Thanks for all of your helpful reviews and feedback. We all benefit from your experience.

Rob

ok to put it simple if you sing as dry and as terrible as me you need dynamics my friend...enough with this product bashing or loving or whatever it is...I'm new here and all this product talk on an opinion is mmm tireing...the first post got it right it depends on the singer or the wannabee singer....as i said in another post buy as many cheap mics as possible under 1000 dollars or 500 ...hey one of them has got to sound good for that particular person