Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off  (Read 5005 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« on: February 21, 2007, 06:01:02 PM »
Since the sister thread for this post was initiated just to ask questions I decided to start a new thread to post the results of my preamp bake-off. 

This unscientific bake-off resulted from the advice of so many of you guys that, for preamp preferences to pair with the MBHOs, you suggested that I should just listen and decide for myself.  So, I took that advice and spent about 4 or 5 hours grabbing files from live music archive and comparison listening. 

First off, it was fun and it was informative, so I suggest to others that this is a great way to educate yourself on some of the differences that can expected in the sound characteristics of various combinations.  When you're investing maybe $1000 or more for a quality product, this is time well spent. 

As I mentioned yesterday, a couple basic conclusions...

1)  The MBHO-603a's do a nice job and provide a nice sounding set of microphones for live music recording no matter what preamps you put behind them.
2)  The results were fairly consistent from rig to rig and venue to venue.  In other words, some basic general conclusions could be reached for, say how the MBHOs sound when they are run straight into an SD-722.  Sure there were sound differences in the recordings from different venues, but there was enough consistency between the recordings that you could make some general conclusions from a few samples.

I stuck with audio samples that used the KA200 capsules.  I downloaded six files (two songs from each of three shows) and tried to use different rigs as the source for each sample.

I chose a 10 point scale in order to provide a relative ability to hopefully differentiate between the various products.  In general, 1 is probably the less desirable end of the scale for most listeners and 10 is the more desirable; however, while it's sometimes difficult not to use words that bias the reader to a typical listeners likes and dislikes, I've tried to just use terms that describe the sound as accurately as I can so that the reader can decide on their own what they want in terms of the types of sounds that they prefer in the output recording.

Please keep in mind that when I use the term 'rating' in the following legend, this is a kinda subjective term.  Even so, I think there can be some real conclusions that can be reached from using this tried-and-true A vs. B vs. C test method.  In the business and statistics world they call this the Delphi Technique to make it sound refined and scientific...which it isn't...but that doesn't mean it's not effective nor does it mean that it can't lead to conclusive results.

I evaluated the preamps on eight factors.  Each of those are described below.


-  High's;  general sound of the MBHO/preamp combination at high frequencies; 1 is shrill and brittle (makes the ears ring after awhile) and 10 is unshrill and round (can listen forever).

-  Mids; general sound of the MBHO/preamp combination at middle frequencies; 1 is harsh and thin and 10 is warm and thick.

-  Low's; general sound of the MBHO/preamp combination at low frequencies; 1 is weaker and colder and 10 is stronger and warmer

-  Trans; this is a rating of the transparency of the MBHO/preamp combination; 1 is not transparent with lots of mic/preamp sound coloration and 10 is very transparent with no mic/preamp sound coloration.

(Note: It is not possible to get a truly accurate gauge of transparency without hearing the source at mic placement; however, I made a rating based on my perception of the accuracy of some 'standard' sounds on a recording, such as drum kits, bass guitars, and applause.)

-  Pres Hi; this is my rating of the presence of the MBHO/preamp combination at high frequencies.  1 is low clarity, not much detail can be heard, the sound is not up-front and 10 is great clarity (common term is 'shimmering'), very much detail, and extremely up-front sound.

-  Pres Mid; this is my rating of the presence of the MBHO/preamp combination at middle frequencies.  1 is low clarity, not much detail can be heard, the sound is not up-front and 10 is great clarity, very much detail, and extremely up-front sound.

-  Pres Lo; this is my rating of the presence of the MBHO/preamp combination at low frequencies.  1 is low clarity (common term is 'muddy'), not much detail can be heard, the sound is not up-front and 10 is great clarity, very much detail, and extremely up-front sound.

-  Depth; this is my rating of the depth of the overall sound of the MBHO/preamp combination.  1 is that it doesn't exhibit alot of depth or space (the terms 'flat', 'thin' and 'lacking character' often describe recordings with low depth) and a 10 rating exihibits great depth and space (the terms 'three dimensional' and 'mature' are often used to describe recordings with good depth.)

Legend

H - Highs
M - Mids
L - Lows
T - Transparency
PH - Presence High
PM - Presence Mids
PL - Presence Low
D - Depth
Avg - Average Rating


MBHO 603a / KA200 combined with...

                                            H     M     L      T    PH    PM     PL     D    Avg

W+ mod UA-5                          8     10    7      9     9     10      6     10    8.6
SD 722                                  10     6     4      9      9     9       8      9    8.0
Lunatec V3                             8      7     7      8     8      8       9     8     7.9
SD MP-2                                 7      8     9     8      6      6      4      9     7.1
BMP2+ mod UA-5                     8      9     4      8     7      8       5     8      7.1
Lunatec V2                             8      5     5      6     8      8       8     7      6.9
T+ mod UA-5                           6     7     8      9      5     6       7      7     6.9
Apogee Minime                         5      8     5     6      6      8      5      8     6.4
Sonosax SX-M2                        4      5     6     8      5      5      8      7     6.0
Stock or DigiMod UA-5               2      4     7      5     5      7       8     4     5.3
Denecke PS-2>AD-20                4      6     5     5      2      4       6     5     4.6 
Oade M148                              NO SAMPLES AVAILABLE TO LISTEN TO
P+ mod UA-5                           NO SAMPLES AVAILABLE TO LISTEN TO
Aerco MP-2                             NO SAMPLES AVAILABLE TO LISTEN TO
Apogee Minimp                         NO SAMPLES AVAILABLE TO LISTEN TO


Conclusions:

Make your own conclusions and use this information however you want.  Here are a couple of interesting conclusions that I think I have for my own purposes in seeking out what I want to buy...

Given the popularity of the MP-2, I was surprised that it didn't come in as high as the W+ mod UA-5...but it was obviously hurt by the one low rating on the presense for the lows, which was a common comment for people that had negative comments about the MP-2.  It's obvious from the listening test that the MP-2 has quite uniquely strong characteristics for really warming up the sound, and the transparency and depth are really nice...so it's got some real sex appeal.  I found the loss of presense (or muddiness) on the low to be a significant distraction on that box compared to the warm mod UA-5 which has nicer balance across the board on all of the ratings.

A second surprise was how well the V3 fared.  Given the negative comments that lots of people made, I really expected it to be down the list.  Not so!  I thought the V3's strengths were in the maturity...excellent presence  of the output sound across the complete range from low to highs...I thought it had very well defined and mature sound.  I also liked the fact that it is consistently high in every category, so to me the V3 really had no weaknesses.  I'm curious why this box seems to have been dismissed quite universally by everyone.

Finally, I note how highly the BMP2+ mod UA-5 scored.  One major potential issue for that box is that it seems to lack low-end balls that so many of us require.  But every sound coming out of this box is really quite elegant sounding.  Too bad it's not warmer.

Well, I know this wasn't scientific and I'm not sure how much people will take this as being good information for their future MBHO's preamp buying consideration, but I had fun and for my purposes and thought it would be fun to share with others.  It really has clarified what I want to focus on and what I defnitely will not bother with for the match my new (used) MBHOs.

Take care everyone

Steve

Offline shaggy

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1928
    • dwonk
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #1 on: February 21, 2007, 06:36:33 PM »
+T and Thanks Steve!

Me and Chucky have been pondering about getting a pair for him and pairing it up with the spare W+mod I have.  He and I always thought that the W+mod would be a an excellent combo with the MBHOs.

Offline fozzy

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3810
  • Gender: Male
  • move along, nothing much to see here
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #2 on: February 21, 2007, 07:51:07 PM »
Care to list the sources used in your comparison?

MK 4V > KCY 250/5 Ig (KS 10I)  > VST62IUg > 722

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2007, 03:50:37 AM »
Care to list the sources used in your comparison?
Good idea since the sources obviously are the basis for my conclusions therefore if I pulled lousy sources from the archive then I'd also reach lousy conclusions.  I'll list the sources when I get home from work.

Something worth mentioning is the criteria I used to evaluate each of the specific sound characteristics. 

For my evaluation of high's, I listened for the high frequency percussion sounds like cymbals. 

For mids, guitar and vocals although most of the samples I pulled were instrumental. 

For lows, obviously bass.

For transparency, as mentioned before, I listened for trueness of the recording based on some standard sounds that are heard on every recording or in every club...the kick drum tones, applause, ambient sounds, etc.

For presense, I listen for how well you can hear the specific notes ringing from the instruments.  For example, for lows, can you hear the vibration of the bass string or is the bass note just a sort monounitone?  Similar for guitar in evaluating presence on mids...how pure and round is the note as opposed to does the note just sort of sound out without having much 'feel'.  For highs, when the cymbal is hit, can you hear the shimmering 'shhhhh' of the cymbal or is just more of a flattish 'hisssss' sound?

Depth is kinda hard for me to describe...for depth, I listened for how much 'space' the recording has...this isn't necessarily a measure of the range of frequencies from very warm to very high, but whether the recording has a dynamic character that provides a sort of three dimensional feel.  To me, depth is an important feature for getting a recording that retains the feel of the live experience.

I'll list the sources tonight when I get home from work.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2007, 03:54:20 AM by stevetoney »

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2007, 11:11:54 AM »
Care to list the sources used in your comparison?

Here they are...


Sources:

W+ mod UA-5
Keller Williams     2003/06/13     MBHO603a/KA200 > w+ mod UA-5 > D-8           (Joe Waldron)
Special Purpose     2006/02/17     MBHO603a/KA200 > w+ mod UA-5 > M-Audio       (Jarod Watson)
STS9                2006/01/29     MBHO 603/KA200N/KA-500HN > W+Mod UA-5 > JB3  (Jarod Watson)

Sound Devices 722
RAQ                 2007/02/17     MBHO603a/KA200 > 722                         (Mike Taylor)
Topaz               2006/05/04     MBHO603a/KA200 > 722                         (Mike Taylor)
Particle            2005/10/08     MBHO603a/KA200 > 722                         (Ian Stone)

Lunatec V3
RAQ                 2006/03/23     MBHO603a/KA200 > V3 > MT2490                 (J Hurlburt)
Fam Groove Co       2004/11/30     MBHO603a/KA200 > V3 >  M1                    (Eric Foelske)
Breaking/Entering   2006/08/24     MBHO 603a/actives/KA200 > V3 > D8            (Eric Foelske)
deke dickerson      2004/07/31     MBHO603/KA200n > V3 > P1 > HHB830            (Stan Orlowski)

Sound Devices MP-2
Ween                2003/09/21     MBHO603a/KA200 > MP-2 > D8                   (pedro; pwking??)
Gomez               2004/08/18     MBHO603a/KA200 > MP-2 > D8                    (pwking)
Lotus               2005/07/03     MBHO603a/KA200 > MP-2 > PC Capture           (Ian Stone)

BMP2+ mod UA-5 
DJWilliams          2006/03/24     MBHO603-KA200 > UA-5(BM2p+mod) > M-Audio     (Andrew Clarke)
Assylum St. Sp.     2006/11/22     MBHO603a/KA200 > BMP2+ UA-5 > JB3            (Dean Lambrecht)
Everyone Orch       2006/07/21     MBHO603a/KA100LK > UA-5 (BM2p+ mod.) > JB3   (Dean Lambrecht)

Lunatec V2
Jerry Joseph        2002/08/17     MBHO603a/KA200 > V2 >  mod SB1-1 > DA-P1     (Eric Foelske)
Smokestack          2003/12/20     MBHO603a/KA200>Excalibur II's> V2 > DA-P1    (Doug Nawrocki)
Derek Trucks        2002/07/25     MBHO 603/KA200 > v2 >  modsbm-1 > da-p1      (Kris Booth)

T+ mod UA-5
Particle            2004/11/13      MBHO 603a ka200n > tmod+ UA-5 > JB3          (Rodney Ramsay)
Big Head Todd       2004/08/07     MBHO 603a ka200n > tmod UA-5 > JB3           (Rodney Ramsay)
(no other samples were taken since all nine archive samples are from the same rig.)

Apogee Minime
Shanti Groove       2003/12/05     KA200N/MBHO603a > Apogee Mini-Me > DA-P1     (Brian Hormann)
Leftover Salmon     2003/12/05     KA200N/MBHO603a > Apogee Mini-Me > DA-P1     (Brian Hormann)
Karl Denson T U     2003/12/06     MBHO603/ka200n -> Apogee Minime -> D8        (Chase Banna)

Sonosax SX-M2
Mike Doughty        2003/04/04     mbho 603a/ka200n > sonosax sx-m2 > d8        (pwking)
(this is the only sample available on live music archive)

Stock or DigiMod UA-5
Bump                2005/09/30     MBHO 603a's(hyper) > UA-5 > JB3              (JC Tibbitts)
Tea Leaf Green      2006/01/27     MBHO 603a/KA500HN  > UA-5 (d.mod.) >  DA20   (Dean Lambrecht)
Matisyahu           2005/10/30     mbho 603a/ka200n > UA-5 > jb3                (Jacob Smith)

Denecke PS-2>AD-20
Derek Trucks        2003/02/15     MBHO603A/KA500HNs > PS-2 > AD-20 > PCM-M1    (Robert Dempster)
String Cheese       2002/10/19     MBHO603A/KA500HNs > PS-2 > AD-20 > PCM-M1    (Robert Dempster)
Jacob Fred J O      2003/09/21     MBHO603A/KA500HNs > PS-2 > AD-20 > PCM-M1    (Robert Dempster)
(this was the only rig available to sample)

Offline fozzy

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3810
  • Gender: Male
  • move along, nothing much to see here
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #5 on: February 22, 2007, 12:31:25 PM »
Some more details about the show/situations

RAQ                 2007/02/17     MBHO603a/KA200 > 722                         (Mike Taylor)

Clamped @ 10' high under steel balcony, about 10'-15' from the stage DFC, I had the mics angled slightly downward.  The venue has a pair of speakers on each side of a 20' stage.  Mics are about 1' higher than the speakers.  I don't know if this matters but I use custom active cables (belden 1804a) that are about 30-35' long.  This situation also adds 15' of starquad between the bodies and 1' (1804a) interconnects.


Topaz               2006/05/04     MBHO603a/KA200 > 722                         (Mike Taylor)

Boomy old room, very small stage(about 5-6" raised), crappy integrated mixer/PA, no FOH.  Drum kit only has a mic in the bass drum, vocal mic, horn mic, drummer vocal mic, harmonica mic > small fender guitar amp > mic on amp.  Everything else is not going thru the PA.  Mics are placed almost directly over a wedge monitor angled about 40-45 degrees up.  same actives as above, based on date I was using an 8" pair of mini-starquad interconnects between the bodies an deck [my 1804a pair was lost a few weeks earlier @ old settler's].  TXT file list the master as 24/48.  It may be a typo since i generally record @ 24/96, I'll have to dig out the master to see whats up (i might have been low on drive space or had it set @ 24/48 ffrom a previous show)

FWIW these are some good examples of consistant results I get.  I have done a lot of shows in these two rooms and used the same/similar setup many times.
These are all 24bit recordings resampled and dithered using Wavelab 5 2/ UV22HR.  I run my 722 very hot, generally get peaks between -1 and -.5  So the resample/dither strategies will definately have an effect on the 16bit fileset.

MK 4V > KCY 250/5 Ig (KS 10I)  > VST62IUg > 722

Offline hoyt

  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 358
  • Gender: Male
    • http://www.the-hoyts.com
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2007, 01:05:14 PM »
Quite the comparisson.  I think I need to point out though that a lot of the people who praise the sd mp2 are also going to pair it with the mod sbm1 to help with the low end.  While that might be considered cheating a bit since it's not the preamp, that pairing would make a difference in how you'd hear the overall sound. 

+t for the work!

--hoyt
dpa4028/4023/4011er > sx-m2d2/ sx-r4+

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #7 on: February 22, 2007, 01:19:15 PM »

Topaz               2006/05/04     MBHO603a/KA200 > 722                         (Mike Taylor)

Boomy old room, very small stage(about 5-6" raised), crappy integrated mixer/PA, no FOH. 
Wow, given that you have painted a fairly negative image about the room/space, this recording turned out really nice.  I recall in listening that I thought this was definitely one of the nicer ones I listened to.

Offline fozzy

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3810
  • Gender: Male
  • move along, nothing much to see here
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #8 on: February 22, 2007, 01:27:33 PM »

Topaz               2006/05/04     MBHO603a/KA200 > 722                         (Mike Taylor)

Boomy old room, very small stage(about 5-6" raised), crappy integrated mixer/PA, no FOH. 
Wow, given that you have painted a fairly negative image about the room/space, this recording turned out really nice.  I recall in listening that I thought this was definitely one of the nicer ones I listened to.

The band is always pretty balaned level wise and LOUD (at least in the situation).  There should also be a 483 > wmod or 483 > ACM 671 source of this show [DINa @ stage lip about 2" above my mics]

guitar: far stage right, Riviera single speaker amp facing front, mesa boogie additional cabinet facing at the guitar player. Fender Strat

Drums/backup vocals: DFC back of stage,

Sax/vocal/harmonica: DFC front, separate mics for each (Sax: sm58, Vocal: Sm58, Harmonica: some beat up bullet type thing)
harmonica amp: slightly stage right

Bass: rear stage left,

keys: front stage left. nard > keyboard amp


I have some sources from the back of that room out there, same band
MK 4V > KCY 250/5 Ig (KS 10I)  > VST62IUg > 722

Offline sleepypedro

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4140
  • Gender: Male
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #9 on: February 22, 2007, 01:59:23 PM »

Stock or DigiMod UA-5
Matisyahu           2005/10/30     mbho 603a/ka200n > UA-5 > jb3                (Jacob Smith)

i know jacob runs the stock UA-5, fwiw.

and i'd just like to state for the record that those recordings are in NO way representative of the great things i've done with the mbhos.

i've got a herbie hancock show from 2003 posted on tapers.org that's a *much* better recording than any of mine you pulled off archive if anyone would like to evaluate it critically.

not hatin', it's still a very cool project and i'm glad you did it!

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2007, 02:28:42 PM »
not hatin', it's still a very cool project and i'm glad you did it!

Nah, it's cool.  I enjoyed doing it and I want to make sure everyone that reads this keys on the word UNSCIENTIFIC.  I think the biggest thing that I learned was not necessarily what sounds better or worse than anything else, but just how valuable a resource the archive can be for conducting this type of study.  It also was a good excercise in the challenging task of describing and differentiating the characteristics of sound recordings.  I'll probably dig it out in the future when I am at a loss for words in trying to describe what a certain recording might sound like.

Offline darby

  • Trade Count: (108)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1357
  • Support artists and venues that allow recording
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2007, 05:52:43 PM »
not hatin', it's still a very cool project and i'm glad you did it!

Nah, it's cool.  I enjoyed doing it and I want to make sure everyone that reads this keys on the word UNSCIENTIFIC.  I think the biggest thing that I learned was not necessarily what sounds better or worse than anything else, but just how valuable a resource the archive can be for conducting this type of study.  It also was a good excercise in the challenging task of describing and differentiating the characteristics of sound recordings.  I'll probably dig it out in the future when I am at a loss for words in trying to describe what a certain recording might sound like.

I commend you on your efforts Steve
I looked like alot of work
but you obviously had fun doing it ;)

that to me is part of the joy of taping
having all these different sources available
because everyone likes something different about every setup

BTW... what type of listening setup did you use?


stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2007, 05:19:16 AM »
not hatin', it's still a very cool project and i'm glad you did it!

Nah, it's cool.  I enjoyed doing it and I want to make sure everyone that reads this keys on the word UNSCIENTIFIC.  I think the biggest thing that I learned was not necessarily what sounds better or worse than anything else, but just how valuable a resource the archive can be for conducting this type of study.  It also was a good excercise in the challenging task of describing and differentiating the characteristics of sound recordings.  I'll probably dig it out in the future when I am at a loss for words in trying to describe what a certain recording might sound like.

I commend you on your efforts Steve
I looked like alot of work
but you obviously had fun doing it ;)

that to me is part of the joy of taping
having all these different sources available
because everyone likes something different about every setup

BTW... what type of listening setup did you use?


Sraight from the web onto the computer and used Windows media player and an average pair of headsets.

Offline Sanjay

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5705
  • Gender: Male
  • www.drivebytruckers.com/tourdiary.html
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #13 on: March 05, 2007, 01:22:29 PM »
I'd just like to say that more people should do what you do when deciding gear purchases.  Even though I somewhat disagree on your ratings, its all about what sounds good to you and i'm glad you found that through experimentation on your own.
mics & cameras

Offline Digital Quality

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1148
  • Gender: Male
Re: MBHO and Preamp Combos -- Unscientific Bake-Off
« Reply #14 on: March 06, 2007, 12:02:39 PM »
I can send you a little nicer t+mod recording if you like. PM me your addy and I'll kick it on out - that is if you didn't already buy something.


Rodney
You are here: http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

rig:         mk41/21>kc5>cmc6>KindKables>v3>Axim x50v,WM6,live2496
playback: Marantz DV7600>Mackie 1202>Mackie HR824

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.085 seconds with 43 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF