Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres  (Read 6783 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline achalsey

  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2151
If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« on: February 04, 2013, 07:21:34 PM »
I forgot I did this.  Literally, I drank too much and had to be reminded several days later.  But Bryonsos' thread stirred my memory again, if anyone is interested.  First set ran through the V2, second set went straight into the 680.

1st set:  AKG CK 1X (~DIN, ~7' high, ~20' back, just LOC) > GAKable/Naiant PFA > Lunatec V2 > Tascam 680 (24/48)
2nd set: AKG CK 1X (~DIN, ~7' high, ~20' back, just LOC) > GAKable/Naiant PFA > Tascam 680 (24/48)


http://archive.org/details/NRPS2012-10-25.CK1X.V2.flac16

Offline acidjack

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5838
  • Gender: Male
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #1 on: February 04, 2013, 09:47:49 PM »
Thanks for this. The more of these, the merrier :)
Mics: Schoeps MK4V, MK41V, MK5, MK22> CMC6, KCY 250/5, KC5, NBob; MBHO MBP603/KA200N, AT 3031, DPA 4061 w/ d:vice, Naiant X-X, AT 853c, shotgun, Nak300
Pres/Power: Aerco MP2, tinybox v2  [KCY], CA-UBB
Decks: Sound Devices MixPre 6, Zoom F8, M10, D50

My recordings on nyctaper.com: http://www.nyctaper.com/?tag=acidjack | LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/acidjack | twitter: http://www.twitter.com/acidjacknyc | Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/acidjacknyc

runonce

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2013, 10:33:24 AM »
thanks for this...hmm...the V2 sure does have a lot more "sing" to it...

Offline hi and lo

  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2314
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2013, 11:35:40 AM »
Thanks! I agree the more the merrier!

Since this is a very tricky comp w/ samples spread across sets, I would recommend providing unlabeled samples to eliminate some of the bias (well... I'd recommend this for any comp). Nevertheless, I appreciate you taking the time to share!

Offline F.O.Bean

  • Is a 4 channel slut and
  • Trade Count: (125)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 40663
  • Gender: Male
  • Taperus Maximus
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2013, 12:51:52 PM »
Great comp. I'd be happy with both sets! The v2 has a bit more "umph" IMO
Recording Rigs:
Schoeps MK4's & MK41's ->
Schoeps | NBob 250/0 KCY's ->
Naiant +60v/Low Noise PFA's ->
DarkTrain Right Angle Stubby XLR's ->
Sound Devices MixPre-6 & MixPre-3 ->
SanDisk 128gb Extreme Pro & 2x 64gb Ultra Plus

Portable Playback Rigs:
Campfire Audio Andromeda & Dorado | Westone (2nd Generation) UM Pro 30 IEM's ->
Linum G2 SuperBax & Bax |  2x CA/ALO SPC Litz | Sony MUC-M2BT1 LDAC MMCX Cables ->
Shanling M5s & M0 | Sony NW-A35 DAP's

DAW:
Dell Inspiron 5570-5521 SLV Laptop
(Pentium i5 Processor/8gb RAM/256gb SSD)

http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/diskobean | http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/Bean420 | http://bt.etree.org/mytorrents.php

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2013, 02:03:52 PM »
I wonder if Mike Grace will come in here and bitch about your methodology.   >:D

Offline F.O.Bean

  • Is a 4 channel slut and
  • Trade Count: (125)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 40663
  • Gender: Male
  • Taperus Maximus
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2013, 02:08:38 PM »
I wonder if Mike Grace will come in here and bitch about your methodology.   >:D

 ;D 8)
Recording Rigs:
Schoeps MK4's & MK41's ->
Schoeps | NBob 250/0 KCY's ->
Naiant +60v/Low Noise PFA's ->
DarkTrain Right Angle Stubby XLR's ->
Sound Devices MixPre-6 & MixPre-3 ->
SanDisk 128gb Extreme Pro & 2x 64gb Ultra Plus

Portable Playback Rigs:
Campfire Audio Andromeda & Dorado | Westone (2nd Generation) UM Pro 30 IEM's ->
Linum G2 SuperBax & Bax |  2x CA/ALO SPC Litz | Sony MUC-M2BT1 LDAC MMCX Cables ->
Shanling M5s & M0 | Sony NW-A35 DAP's

DAW:
Dell Inspiron 5570-5521 SLV Laptop
(Pentium i5 Processor/8gb RAM/256gb SSD)

http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/diskobean | http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/Bean420 | http://bt.etree.org/mytorrents.php

Offline hi and lo

  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2314
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #7 on: February 05, 2013, 03:05:41 PM »
I wonder if Mike Grace will come in here and bitch about your methodology.   >:D

No, he's too classy for that. However, he wouldn't hesitate to come into the section and tell you that your decca tree isn't setup properly... and then he'd help you fix it!

Offline bryonsos

  • Omni addict
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2062
  • Gender: Male
  • If it's important, tell me to write it down.
    • LMA uploads
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2013, 01:14:58 AM »
I like them both too. The V2 is brighter, but the 680 has a fuller bottom IMHO. I believe I'd leave the V2 at home and EQ if needed. Thanks for this!
Mics: 3 Zigma Chi HA-FX (COL-251, c, h, o-d, o-f) / Avenson STO-2 / Countryman B3s
Pres: CA-Ugly / Naiant Tinyhead / SD MixPre
Decks: Roland R-44 / Sony PCM-M10
GAKables
Dead Muppets

My recordings LMA / BT / TTD

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (13)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 12651
  • Gender: Male
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2013, 11:22:11 PM »
Since this is a very tricky comp w/ samples spread across sets, I would recommend providing unlabeled samples to eliminate some of the bias

I didn't get a chance to listen until the next day, had forgotten which set was which at that point and then just listened before checking again.  After I heard the clear differences and easily decided on a preference I went back to see which was which. Sometimes bad memory works to one's advantage.

I wasn't suprised by my preference, though I noticed much more of a difference in here than I have running MG cadioids on-stage direct > DR680 verses > V3 > S/SPIF > DR680.  That was similarly 'compromised' by being different nights, though without the PA variables, yet the same band, layout, room, mic placement and config.  I left the V3 out of the chain to simplify things partially because I didn't hear as significant a difference as I hear with achalsey's recording, but I'm now using different mics for these gigs so maybe I'll revisit it.

It can be good to question previous conclusions, as long as some solid footing remains. Thanks for the thread.

As bryonsos notes, the next logical question is how close can some EQ come to mitigating the differences, if open to that.  In my case the MGs I used were over-bright on stage up close in the free-field and needed EQ eitherway, just different settings depending..

« Last Edit: February 07, 2013, 09:13:10 AM by Gutbucket »
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

Offline achalsey

  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2151
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #10 on: February 07, 2013, 12:26:02 AM »
Interesting responses everyone.  Thanks.  I will also note that I asked over in the LMA thread and streaming is only in MP3 (I didn't really realize or else would have posted flac samples), so take that for whatever its worth.

I wasn't thrilled with the music that night, and didn't even remember switching the V2 out, so honestly haven't given this much thought at all.  The brightness note though, is an interesting one.  One of my main (minor) complains about this set up is the tendency towards the brighter side of things.  I know very little about EQing so try to do it as little as possible, but there have been a couple instances where boosting some lower frequencies has produced better results (at least to me personally on my playback).  That said, it does work out most of the time since in general I've found I personally like the brighter side of the spectrum more than the opposite.

I've got a pair of 63s, have the Naiant actives coming, and only the V2 as an external preamp, so will be doing some more very informal tests with these,  the 63s, V2 and 680 soon.

adrianf74

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #11 on: February 07, 2013, 07:13:23 AM »
A buddy of mine used to run AKG 48x > 680 and the recordings were good but once he added a V3 into the mix, it was night and day.  I'm sure the V2 helps it out, too.  I'll have to listen to the clips later when I'm home.

Offline it-goes-to-eleven

  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6702
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2013, 10:09:10 AM »
Thanks for this.  My ears are congested, so I can't really listen.

It would be useful to repackage this as more of a comp.  Maybe make it blind, maybe break it up into some small examples that are similar in character from each source, adjust the levels to match on a per-sample basis.

Speaking generally, I find the v3 does really well on details, sound stage, 3d placement of sources (if your playback is capable of that), and instrument separation.  Those aren't things, or characteristics, that I think you can really EQ.

In fact, I'd argue that EQ tends to introduce artifiacts, and smears details and the subtle timing required to accurately recreate a detailed soundstage.  Though it may not always seem that way - a cymbal may seem more solidly fixed in the soundstage because you EQ it and bring it's frequencies up.

New product - Get your NEUMANN active mounting bars
Active microphone mounting bars for Schoeps and AKG, and Naiant AKG, ready to ship

Offline bryonsos

  • Omni addict
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2062
  • Gender: Male
  • If it's important, tell me to write it down.
    • LMA uploads
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2013, 10:22:05 AM »

In fact, I'd argue that EQ tends to introduce artifiacts, and smears details and the subtle timing required to accurately recreate a detailed soundstage.  Though it may not always seem that way - a cymbal may seem more solidly fixed in the soundstage because you EQ it and bring it's frequencies up.

This is interesting to me, I've been under the impression that you could EQ a suitably flat source to sound however you want. I hadn't thought that a pre could have that sort of influence on the overall image/soundstage on the recording.
Mics: 3 Zigma Chi HA-FX (COL-251, c, h, o-d, o-f) / Avenson STO-2 / Countryman B3s
Pres: CA-Ugly / Naiant Tinyhead / SD MixPre
Decks: Roland R-44 / Sony PCM-M10
GAKables
Dead Muppets

My recordings LMA / BT / TTD

adrianf74

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: If we're talking useless unscientific comps: V2 vs. 680 pres
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2013, 10:30:48 AM »
@Bryonsos: Preamps often add a little sizzle or colour to a recording do I'm not surprised a V3 or V2 does. 

Even when I used to run a 9100, I could hear a small difference between running it at unity and using a battery box.  In that case, I preferred a battery box.  if there was gain involved, I liked the 9100 better.

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.246 seconds with 42 queries.
© 2002-2018 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF