Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Battery Boxes, Preamps, Mixers, ADCs, and Processors => Topic started by: Big Perm on September 19, 2009, 02:38:40 PM
-
My buddy is running 184's, he currently running sound devices mix pre>RME ADI2>pmd671. He is still not totally satisfied with his sound. we ran it last night and the sound just still has some holes in it. any recommendations would be great
thx
-
V2, V3, Naiant Littlebox, Wendt x2
-
the sound just still has some holes in it.
What does that mean? What don't you like about the sound?
I ran 184s with an MV100 and then a V2. I brought home some really satisfying tapes with the MV100 but the V2 brought the awesome.
-
I have run my 140s thru a MixPre a few times and I just am not happy with the results.
FWIW, I've got to say that I'm very pleased with what I get out of my Aerco MP2 with the 140s.
-
First, I must preface my response below by saying that I owned a SD MP-2, which was the predecessor of the MixPre. Some have said that it's basically the same preamp, others have said that it has an improved sound. I don't know which is correct, however...
My opinion of the SD MP-2 was that it was overly loose on the low end and lacked a tightness/detail of sound that I wanted. People turned me onto the MP-2 because it has a nice warmth, and I agree with that assessment, but I couldn't get past the looseness which, at times on my recordings, was on the verge of an almost distorted-ly dirty bass sound. Bottom line is that I didn't like the MP-2 at all.
Some have recommended the V2 or V3. Personally, I don't care for that combo either because it's just too bright for my tastes. The KM184s have a real sparkle on their own and the strength of the V2/V3 is detail and transparency in the mid and high frequencies...but too much of a good thing is, well IMHO just too much. So for my tastes, the grace sound is overkill when you match them with the KM184...that combo was almost shrill to my ears.
Personally, I think that Rob Clarks recordings are amongst the best 184 recordings on the net and he uses a W+ UA-5. Check them out on LMA.
So, I'm not sure if you're into the UA-5...they seem to be out of style lately. If not a W+mod UA-5, then I'd go for a pre that tends towards warmth while maintaining detail. So, I guess of the preamps that I'm familiar with, that to me would mean something along the lines of the Oade M148, MMP, Aerco MP-2, PSP2, PSP3 or, for all-in-one boxes, any of the Oade warm-ish mods or Busman classic mods.
My two cents anyway.
-
First, I must preface my response below by saying that I owned a SD MP-2, which was the predecessor of the MixPre. Some have said that it's basically the same preamp, others have said that it has an improved sound. I don't know which is correct, however...
My opinion of the SD MP-2 was that it was overly loose on the low end and lacked a tightness/detail of sound that I wanted. People turned me onto the MP-2 because it has a nice warmth, and I agree with that assessment, but I couldn't get past the looseness which, at times on my recordings, was on the verge of an almost distorted-ly dirty bass sound. Bottom line is that I didn't like the MP-2 at all.
Some have recommended the V2 or V3. Personally, I don't care for that combo either because it's just too bright for my tastes. The KM184s have a real sparkle on their own and the strength of the V2/V3 is detail and transparency in the mid and high frequencies...but too much of a good thing is, well IMHO just too much. So for my tastes, the grace sound is overkill when you match them with the KM184...that combo was almost shrill to my ears.
Personally, I think that Rob Clarks recordings are amongst the best 184 recordings on the net and he uses a W+ UA-5. Check them out on LMA.
So, I'm not sure if you're into the UA-5...they seem to be out of style lately. If not a W+mod UA-5, then I'd go for a pre that tends towards warmth while maintaining detail. So, I guess of the preamps that I'm familiar with, that to me would mean something along the lines of the Oade M148, MMP, Aerco MP-2, PSP2, PSP3 or, for all-in-one boxes, any of the Oade warm-ish mods or Busman classic mods.
My two cents anyway.
One of my friends runs a UA-5 with her KM-184s. I think she may now have a mod beyond the regular digimod, but I can't recall which off the top of my head. I borrowed her rig for a summer, before I got my own, and I was happy with the sound....
-
tonedeaf, your description of the sound problems with the mixpre are exactly what we are hearing as well. I just sold my 148 I should have let my buddy (the one with the 184s) borrow it first, i ran it with 140s forever-...what do you think of the 248
-
First, I must preface my response below by saying that I owned a SD MP-2, which was the predecessor of the MixPre. Some have said that it's basically the same preamp, others have said that it has an improved sound. I don't know which is correct, however...
My opinion of the SD MP-2 was that it was overly loose on the low end and lacked a tightness/detail of sound that I wanted. People turned me onto the MP-2 because it has a nice warmth, and I agree with that assessment, but I couldn't get past the looseness which, at times on my recordings, was on the verge of an almost distorted-ly dirty bass sound. Bottom line is that I didn't like the MP-2 at all.
Some have recommended the V2 or V3. Personally, I don't care for that combo either because it's just too bright for my tastes. The KM184s have a real sparkle on their own and the strength of the V2/V3 is detail and transparency in the mid and high frequencies...but too much of a good thing is, well IMHO just too much. So for my tastes, the grace sound is overkill when you match them with the KM184...that combo was almost shrill to my ears.
Personally, I think that Rob Clarks recordings are amongst the best 184 recordings on the net and he uses a W+ UA-5. Check them out on LMA.
So, I'm not sure if you're into the UA-5...they seem to be out of style lately. If not a W+mod UA-5, then I'd go for a pre that tends towards warmth while maintaining detail. So, I guess of the preamps that I'm familiar with, that to me would mean something along the lines of the Oade M148, MMP, Aerco MP-2, PSP2, PSP3 or, for all-in-one boxes, any of the Oade warm-ish mods or Busman classic mods.
My two cents anyway.
My opinion:
I would say if you're not happy with the sound, it is the mics, not the preamp!
Yes, the preamp makes a difference, but it seems to be in level of detail, not in making something sound "good" or "bad". A good mic should sound great, through any decent preamp/ADC. If something sounds "shrill" or "dark" or "scratchy" or whatever, you'll hear that on any front end. At least anything cleaner than an HiMD mindisc or Edirol R09.
I would say cheaper inputs, like unmodded UA5, R4 are not good enough. But a modded input, or a clean stock unit is enough.
I think the problem is most (reasonably) priced mics will have some distortion, or some limited level of detail (or both). For example, to my ears, it seems that AKG 48x have a lot of detail, but there is some "edginess" to them that I don't like. We all compromise on something. I've chosen Beyerdynamic MC930, which have less detail, but a nice smooth sound, with no edginess at all that I can hear. I think the 184's are a compromise too, a some more detail, but at the cost of some coloration on the high end. I find DPA 402x to have the most detail, but again some sharpness that bothers me.
The only mics that I would rate excellent are Schoeps and MG200. The MG200 especially, they sound just wonderful. Natural sound, all the detail and no edginess whatsoever. The Schoeps are great too, but they have some "color" or "darkness" to them.
If you really want to test mics, set up two different mics side by side in your kitchen. Record familiar sounds and voices. Listen back and you'll hear the difference in mics. I've done this for several different lavalier mics, and for various bare capsules.
Richard
-
I would say if you're not happy with the sound, it is the mics, not the preamp!
Yes, the preamp makes a difference, but it seems to be in level of detail, not in making something sound "good" or "bad".
I guess it depends.
When I ran 184>MV100>SBM1 I found that the bass could get sloppy and I didn't like that. When I replaced the MV100 with the V2, sloppy bass went away. After getting the V2 I went back to some of my old tapes mad with the MV100 and I thought that they sounded bad in comparison.
I didn't think that the 184s were too bright with the V2. It's possible that I ran wide and got some off axis attenuation of the highs when I was running wide of the stack? But then I don't hear sharpness with the 4023s either, even with the grace box. So maybe I'm going deaf.
-
I would say if you're not happy with the sound, it is the mics, not the preamp!
Yes, the preamp makes a difference, but it seems to be in level of detail, not in making something sound "good" or "bad".
I guess it depends.
When I ran 184>MV100>SBM1 I found that the bass could get sloppy and I didn't like that. When I replaced the MV100 with the V2, sloppy bass went away. After getting the V2 I went back to some of my old tapes mad with the MV100 and I thought that they sounded bad in comparison.
I didn't think that the 184s were too bright with the V2. It's possible that I ran wide and got some off axis attenuation of the highs when I was running wide of the stack? But then I don't hear sharpness with the 4023s either, even with the grace box. So maybe I'm going deaf.
Sometimes I notice "sharpness" with DPA 402x and 406x, and sometimes not. I think a lot depends on the PA, room, etc. Also, sometimes it takes a while to "digest" a recording, to figure out what you really like or dislike about it.
All subjective of course...
One interesting thing would be auditioning preamps just like we do with mics. Run a standard mic, like KM184 through a splitter and put it into two preamps. See if we can tell the difference. I guess that depends on the quality of the splitter though. Another option would be take a pair of KM184, put them side-by-side and record through two different pres. It would be a mono recording, but interesting to see the differences.
As Chris Church said to me recently (in a PM), "too many mics, too little time!".
Richard
-
My first pre with the 140s was a Beyer MV100, and I was not a fan. I was kind of unhappy with my mics, until I bought the SD MP2 which cleaned up the sound considerably, especially the low end. Buy a V2 or an Oade brick.
I would say if you're not happy with the sound, it is the mics, not the preamp!
Yes, the preamp makes a difference, but it seems to be in level of detail, not in making something sound "good" or "bad".
I guess it depends.
When I ran 184>MV100>SBM1 I found that the bass could get sloppy and I didn't like that. When I replaced the MV100 with the V2, sloppy bass went away. After getting the V2 I went back to some of my old tapes mad with the MV100 and I thought that they sounded bad in comparison.
I didn't think that the 184s were too bright with the V2. It's possible that I ran wide and got some off axis attenuation of the highs when I was running wide of the stack? But then I don't hear sharpness with the 4023s either, even with the grace box. So maybe I'm going deaf.
-
The E.A.A. PSP-2 is small, and sounds AWESOME With any Neumann KM-1xx.
-
I'm just curious: Why does the original poster's buddy believe (or assume) that the problem lies in the choice of a preamp?
In most cases, if a preamp is working properly, if it's powering the microphones correctly, loading them correctly and not being overloaded itself, then it won't have any very noticeable effect on the recording other than to enable it, by raising the signal levels of your microphones to voltages that can feed the line inputs of your recorder. Most competently made preamps, including the MixPre, are damn near sonically neutral when operated within their design parameters. This makes the preamp the least likely suspect, if what you dislike isn't due to a technical problem such as overload or incorrect microphone powering.
Did your friend consider that maybe he got a basically accurate recording of a bad P.A. system and/or a terrible-sounding performance venue? When you aim good microphones at ugly sound, the resulting recording will not be beautiful.
--best regards
-
When you aim good microphones at ugly sound, the resulting recording will not be beautiful.
--best regards
that says it all right there!!!!
-
damn near sonically neutral when operated within their design parameters.
I agree that a preamp should be just a wire with gain, I think the more common case is that we buy what we can afford and there is some compromise in the design of the more easily affordable units. For a lot of us there is a fairly good chance that we'll get into a situation where the device we have on hand isn't the best for the job that night and the intended operating limits are going to get tested.
-
Lil' Kim, if you were talking about microphones I would agree, but preamps ... OK, yes, some of the entry-level models are poor from the standpoint of overload margin and/or immunity to RFI, and have phantom powering circuits that don't make the grade, and overload indicators that are worse than useless. And some have poor operating controls and are noisier than they should have to be. All granted.
But those are objectively measurable characteristics, not sound quality as such; for some users they won't matter (e.g. the preamp noise may be completely "swamped" by venue noise, especially when high-output microphones are used; some electret microphones aren't affected much by substandard phantom powering, and so on). With microphones it's painful--the really good sounding ones are far more expensive than the merely good ones, especially where directional microphones are concerned. But there are (say) $250 preamps that I find really good sound-wise as well as (in most respects) technically, and the sonic improvement that you'd get by trading up from them to the very best high-priced preamps simply isn't as great as the improvement you'd get by investing similarly in the microphones.
--best regards
-
When you aim good microphones at ugly sound, the resulting recording will not be beautiful.
--best regards
that says it all right there!!!!
I agree.