Topic: 722 / V3 Front End Question

[ljramsey]

I know there have been discussions regarding the use of a V3 as the front end with a 722. But I have not seen any final conclusions. I will be ordering a 722 on Monday. For the best sound should I run my V3 in front of the 722? If the performance of the 722 pre-amp equals that of the v3 then I plan on selling my V3 to help offset the cost of the 722. Any and all input will be appreciated.

Peace,

Lee

[Brian Skalinder]

I prefer the V3 pre, others prefer the 722 (or don't think the V3 is significantly better to justify the additional expense, though some in this camp are using V2s).  If you can afford to hang onto the V3 for a short while, run it both ways and see which you prefer.  Gotta make your own ears happy, after all.

[Lil Kim Jong-Il]

I've run the 722 alone, 722+V3line, and 722+V3AES.   I can live with the 722 alone for low profile situations, but the 722 alone is not as pleasing as the the 722 fronted by the V3 in either mode for my tastes.  I'm favoring the 722+V3line over the 722+V3AES but narrowly.  The 722 ADC seems a little smoother than the V3 ADC.

It's already been said but it's worth repeating, you have to do what your ears like best.  For me, I'm most happy with the 722+V3line.  I think the V2 would be a better value, but I keep the V3 because I can use it to offer a 16-bit patch.

[ljramsey]

Thanks for the thoughts. I will plan on keeping the V3 for awhile. I will try to run the 722 solo at a show of lesser importance to me.

[nickgregory]

I prefer the V3 pre, others prefer the 722 (or don't think the V3 is significantly better to justify the additional expense,

Brian partially hit the nail on the head for me personally.  The other part of it is I dont hear a significant enough difference to justify me carrying around an additional box, battery and interconnects.  I have grown quite fond of having a tiny rig that sounds fantastic.

[MattD]

I concur with Nick on this one. Of course, it was easier for me since I never owned a V3 in the first place.

[Brian]

sell the v3 and get a v2.

edit: i also agree that the adc in the 722 is better(smoother, more neutral), than the V3.

[Brian]

other than the slightly hyped midrange(which can be good) and slightly tubby low end, i think the 722 has fine preamps in it, IMHO.

[Brian Skalinder]

other than the slightly hyped midrange(which can be good) and slightly tubby low end, i think the 722 has fine preamps in it, IMHO.

Good take on this, Brian.  FWIW, I didn't mean to suggest the 722 preamps aren't very good.  They're very good.  They just don't suit my preferences, that's all.

[Lil Kim Jong-Il]

I'm not bashing the 722 either.  I agree that the preamp is good, I just think the grace is better for my tastes.  I've noticed that the results are definitely dependent on the mics. 

I was more tolerant of the 722 preamp characteristics when running the KM140 or 143s because the HF boost in the neumanns seemed to balance the "slightly hyped midrange and slightly tubby low end".  But since I've been running the 4023s, I've found the 722's character to be less appealing.  I can imagine that the same would apply for schoeps or other mics that have a flatter response.  Of course this is all nitpicking and at this level it's all very good sound.

[Brian]

other than the slightly hyped midrange(which can be good) and slightly tubby low end, i think the 722 has fine preamps in it, IMHO.

Good take on this, Brian.  FWIW, I didn't mean to suggest the 722 preamps aren't very good.  They're very good.  They just don't suit my preferences, that's all.

 

I'm not bashing the 722 either.  I agree that the preamp is good, I just think the grace is better for my tastes.  I've noticed that the results are definitely dependent on the mics. 

well....there's a definitely a reason why i still have a the v2