ProSoundWeb Community
Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums => LAB Lounge => Topic started by: Ron Roberts on March 24, 2024, 09:48:35 PM
-
Amateur/Hobbyist/musician here looking for insight on the difference between investing in good mic-pres like the Neve 1073OPX or Rupert Neve Designs RMP-D8 or Audient ASP880...
OR....
just investing in a better board that has high-quality mic-pres like the Midas M32.
There is not alot of difference in cost. But with the Midas M32 you get a whole mixing board....
Goal is gear that can be used for live-sound P.A. and for recording with a DAW.
Anyone have any thoughts?
thank you,
Ron
-
Amateur/Hobbyist/musician here looking for insight on the difference between investing in good mic-pres like the Neve 1073OPX or Rupert Neve Designs RMP-D8 or Audient ASP880...
OR....
just investing in a better board that has high-quality mic-pres like the Midas M32.
There is not alot of difference in cost. But with the Midas M32 you get a whole mixing board....
Goal is gear that can be used for live-sound P.A. and for recording with a DAW.
Anyone have any thoughts?
thank you,
Ron
I am not saying there is not a difference in preamps, however, there are things that will be readily more apparent (in rough orders of importance):
1. Musician skill
2. Parts + Arrangement
3. Instrument/Gear Quality/Condition
4. Proper Gain Staging
5. Mic Choice
6. Mic Placement
7. Space/room the mics are in
I often bring tracks from live back to the monitors at home, the above are all readily apparent, the console and its preamps on the other end? Not so much.
I have brought tracks home recorded from all sorts of desks from a DiGiCo Quantum with 32-bit Preamps down the lowly Behringer X32 and the preamps have never been a deciding factor in how the tracks sounded.
At work we tried Neve vs our DiGiCo preamps, and did not find them to be worth the extra cost - but your mileage may vary.
Modern mic preamps are extremely clean, and are quite detailed, even on an M32 - if it is colour or saturation you are after there are many ways to add that after things are tracked.
I am not saying there is no difference, but I would spend the money on something that is not a subtle difference, such as nicer mics.
-
I can't remember the last event I worked at where someone brought external preamps along. Maybe in the studio they matter. Live? nope.
-
Don't worry about the mic-pres, especially for live sound. What Matthias McCready stated above is far more important. For studio work, the mic-pres may be important, but that may be based on microphone choice. If the mic-pres are that important, you may want to look at a separate console for the recording of shows.
-
You will experience a bigger difference between microphones than preamps. Modern console preamps are competent.
JR
-
Mic Pre's are absolutely the LAST thing that will affect your recordings.
If EVERYTHING else is perfect (not likely) maybe you will hear an A / B difference in 2 modern Pre's.
As others have said, talent, mic choice, placement, room effects, and bleed will make more difference than Pre's.
Put your hard earned cash where it will do the most good.
I'd probably start with great Cans or a nice set of Genelec's.
Chris.
-
Mic Pre's are absolutely the LAST thing that will affect your recordings.
If EVERYTHING else is perfect (not likely) maybe you will hear an A / B difference in 2 modern Pre's.
As others have said, talent, mic choice, placement, room effects, and bleed will make more difference than Pre's.
Put your hard earned cash where it will do the most good.
I'd probably start with great Cans or a nice set of Genelec's.
Chris.
I am saving myself some typing here as Chris said almost exactly what I was going to type :).
As for the live sound, FOH speakers make the biggest difference. All current digital mixers have very good to outstanding preamp circuits with near perfect linearity and a ridiculously low noise floor.
-
I am saving myself some typing here as Chris said almost exactly what I was going to type :).
As for the live sound, FOH speakers make the biggest difference. All current digital mixers have very good to outstanding preamp circuits with near perfect linearity and a ridiculously low noise floor.
Even lowly analog cheapies have better IC preamp implementations than we had on larger format desks back in the 80's. Lower noise floor at high gain.
Just having even very high quality PA mains in the same space as the microphones will affect the sound far more than any discernible preamp differences. Adding wedges makes it even worse. Throw headset wireless into that mix and I wish preamps were all there was to worry about!
In that environment I haven't even really been bothered to see if there's a noticeable difference between the X32 and supposedly "better" M32 preamps.
-
Amateur/Hobbyist/musician here looking for insight on the difference between investing in good mic-pres like the Neve 1073OPX or Rupert Neve Designs RMP-D8 or Audient ASP880...
OR....
just investing in a better board that has high-quality mic-pres like the Midas M32.
There is not alot of difference in cost. But with the Midas M32 you get a whole mixing board....
Goal is gear that can be used for live-sound P.A. and for recording with a DAW.
Anyone have any thoughts?
thank you,
Ron
Hi Ron,
After re-reading your original post, I have a few questions.
1) What is the situation you are working in (bars, venue with FOH speakers but no mixer, playing in a garage, wanting to provide sound for a local band, etc)?
2) What PA gear do you already have?
3) What is your budget to upgrade your current stock of PA equipment?
To re-iterate, no matter what your answers are to the above questions, the answer will not be to spend money on preamps :).
If you can answer these questions though, I think you will find that the people here can definitely provide you with very valuable and great advice on what you should spend your money on.
-
I can't remember the last event I worked at where someone brought external preamps along. Maybe in the studio they matter. Live? nope.
Even in the studio, preamps are extremely low on the sonic impact list. Yes, if you have a mic that needs tons of gain or wants to see a specific impedance, then the pre might be important, but there are ways around that with devices like the FET head or Cloud lifter. And these aren't mics one would typically use live.
As for color, as others stated, there are plenty of ways to add that. Most "cheap" preamps built into a digital live console (X32, etc) or a $100 desktop audio interface are clean and detailed enough for live or studio.
-
Even lowly analog cheapies have better IC preamp implementations than we had on larger format desks back in the 80's. Lower noise floor at high gain.
Just having even very high quality PA mains in the same space as the microphones will affect the sound far more than any discernible preamp differences. Adding wedges makes it even worse. Throw headset wireless into that mix and I wish preamps were all there was to worry about!
In that environment I haven't even really been bothered to see if there's a noticeable difference between the X32 and supposedly "better" M32 preamps.
I tend to go even further in my belief that the difference between an X32 and an SQ or even DLIVE or DIGICO pales behind good FOH speakers, good microphones, and the use of an IEM system vs wedges in terms of quality of sound the audience hears.
As always, I agree that a very accomplished person behind the mixer (and setting up the system in the room) generally makes the most difference .... within reason. I doubt even a very talented person could sound "good" with an old Behringer analog mixer, pg microphones and JRX speakers.... but then, that is a pretty extreme example.
With decent gear (X32 level mixer, SM58 level mics, JBL PRX level speakers, etc) the difference in sound quality due to the gear starts to reach diminishing returns. Once you start getting one step up from the mics and speakers, it starts diminishing quite rapidly. Not saying there is NO difference, just that it starts paling beside room acoustics, talent of the act, and talent of the person behind the board.
-
{...}
With decent gear (X32 level mixer, SM58 level mics, JBL PRX level speakers, etc) the difference in sound quality due to the gear starts to reach diminishing returns. Once you start getting one step up from the mics and speakers, it starts diminishing quite rapidly. Not saying there is NO difference, just that it starts paling beside room acoustics, talent of the act, and talent of the person behind the board.
I mostly agree, except that when it comes to speakers (where >10% THD traditionally isn't uncommon) I think the differences between "good" and "great" can still be readily heard in a lot of situations and environments.
But preamps? Not so much. (And don't get me started on 96k...)
-Russ
-
There's a noticeable difference in pres. Does it matter than much? Probably not, pretty much everything sounds good these days, just different. The X32 sounds good, the M32 sounds a bit better. Subjectively, of course. But both of them are very usable, and you can get great results on either.
I have an A&H Avantis, and among other things I use it to track orchestra recordings. I used to do that job with an M32. The preamps in the GX4816 sound arguably better than the M32. The M32 had a bit more flavor, but the GX pres are much cleaner. That's based on memory though, I never did a direct A-B comparison.
However, I picked up 32 channels of A&H Prime Input preamps recently, and I did a direct A-B comparison last month between them and the GX pres during a concert cycle. I used an analog split to get 32 channels into the GX4816 and another 32 into the Prime pres, set them identically, and tracked all 64 channels at 96k. There's a noticeable difference, and everyone here agrees the Prime pres are better. They sound warmer, cleaner, and more linear to me, although I'll admit I haven't spent a million hours comparing them. People who didn't know what I spent on them feel the same, so it's not just me.
My rock-n-roll type clients don't care about pres at all though. Not enough to pay more for them, anyway. And I don't really see anyone using external pres with a live rig these days.
If you're looking primarily for a live board that you can also track with, the M32 is a solid choice, since you can easily record 32 tracks over USB.
If you want something dedicated to a studio, that's when you should start looking at preamps. But even then, I have a UAD Apollo x8p and the pres in it are pretty great, but it does a whole lot more than that. There are a lot of options out there, that's for sure.
-
Rendering an opinion regarding sound quality by attributing everything to preamps is an incomplete assessment. Higher end doesn’t only include better preamps. A/D is part of the equation. Even direct outs has to include at least one trip through conversion.
In live sound, there are way too many factors messing with sound quality. Bleed, phase, acoustics, proximate speakers to the mics capturing everything, power alleys, comb filtering, and little control of sound sources are but a few challenges. Studio is a closed loop environment. They’re over there, in a different space. You have time. The rooms are always better. No monitors or PA. Except for a drum kit or a band tracking live(does anyone do that anymore) a couple/few “color” channels are usually enough for dubs.
Bring a bunch of Neve preamps into your line ins with $20 A/D then D/A and I guarantee you’ll “hear” the price tag. 8)
Preamps in live sound to me are somewhere after FOH chair comfort :)
-
RE M32 and preamps. There is an audible difference between M32 with DL32 and M32 with DL251.
Haven't tried a X32 with DL251, but I suspect you'll find the same thing there.
-
The biggest difference between preamps in premium consoles is the amount of money spent on advertising to convince customers that they are better. One old rule about merchandising is that you need to sound different when claiming to sound "better".
At least one digital console maker incorporated a soft clip limiter into their mic preamps. This allows operators to crank the preamps up to hotter gains (past overload) without sounding horrible. Louder is often perceived as sounding better, while the soft limiter is in fact distorting the waveform.
The general perception about this one actual sonic difference is subjective. I won't share my personal opinion.
JR
PS: As a console designer (last century) it used to make me crazy the way customers have lower expectations about the sound quality of console mic preamps just because they exist in multiples inside a common chassis. :o
-
I mostly agree, except that when it comes to speakers (where >10% THD traditionally isn't uncommon) I think the differences between "good" and "great" can still be readily heard in a lot of situations and environments.
But preamps? Not so much. (And don't get me started on 96k...)
-Russ
Oh I can hear it ;).... and I agree that 96K arguments are similar to preamp arguments in mixers today with respect to live sound.
I will say that the quality of processing in a digital mixer does make a difference (vs preamps). A mixer with more DSP power will be able to provide better compression, higher quality reverb, more accurate and complete eq, etc. I believe that these aspects of a board are now what actually makes one mixer sound "better" than another one ..... or that a soundman would say it is "easier to get a good mix" on.
I can hear the difference between a PRX 812 and a Yamaha DZR12 (but would argue many in the audience can't). It is much harder to hear the difference between a DZR12 and an RCF932, but I believe it is still there, but if it is, it isn't that big. RCF NX932 and Meyer UPA1P? I can certainly feel the difference when you carry them :).
The difference between a band in a medium size indoor venue with IEM's vs floor wedges? I can hear that every time.
-
The difference between a band in a medium size indoor venue with IEM's vs floor wedges? I can hear that every time.
Agreed; this is an area where HoW systems pulled way ahead of live concert systems. The places where wedges actually make sense now is nearly, but not quite, zero.
-
Agreed; this is an area where HoW systems pulled way ahead of live concert systems. The places where wedges actually make sense now is nearly, but not quite, zero.
Oh how I wish every band would see it that way!!!
Although still many times advancing a show I still hear..."we're easy just put out wedges for all of us" or
I mention IEM's and the answer is something like "we're deaf old school musicians wedges will be fine" actually I heard that one!
-
Agreed; this is an area where HoW systems pulled way ahead of live concert systems. The places where wedges actually make sense now is nearly, but not quite, zero.
From a sonic standpoint, no question, IEM's are the way to go. But the majority of shows are small local bands, and very few of those have IEM's.
Another thing to consider - most of the gigs these smaller bands get don't have the budget for a sound man, so they "mix" from stage, hard enough with wedges, but nearly impossible with IEM's. So when these bands play a bigger gig with real sound, they are used to wedges and have zero experience with IEM's.
As both a musician and a sound guy, I'd love nothing better than to have everyone on IEM's. But I realize it isn't gonna happen. I've even considered selling my IEM gear since it almost never gets used.
But back on topic.....band > arrangement > speakers/IEMs/sound guy > mics > console (effects quality) > etc > etc >preamps or something like that.
-
From a sonic standpoint, no question, IEM's are the way to go. But the majority of shows are small local bands, and very few of those have IEM's.
Another thing to consider - most of the gigs these smaller bands get don't have the budget for a sound man, so they "mix" from stage, hard enough with wedges, but nearly impossible with IEM's. So when these bands play a bigger gig with real sound, they are used to wedges and have zero experience with IEM's.
As both a musician and a sound guy, I'd love nothing better than to have everyone on IEM's. But I realize it isn't gonna happen. I've even considered selling my IEM gear since it almost never gets used.
But back on topic.....band > arrangement > speakers/IEMs/sound guy > mics > console (effects quality) > etc > etc >preamps or something like that.
I have been using IEM's since the mid 90's in my band. A wired IEM setup is actually more cost effective (and smaller and lighter) than wedges. Cost is one of the big reasons I hear bands say they aren't using IEM's.
To your point though, many bands (and some individual members) simply refuse to use IEM's as they don't hear "their tone". I would argue that no one can get as good a mix from stage as can be achieved from out front.
I totally agree with your assessment: "band > arrangement > speakers/IEMs/sound guy > mics > console (effects quality) > etc > etc >preamps"
-
RE M32 and preamps. There is an audible difference between M32 with DL32 and M32 with DL251.
Haven't tried a X32 with DL251, but I suspect you'll find the same thing there.
The DSP on the X32 and M32 are nulls-to-zero identical, so whatever you've experienced with external I/O on an M32 will translate directly to an X32. :)
-Russ
-
I have been using IEM's since the mid 90's in my band. A wired IEM setup is actually more cost effective (and smaller and lighter) than wedges. Cost is one of the big reasons I hear bands say they aren't using IEM's.
To your point though, many bands (and some individual members) simply refuse to use IEM's as they don't hear "their tone". I would argue that no one can get as good a mix from stage as can be achieved from out front.
I totally agree with your assessment: "band > arrangement > speakers/IEMs/sound guy > mics > console (effects quality) > etc > etc >preamps"
It's also faster to set up - and when you get to the gig (provided you brought your digital mixer and gave splits to the FOH or have your own guy running FOH), it instantly sounds like your rehearsal space! Rarely is there need for major adjustments - everything just sounds like it should (in the IEM's). I'll never forget my first IEM gig after rehearsing with the band using IEM's in the studio. Swore I'd never go back.....but then enter lots of jobs playing with various bands/artists who refuse to use IEMs, and I'm back to wedges.....arrrrggghhh
So to the OP - if you can convince the acts you work with to use IEMs it will make a huge difference, way more than any preamp upgrade.
-
It's also faster to set up - and when you get to the gig (provided you brought your digital mixer and gave splits to the FOH or have your own guy running FOH), it instantly sounds like your rehearsal space! Rarely is there need for major adjustments - everything just sounds like it should (in the IEM's). I'll never forget my first IEM gig after rehearsing with the band using IEM's in the studio. Swore I'd never go back.....but then enter lots of jobs playing with various bands/artists who refuse to use IEMs, and I'm back to wedges.....arrrrggghhh
So to the OP - if you can convince the acts you work with to use IEMs it will make a huge difference, /way/ several orders of magnitude more than any preamp upgrade.
My $0.02.
-
...if you can convince the acts you work with to use IEMs it will make a huge difference, way more than any preamp upgrade.
The trick is sorting between legitimate reasons versus excuses. Choirs, and battle of the bands (each band walks up, plays one song, walks off), are legit reasons to use wedges. Pretty much anything else is just an excuse, and needs to be called out as such.
*Self-mixing IEMs is easier than wedges, plus there's zero feedback.
*Refusing to use IEMs due to "their tone" is false; IEM's mimic FOH sound better.
*Cost of IEM's can be better than wedges, unless they're sharing Seismic level mons.
-
{...}
*Refusing to use IEMs due to "their tone" is false; IEM's mimic FOH sound better.
{...}
If it only it were that simple. I was reminded recently that part of the challenge of dealing with electric guitar players is that, for many of them, "their tone" is what's coming out of the amp ~45° off-axis and at least 1m away, and what's being perceived by a typically-on-axis microphone (or the poor sods on house left, for that matter) "doesn't sound right" regardless of the fact that it's what the audience will actually be hearing. It's why many guitar players don't want their instrument in their wedge (and IEMs only make things that much worse).
I once had a loud-enough-that-the-drums-needed-reinforcement-in-a-smallish-venue guitar player explain to me that he once tried a tilt-back on his amp but it "really caused him some problems". Or there was the one who mentioned that he couldn't put the amp offstage somewhere and rely on his monitor mix instead because what comes out of the wedge "always sounds too harsh and it causes me to play timidly".
-Russ
-
If it only it were that simple. I was reminded recently that part of the challenge of dealing with electric guitar players is that, for many of them, "their tone" is what's coming out of the amp ~45° off-axis and at least 1m away, and what's being perceived by a typically-on-axis microphone (or the poor sods on house left, for that matter) "doesn't sound right" regardless of the fact that it's what the audience will actually be hearing. It's why many guitar players don't want their instrument in their wedge (and IEMs only make things that much worse).
I once had a loud-enough-that-the-drums-needed-reinforcement-in-a-smallish-venue guitar player explain to me that he once tried a tilt-back on his amp but it "really caused him some problems". Or there was the one who mentioned that he couldn't put the amp offstage somewhere and rely on his monitor mix instead because what comes out of the wedge "always sounds too harsh and it causes me to play timidly".
-Russ
I've had similar conversations with guitar plays about about leaning their amp back on the amps built in kick back legs so they could actually hear their amp!
-
Loud acoustic drummers, and sadly (in my experience) most lead guitar players produce enough stage volume that it will muck up the mix in anything but a stadium sized stage (where everything can be spaced far apart to prevent the vocal mics from picking up the stage noise louder than the vocals).
My solution for my band was 2 fold:
1) Replaced drummer with piccolo snare rim shot syndrome with a drummer with vDrums
2) Replaced lead player with a lead player that would use IEM's (both of them) for practice and gigs. Guitar amp plexiglass shield created to keep the amp direct sound out of the stage and audience.
Night and day difference in out front sound quality. No amount of PA equipment could have come even CLOSE to making that huge of a sonic difference out front.
Note: It isn't that I haven't heard bands using wedges that sound good, but generally their drums and guitars are under control (seems rare) and the stage noise is kept to a reasonable level.
Most of the bands that have really good out-front sound are using IEMs. WAY bigger upgrade than mic pres, microphones or even speakers IME.
-
I've had similar conversations with guitar plays about about leaning their amp back on the amps built in kick back legs so they could actually hear their amp!
To that point, here's the best solution I've seen in awhile:
Dave
-
I'm with JR. Preamps - straight wire with gain - have been sussed out decades back. What has been happening since then is selling "color" or any audible difference as being "better" when it's your product and "bad" when it's a competitor's.
When operated within their linear range most preamps sound far, far more alike than different. It's what happens around the edges that set them apart.
If you want color, fine. If you need 70dB of ultra-quiet gain, (like in video and film and some corporate stuff), fine.
If you want to make good live mixes almost anything and everything will have greater impact on the perceived sound quality.
Leave the preamp, take the cannoli.