Hello Davon, you’ll notice more differences with vocals and other instruments than with snare hits. The harmonic distortion and other elements of the preamp play a significant role, especially in how it pairs with the microphone, the type of voice being recorded, and the frequency range. When dealing with broader frequencies, you’re more likely to notice how the transformer behaves or, in the case of a transformerless design, how the circuit responds, along with the tube circuit and the op-amp. This also depends on whether the microphone itself is a tube mic, transformer-based, dynamic, ribbon, or otherwise. There are simply too many factors to consider. Preamps can make a huge difference in orchestral recordings, particularly in quiet passages or when the music has a high dynamic range and sharp transients. From classical to jazz to pop, preamps play a crucial role in shaping the sound. In fact, I believe preamps are way more important than EQs and compressors. Best regards!
Thank you for your insight. Actually the snare hit demonstrated my point about transient response. I did a separate test with my voice using a U87, I heard distinct differences between the Neve 1073, the PAL (which sounded best) and the Onyx while tracking using headphones. But upon playback with my Focal Trio 11Be's those differences seemed to vanish for the most part. So I didn't include that section because it didn't prove anything obvious. I left some points out which I should have mentioned about headroom and clean gain on the expensive stuff. But I'll do a follow-up on that.
@@devon-graves-studio-D Hi Davon , I completely agree with you when it comes to demonstrating for a younger audience, especially those who are just starting out and working from home studios. Prioritizing what’s really important is key, and in that case, even using the preamp of a sound card is totally fine. However, as we move into the realm of those who have been doing this for 30-40 years and are working on more high-end, professional projects, we might start noticing some differences in gear and final results. The U87 is a transformer-based microphone, and if you compare it to other transformerless mics, such as the TLM 103 (which uses a variant of the U87’s capsule), you’ll notice that it sounds quite different, particularly in how it handles transients and harmonic distortion. The TLM 103 is more transparent with less coloration, bright. When paired with preamps, the difference becomes even more noticeable, especially in how the mic compresses transients and adds harmonic content. That said, at the end of the day, what truly matters is the music and the performance. I just wanted to share a different perspective for you to consider and expand on to your audience. All the best!
What a great video, well done on the explanation of the different topologies, it's the first time it actually made sense to me. I've tried many different preamps, and while I can usually hear a subtle difference between them, it's mostly stuff that can be done with a bit of eq, and some compression. And this leads me to how I eventually chose the front end that I settled on. I tried the coveted 1073 and it was ok, but the eq left me very disappointed. And many others. In the end I favoured the API Channel strip because the preamp sounds great when pushed (something I don't really ever do for my use), the eq is probably my favourite sounding of all that I've tried, even with it's more heavy handed 2db increments and the comp (again for my use) is by far the best out of every single comp I've tried regardless of topology and price (I went as hight as 6K with the Crane Song STC-8). Like you said, it all depends on the result you want.
In tests I listened to, the api came out on top for me as well. It just cleaner than anything else. But I do love the 1073 eq. It makes short work of getting many great sounds for me, from vocals to kick drum. I'm still learning the api.
@devon-graves-studio-D it's clean until you push it, at which point it can get very dirty, but in a lovely way. I have a feeling that the eq is very dependant on the material you're using it on. Or perhaps it's a particular sound that we all know and subconsciously like from all the records we've heard where it was used. Either way, it's legendary, but I chose something else... I also find I very rarely reach for a Pultec. Bearing in mind that these things are used by everyone, there's probably a reason for it, but I just prefer different sounds for my work. Who knows, maybe one day I'll be the next world famous mix engineer 🤣
Cool! I'm a musician and time is passing by. I want to record as much as possible. I love working at pro studios, but I don't have the cash. Maybe if these stupid companies would stop firing everyone. The point is I wanted to say thank you for the help. I like the video with the mics too. I feel like if I can come away with one or two points, I'm better off than before.
I agree that the biggest difference is made by the microphones. But preamps are just as important in my opinion. They show you a path. They alter the dynamics of the signal in a natural way that no compressor can do. And if you don't have a preamplifier with a transformer or tubes, then you depend on a compressor that can give you (or not) the desired dynamics. And you waste time in the mix looking for something you could have from the recording to begin with. My opinion is, in order of importance, microphone-preamp-eq-comp-converter
I agree with everything you said. Absolutely. What I was getting at was the difference in tonality is very subtle. But the transient and dynamic content is in full display in my example. I will dig deeper in some experimentation to show the cumulative differences which should be more revealing. And again, I heard tonal differences and clarity differences when tracking vocals. But those differences seemed to vanish on playback, even through my Focals. I wanted to prove a bigger point which I wasn't convinced I was able to do with the abandoned effort. I was making my best attempt to prove my point, beyond mere opinion. Look for that video in the future :)
@@thegroove2000 Tape saturation has a natural dynamic range reduction. But the tape doesn’t bring up the quiet parts of the sound like a compressor does. Analog tape it gives tape saturation and soft clipping, which gives a perceived compression effect. A compressor actively adjusts the dynamic range by attenuating peaks and optionally boosting lower signals. So, when you record to tape, what you are able to achieve is a soft-clipped and dynamically squashed signal, but it doesn’t behave like a real compressor.
@@devon-graves-studio-D Tape saturation has a natural dynamic range reduction. But the tape doesn’t bring up the quiet parts of the sound like a compressor does. Analog tape it gives tape saturation and soft clipping, which gives a perceived compression effect. A compressor actively adjusts the dynamic range by attenuating peaks and optionally boosting lower signals. So, when you record to tape, what you are able to achieve is a soft-clipped and dynamically squashed signal, but it doesn’t behave like a real compressor.
Yep. I agree. I think the tube pre hears more like our ear. Remember we are dealing with a dry, single spot mic. The snare sound would be normally filled in by the overheads, rooms, and bottom mic. So that thin transient on the other two (especially the api) might give that needed transient for attack whereas the body would come from the other mics, and of course processing. When I record snare I use an api top and bottom with eq and compression and it sounds much better for that. But it would have skewed perception of the preamps themselves.
Good presentation and explanation of the tonal differences we hear in preamp topologies. Thank you for the video. I do wish you had recorded your video spoken word audio into your DAW instead of into the camera. There is a ton of hiss from the camera (to the point of distraction). I understand the ease of convenience for editing, but encourage you to take the extra time so people who don't know who you are and your experience aren't wondering why they should take the information seriously due to the amount of noise in the video.
Actually I did. I recorded into Pro Tools, and also into Screenflow using the Tone Beast into the Audix iD44. The massive distortion on the singing demonstration was the TB12 in full overdrive singing into an SM7B.
@@devon-graves-studio-D The TB distortion was evident as you raised gain and lowered output respectively to demonstrate different gain structuring / saturation options. However, the entire speaking portion of your video has an enormous amount of hiss, which I assumed (erroneously now that you say it went into an Audix ID44) was your capture mic going direct into your camera. Not sure if the hiss is apparent on your end, but I am happy to send you an isolated audio clip if you would like to see it in PT. Again, thank you for the video, and I am certainly not trying to poke holes or be a pain for you....just trying to offer constructive feedback. 🙏
@@FLOSPhotographer Hmmm, I can look at the raw video. Maybe I neglected to mute camera 2. :0 But the voice would be phased... Maybe the TB12 is that noisy. I had that issue with the Neve in another demonstration. But nall the dialog and thast singing was all done single-pass by then same means. Still, it obviously needs some attention. I will check into it. Thank you for reaching out :)
Its a transformerless design. But one of the best ones out there in my opinion. Very clean, very low noise. I have a video where I compare how it stacks up with a 1073 with an 1176 and opto compressor (hardware) and how close you can get the Audient using plugins. There is also a direct comparison with acoustic guitar without the compressors. th-cam.com/video/EwLoVdAOgaA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=-IdkOvgKVyj8Bzv8
I just watched the video and I think using the Audient ID44mkii preamp with an hardware 1176 and LA2A compressor would have been more interesting and better comparison since the interface has balanced inserts point and the Audient preamp could have shine better cos it would be cleaner with less noise
I record a lot of acoustic guitars. The mic pre makes a difference to the feel of what I am hearing and how I play a part. My La Chappell 992 is so nice on acoustic with schoeps sdc. My buzz audio ma2.2 mic pre does not have the lift and delicate Touch I feel with the 992. It may not sound different but it sure feels different based on type of mic pre. 500 series mic pre Is even worse.
Excellent! It's hard these days to find solid, reasonably neutral information taken from intelligent experience. What, may I ask, are your thoughts on the TB12 ? I don't have one, or any other Warm gear (yet), but have given it some thought from time to time. The design and build quality appear good from what I can gather and the pricing fair.
The TB 12 It is right up there with the best of the transformer in-out designs at a very affordable price comparatively. The choice of two different op amps, two different output transformers is very unique. However the differences ar a bit subtle for my ear. For the price you can't go wrong. Having said that, if you had about 300 more to spend, you might get a lot more out of the WA73 because the eq can change your sound much more dramatically than the different transformers on the TB12. I use the eq on my 1073 all the time.
I am torn between how to do this more precisely. I think these takes do accurately represent my experience with all these preamps. However, I had been considering a mic splitter to simultaneously record to different preamps, but then it would be skewed by the splitting transformer.
The point comes across regardless of the difference in performance. The API has a weight in the transient that the onyx lacks. Now I can see why people love that topology for drums.
True about the sound. Normally there would be a bottom mic, overheads and rooms pkus processing to create a good sound. Spot mics never sound so great on their own. especially bone dry.
Hi Devon, I'm about to react to your you reacting to my comments from last week, but there's one problem: in one of those comments, I asked you about what you think of Arjen's production of his Human Equation album and I see now that you replied to it and left a nice comment about that project, but for some reason, my comment got deleted and I don't know why (?!). I could still see a bit of what you said, which's something in the vain of: "I think he did a great job and he said he couldn't hear the difference between 16 bit and 24 bits back then...; etc" and that's all I'd see, unfortunately. I probably said something in that comment that goes against YT's (ridiculous) guidelines, but I can't seem to remember what I said exactly. All I know is that I was talking about his then Pro Tools 24 MIX+ system he used to record his Human Equation album with and that I sold a lot of that system, but burned his Mac OS9 onto a CD (LOL!) and kept his 888/24 so I'd be able to hook it up to my 192 interface; etc. You started out saying something really interesting about that and when I clicked on your comment, I found out my original comments not there anymore. 😢 Can you pls tell me (in short) what you said, or maybe your comment's still in your mail inbox, because it's not in mine? ;) Great video, as always by the way! :D Still watching now. ps. Hope this won't get deleted for some (as I said.... ridiculous) reason
Oh, one last thing. A couple of weeks ago, Arjen sent me the remixed version of Human Equation. It's GREAT!! :D "For your ears only", he said, so I can't share it unfortunately, but you'll hear it one fine day of course. I don't know when he's gonna release it, but since he's done remixing it, I think it will be released somewhere in between february and june. ;)
This is a great explanation of mic preamps. I’m going to direct my mixing clients here when they ask about mic preamps
Hey, that is awesome. Thank you!
Hello Davon, you’ll notice more differences with vocals and other instruments than with snare hits. The harmonic distortion and other elements of the preamp play a significant role, especially in how it pairs with the microphone, the type of voice being recorded, and the frequency range.
When dealing with broader frequencies, you’re more likely to notice how the transformer behaves or, in the case of a transformerless design, how the circuit responds, along with the tube circuit and the op-amp. This also depends on whether the microphone itself is a tube mic, transformer-based, dynamic, ribbon, or otherwise. There are simply too many factors to consider.
Preamps can make a huge difference in orchestral recordings, particularly in quiet passages or when the music has a high dynamic range and sharp transients. From classical to jazz to pop, preamps play a crucial role in shaping the sound. In fact, I believe preamps are way more important than EQs and compressors. Best regards!
Thank you for your insight. Actually the snare hit demonstrated my point about transient response. I did a separate test with my voice using a U87, I heard distinct differences between the Neve 1073, the PAL (which sounded best) and the Onyx while tracking using headphones. But upon playback with my Focal Trio 11Be's those differences seemed to vanish for the most part. So I didn't include that section because it didn't prove anything obvious. I left some points out which I should have mentioned about headroom and clean gain on the expensive stuff. But I'll do a follow-up on that.
@@devon-graves-studio-D Hi Davon ,
I completely agree with you when it comes to demonstrating for a younger audience, especially those who are just starting out and working from home studios. Prioritizing what’s really important is key, and in that case, even using the preamp of a sound card is totally fine.
However, as we move into the realm of those who have been doing this for 30-40 years and are working on more high-end, professional projects, we might start noticing some differences in gear and final results. The U87 is a transformer-based microphone, and if you compare it to other transformerless mics, such as the TLM 103 (which uses a variant of the U87’s capsule), you’ll notice that it sounds quite different, particularly in how it handles transients and harmonic distortion. The TLM 103 is more transparent with less coloration, bright. When paired with preamps, the difference becomes even more noticeable, especially in how the mic compresses transients and adds harmonic content.
That said, at the end of the day, what truly matters is the music and the performance.
I just wanted to share a different perspective for you to consider and expand on to your audience.
All the best!
What a great video, well done on the explanation of the different topologies, it's the first time it actually made sense to me.
I've tried many different preamps, and while I can usually hear a subtle difference between them, it's mostly stuff that can be done with a bit of eq, and some compression. And this leads me to how I eventually chose the front end that I settled on. I tried the coveted 1073 and it was ok, but the eq left me very disappointed. And many others. In the end I favoured the API Channel strip because the preamp sounds great when pushed (something I don't really ever do for my use), the eq is probably my favourite sounding of all that I've tried, even with it's more heavy handed 2db increments and the comp (again for my use) is by far the best out of every single comp I've tried regardless of topology and price (I went as hight as 6K with the Crane Song STC-8).
Like you said, it all depends on the result you want.
In tests I listened to, the api came out on top for me as well. It just cleaner than anything else. But I do love the 1073 eq. It makes short work of getting many great sounds for me, from vocals to kick drum. I'm still learning the api.
@devon-graves-studio-D it's clean until you push it, at which point it can get very dirty, but in a lovely way. I have a feeling that the eq is very dependant on the material you're using it on. Or perhaps it's a particular sound that we all know and subconsciously like from all the records we've heard where it was used. Either way, it's legendary, but I chose something else... I also find I very rarely reach for a Pultec. Bearing in mind that these things are used by everyone, there's probably a reason for it, but I just prefer different sounds for my work. Who knows, maybe one day I'll be the next world famous mix engineer 🤣
Amazing!!!! Without owning any good color preamp, I know, through your video, how to do post much better all in the box.
Than't a great an unexpected outcome! Fantastic! Thank you :)
man that sound good, I was dozing off at the console and that woke me up
LOL🤣
Cool! I'm a musician and time is passing by. I want to record as much as possible. I love working at pro studios, but I don't have the cash. Maybe if these stupid companies would stop firing everyone. The point is I wanted to say thank you for the help. I like the video with the mics too. I feel like if I can come away with one or two points, I'm better off than before.
Great, frind. Thank you and all the best. I'm always here to help, so feel free to reach out any time.
Thx for the excellent explanation
You are welcome Norbert!
I agree that the biggest difference is made by the microphones. But preamps are just as important in my opinion. They show you a path. They alter the dynamics of the signal in a natural way that no compressor can do. And if you don't have a preamplifier with a transformer or tubes, then you depend on a compressor that can give you (or not) the desired dynamics. And you waste time in the mix looking for something you could have from the recording to begin with. My opinion is, in order of importance, microphone-preamp-eq-comp-converter
I agree with everything you said. Absolutely. What I was getting at was the difference in tonality is very subtle. But the transient and dynamic content is in full display in my example. I will dig deeper in some experimentation to show the cumulative differences which should be more revealing. And again, I heard tonal differences and clarity differences when tracking vocals. But those differences seemed to vanish on playback, even through my Focals. I wanted to prove a bigger point which I wasn't convinced I was able to do with the abandoned effort. I was making my best attempt to prove my point, beyond mere opinion. Look for that video in the future :)
And Tape compression for more natural effects.
@@thegroove2000 Mmmmmm... tape compression...
@@thegroove2000 Tape saturation has a natural dynamic range reduction. But the tape doesn’t bring up the quiet parts of the sound like a compressor does. Analog tape it gives tape saturation and soft clipping, which gives a perceived compression effect. A compressor actively adjusts the dynamic range by attenuating peaks and optionally boosting lower signals. So, when you record to tape, what you are able to achieve is a soft-clipped and dynamically squashed signal, but it doesn’t behave like a real compressor.
@@devon-graves-studio-D Tape saturation has a natural dynamic range reduction. But the tape doesn’t bring up the quiet parts of the sound like a compressor does. Analog tape it gives tape saturation and soft clipping, which gives a perceived compression effect. A compressor actively adjusts the dynamic range by attenuating peaks and optionally boosting lower signals. So, when you record to tape, what you are able to achieve is a soft-clipped and dynamically squashed signal, but it doesn’t behave like a real compressor.
To me the tube pre sounds more like an actual snare in the room .the first 2 pres sound like popcorn
Yep. I agree. I think the tube pre hears more like our ear. Remember we are dealing with a dry, single spot mic. The snare sound would be normally filled in by the overheads, rooms, and bottom mic. So that thin transient on the other two (especially the api) might give that needed transient for attack whereas the body would come from the other mics, and of course processing. When I record snare I use an api top and bottom with eq and compression and it sounds much better for that. But it would have skewed perception of the preamps themselves.
Good presentation and explanation of the tonal differences we hear in preamp topologies. Thank you for the video. I do wish you had recorded your video spoken word audio into your DAW instead of into the camera. There is a ton of hiss from the camera (to the point of distraction). I understand the ease of convenience for editing, but encourage you to take the extra time so people who don't know who you are and your experience aren't wondering why they should take the information seriously due to the amount of noise in the video.
Actually I did. I recorded into Pro Tools, and also into Screenflow using the Tone Beast into the Audix iD44. The massive distortion on the singing demonstration was the TB12 in full overdrive singing into an SM7B.
@@devon-graves-studio-D The TB distortion was evident as you raised gain and lowered output respectively to demonstrate different gain structuring / saturation options. However, the entire speaking portion of your video has an enormous amount of hiss, which I assumed (erroneously now that you say it went into an Audix ID44) was your capture mic going direct into your camera. Not sure if the hiss is apparent on your end, but I am happy to send you an isolated audio clip if you would like to see it in PT. Again, thank you for the video, and I am certainly not trying to poke holes or be a pain for you....just trying to offer constructive feedback. 🙏
@@FLOSPhotographer Hmmm, I can look at the raw video. Maybe I neglected to mute camera 2. :0 But the voice would be phased... Maybe the TB12 is that noisy. I had that issue with the Neve in another demonstration. But nall the dialog and thast singing was all done single-pass by then same means. Still, it obviously needs some attention. I will check into it. Thank you for reaching out :)
Which category will you place the Audient ID preamp since it's same as they have on their console
Its a transformerless design. But one of the best ones out there in my opinion. Very clean, very low noise. I have a video where I compare how it stacks up with a 1073 with an 1176 and opto compressor (hardware) and how close you can get the Audient using plugins. There is also a direct comparison with acoustic guitar without the compressors. th-cam.com/video/EwLoVdAOgaA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=-IdkOvgKVyj8Bzv8
@devon-graves-studio-D thank you
I just watched the video and I think using the Audient ID44mkii preamp with an hardware 1176 and LA2A compressor would have been more interesting and better comparison since the interface has balanced inserts point and the Audient preamp could have shine better cos it would be cleaner with less noise
@@samueloluyinkaojomu6548 Interesting
I record a lot of acoustic guitars. The mic pre makes a difference to the feel of what I am hearing and how I play a part.
My La Chappell 992 is so nice on acoustic with schoeps sdc. My buzz audio ma2.2 mic pre does not have the lift and delicate
Touch I feel with the 992. It may not sound different but it sure feels different based on type of mic pre. 500 series mic pre
Is even worse.
Excellent! It's hard these days to find solid, reasonably neutral information taken from intelligent experience. What, may I ask, are your thoughts on the TB12 ? I don't have one, or any other Warm gear (yet), but have given it some thought from time to time. The design and build quality appear good from what I can gather and the pricing fair.
The TB 12 It is right up there with the best of the transformer in-out designs at a very affordable price comparatively. The choice of two different op amps, two different output transformers is very unique. However the differences ar a bit subtle for my ear. For the price you can't go wrong. Having said that, if you had about 300 more to spend, you might get a lot more out of the WA73 because the eq can change your sound much more dramatically than the different transformers on the TB12. I use the eq on my 1073 all the time.
@@devon-graves-studio-D Thanks!
As always different takes sounds totally different, this is not enough to have an objective comparison.
I am torn between how to do this more precisely. I think these takes do accurately represent my experience with all these preamps. However, I had been considering a mic splitter to simultaneously record to different preamps, but then it would be skewed by the splitting transformer.
The point comes across regardless of the difference in performance. The API has a weight in the transient that the onyx lacks. Now I can see why people love that topology for drums.
Great comparison, worst snare "sound" ever.....
True about the sound. Normally there would be a bottom mic, overheads and rooms pkus processing to create a good sound. Spot mics never sound so great on their own. especially bone dry.
For a snare top mic, this sounds great. I’m sure in the context of the overheads and room mics it would sound awesome
@@easternsouvenirs Thank you!
Hi Devon, I'm about to react to your you reacting to my comments from last week, but there's one problem: in one of those comments, I asked you about what you think of Arjen's production of his Human Equation album and I see now that you replied to it and left a nice comment about that project, but for some reason, my comment got deleted and I don't know why (?!). I could still see a bit of what you said, which's something in the vain of: "I think he did a great job and he said he couldn't hear the difference between 16 bit and 24 bits back then...; etc" and that's all I'd see, unfortunately. I probably said something in that comment that goes against YT's (ridiculous) guidelines, but I can't seem to remember what I said exactly. All I know is that I was talking about his then Pro Tools 24 MIX+ system he used to record his Human Equation album with and that I sold a lot of that system, but burned his Mac OS9 onto a CD (LOL!) and kept his 888/24 so I'd be able to hook it up to my 192 interface; etc. You started out saying something really interesting about that and when I clicked on your comment, I found out my original comments not there anymore. 😢 Can you pls tell me (in short) what you said, or maybe your comment's still in your mail inbox, because it's not in mine? ;)
Great video, as always by the way! :D Still watching now.
ps. Hope this won't get deleted for some (as I said.... ridiculous) reason
Oh, one last thing. A couple of weeks ago, Arjen sent me the remixed version of Human Equation. It's GREAT!! :D "For your ears only", he said, so I can't share it unfortunately, but you'll hear it one fine day of course. I don't know when he's gonna release it, but since he's done remixing it, I think it will be released somewhere in between february and june. ;)
Basically I had said that buying an additional 192 input card for a couple hundred bucks would be better than the 888 for extra inputs.
@@devon-graves-studio-D Ah okay, thank you very much! :D