VO-BB - 20 YEARS OLD!

Tom Test · DC Joined: 23 Jan 2007 Posts: 629 Location: Chicago, IL

How much of a difference does a mic preamp really make to your sound? Well, I’ve just recorded my own little preamp shootout using cheap to mid-level preamps, so you can decide with your own ears.

Here’s how I did it: using my trusty Gefell M930 (similar to the TLM-103), I recorded 4 distinct types of reads through 4 preamps. (I thought perhaps one pre might be better for “warm & fuzzy” while another might be superior for an “energetic retail” read. Or maybe one will rise above all others for every type of read). I performed all reads over a one hour period, and tried my best to keep the same approach to the mic for all preamps (e.g., got closer for the warm & fuzzy, further away for the retail read), though I'm sure I wasn't perfect at it. Afterward, I normalized each individual read at -1.72 db to try and make all the levels even as much as possible.

I'm also pretty sure someone will say this is far from a scientific comparison (and they'd probably be right), but it's the best I know how to do and I hope it is helpful. I welcome any feedback or criticisms of my method.

I am comparing four preamps, one of them twice using different settings. I’ll reveal the lineup later to eliminate any bias. The four preamps in alphabetical order are:

dbx286A with all processing bypassed - $200
Golden Age Pre-73 (a “Neve clone”) with the output at 11 PM - $300
Golden Age Pre-73 with the output at 2:30 PM and Low-Z engaged
Mackie 802-VLZ3 mixer preamps - $200
Summit 2BA-221 tube/solid-state hybrid w Mullard NOS tube (tube blend set at 10:30 PM) - $680 plus $75 for the tube upgrade

Here is a link that will take you to my Box.net site, where you will be able to either download the WAV file: http://www.box.net/shared/4uxtp4stso0eqapq5dsq

...or use the nifty built-in audio player (it's an MP3 at 128 mono): http://www.box.net/shared/jtkk7aidd1nzeq7n6moo
_________________
Best regards,
Tom Test
"The Voice You Trust"
www.tomtest.com

Tom Test · DC Joined: 23 Jan 2007 Posts: 629 Location: Chicago, IL

I forgot to mention that the GAP-73 has the "TT Mod" upgrade. Not sure if it makes a great difference for VO from the stock unit.
_________________
Best regards,
Tom Test
"The Voice You Trust"
www.tomtest.com

Mike Sommer · Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 10:45 pm Post subject:

What are your input settings on the GAP??
_________________
The Blog:
http://voiceoveraudio.blogspot.com/

Acoustics are counter-intuitive. If one thing is certain about acoustics, it is that if anything seems obvious it is probably wrong.

Bill Campbell · DC Joined: 09 Mar 2007 Posts: 621

I like 1 & 2 best They sound very similar.
_________________
www.asapaudio.com

Tom Test · DC Joined: 23 Jan 2007 Posts: 629 Location: Chicago, IL

Bish · Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2011 6:55 pm Post subject:

My impressions:

1 & 2 - I couldn't really separate
3 - I think the tech expression is "a little bottomy for me"
4 - Sounded thinner than the rest
5 - To me, it was like 1/2, but a tad "muddier"

I'm with Bill... 1 or 2
_________________
Bish a.k.a. Bish
Smoke me a kipper... I'll be back for breakfast.
I will not feed the trolls... I will not feed the trolls... I will not feed the trolls... I will not feed the trolls.

Steve Knight · Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2011 8:11 am Post subject:

I agree with everything Bish said ...

chuckweis · Contributor IV Joined: 27 Feb 2008 Posts: 136

Just listened on some pretty good monitors, and while I could definitely hear differences, they all do have a similar sound overall. The differences were most clear on the reads where you were further away from the mic, which is where #4 sounded thinner. I'm going to take a wild guess that #3 would be the GAP w/the Low Z engaged. I just got a GAP (new version 2), and my wav forms take on that same look with the Low Z popped on...almost on the verge of being a bit too bottom heavy if you're not careful.

Tom Test · DC Joined: 23 Jan 2007 Posts: 629 Location: Chicago, IL

I'll reveal the lineup in a few days, but Chuck, your guess is incorrect. Much thanks to all who have contributed!
_________________
Best regards,
Tom Test
"The Voice You Trust"
www.tomtest.com

chuckweis · Contributor IV Joined: 27 Feb 2008 Posts: 136

hmmm. I'm intrigued now.

I can say that I am thoroughly enjoying my new GAP Pre. Love the different options to push it for more thickness, or dial it back. On a sidenote, also REALLY loving the Focusrite ISA One. It sounds very nice and buttery smooth.

Bill Campbell · DC Joined: 09 Mar 2007 Posts: 621

I appreciate the pre shootout, but.....

Buy a parametric EQ and you can dial in any sound you want. Use it as an insert with your Mackie mixer. It will have a much bigger and better impact on your "sound" than any preamp.

Speck & Daking make excellent EQs, and the one in a Symetrix 528 is good.

Any of the preamps in your shootout would sound excellent through a parametric EQ. Just another way to go.
_________________
www.asapaudio.com

Tom Test · DC Joined: 23 Jan 2007 Posts: 629 Location: Chicago, IL

Bill Campbell · DC Joined: 09 Mar 2007 Posts: 621

Understood Tom. You could go with preamp 1 or 2 and your mission is accomplished. Both of those sound very good.

I do TV commercial VO for some stations in my home market, so I get to hear it on air. The TV producers never "sweeten" the audio. I've learned to do it myself and the audio always sounds better.
_________________
www.asapaudio.com

Dayo · Cinquecento Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 544 Location: UK

Bill Campbell · DC Joined: 09 Mar 2007 Posts: 621

Nobody recommended a Behringer. The Speck and Daking are pretty expensive.
But, in a technical sense. all a preamp does is increase gain. Some add color and some don't. With a good mic, clean preamp, and a parametric EQ you can create some nice, different tones.
_________________
www.asapaudio.com