VO-BB - 19 YEARS OLD!

Monk · Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2014 7:40 am Post subject: A B comparison of a preamp.

I need some critical ears to just listen to a preamp for me.

The first read of the line is preamp A the repeat of the line is preamp B.

Thoughts?

http://monksvoice.com/PreAmpTest/ABTest.mp3

Thanks!
_________________
Company, villainous company, hath been the spoil of me...

www.monksvoice.com

Jason Huggins · Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2014 8:29 am Post subject:

I personally preferred A. Be was a bit harsher and I could hear more room tone. A seemed smoother, but a bit bassy. I don't think it sounded muddy though. It added some good meat to the narration and sounds like it would easily take some EQ if it needed to be tighter.

Just my 2 cents though.

Frank F · Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2014 10:34 am Post subject:

I found this an interesting "test" or comparison. Each has it's own character, one has brought the microphone out into the front better than the other.

Many VO people would call "A" full and say this is the more solid sound of the two preamps presented. However, I have to compare this test/comparison to the venerable U87 Vintage microphone where the microphone does not sound wonderful when dry. When mixed the sound of the Neuman shines through and the unique presence and qualities of the U87 comes to life. In this case, preamp "B" is the sleeper.

I find the EQ on "B" (on my equipment) a bit disconcerting as it seems to enhance some flavors (when dry) which are grating to my ears, but overall it works in the mix.

Frank F
_________________
Be thankful for the bad things in life. They opened your eyes to the good things you weren't paying attention to before. email: thevoice@usa.com

Monk · Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2014 11:55 am Post subject:

ricevoice · Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2014 1:08 pm Post subject:

First thoughts: B sounds cleaner to me, I think it would sit better in a mix.

So I decided to mix it. And B did cut through much better. But with just a little EQ rolloff around 70Hz, A sounded nearly identical to B, both on $1000 monitors and in $500 headphones.

Conclusion: if you're dealing with a client who doesn't really know how to do audio post (ie, a lot of P2P clients), you may want to use B since it's pretty much ready to use. Otherwise, both sound fine.
_________________
Chris Rice - Noisemaker
www.ricevoice.com

Monk · Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2014 1:52 pm Post subject:

Chris,

Thank you, I've listened back and fourth and the more I listen the more I'm liking B as well, but wanted to make sure I wasn't crazy and missing something.

They're very close.
_________________
Company, villainous company, hath been the spoil of me...

www.monksvoice.com

kgenus · Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 4:12 pm Post subject:

They sound so close to me, I'd buy the one that introduces the least amount of noise and call it day.
_________________
Genus

Voxman · Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:54 pm Post subject:

Likewise, they are so close, to me on my Genelec monitors I would have to be listening so critically to realy tell a difference.

Any chance now of revealing the two Pre's??? and the mic???

Cheers
Peter

Frank F · Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2014 6:16 pm Post subject:

Hmmm, this is unique as I still find myself seeing a difference between the two pre's. I am still enjoying "B" as it puts the mic "to the front" in this setup.

Looking forward to the BIG Reveal!

Frank F
_________________
Be thankful for the bad things in life. They opened your eyes to the good things you weren't paying attention to before. email: thevoice@usa.com

Jason Huggins · Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 7:55 pm Post subject:

Dying to hear the results Smile

Monk · Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 5:43 pm Post subject:

caught up in the holidays!

Ok, the microphone is my U87ai.

Preamp 1 is an ART MPA Gold with a vintage Mullard tube in place of the stock tube that came with it.

Preamp 2 is a Redd 47 clone called the D4 by Dizengoff Audio. Built in Chicago.

The ART MPA Gold, cost me $299.00 a couple of years ago, and works fine, but I felt it was lacking a wee bit of something. So I started shopping around for what would mate well with the U87 and came across the idea of the Redd 47 circuit used by EMI to record at Abby Roads Studios. Which led me to seek out www.Dizengoffaudio.com.

It's just a preamp with phantom power. No other bells and whistles aside from a rough and fine gain, (ok a 20db pad and phase inverter as well). No compressor, no Eq, just preamp and cost me $599.oo. Kind of a Christmas gift to myself and the studio. Holiday G.A.S.
_________________
Company, villainous company, hath been the spoil of me...

www.monksvoice.com

Lance Blair · M&M Joined: 03 Jun 2007 Posts: 2279 Location: Atlanta

Go with B.

I used to have the ART MPA Gold too, and used it with new Tung Sol tubes. I loved the sound of it raw for VO, but it had a tubbyness and fuzz in a mix. It was wonderful for synths, and regret having sold it for that purpose. The MPAs are really interestingly designed pres that come the closest to having the real 'tube' experience for a fraction of the cost - but not ideal for VO (but they can be great for singing).
_________________
Skype: globalvoiceover
and now, http://lanceblairvo.com the blog is there now too!