Mics, preamps and technique...

[DesolationAngel]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

Fortunately it has been a few years since I felt the need to spend more money on new gear. Buying stuff can be never ending if you don't watch out.

Oh yes... but this is phase 2 (of 2). The first phase was guitars... I'm pretty happy with what I have there, now. So time to focus my attention on upgrading the studio.

[DesolationAngel]

Originally Posted by alohachris

How do you like the Royer 122's? For the reasons you mentioned about asymmetrical response of front/back on those, I had a tougher time dialing in that particular mic.

I haven't tried 'em... I have the 101s and the 121's.

You were lucky on getting that partially treated space. Moving blankets really DO help the mid-range. Adding 2-4 DIY broadband absorbers (front & back) would tighten up your basses & lower mid freq's for sure.

Given that we're renting I'm thinking of buying some of the Auralex stand mounted 'LENRDs'. That way I can move things around a bit AND take 'em with me when we leave. They come in sets of 4, I can trap the corners of the room where I mix and then use the other two within the 'soft' corners of my blanket 'room'.

I also flirted with the 500 series lunchbox technology, albeit briefly. However, many engineers told me that, despite its space-saving & cheaper components, it was not as great sonically as first suspected...

I still haven't been able to find a consensus on it, some people just love 500 series stuff. For me, as I said above, I'd rather have a palette of 'good' flavours over one of the very best, though. This is a hobby and I like experimenting. My guitars range in tone from hundred year old parlour to brand new custom made, passing steel resonators and archtops along the way... I like variety

I'll tell you Martin, a fantastic mic/preamp combo is playing through the Peluso P-28 Tube SDC combined w/ a Pacifica.

I hear so many good things about the Pacifica and A Designs in general (including their tube two channel, too). I've been very interested in the Peluso offerings... and I'm really excited to be trying this Mojave tube SDC, too. I'm also keen to try some Advanced Audio, given that those are made right here in this province...

[KevWind]

The only thing in my set up that is new state of the art is a Tubecore 3 U Mastering Edition compressor . The mic's and pre are the same as in the "set ups" thread

Mics are a Brauner Phantom V and Schoeps CM 6 MK4, into an A Designs MP2A .... Technique usually spaced pair the Schoeps out about 12 -14 inches
in front of 12- 14 th fret area. The Brauner out about two ft. facing lower bridge area

[DesolationAngel]

Those A Designs micpre's certainly seem to get a lot of love... anyone with an MP2A ever had a Pacifica (or vice versa) and care to chip in with differences? (Or, on a more apples to apples comparison, the MP2-A to the Pendulum MDP-1. Curious to see that Aloha Chris is a big fan of the Pacifica but chooses to use a Pendulum–SS versus tube).

[alohachris]

Aloha Martin,

Yes, I am a Pacifica fan. And I would be very happy if the only preamp I had for recording were the Pacifica, a Quartet, or the Pendulum SPS-1 live preamp I've used gigging for many years. They work well with many types/brands of mic's.

I've also done several preamp shoot-outs using many mic's though each of those preamps, plus all of the high-end pre's I mentioned in a previous post here - all fantastic for recording acoustic guitar.

However, preamps alone DO NOT make the lion's share of difference in recording an acoustic guitar. In fact, the subtle differences are almost felt rather than heard. Mic choice & placement makes more of a difference. That said, certain mic/preamp combo's absolutely sizzle together when used in a recording signal chain where ALL the parts are of equal quality. That I can hear - most of the time.

For me Martin, the Pendulum MDP-1a tube preamp coupled with my aforementioned favorite studio mic's for vocals ( M-G UM-900 tube LDC) or solo guitar tracks (Schoeps CMC641 SDC's) is what really rings my bell for recording.

Even with my limited abilities as an engineer - especially for mastering, when I hear even raw the recorded tracks of those combo's it makes me accept the fact that whatever limitations exist in my recordings are purely mine - not the gear's. Therefore, I've found what I want & I ain't lookin' no more.

Recording techniques of acoustic guitars (like mic placement) have been well established for many decades now. Applying them WELL & consistently in home recording studio's is what's relatively new. Yeah, the gear is constantly changing & getting cheaper for us player/recordists. But newer cheaper gear is rarely near as good as slightly older, established higher-end gear - especially in mic's, IMO (ever hear of the U-47?). So don't always look to new gear as a salvation. Try out BETTER gear, Martin.

However, the biggest differences in my home recording development have been in finally being able to move up to full room treatment, & also up to the high-end in terms of mic's, preamps, etc. There is only so far that entry-to-mid-level can get you in studio mic's (move up to Schoeps or Micro-tech Gefell's when you can, Martin). That's what other home recording veterans in this thread use primarily (Doug, Rick-slo, Kev, Rick Shepherd, sdelsolray, Ty, etc. There are good reasons for that.

Additionally, the growing list of great & more compatible plug-in's that do things that make life easier for making more consistent recordings is what's really new & state of the art. Waves Silver Bundle, Izotope 6 & Altiverb 6 are but three that I like.

Back to my preference for mic/preamp combo's. For me, the CMC641/MDP-1a combo sounds even better than the vintage 1970 U-87's & Neve 1073 pre I used to use for recording solo acoustic tracks.

If you speak with Lou Gualtieri of Pendulum, Martin, it'll make you want to have him build you something one day. He's the man! And the MDP-1a is the preamp for me!

RE: The A Designs MP-2A tube preamp. I auditioned it in LA. It's a Fantastic preamp. Very smooth & easy to use w/ several mic's. I'd be VERY, VERY happy with that preamp as Kev is.

However, by comparison, the cheaper Pacifica has an "immediacy (it's fast)" & "accessible lightness" in its response that I preferred. Using descriptive words here (sigh), the analogy is that it's a little like the difference tonally between Rosewood (MP-2A) & Mahogany (Pacifica) back & sides on a guitar - though much more subtle. Does that make sense? I'm sure that both of those great A-Designs preamps can be made to work well for any kind of source. It is easier to score a used Pacifica because more of them were made & distributed. than the MP-2A.

Have a great weekend, Martin!

alohachris

PS: What about monitors?

[DesolationAngel]

Mahalo, Chris... that's some useful descriptions in there. I'm resigned to the idea that I'll need multiple micpre's, in the end, in the same way that I have multiple guitars (my rosewoods don't sound like my mahoganies, my maples don't sound like my brass resonators etc.). And then, of course, I have my electric guitars and the amps they use...

I'm not trying to find a swiss army knife, I am fully aware that multiple products may be involved

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by DesolationAngel

Those A Designs micpre's certainly seem to get a lot of love... anyone with an MP2A ever had a Pacifica (or vice versa) and care to chip in with differences? (Or, on a more apples to apples comparison, the MP2-A to the Pendulum MDP-1. Curious to see that Aloha Chris is a big fan of the Pacifica but chooses to use a Pendulum–SS versus tube).

I only have experience with the A Designs and have only owned the MP2A. I have heard the Pacifica a number of times but no I have not done a side by side A/B.
The basic difference from the MP2A is that the Pacifica has no tubes, it is a solid state preamp

I have not heard the Pendulum so the only comparison differences I can offer are in the design spec's . Both are considered to be true tube preamps as there are no solid state integrated circuits or transistors. Therefor the design difference is the A Designs has transformers on the both input and output stages and the Pendulum has transformers on the input stage only

As for sound At this level of quality while there could be some very very subtle sound differences, I cannot imagine one would be disappointed in any of the three. In other words I would suggest you could not make a bad choice among these.

[DesolationAngel]

Originally Posted by KevWind

The basic difference from the MP2A is that the Pacifica has no tubes, it is a solid state preamp

Yup, hence my 'apples to apples' addendum

[Ty Ford]

On the topic of preamps, (and circuits in general) I find that good tubes are better than bad solid state and good solid state is better than bad tubes.

I use GML (solid state) preamps and also have a Millennia Media STT-1 (tube and solid state), two Groove Tube (Brick & Ditto) tube DIs and a (solid state) Fire-Eye, Red-Eye Twin.

I also have several Sound Devices mixers with solid state preamps. The 442 has input and output transformers and is thick (or perhaps slow, if you like). The 664 and MixPre-D don't have input transformers. I forget if they have output transformers at the moment.

They all sound great to me. Their differences are less obvious than rosewood verses mahogany.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[sdelsolray]

Originally Posted by DesolationAngel

I know these questions come up fairly regularly but, sometimes, I see it as useful to do a quick poll as to the current 'state of the art'. So, that being said, what's everyone using? I'm only really interested in mics, preamps and techniques.

I'm currently auditioning a bunch of mics, and preamps (probably 500 series) are coming next...
...

When it comes to mics, preamps and techniques, the "state of the art" was established decades ago. What has changed is that there are more products available today and many of them are at much lower prices than in the past. As far as recording techniques/engineering goes, again the "state of the art" was pretty much set a long time ago (e.g., mic placements, mixing, etc.). Of course, the big change here is the infusion of digital technologies into the recording process. How much analog versus how much digital technologies are in the recording, monitoring and production chains can vary.

I'm current using (for solo fingerstyle acoustic and classical guitar):

1) Mics - Pairs of Microtech Gefell M295, Telefunken M260 (3 capsule stereo set) and Schoeps CMC6/MK64 and have a few other pairs around which aren't used much (3 Zigma CHI, Peluso CEMC6, Neumann KM184, Oktava MC-12).

2) Preamps - dbx 786, Pair Speck 5.0 MicPre and Pendulum MDP-1a and some others that don't get used much for recording (Pendulum SPS-1, Rane DMS22 (modded), Presonus MP20 (modded)).

For my uses, since I always record two channels (sometimes 3 or 4), there is no functional difference between rack mounts dual preamps and two of the same 500 style units. Since my other outboard gear (converters, eq, power strips) are rack mounted, it makes sense to stick with standard rack mounted format for all outboard gear.

Originally Posted by DesolationAngel

...

Right now the Josephson C42's are floating my boat (although I will be testing against KM184s and a Mojave MA-100 this weekend). I'm also dabbling with ORTF, XY, AB and M/S recording at the moment, and enjoying every minute.
...

The Josephson C42 is a nice mic, but I found it a bit noisy and a bit too bright for my uses. I never owned them though, I've only used them a few times, so I don't know much more about them. I did own and become familiar with a couple of different pairs of Josephson Series 6 mics (modular SD). I liked those more, but still prefer the mics I'm currently using.

Originally Posted by DesolationAngel

...
You? Any Peluso users? Advanced Audio? Cascade? ShinyBox? Oktava? Avantone? Telefunken? Beyer?

I've owned Peluso P28 and CEMC6 6 pairs. The P28 is a rather nice mic, but Peluso jacked up the price from about $750 each to $1,000 each about two years ago. The CEMC 6 is very good, certainly detailed, accurate and linear, but the HF rise is a bit much (easily adjusted when mixing with eq) and the noise is a bit high (not objectionable though).

I haven't tried any Advanced Audio or Shiny Box mics and the only Cascade mics I've tried were not impressive.

The Oktava MC-012 is becoming a venerable mic. It has a lot going for it. It pretty much fires on all cylinders and its cheap, and it can be modded to improve it somewhat. Still, even modded, it is a bit grainy, non-linear and the off-axis response is not up there with the big boys.

As to Avantone, I bought a pair of C28 (MD tube mics), and they are decent and very similar to the Groove Tubes GT44 and Sterling 44 mics. I've also tried the Mojave 100 SD tube mics and a few other MD and SD tube mics. The Tele M260 is the king of the hill in this area (excluding some vintage mics).

The Telefunken M260 is a wonderful mic. In speaking with the Tele USA folks, the newer M60 (FET based) is quite similar with a bit better transient response and a bit less noise (about 2 dB), but it is missing the euphonics and sensuality of the M260.

The Beyer Dynamic M930 is an excellent mic, a bid scooped when placed close to the source, but very serviceable.

In terms of possible recommendations to try out for SD and MD (I'm leaving out LD mics), here's a short list:

1) Under $1,000 per pair:

3 Zigma CHI SD
Oktava MC-012 set (Joly mod) (with additional capsules)
Beyer MC930
Peluso CEMC 6 set (with additional capsules)

2) Between $1,000 and $2,000 per pair:

Microtech Gefell M300 (very nice mic)
Neumann KM184
Peluso P28
Telefunken (USA) M60 (with additional capsules)

3) North of $2,000 per pair:

Microtech Gefell M295
Telefunken (USA) M260 (with additional capsules)
Schoeps CMC6 (with single pair of capsules, MK4 or MK41)

As to preamps, there are basically two types. First, theres the clean wire with gain type with their lack of coloration, linearity, "what to hear is what you get" results, etc. Second, there are the character pieces, which are difficult to describe, but are are usually described with words like colored, aggressive, punchy, etc. Either will work and your own choice should be driven by your aesthetics. That being said, when recording just two tracks for solo fingerstyle, the differences among preamps is less noticeable because (i) there are only two tracks, not, say, 30 tracks and (ii) the preamp is not usually pushed into the upper gain ranges. The biggest differences between inexpensive preamps and expensive ones are (i) lower noise, (ii) more robust power supplies, (iii) better components and (iv) durability.


Hope that helps.

[rick-slo]

Steve, which tube mike would you pick for use on acoustic guitar that:

1. runs on preamp phantom power (I usually can't be bothered setting up an independent microphone power supply).
2. is cardioid (or switchable)
3. warms up quickly
4. sounds good
5. reasonable cost (say under $2000).
?

[sdelsolray]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

Steve, which tube mike would you pick for use on acoustic guitar that:

1. runs on preamp phantom power (I usually can't be bothered setting up an independent microphone power supply).
2. is cardioid (or switchable)
3. warms up quickly
4. sounds good
5. reasonable cost (say under $2000).
?

Derek,

Gee, the only 48v phantom powered tube mic I'm aware of the the Gefell UM900, which is perhaps the coolest looking mic ever made ("Made by the Elves, you know."):

Gefell UM900

But its uber-expensive, designed for vocals, etc.

Perhaps there are others. In recent years, several 48v phantom powered ribbon mics have come to market, but thats just to overcome the preamp gain issue passive ribbons have, and that's not what you're looking for.

Every tube mic I've owned or used needs that external power supply and 7-pin cable and needs to warm up for 30 minutes or so for optimal response.

[DesolationAngel]

Thanks for all that info sdelsolray...

By "state of the art" I didn't mean to imply that it's 'all change', the basics are all the same as they have been... but new forms come up, new mixtures, new price points, new form factors even new-ish combinations of items. There's some clever people out there. 5 years ago it was product X that everyone was raving about, 3 years ago product Y... etc... So a Peluso mic wouldn't have been on anyone's radar before 2002, for instance.

That's a great list of mics... I'm really interested in the Telefunken line (esp the FET line) but the tube mics, given that they are twice the price of a Mojave set, might not be in my sights at this time (given that this is a wider studio upgrade than just mics).

Again, thanks for the info.

[sdelsolray]

Originally Posted by DesolationAngel

Thanks for all that info sdelsolray...

By "state of the art" I didn't mean to imply that it's 'all change', the basics are all the same as they have been... but new forms come up, new mixtures, new price points, new form factors even new-ish combinations of items. There's some clever people out there. 5 years ago it was product X that everyone was raving about, 3 years ago product Y... etc... So a Peluso mic wouldn't have been on anyone's radar before 2002, for instance.

That's a great list of mics... I'm really interested in the Telefunken line (esp the FET line) but the tube mics, given that they are twice the price of a Mojave set, might not be in my sights at this time (given that this is a wider studio upgrade than just mics).

Again, thanks for the info.

A bit more info on the Tele M260 mics. There are three versions of that mic. All use the same capsules...no change there. The first is Rev 1 of the mic amp using the NOS Telefunken tube. The second is Rev 2 of the mic amp using the NOS Telefunken tube. The third is Rev 2 of the mic amp using a modern Phillips tube (same tube design as the Tele tube). The rev on the mic amp improved nose and linearity. Tele changed tubes when they ran low on the original NOS Tele tubes. According to Tele USA, the second model is the sweet spot, i.e., it is the best of the three. Tele still has the NOS Tele tubes but they are saving them for repairs on models that had them to begin with and won't put them in other models.

I bought a 2011 used set with (fortunately) the second version of the mic amp described above with the NOS Tele tubes about two years ago or so. I paid $1,875 for them, which I consider a decent deal. Unfortunately, I've only seen two sets for sale since then on eBay, so they don't come up for sale used very often. The run about $2,900 new. Since they are modular, I can get a new pair of the M60 mic amp bodies for about $800 and use the capsules I already have. I don't think I will do that since they are apparently so close to each other overall, but I haven't tried the M60 mic amps myself yet to confirm that.

[DesolationAngel]

So far, this morning, I have learned that;

1. In my space, on my 1946 LG-2, I like the 184's over the C42's and the 101's
2. My space actually sounds better without the room treatments I was trying
3. Everything I'm trying out sounds better than what I have already

Everything but item 3 is a bit of a surprise...