Question about tube preamps...

[DupleMeter]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

Having worked on both 1073s and 31102s for ten years, I came to appreciate the 31102s. They were basically 1073s with a few more frequency choices. These were the preamps from the 8058/68/78 series and were designed before NEVE the company diverged from Neve the man.


!979 8058 with 31102s. We had two of these. This has been one of the most respected music consoles of all time. Our other one of these ended up in upstate New York.


Mid-'70s 8024 with 1073s. Both of the previous consoles have been rejuvenated and are living new lives in high-end studios. This one is in Texas.


There was a custom-ordered Neve 10x1 mixer associated with the above console that I now own. It is forty-seven years old at this point and sill going strong.


And the SSL 4000s? The three preamps available were all useful for purposes. They were very neutral if you ran another preamp before them, by the way. That's an SL4048 E/G with a mix of preamps in 2003. The design philosophy of the SSL preamp was basd around high slew rate for crispness. If you wanted the roundoff of slow slew rate you weren't going to like it. But thousands of hits and scores were recorded on these.


Scoring recordist/mixer Danny Wallin at Record Plant (Paramount) loved these for the big string gigs.


Bob

Neves after Rupert left were hit or miss (mostly miss). The V series were just embarrassingly bad.

I learned on an SSL 4000E. It was NOT nearly as open & big as anything API or Trident had. But, yes people used them, but a lot of that was because they integrated the automation better than anyone. That was the big reason for their quick adoption & rabid following. In the ‘80s it was pretty much SOP to record on an API or Neve & then mix on an SSL.

Of course all those great albums from the Power Station were done on the 4000E. But I also know a lot of the recordings done at RCA & The Hit Factory were brought to power station to mix to get the automation of the SSL. RCA had that great old Neve. I dint remember what Germano had over at his place. I seem to remember a Trident.

I stand by my comment. The SSL preamps were very claustrophobic to me. I’m not a fan. They got better when they got to the Super Analogue version, but they never had the clarity & headroom of an API. I also find the Neves a touch mushy on some sources. I like what I like. I’m picky. 30 years in the business taught me that it’s ok if I don’t agree with others on what tools I liked & don’t like.

Actually we got into this a couple of weeks ago the Production Expert podcast. The one with myself & William Wittman. He shares my dislike for SSLs. It was here, if anyone’s interested: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas...=1000571329847

[jim1960]

I don't have anywhere near the experience of Steve or Bob have but all the commentary regarding Neve vs API vs SSL is very interesting to me. I think API preamps were the first that really impressed me for a particular purpose. Every time I heard them on strummed acoustic I thought they really shined and stood out. Over time I've come to prefer Neve-ish preamps for vocals and fingerpicking but I have a fair amount of options here and I still go through a bunch of combinations when I'm deciding what to use for any given project.

[DupleMeter]

Originally Posted by jim1960

I don't have anywhere near the experience of Steve or Bob have but all the commentary regarding Neve vs API vs SSL is very interesting to me. I think API preamps were the first that really impressed me for a particular purpose. Every time I heard them on strummed acoustic I thought they really shined and stood out. Over time I've come to prefer Neve-ish preamps for vocals and fingerpicking but I have a fair amount of options here and I still go through a bunch of combinations when I'm deciding what to use for any given project.

It’s funny because it wasn’t really until sometime in the ‘90s that the whole “different pre for different sources” thing happened. Up until then you used the preamps in the desk & that was pretty much it.

I happen to think that using the same pre on an entire record is more glue than you’ll ever get from bus compressor…and if they happen to be APIs, well that’s just a bonus. [emoji6]

[KevWind]

I can't offer any definitive answers

My experience was going from pretty cheap pre's in my Digi 002 to an A-Designs MP2A, which was a very noticeable improvement .
That said ::: now that I have really good Solid State pre's in my Avid Carbon, I don't really use the A-Designs any more

[Al Acuff]

Originally Posted by PDXSmitty

I record acoustic guitar and mandolin with a KM184 for my SDC and and Austrian Audio C818 for my LDC. Would a decent tube preamp improve the performance of these mics or have no effect since I have to use an interface (Duet 3) to record to my computer and the interface has mic preamps.

What is your room like? If it needs treatment then your money would be better spent on that. That's where you get the biggest bang for your buck when it comes to sound quality.

For recording soft acoustic sources I look for a mic preamp with a super low noise floor. I don't want to hear tube hiss on a soft fingerpicked guitar solo.

For what it's worth I own a transformerless and a transformer based preamp both of studio quality. I like the coloration of the transformers and use that preamp more. YMMV.

[DupleMeter]

I will say - for those who can't permanently alter a room, ATS Stackers are great temporary sound treatment solutions that can be stowed away in a closet when done.

https://www.atsacoustics.com/studio-stacker.html