Question

[TeleKing]

Which usually makes the biggest difference in sound. Great pre or great mic?

Will buy one or the other. Heard great mic normally makes the most difference, but I haven't toyed around with top end pre's yet.

Thoughts?

thanks

[scott anthony]

A great mic makes the most difference, but I would prefer to have at least one great pre and a decent, cheap mic then a great mic and a crappy pre.

[RodC]

Depends, how about telling us what you want to record next and what you have. Example, if you have a SM57 and want to record loud guitars, then you need a pre. If you have a decent pre and want to record Vox...

Its a slippery slope...

[scott anthony]

Depends, how about telling us what you want to record next and what you have. Example, if you have a SM57 and want to record loud guitars, then you need a pre. If you have a decent pre and want to record Vox...

Its a slippery slope...

Yes, knowing what you have and where you want to go would help...

[TeleKing]

I have a FMR RNP for a pre. I have a Soundelux u195 for mic. I love the mic, just looking for a little more shimmer I guess.

Mainly vocals and some acoustic guitar.

Thanks, and if you could suggest some mics and/or pre's to take a look at, I'd appreciate it. Reading here, everyone seems to like Great River. Any others?

I'm not a screamer, just a singer/songwriter.

[nlmd311]

You could look into the Hamptone pre's ( www.hamptone.com ) . I've never used the RNP, but the Electro-Harmonix 12AY7 pre amp might be right up your alley!

-Darrill

[joel hamilton]

I really thought about this after the last time this queston came up... I keep coming back to this line of thinking, from experience:

Shure SM57 into neve 1073: great sounding discrete goodness.

Neumann U87 or 67 or whatever into crappy pre: sound of crappy pre. period.

I always find that the sound of the last thing in a chain before the capture device, or during the mix, the last thing in the chain befor the return... important.

DBX 160XT into collins 26W tube compressor: I hear the tube comp returning on the bass more than the 160XT licking the froont end of the transient.

Etc...etc...etc... Like a discrete follower stage after an IC... both count, but at least the follower supplies some "oomph."

[Professor]

Shure SM57 into neve 1073: great sounding discrete goodness.

Maybe so, but I wouldn't use it to record an orchestra.

Neumann U87 or 67 or whatever into crappy pre: sound of crappy pre. period.

But this would still work fine on a guitar amp.

Though I'll admit I have neither the collection of preamps nor the experience JH has, I will none-the-less put in a vote in favor of microphones.
A microphone is a tranducer, it changes enery from one state (acoustic waves) into another (electricity). That's a pretty substantial line of work.
A preamp multiplies that voltage 10x, 100x, perhaps 1000x its original strength. Also a substantial contribution to be sure, but I think the first is more critical.
A preamp, no matter how good, cannot put back what a microphone is removing. If a mic is dull, you might find a really bright preamp to put back the top end, but why not switch to a mic that doesn't remove it in the first place. If a mic is slow, then even the fastest preamp can't put the transients back on the front of the waves.

Now if you're talking about a $3500 microphone into an utter dogmeat, piece of crap preamp then yeah, you should probably bump up the preamp. But you're talking about a mid-level mic into a mid-level preamp that so many folks around here just go on about.
What would be the potential upgrades?
Are we talking about an "upgrade" of the mic, meaning the same type of large diaphragm condenser, but a better one? Or are we talking about a parallel mic like finding a high-end condenser or ribbon or tube condenser?
Are we talking of an upgrade from a clean SS preamp to a cleaner SS preamp? Or perhaps a parallel towards a similarly priced tube or transformer-laden preamp?

-Jeremy

[scott anthony]

Now if you're talking about a $3500 microphone into an utter dogmeat, piece of crap preamp then yeah, you should probably bump up the preamp. But you're talking about a mid-level mic into a mid-level preamp that so many folks around here just go on about.
What would be the potential upgrades?
Are we talking about an "upgrade" of the mic, meaning the same type of large diaphragm condenser, but a better one? Or are we talking about a parallel mic like finding a high-end condenser or ribbon or tube condenser?
Are we talking of an upgrade from a clean SS preamp to a cleaner SS preamp? Or perhaps a parallel towards a similarly priced tube or transformer-laden preamp?

-Jeremy

I think what we're talking about is expanding the pallatte of someone who does vocals and acoustic guitar. I'm not familiar with the RNC, but it's reputation is good. I think a total of 3 somewhat transparent preamps (one vocal, 2 guitar) is a goal, but your next purchase sounds like a another mic. If the Soundelux works well on your voice, I'd suggest focusing on guitar mics.

[I'm Painting Again]

technically I'd love to agree with the professor and put mics above preamps..but sonically and with experience using cheap to nice pres and conversion on the same set of mics..sonically preamps make more of a difference in quality to my ears..they've made the biggest difference in my sound quality by far..

[kayagum]

I have a FMR RNP for a pre. I have a Soundelux u195 for mic. I love the mic, just looking for a little more shimmer I guess.

Mainly vocals and some acoustic guitar.

Thanks, and if you could suggest some mics and/or pre's to take a look at, I'd appreciate it. Reading here, everyone seems to like Great River. Any others?

I'm not a screamer, just a singer/songwriter.

The RNP is relatively neutral. I myself have 2 of them, and they've been great for live recording and my sound design gigs. I am also getting the 12AY7 this week to see if it really is that much more "flattering".

If you want to hear what a Hamptone can do, search for Dynomike's stuff on "Listen to My Music". Remember, he's quite good at placement, so it's not just the gear

[audiogeek1]

My vote is on the Pre amp for changing the sound more than the mic. Using a U67 on the Euphonix pre sounds different than the GML sound different than the Manley sounds different than the API etc...

After you have a few types of pres (color, clean etc..) then check out many mics. the u195 is a great mic. you could look at an akg 414 it is way more bright than the soundelux.

Hope it helps.

Mike

[NewAndImprov]

Since getting a couple of pretty seriously good preamps (an Amek 9098 and a 7th Circle N72), I'm finding I like all my mics a lot more. Cheap mics can sound very good through a good pre. I've been recording a lot of acoustic guitar lately with an AKG C3000 through the AMEK lately, and it sounds very good. 57's sound really nice through good pre's as well. The only reasonably good mic I have access to is an AT 4050, and it sounds fantastic through either of my good channels.

Seriously, even my wife has been commenting that my recent recordings sound a lot better than before, and it certainly isn't because I'm getting beter

[mwingerski]

I put my vote in on getting a better mic pre... to my ears, a 57 can sound radically different depending on the mic pre... and the same goes with lots of other mics i have... the 195 is a good mic and I think you'd do well to get a pre that has a bit more character to it... I love the neve portico right now, it's got the silk switch on it which makes it like two pres in one... the clean version sounds similar to a 9098 pre and the silk sounds close to the great river nv1... definitely my first choice when working with just about anything lately... but it's always about what you're going for and what you like.

Some tubes could be good for you too... depends on how much you want to spend...