|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Dec 31, 2017 18:38:15 GMT -6
I agree Wiz, that's the thing, all this might not matter at all to some people. Eventually there's gonna be someone who buys an Apollo Twin with some plugs and makes a benchmark recording. There's quite a lot of UAD on all my tracks. The ATR-102's on every 2 bus of everything I do.
But also don't forget, after all the time and effort we've all made to learn our way around recording music, we're a bit like connoisseurs, and have some refined tastes. My main priority is a big clean vocal sound. The Stam gets me much closer to what I'd really like than the UAD plug-in has.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Dec 31, 2017 18:53:37 GMT -6
My amateur friend calls me a connoisseur from time to time, haha, I'd like to tell him he has no taste.
Happy NEW GEAR.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Dec 31, 2017 21:16:31 GMT -6
I think those tests are nice, but they don't give any value about the everyday use. From my past tests with UAD 1073 I bet that the signal from the Stam is more easy to handle in the mix.
Truth is told if you have to use the gear every day....
But who care's happy 2018 to everyone...
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Dec 31, 2017 21:29:50 GMT -6
I did find that mixes were easier when every track had gone through the SA73. It's true that one of the problems with many tests or shootouts is little info regarding long term listening and use. Things you don't notice right away can become obvious over time, and eventually become a deal breaker. That's one reason I could sell all my outboard without too much regret. Even though I wish I could have kept it all, I had slight dissatisfactions with all of the pieces.
I've had the SA73 for quite a while now, and I haven't felt any "if only, or I wish" thoughts yet, other than wanting a matching EQ ;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 1, 2018 16:18:25 GMT -6
It’s the reason I believe all our discussion about mic pres is a little overstated.
|
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jan 1, 2018 16:31:27 GMT -6
It’s the reason I believe all our discussion about mic pres is a little overstated. lately i've been reading a lot of what silvia massey thinks. she says preamps are the most important part of the signal chain. in her case she is referring to neve but goes further and says without good pres she wouldn't bother recording. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 1, 2018 16:41:44 GMT -6
I've been back and forth on their importance but I'm now a bigger believer in mic pres than I ever was.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jan 1, 2018 16:44:37 GMT -6
It’s the reason I believe all our discussion about mic pres is a little overstated. lately i've been reading a lot of what silvia massey thinks. she says preamps are the most important part of the signal chain. in her case she is referring to neve but goes further and says without good pres she wouldn't bother recording. Well Sylvia is ITB now, so front end must be super-extra-important for her, I would think! |
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jan 1, 2018 17:12:19 GMT -6
yeah could be monkey.
|
|
|
|
Post by nick8801 on Jan 1, 2018 20:33:03 GMT -6
Finally got a chance to listen....The Stam wins easily hands down. It's like there is an extra octave of information in the signal. There's also this wooly sort of presence in the upper mids if that makes any sense. For what it's worth, the Stam has more noise than the UAD, but that doesn't really bother me. Thanks for making the video!
|
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Jan 1, 2018 20:43:42 GMT -6
lately i've been reading a lot of what silvia massey thinks. she says preamps are the most important part of the signal chain. in her case she is referring to neve but goes further and says without good pres she wouldn't bother recording. Well Sylvia is ITB now, so front end must be super-extra-important for her, I would think! She tracks on the Neve but is mixing ITB now. Which is absolutely nuts because her collection of outboard is amazing. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 1, 2018 20:48:14 GMT -6
It’s the reason I believe all our discussion about mic pres is a little overstated. lately i've been reading a lot of what silvia massey thinks. she says preamps are the most important part of the signal chain. in her case she is referring to neve but goes further and says without good pres she wouldn't bother recording. Guess I totally disagree with Sylvia Massey then. I’d much rather record a vintage 47 through a presonus mic pre than a Blue Spark through a V76. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 1, 2018 21:54:54 GMT -6
I agree with John in a way. For me, it's mic first. A great mic will sound great through almost anything, but a great preamp can only do so much for a mediocre mic. You can't fix what isn't there in the first place. That said, I've had a bunch of preamps, though nothing like the kind of experience some of you guys have had, and the sound of the Stam finally put me in the ballpark of what I've been looking for at home.
|
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jan 1, 2018 21:55:41 GMT -6
lately i've been reading a lot of what silvia massey thinks. she says preamps are the most important part of the signal chain. in her case she is referring to neve but goes further and says without good pres she wouldn't bother recording. Guess I totally disagree with Sylvia Massey then. I’d much rather record a vintage 47 through a presonus mic pre than a Blue Spark through a V76. not to talk for her, but from what I have read she would agree with using the most expensive mic in the chest as wel . but there are many many examples from her and others of cheap mics doing a stellar job through high end preamps and I think that's her point.
an sm57 into a neve is one example. whereas an sm57 into a presonus looses something.
isn't that exactly what this thread proves.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 1, 2018 22:06:30 GMT -6
Notice I said mediocre, not cheap. An SM57/58 does a great job on some things. The new Roswell Delphos sounds great in its own right and sells for under a grand. Massey, like most of us will use what works in a given situation. Her advantage is she usually has more options. She in particular likes to experiment with unusual sounds, so a cheap or weird mic might be used, but you can be sure if a megabuck vintage mic is called for, she'll have one there. I know she uses her Soyuz 0-17 on many of her new projects.
I think if an sm57 sounds great through a Neve, it proves the 57 is a great mic.
|
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jan 1, 2018 22:36:55 GMT -6
Hi Martin,
it's an interesting part of the conversation for sure. with your stam versus the uad there is a bunch of stuff the stam is adding to the signal.
none of that is added by the mic or it would be heard in both examples. I'm kinda surprised the uad performed so poorly. it is obviously capable of capturing what the stam is creating but simply can't replocate that in software.
unless you used different converters for each take?
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 1, 2018 22:37:04 GMT -6
Well, if she said the pre is “the most important part of the chain” then I disagree with her. If she said an sm57 through a Neve can sound good, I would agree with her there lol. Truth of the matter is that it all matters.
Sometimes I think what people (not saying anyone in particular) attribute to “sounding amazing” with a lot of vintage recordings is not particularly the sonic quality, it’s any number of other things...the song, the performance, the lack of a painful crispy top end, the emotion it conveys, the ability of true legendary artists, the effects, etc. now, sometimes I think both were achieved - the Beatles records from 66 on - were just masterpieces. The Sinatra recordings at Capitol. Nat King Cole.
Anyway, I’m babbling. We have the ability now to make better sounding recordings than ever...but it still ain’t particularly cheap.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Jan 1, 2018 22:47:45 GMT -6
Notice I said mediocre, not cheap. An SM57/58 does a great job on some things. The new Roswell Delphos sounds great in its own right and sells for under a grand. Massey, like most of us will use what works in a given situation. Her advantage is she usually has more options. She in particular likes to experiment with unusual sounds, so a cheap or weird mic might be used, but you can be sure if a megabuck vintage mic is called for, she'll have one there.I know she uses her Soyuz 0-17 on many of her new projects. I think if an sm57 sounds great through a Neve, it proves the 57 is a great mic. Bolded the truth. I’ve seen her use a battery powered amp (the piggy!) for the so-bad-it’s-good sound. Into a 57 into the Neve of course. And then blend that in with a vintage plexi. It’s all about what works. But I think with any of these interviews you have to take it with a grain of salt. It’s easy to say “oh yeah the pre is the most important part”...especially when you’ve basically not thought a lot about pre selection in 30 years since you’re usually tracking everything through your 8038... |
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jan 1, 2018 23:12:53 GMT -6
Notice I said mediocre, not cheap. An SM57/58 does a great job on some things. The new Roswell Delphos sounds great in its own right and sells for under a grand. Massey, like most of us will use what works in a given situation. Her advantage is she usually has more options. She in particular likes to experiment with unusual sounds, so a cheap or weird mic might be used, but you can be sure if a megabuck vintage mic is called for, she'll have one there.I know she uses her Soyuz 0-17 on many of her new projects. I think if an sm57 sounds great through a Neve, it proves the 57 is a great mic. Bolded the truth. I’ve seen her use a battery powered amp (the piggy!) for the so-bad-it’s-good sound. Into a 57 into the Neve of course. And then blend that in with a vintage plexi. It’s all about what works. But I think with any of these interviews you have to take it with a grain of salt. It’s easy to say “oh yeah the pre is the most important part”...especially when you’ve basically not thought a lot about pre selection in 30 years since you’re usually tracking everything through your 8038... but that was her point. everything gets the neve. that's the common denominator regardless of mic. that's what martins example also shows. the neve type pre adds something.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,961 
|
Post by ericn on Jan 2, 2018 7:56:09 GMT -6
Not trying to put words in her mouth but the way I have always understood her in the past was right mic, price be damned then the right pre. I know part of her approach is Neve, Neve, Neve because it puts the same sonic foot print on everything and makes everything gel.
A simple cheat I taught beginners was to use the same pre for everything but the vocal and it will sound like a band but the vocal will cut through!
The same pre on everything is why I have 8ch of Dan Alexander 1272 & Need to build 8 ch of CAPI ( oh how I wish Jeff offered the Heider in kit form to save some dough! )
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 2, 2018 9:32:29 GMT -6
I think differently about a vocal than you eric, though we want the same result, an outstanding vocal. Being a vocalist, I'd want the vocal to have the absolute best sounding preamp first, and only then worry about fitting the music around that sound.
You could still do it the way you mentioned, but I'd pick the better pre for the vocal first.
My "technique", turn the vocal up. I often go too far and my vocals get crunchy when mastering, but then I back down a db or so, and remaster. Not a great way to do it, but it works pretty well. A good preamp helps a lot though. The sound itself cuts through, so there's less need for EQ. I didn't EQ anything on the tracks for the video, I just roll off vocals below 40Hz.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,961
|
Post by ericn on Jan 2, 2018 10:04:39 GMT -6
I think differently about a vocal than you eric, though we want the same result, an outstanding vocal. Being a vocalist, I'd want the vocal to have the absolute best sounding preamp first, and only then worry about fitting the music around that sound. You could still do it the way you mentioned, but I'd pick the better pre for the vocal first. My "technique", turn the vocal up. I often go too far and my vocals get crunchy when mastering, but then I back down a db or so, and remaster. Not a great way to do it, but it works pretty well. A good preamp helps a lot though. The sound itself cuts through, so there's less need for EQ. I didn't EQ anything on the tracks for the video, I just roll of vocals below 40Hz. Martin did I say Or imply that the choice of vocal pre would be less than the pre's used for tracking everything else? This was not my intention, and again this is a simple trick for beginners who are easily frustrated when it comes to mixing and making the vocal stand out. As for the "Best pre" I hate that as a generic term and find it leads to the assumption that more expensive is always the way to go, I think we have to use the term " the right pre" it could be the Neve flavor, the API flavor, the tube flavor, hell it could be the Mackie mixer pre! The other part of this is you don't know till you try! With beginners, that's the hardest part to encourage them to do, try everything on hand to find what is going to give them what they want & it's often the road least expected ! I can tell you from experience it still amazes me how often the least expensive combo is the one that works, but everybody was afraid to try it because they thought with their wallet instead of their ears. I should add another important trick for beginners is get the sound of the featured source first, if you find that sound it's so much easier to build around it then come back knowing what you need for that featured source. |
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Jan 2, 2018 14:48:02 GMT -6
I've been back and forth on their importance but I'm now a bigger believer in mic pres than I ever was. My thought has always been that quality preamps work, no matter what they are. I did a wonderful classical recording with my old Avid Mbox Pro's built in pres a while back and have done stuff with my built in Apollo pres without and unison enabled. They both are clean, even, and not brittle. For me I feel that it's about the signal chain as a whole; how this mic works with this preamp on this source. What I find different Preamps are good for are different vibes. I'll use tube preamps when I'm working on jazz or some pop stuff. I lean toward something like an SSL or Neve preamp for classical. For me the preamp can help direct the vibe of what you're working on. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 2, 2018 16:06:24 GMT -6
Eric, I misread a little, sorry bro.
|
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jan 2, 2018 16:48:07 GMT -6
Hi martin,
One of the reasons I liked the uad vocal was because I thought it would sit better. I think you had the vocal up louder in the full stam mix because some eq is needed to give the vocal some space.
Could you try a mix with instruments stam and vocal uad.
|
|
