"hank alrich" wrote

So, which is it "preamp that sounds good" or "not worry
about what technology it's built with" or IS IT the
technology "cheesy tube stage?" All mixed signals to
the consumer (original poster).

It's nice that you appreciate a sucky preamp for your
voiceovers; that's no reason for anybody seeking a
quality microphone preamplifier to use it.

You don't get it... there are no "quality" mic pre-amps
at the sub $500 level.


Voicingover and music recording may not have much
in common.

Reproduction of the human voice is the most
demanding aspect of audio production/reproduction.
The ear detects the most details and microdynamics
in this frequency range.

What don't they have in common (music/voice)?
Please provide a technically based list of
objections?


"With a real tube preamp"... what "real" anything? The
discussion is the sub $500 pre-amp price point, BTW.

He's talking about a preamp where the tube elements provide the
significant gain, not some cheesdeball setup designed in marketing to
dupe the unaware into thinking what they've bought uses tubes for
amplification.

Quack, quack, quack...


I have no quarrel with anybody wanting to use coloration,
but I take issue with the idea that tubes have some inherent
coloration that is at all represented by the likes of your
sucky preamp.

Please enlighten me then. What empirical experiences
lead you to that conclusion? Have you personally auditioned
the PMA Pro Gold in you setup? Do you have something
to add that someone else didn't tell you (empirical)?