Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
|
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
Powell wrote:
"hank alrich" wrote Have you used an FMR RNP? No, but I went to the web site and read about the product. The manufacture states this about the RNP, "WHAT SUCKS Now I will violate a very important marketing rule by telling you what I think sucks about the RNP. Why? Because nothing is perfect and compromises always have to be made."... I have claimed nothing different. After reading the product information it doesn’t appear to be a good candidate for studio use. If used for this purpose one would need a roll of duck tape to hold it down in an equipment rack. Weak power supply. It also only has three LED lights to represent the entire audio spectrum, that not very useful. Considering that the GML 8302/8304 have but a single LET per channel, your logic would seem to indicate that the RNP must be 3 times as good as the GML. |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"hank alrich" wrote Have you tried one? If it's not equal in some specifications to pres that cost four or more times what it costs, Also please site specific makes and models of mic. pre-amps (" four times the price") that the RNP blows out of the water, which you personal have working experience with? You obviously have no professional or high quality audio experience, you think you can tell what somethng sounds like by seading specs sheets, and you have not tried an FMR RNP. "cost four or more times what it costs"... so you really have no idea (empirical experience) what is better at 2X, 3X, or 4X. So why make that claim, mr. Self-importance? How would you know? What microphone pre-amp/s do you own that you consider *state of the art*? If you'd been here more than a day or two you'd already know the answer to your ignorant question. Shoot yourself in the other foot now and proclaim your marksmanship. "Shoot yourself in the other foot now"... hehehe, oh right. Were are the name of manufactures and specific models costing four times the expense of the PNR that do worse? It's you claim, sugar pants. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"hank alrich" wrote in message .. . Scott Dorsey wrote: Then again, I know folks who like to run transformerless preamps into clipping on kick drum tracks to get a more clicky sort of sound. They could just drop a calve smaple into it, combine to taste. Are you talking about bovine calves or lower-part-of-the-leg calves g -- Neil Henderson Progressive Rock http://www.saqqararecords.com |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
Mike Rivers wrote:
One of the problems is that beginners need to make A/B/C comparisons in order to make decisions. They aren't tuned in to what just sounds good and they don't yet know that when they hear it. So even if they mail-order one mic preamp, play with it at home, and don't hear any problems, they still have some doubts as to whether there might be another choice in their price range that would be better. My take on this is that it shouldn't matter - that "good enough for me" is good enough until your ears get bettter. Yes, Yes, YES! Sometimes "good enough" really is good enough. That's why pros at the very top of the field still use & recommend SM57s after all these years. But it's hard to accept that. Here we have a case where someone said that he found that the ART was good enough for his application, and a whole bunch of people telling him that he could do better. I don't know what more to say. I don't think he's getting slammed for saying the ART was good enough for HIS application. He's getting slammed for trying to pass himself off as an expert & for touting the ART preamp to the original poster as if it were truly a piece of pro gear. Being rude to Scott surely didn't win him any friends either. I must say, Scott has shown a lot of class & professionalism by simply ignoring him once he had shown himself to be a moron. |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Powell" wrote in message
Were are the name of manufactures and specific models costing four times the expense of the PNR that do worse? It's you claim, sugar pants. PNR? That must be one of those military designations for that particular device... Preamp, Nice, Really (1 ea.). -- Neil Henderson Progressive Rock http://www.saqqararecords.com |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Monte P McGuire" wrote After reading the product information it doesn’t appear to be a good candidate for studio use. If used for this purpose one would need a roll of duck tape to hold it down in an equipment rack. Weak power supply. It also only has three LED lights to represent the entire audio spectrum, that not very useful. The incomplete specification sheet is particularly troubling, too. The important thing you missed was how the RNP sounds. That's because you've never tried to use one in a real session. Why not comment after you've used one. I'm not interested in that price point or performance level. All A/C current is dirty. The only real question is how much and how audible is it. Running the mic pre-amp and computer, while recording, through a power conditioner I can see that the noise floor drops 4-7 dB on the meter while idling. The audio effect is a blacker/quieter background. OK, you're an idiot. You're capable of self deception too. What empirical experiences do you have with power conditioners that lead you to that conclusion... none? You just know, right? It would truly be “straight wire with gain.” None of the sited manufactures are working the on bleeding edge of technology. Have you looked at the Gordon preamp? That design is completely and radically different than anything I've seen before and is built with some extremely high quality parts. Gordon is a new name for me. I found this: http://www.proaudioreview.com/par/ju...n_micpre.shtml The Gordon Instrument web site provides this technical information http://www.gordonaudio.com/specs.htm Why must you comment on things that you know nothing about? Why not, you just did... power line conditioners. In a similar technology like phono pre-amps, for example, one has to invest $2-10 K per channel to reach that level. There is no market place in the sound recording industry for that kind of assault. Honestly, look inside of the Gordon preamp and tell me that the parts cost for that box isn't at least $1500 a channel. I don't know how or why that guy can sell the preamp for as little as he does. The Gordon Instrument web site provides this technical information http://www.gordonaudio.com/specs.htm Would it make you happier if he charged $20K for it instead? What sort of folks are supposed to pay $10K a channel for a mike preamp? No, I wouldn't like to pay "$20K", OTOH, one usually gets what they pay for (no free lunch). And heck, aren't you the guy who's happy with a $50/channel toy preamp? What are you talking about "$50/channel"... it is a typo for $250? I’m not committed to any particular product. How can you have it both ways? Any why haven't you spent real money for a real preamp? I'm all ears... waiting for enlightment. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
In article , "Powell"
writes: How would you know? What microphone pre-amp/s do you own that you consider *state of the art*? I cant answer for Hank but in my case I own Neve, Manley, Grace, Great River and quite a few other makes as well. The RNP is right up there with any of them IMO and it gets daily use in my place. One thing you dont seem to understand is that there is no completely uncolored preamp, least of all the ART! The most neutral pre I own is probably the Great River which is nearly as transparent as the Millenia HV3 (considered my many to be as neutral a pre as there is). Rather than dissing something you've never heard you ought to be happy that someone makes a good pre for this kind of money. Garth~ "I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle." Ed Cherney |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
In article , "Powell"
writes: "Garthrr" wrote This is how you judge the efficacy of equipment? I think there are better ways to do it. Try listening. I have both the RNP and the ART PRO MPA. the is very little comparison and its not favorable to the ART. That's an opinion you get to have. As do many others who have actually heard the two pieces in question. Apparently you have not so your ignorance is understandable. Two more errors: First, it's "duct" tape, not "duck" tape. Its used for taping heat ducts. For your lacking education: "Is it Duct or Duck? We don't want you to be confused, so we will explain. The first name for Duct Tape was DUCK. During World War II the U.S. Military needed a waterproof tape to keep the moisture out of ammunition cases. So, they enlisted the Johnson and Johnson Permacel Division to manufacture the tape. Because it was waterproof, everyone referred to it as "duck" tape (like water off a duck's back). I had not heard that. Thanks for the info. Secondly, the RNP can be easily mounted to a UTR1 rack tray which costs $20. I have three of them in one rack space. That's nice. Yes it is. My racks are very crowded and any way to cram more functionality into the available space is much appreciated. But the main point that you seem so illogically resistant to is that the RNP is an extraordinarily good piece of kit at an astonishing price. Your prejidice is really only hurting you. Have fun with your ART. Garth~ "I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle." Ed Cherney |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Garthrr" wrote This is how you judge the efficacy of equipment? I think there are better ways to do it. Try listening. I have both the RNP and the ART PRO MPA. the is very little comparison and its not favorable to the ART. That's an opinion you get to have. As do many others who have actually heard the two pieces in question. Apparently you have not so your ignorance is understandable. So, let me see if I’m have the right message here. ART manufactures only junk and they have no market share in comparison to FMR, and everyone knows this? |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1080403010k@trad... One of the problems is that beginners need to make A/B/C comparisons in order to make decisions. They aren't tuned in to what just sounds good and they don't yet know that when they hear it. That's about the best I've ever heard it put. |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
|
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
|
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Garthrr" wrote How would you know? What microphone pre-amp/s do you own that you consider *state of the art*? I cant answer for Hank but in my case I own Neve, Manley, Grace, Great River and quite a few other makes as well. The RNP is right up there with any of them IMO and it gets daily use in my place. So, in other words Neve, Manley, Grace, Great River are poor price performers in comparison, right? I’m not paying for superior performance across the board but only slight nuances. One thing you dont seem to understand is that there is no completely uncolored preamp, least of all the ART! No, I get that. The most neutral pre I own is probably the Great River which is nearly as transparent as the Millenia HV3 (considered my many to be as neutral a pre as there is). But you've indicated that RNP is at the same price performance level. Rather than dissing something you've never heard you ought to be happy that someone makes a good pre for this kind of money. Sorry, I don't buy the "it has no competition" mantra. We wouldn’t be having this conversation if the high end companies I’m most familiar with built mic. Pre-amps... I would have purchased one from them. Instead, I find an niche market in an industry of largely shoddy products. Why is that? Why don’t major manufactures enter this market. I don’t know the answer but would suspect that it’s either profit related or an uneducated buyer demographic (no money). |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
In article , "Powell"
writes: So, let me see if Im have the right message here. ART manufactures only junk and they have no market share in comparison to FMR, and everyone knows this? Are you serious?? ART probably has many times the market share that FMR (RNP manufacturer) has. So what? FMR is a tiny micro business. Surely you arent implying any relationship between market share and quality. I give even you more credit than that. There's probably an inverse relationship if one at all. McDonalds has a big marketshare. Do they make high quality food? Look, its very simple--The RNP is a very good sounding piece. Its made by a guy who does good work and is a nice guy. You ought to be supporting him if you care about good gear and good prices. The ART is not in the same league soundwise. I am not aware of anything ART makes that is of particularly high quality. I have a PRO VLA compressor that I like on some stuff but its certainly not an uncolored or clean sounding piece. Its also probably the best thing they make. And yes, most of us already know this stuff. Garth~ "I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle." Ed Cherney |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
In article , "Powell"
writes: So, in other words Neve, Manley, Grace, Great River are poor price performers in comparison, right? Im not paying for superior performance across the board but only slight nuances. The Manley costs about $2500, The Grace and Great River are somewhere in the same ballpark pricewise I think. The RNP costs $500. There are times when I prefer the RNP to any of the others. Sometimes I like the Grace. It depends on the individual app. They all sound a little different but all very good. The RNP has some price-related drawbacks: It has stepped gain in 6dB increments, its noise floor is higher than the Grace although still respectable, it has a wallwart power supply (I only refer to the inconvenience of the wallwart, not to any deficiency in its operation.) Those are the trade-offs that are made to keep the price low. I have no problem with that. The most neutral pre I own is probably the Great River which is nearly as transparent as the Millenia HV3 (considered my many to be as neutral a pre as there is). But you've indicated that RNP is at the same price performance level. No, I didnt. The Great River costs about 4 times as much. It has a slightly lower noise floor than the RNP. Its more neutral souinding I think. Sound quality-wise they are peers IMO. Rather than dissing something you've never heard you ought to be happy that someone makes a good pre for this kind of money. Sorry, I don't buy the "it has no competition" mantra. Well, I sure cant think of any. And I'm aware of most of the products out there right now. For instance, I have a Presonus MP20 (which kicks the ART's ass BTW) which cost about $450 as I recall and it doesnt hold a candle to the RNP. We wouldnt be having this conversation if the high end companies Im most familiar with built mic. Pre-amps... Who are you thinking of? Garth~ "I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle." Ed Cherney |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Powell" wrote in message
... "Monte P McGuire" wrote Snip The important thing you missed was how the RNP sounds. That's because you've never tried to use one in a real session. Why not comment after you've used one. To which the idiot replied... I'm not interested in that price point or performance level. Right. You have already indicated that crap is just right for you. Sorry. Forgot that for a moment. Steve King |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
In article ,
Powell wrote: "Monte P McGuire" wrote Powell wrote: After reading the product information it doesn’t appear to be a good candidate for studio use. If used for this purpose one would need a roll of duck tape to hold it down in an equipment rack. Weak power supply. It also only has three LED lights to represent the entire audio spectrum, that not very useful. The incomplete specification sheet is particularly troubling, too. The important thing you missed was how the RNP sounds. That's because you've never tried to use one in a real session. Why not comment after you've used one. I'm not interested in that price point or performance level. ....but yet you make this grand pronouncement that a particular device isn't suitable for studio use, because it doesn't have a complete spec sheet, the chassis is too small and it doesn't have enough LEDs. I guess that sort of puts your opinions as to the 'studio worthiness' of a piece of gear into perspective. All A/C current is dirty. The only real question is how much and how audible is it. Running the mic pre-amp and computer, while recording, through a power conditioner I can see that the noise floor drops 4-7 dB on the meter while idling. The audio effect is a blacker/quieter background. OK, you're an idiot. You're capable of self deception too. What empirical experiences do you have with power conditioners that lead you to that conclusion... none? You just know, right? Yes, I do know. I have done a lot of amplifier design and testing using an Audio Precision test set and I theoretically and practically know of nothing that could be done to any sort of power supply, unless it was broken to start with, that will give you 4 to 7dB less noise out of an amplifier. Forget about power conditioners, I'm talking complete supply redesign, which I have done a few times to various pieces of commercial gear, and it didn't provide any such benefits, nor did I expect it to. Why you claim to get 4-7dB less noise by adding some crap to the line cord and expect _us_ to believe it is the real question. Why should I trust your measurements? Do you even have a way to make a calibrated measurement of any sort? OK, just to be fair, name the exact model of preamp and power conditioner and if I can find them, then I'll put them on the test set and compare the two measurements, with and without conditioner. Maybe you do have some magical device that really does work, but you have to refer to it precisely. You can't just call it a 'power conditioner'. You must be more specific. Why must you comment on things that you know nothing about? Why not, you just did... power line conditioners. What makes you think I know nothing about them? Do you even own any real test equipment? Do you know what end of a soldering iron to hold? Do you know _anything_ about analog electronics at all? I find it hard to believe that if you make these fantastic claims about getting 4-7dB less noise from a mike amp by adding crap to the power cord. I'm all ears... waiting for enlightment. Then start talking less and listening more around here. You've done little more than **** a bunch of people off with some half assed theories and haven't offered anything useful in return. Read a bit more and you might walk away with some useful information. Best of luck to you... Monte McGuire |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 23:58:31 -0500, "Powell"
wrote: I recently enjoyed a casual comparison of four truly excellent preamps (Gordon Model 3, Grace Lunatec V. 3, Great River MP2-MH and Millennia Media HV-3D), all with admirable linearity to 100 KHz or well beyond, all with admirable phase coherence and extremely low noise floors bumping theoretical minimum, and they all sounded different. "extremely low noise floors bumping theoretical minimum"... not likely. Yes, near the theoretical minimum. It's not wildly difficult to achieve. In fact, "excellent specfications" in general are pretty common any more. But virtually all micamps, like different microphones, sound different. "Specs" and "sound" often do not correlate. Bottom line -- rent, borrow, demo, do whatever it takes to get a bunch of candidate micamps into your room, with your mics, on your program, and make your own analysis. JL |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
colon ducksbutt Powel grunted:
I'm not interested in that price point or performance level. Mainly because you'd rather pay half that for outright crap. You probably enjoy eating secondhand kitty litter and calling it caviar. The RNP is so much better than your feces of ART that you wouldn't have a clue what to do with it. Man, if dirt was half as dumb as you are there would be no land-based lifeforms. Wait... your mom just called to say you're supposed to get out of the sheep dip tub and go clean the catbox. -- ha |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
neil.hendersonwrote:
"hank alrich" wrotet... Scott Dorsey wrote: Then again, I know folks who like to run transformerless preamps into clipping on kick drum tracks to get a more clicky sort of sound. They could just drop a calve smaple into it, combine to taste. Are you talking about bovine calves or lower-part-of-the-leg calves g Claves, Hank, claves... g Mehaps me typing was moooving too fast for my so-called brain. -- ha |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
Monte P McGuire wrote:
Why must you comment on things that you know nothing about? Then colon Poweel sputumed: Why not, you just did... power line conditioners. What makes you think I know nothing about them? Do you even own any real test equipment? Do you know what end of a soldering iron to hold? Do you know _anything_ about analog electronics at all? I find it hard to believe that if you make these fantastic claims about getting 4-7dB less noise from a mike amp by adding crap to the power cord. Monte, Unlikely as it seems considering how litle I know technically, I've figured it out: his power conditioner doesn't pass juice and his amp noise went down 4 to 7 dB as soon as he hooked it to the conditioner. Pretty simple, hunh? The solution is for him to buy a ten thousand dollar AC cord for the power conditioner. -- ha |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
Powell wrote:
The important thing you missed was how the RNP sounds. That's because you've never tried to use one in a real session. Why not comment after you've used one. I'm not interested in that price point or performance level. Isn't "that price point" what your subject line asks for? The performance level is what we are discussing. Several of us have recommended the RNP as a good option at thae price and you are insisting (without ever having heard one) that it doesn't perform well. |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
Powell wrote:
We wouldn’t be having this conversation if the high end companies I’m most familiar with built mic. Pre-amps... I would have purchased one from them. Companies selling high end consumer gear which make mic preamps? Offhand--I can think of Manley, FM Acuostics, and EAR. I find an niche market in an industry of largely shoddy products. Why is that? Why are you calling them shoddy? Have you ever seen the inside of a Great River preamp? Why don’t major manufactures enter this market? Major is a rather loose term, but if you are thinking volume--Mackie will shortly be selling an 8-channel preamp under their Onyx label. Aphex, Symmetrix, Presonus, and DBX are in the standalone preamp market. If you are thinking reputation, then the players most of us would consider Major have already been named. Is George Massenburg major enough for you? I don’t know the answer but would suspect that it’s either profit related or an uneducated buyer demographic (no money). It's always profit related if you're in business to make money. Understand that until recently, consoles (real consoles, like those used in real studios) had good quality preamps in them. Massenburg's was the first standalone preamp I recall using in a studio--maybe in '85 or '86? John Hardy started running ads not long after that IIRC. The whole boutique preamp craze really started in the mid-90s and there is still precious little original thinking being done on the matter. You've been pointed at most of it during this thread. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
Anyone have a good recommendation for a warm, tube, 2-channel mic preamp
for around four hundred clams? The only inexpensive tube *circuit* with a healthy plate voltage is in the DBX silver-face stuff, which is quite well designed, but unfortunately some jackass executive decided to use cheap parts like aluminum electrolytic capacitors. I have a DBX 386, which is a dual mic preamp (solid state dual servo, possibly class A), with tube circuit (2 12AX7's with 200V plates), and a 24/96 A/D converter based on an AKM 5383 chip, same as in the Digi002. The preamp section is somewhat trashy on treble, but I've used it just for its tube circuit before and it achieves the desired effect without butchering the treble. The A/D is pretty clean too, and has a digital peak limiter that simulates tape saturation, though I generally avoid it. 386's generally go for around $300-350 used. |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Monte P McGuire" wrote ...
??? Done a lot of studio work? Save r.a.p Please don't feed the troll. |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ... Powell wrote: The important thing you missed was how the RNP sounds. That's because you've never tried to use one in a real session. Why not comment after you've used one. I'm not interested in that price point or performance level. Isn't "that price point" what your subject line asks for? Save r.a.p Please don't feed the troll. |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"hank alrich" wrote...
Wait... your mom just called to say you're supposed to get out of the sheep dip tub and go clean the catbox. Save r.a.p Please don't feed the troll. |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Steve King" wrote in message ... The Troll is stinking up the place. Steve King "Powell" wrote in message ... (drivel) Well, thats the end of the useful lifespan of this thread. |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
Powell wrote:
They sure do get jumpy over here when you challenge their notions of fidelity/accuracy. I don’t see any potential pledges for the r.a.o. fraternity. As a group they are delicate wall flowers by comparison . That's because, on the whole, people here tend to actually listen to equipment. You might be better off back in r.a.o. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
Anyone have a good recommendation for a warm, tube, 2-channel mic preamp for
around four hundred clams? -- Doesn't exist. Richard H. Kuschel "I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
|
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Powell" wrote in message
... We wouldn't be having this conversation if the high end companies I'm most familiar with built mic. Pre-amps... I would have purchased one from them. Instead, I find an niche market in an industry of largely shoddy products. Why is that? Why don't major manufactures enter this market. I don't know the answer but would suspect that it's either profit related or an uneducated buyer demographic (no money). You have now asked an interesting question. There is, I think, one primary reason: pro and semi-pro recording gear is sold to a different market than home audio gear (including high-end), through different dealers. For a high-end audio manufacturer to go into the recording market would require setting up an entirely new dealer network, and these days most home audio manufaturers have their hands full already. The work and money involved in diversifying into this new area would be, I think, too much of a risk for most of them. The ones who are doing well (like Conrad-Johnson, Audio Research and Krell) are keeping on doing what they're doing, and the ones who aren't doing well are struggling just to stay afloat. All that said, a few high-end audio people *have* marketed recording gear over the years. Manley is a corporate descendant of David Manley's Vacuum Tube Logic company, an outfit from England. They've been back and forth a number of times: David M. started out designing studio gear, decided to apply his skills to designing home gear, and did reasonably well. From there, he went back to selling recording gear, and did quite well, but (Scott, you can correct me if I got this wrong) he and his wife got a divorce, and she got the company in the settlement. They still make pro audio gear, including microphones and preamps, and their preamps are excellent; I've used them. Tim de Paravicini, another high-end audio guy, made some very fancy and expensive microphones and marketed them; I think he used capsules from the Swedish Pearl firm, and whopping huge transformers. He also built custom preamps, but I don't know whether he marketed them or not. He was pretty much a one-man firm, and I don't think he's doing it any more; his stuff was so pricey that his market was quite limited. Mark Levinson (the person, not the company that now owns the name) has designed some high-end recording gear, and issued some very good-sounding recordings. I don't think he markets the equipment any more, though. He made a very nice analog tape recorder for a while. He has designed an equalizer for Cello that, although it was originally intended for high-end home users, has found a home in quite a few mastering studios. Peace, Paul |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Monte P McGuire" wrote in message
... In article znr1080328791k@trad, Mike Rivers wrote: You might want to look at Monte McGuire's three-issue mic preamp construction article that was in Recording a few years ago. He'd be happy to hear that someone has actually built one, I'll bet. I'm pretty sure that was Paul Stamler's article, but I'm certain it wasn't mine. The design looked good too IIRC... I think it was too. I'm working, rather slowly, on a followup design, one which will include some compromises for the sake of getting eight channels into a 2U cabinet. Still costing it out. A couple of folks have built them, by the way, and the ones I've heard from have liked them. One guy has had oscillation problems, and I'm working with him now to try and figure out why, and how to fix it. Peace, Paul |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
"Monte P McGuire" wrote in message
... Yes, I do know. I have done a lot of amplifier design and testing using an Audio Precision test set and I theoretically and practically know of nothing that could be done to any sort of power supply, unless it was broken to start with, that will give you 4 to 7dB less noise out of an amplifier. Forget about power conditioners, I'm talking complete supply redesign, which I have done a few times to various pieces of commercial gear, and it didn't provide any such benefits, nor did I expect it to. Why you claim to get 4-7dB less noise by adding some crap to the line cord and expect _us_ to believe it is the real question. Why should I trust your measurements? Do you even have a way to make a calibrated measurement of any sort? OK, just to be fair, name the exact model of preamp and power conditioner and if I can find them, then I'll put them on the test set and compare the two measurements, with and without conditioner. Maybe you do have some magical device that really does work, but you have to refer to it precisely. You can't just call it a 'power conditioner'. You must be more specific. Monte, while I think you're right and the troll is wrong, I also have dramatically lowered noise in preamps by adding various things to the power supply, the same sorts of things that a power conditioner adds -- serious RFI filtering. In an extremely high RFI field, it can make a difference. The two examples that were most dramatic were the temporary studio in the transmitter shack at KDHX, ten feet from an 18kW FM transmitter, that we used for two years before we got our studios finished, and my father's apartment, which is two blocks from an antenna farm on the near north side of Chicago. Wendy Carlos also has an interesting story about how she built a Faraday cage around her studio in Manhattan, did a really thorough job of it, and she claims something like 10dB reduction in overall noise level. Mind you, I think Powell is talking nonsense about 90% of the time. But if he's operating in a real RFI jumgle, that power conditioner may be making a real difference. Peace, Paul |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
Monte P McGuire wrote:
Why you claim to get 4-7dB less noise by adding some crap to the line cord and expect _us_ to believe it is the real question. Why should I trust your measurements? Do you even have a way to make a calibrated measurement of any sort? I've got years of experience with Powell. Jim Johnson (then of AT&T labs) and I went around in circles with Powell many times on RAO back in the days when it was an audio forum. Powell tried to get AT&T to fire JJ. You've already vastly exceeded Powell's ability to hold a factual conversation. It's highly likely that this Art MPA Gold is the only mic preamp that Powell has ever had his hands on in his life. |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
Powell wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote You're new here, aren't you? I've posted a few times on r.a.o over the years. We have a different accent in our conversations over there . Why am I not surprised? Oh, Powell outed himself. They sure do get jumpy over here when you challenge their notions of fidelity/accuracy. You still don't get what a Art MPA Gold is, do you Powell? Ironically, I tried to straighten you out about this POS months ago, but did you listen to me? No! I don't see any potential pledges for the r.a.o. fraternity. RAO - that's a political talk show, right? News flash Powell, there is no RAO fraternity any more - just a bunch of political pundits. As a group they are delicate wall flowers by comparison . Powell, you really still don't understand how thoroughly you've already discredited yourself, right? Comparing a Art MPA Gold to a Great River, forget your hatchet job on the RNP, has to be the stuff that Usenet audio legends are made out of. BTW, that's not the good kind of legend. Powell, you're about as big of a hoot as the guy over in 4-track who is so thoroughly MIDI-fied that he couldn't even spell *cardiod*. BTW Powell, cardiod is a type of microphone. I think that might help you, given where you are right now. |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
In article , "Arny Krueger"
writes: It's highly likely that this Art MPA Gold is the only mic preamp that Powell has ever had his hands on in his life. So, if he has that little experience why is he so convinced he knows more than people who do this stuff everyday for a living and have thousands of hours on the gear in question? Its sad to see him walk into the middle of a gun store and start flailing with a butter knife. Garth~ "I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle." Ed Cherney |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp?
In article , "Arny Krueger"
writes: Ironically, I tried to straighten you out about this POS months ago, but did you listen to me? No! You mean he had prior warning about this and still stepped in the poop with both feet and one hand? Talk about not listening... I don't see any potential pledges for the r.a.o. fraternity. RAO - that's a political talk show, right? News flash Powell, there is no RAO fraternity any more - just a bunch of political pundits. I havent looked at that group for a few years actually so earlier today I popped in for a minute. I think I found one audio-related thread. After seeing this I think I'm beginning to see why Ty Ford was so adamant about off-topic posting. My god, RAO is a wasteland. Its sad. As a group they are delicate wall flowers by comparison . Powell, you really still don't understand how thoroughly you've already discredited yourself, right? Comparing a Art MPA Gold to a Great River, forget your hatchet job on the RNP, has to be the stuff that Usenet audio legends are made out of. BTW, that's not the good kind of legend. I think only a couple times in the past 7 or 8 years have I seen somebody appear and so thoroughly alienate the regulars in a day or two. Powell, you're about as big of a hoot as the guy over in 4-track who is so thoroughly MIDI-fied that he couldn't even spell *cardiod*. BTW Powell, cardiod is a type of microphone. I think that might help you, given where you are right now. Ahh... Arny, I dont know if you were kidding but I think its "cardioid". Garth~ "I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle." Ed Cherney |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
rec.audio.car FAQ (Part 2/5) | Car Audio | |||
DIY Multi Channel Tube Preamp | High End Audio | |||
Tube preamp low freq loss | Pro Audio | |||
AES Show Report (LONG!!!!) | Pro Audio | |||
art tube mp mic preamp | Pro Audio |