Mic Preamp and Converter Comparison

[easstudios]

Just did this real quick. Maybe useful for the guys recording demos at home, or are thinking of picking up some gear to do so.

Reamped the same DI’s through a JMP2203 and Bogner cab with V30’s.

Shure Unidyne III 545

Chandler TG-2
Neve 1073
Behringer ADA8200

RME ADI-2 PRO FS Black Edition
UAD Silverface Apollo
Behringer ADA8200

Differences are a hell of a lot smaller than I maybe expected. Might be interesting for anyone who isn’t sure how much money to invest in some recording gear. Worth bearing in mind they all have slightly different features and uses so I won’t be rushing out and selling anything.

Curious if anyone is able to guess which files are which pre/converter, or even if they can pick out the lowly Behringer from the list.

Possible options (in no particular order) are:

BEHRINGER (PRE+A/D)
1073 BEHRINGER
1073 UAD
1073 RME
TG-2 BEHRINGER
TG-2 UAD
TG-2 RME



https://www.dropbox.com/s/d1jv54v4wbf6tdp/BLIND TEST.zip?dl=0

 

[PhilC]

Thanks for doing this. In my experiments I’ve found a mic on a guitar speaker generally shows less difference between preamps. Guitar speakers are very limited bandwidth, and distorted guitar tends to have a pretty small dynamic range. But, there are differences and I look forward to hearing your samples.

 

[easstudios]

Thanks for doing this. In my experiments I’ve found a mic on a guitar speaker generally shows less difference between preamps. Guitar speakers are very limited bandwidth, and distorted guitar tends to have a pretty small dynamic range. But, there are differences and I look forward to hearing your samples.

I’ve done preamp shootouts with guitar before, and there is often quite noticeable differences. Not huge, and it depends how hard you’re driving them and if they’re drastically different topologies. Usually I find the differences are caused from different impedances making mics behave different.

That said, perhaps the differences are a little smaller here than other tests I’ve done because TG-2 and 1073 aren’t TOO far apart

 

[Spaceboy]

I can barely tell a difference, voted D because it's maaaaaybe a bit more three dimensional. I'm listening on Kali IN-8s in a minimally treated room with some GIK traps and side panels. I've never dived into preamps and converters, I've been content with "prosumer" level hardware like RME and avoided that rabbit hole. I figure mikes make a much larger impact if I want "color", so grabbing a Neve, Crane Song, or whatever the fuck is kind of pointless if I'm not in a perfect listening environment and trying to critical mix or master something. Besides, years of metal have taken it's toll on my hearing, left side in particular, so what the fuck do I know about these minute details... lmao.

 

[easstudios]

I can barely tell a difference, voted D because it's maaaaaybe a bit more three dimensional. I'm listening on Kali IN-8s in a minimally treated room with some GIK traps and side panels. I've never dived into preamps and converters, I've been content with "prosumer" level hardware like RME and avoided that rabbit hole. I figure mikes make a much larger impact if I want "color", so grabbing a Neve, Crane Song, or whatever the fuck is kind of pointless if I'm not in a perfect listening environment and trying to critical mix or master something. Besides, years of metal have taken it's toll on my hearing, left side in particular, so what the fuck do I know about these minute details... lmao.

Thank you for taking part!

I would say that nice preamps are a solid investment, and that preamps in general can sound more different than this one example (how hard you drive them, different impedance relationships with mics, different topologies). Impedance relationships with mics can really alter the sound of what you’re capturing in a way that is beyond EQ curve, so it’s hard to approximate after.

I’ve done preamp comparisons before with more pre’s where the differences were more audible but because I was using several converters here, it would have multiplied everything by 3 and been much bigger. I wanted enough options to make it harder than a “lucky dip”.

IMO if they’re just being used in a normal way rather than driving them for some distorted effect it’s pretty remarkable how similar they can sound. Certainly nothing to worry about if you’re using the cheapest of the cheap. They’re a fun thing to upgrade and have choices of but the differences really are small compared to adjusting things further up the chain. Driving a nice pre into a bit of saturation is really awesome for certain things and kind of worth the price of admission alone (TG-2 on vocals rules!).

 

[Nolly]

Thanks for continuing to spread the gospel on what actually matters. The concept of mic preamps/converters being things that separate good sounds from bad is a massive myth in our industry and continues to be parroted ad nauseam despite the fact that comparisons like this show that we are talking about absolutely tiny differences, at least with the equipment on the market today.

edit: I'll throw a guess in that E is the all-Behringer signal path. I fully expect to be wrong.

 

[easstudios]

Thanks for continuing to spread the gospel on what actually matters. The concept of mic preamps/converters being things that separate good sounds from bad is a massive myth in our industry and continues to be parroted ad nauseam despite the fact that comparisons like this show that we are talking about absolutely tiny differences, at least with the equipment on the market today.

edit: I'll throw a guess in that E is the all-Behringer signal path. I fully expect to be wrong.

Thats very kind mate, and thank you for taking a guess! I can understand why people might be reluctant to put their neck on the line, but I can honestly say I'd never be able to single any of them out in this example. Ill reveal the result a little later because of how people's hearing suddenly changes once they know the results.

Tests like this are so easy to do (took maybe 20-30 mins to throw together) so it baffles me somewhat why people don't back up their claims with proof. We're in a pretty incredible time for making music, so its somewhat painful when obstacles are invented that will get in the way of what's really important. Its an easy trap to fall into (myself included), and these little tests help alleviate some of that doubt by showing its really not worth worrying about, and that it doesn't need to be a problem at all.

 

[Nolly]

Yeah I couldn't agree more with everything you've written there. It really gets my hackles up when I see people involved in educational roles who should know better (or try harder) spreading these myths to the next generation of musicians and engineers. There's an opportunity now for the new crop to be educated in actual facts, not be weighed down with this pointless mythology, yet I still see a painful amount of the latter.

Have you seen Eric Valentine's video on critical listening? It's so great, and shows you how you LITERALLY hear differences that aren't there when it's not a blind test. No-one is above this, it's beyond our conscious ability to turn this off. Link in case you or any other readers in the thread haven't seen it:

 

[easstudios]

It really gets my hackles up when I see people involved in educational roles who should know better (or try harder) spreading these myths to the next generation of musicians and engineers

This is such a big thing right now that needs addressing, many of the educators with a massive audience don't really have channels to be critiqued or question what they claim. And it comes from people of varying levels of experience and success in the industry - Jack Joseph Puig's MWTM videos talking about sample rates (among other things tbf) are excruciating. So much information is contradictory, out of context, and without any demonstration. I remember Frank Fillipetti calling out Joe Chicarelli on facebook for claiming offline bounce sounded different to realtime bounce and it was great seeing it nipped in the bud.

I'm absolutely OK with people citing perceived differences and things that may give them peace of mind, but when there are bold blanket statements made to a wide audience who are keen to learn, its actually more problematic than it may seem. It sets a pretty bad example, and it allows myths to perpetuate. There are throwaway comments I remember from forums years ago that have been repeated so much that many of these educators repeat them now on youtube as absolute fact.

I find it amusing how these little tests get brushed off by some as not important, when the crux of our jobs as mixers or engineers is to make these small decisions. At what point do you start or stop turning a blind eye to certain differences and not others? Dan Worrall did a video recently where a mix he did sounded almost indistinguishable from a mix of just balancing faders. Knowing if we're actually making something better (or even different) rather than just louder is so important.

 

[Nolly]

Once again, I couldn't agree more on all points! I have to give massive props to Dan Worrall for his output in recent times.

I look forward to the results, especially seeing the shameless people who will claim to have guessed right and not seen the answers before posting

 

[Krull]

If the preamps didn't matter, why are all these studios wasting their money. Should just stock up on Berhingers and call it a day.

 

[easstudios]

If the preamps didn't matter, why are all these studios wasting their money. Should just stock up on Berhingers and call it a day.

This wasn’t really what the test is trying to imply, and certainly not what I think - Preamps absolutely do sound and behave different to each other. Sometimes these differences are more obvious than others (for a number of reasons).

I’ll admit that I can’t hear any clear difference at all in this test, but I’m absolutely not selling my nice preamps and using Behringer instead. They all have their uses and pro’s and con’s, and that’s why I have both.

I just think this should demonstrate that cheap preamps and A/D really shouldn’t be enough to hold anyone back. If these are what you have/can afford, then they really don’t sound worse than anything else available. Is there any reason with these clips that someone should absolutely not use Behringer preamps or A/D? I think it’s shown they’re absolutely good enough purely by how diverse peoples guesses are.

Behringer is probably unrepairable, and even if it is, it’s probably cheaper to buy a new unit. The gain controls are hard to dial in with any degree of accuracy, the jacks aren’t particularly nice. Maybe on quieter sources it wouldn’t be as quiet as others. These probably aren’t dealbreakers for most people in most situations. Good preamps cost what they do - it’s not a scam; try building a clone with the same quality of parts. It’s more of a miracle that gear can be made for such a low price that really doesn’t sound bad at all.

 

[easstudios]

I posted the results in the comments on the youtube video (just in case anyone see's this thread and wants to hear them blind), thanks for the 1 vote Nolly!

Very interesting results (I tried to post this in various places to get a reaction but there wasn't a ton of guesses). One person on the youtube comments almost got all the preamp's correct which was quite impressive (but all the converters were random). Curious if the results change anyones perspective now.