fireberd
Max Output Level: -38 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3704
- Joined: 2008/02/25 14:14:28
- Location: Inverness, FL
- Status: offline
Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
I did a quick comparison between using a tube preamp (bypassing the internal preamp) into a MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid and going direct into the MOTU and using the built in mic preamp. The "quick and dirty" test, the MOTU preamps win. I recorded my wife singing, first into the tube preamp and then direct and compared the two on playback. I used an ART PRO MPA II preamp, with High Plate Voltage for the 12AX7 tube. An AT2035 mic. With the ART preamp going into a channel on the MOTU 1/4" TRS input (bypasses the internal preamp) and the voice seemed to have a trebly edge to it. Going direct into the XLR input on the MOTU (using the built in preamp) the recorded voice sounded exactly like her actual voice and didn't have the trebly edge. This was a very unscientific test. Mainly I wanted to compare the two with my new MOTU. A side note, I've seen a mod for the ART PRO MPA II, that changes an op amp and I'm not sure what else. Considering my comparison test I'm going to pursue the mod and see what happens.
"GCSG Productions" Franklin D-10 Pedal Steel Guitar (primary instrument). Nashville Telecaster, Bass, etc. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero M/B, i7 6700K CPU, 16GB Ram, SSD and conventional hard drives, Win 10 Pro and Win 10 Pro Insider Pre-Release Sonar Platinum/CbB. MOTU 896MK3 Hybrid, Tranzport, X-Touch, JBL LSR308 Monitors, Ozone 5, Studio One 4.1 ISRC Registered Member of Nashville based R.O.P.E. Assn.
|
Starise
Max Output Level: -0.3 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7563
- Joined: 2007/04/07 17:23:02
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/15 13:30:32
(permalink)
I have the same preamp and I love it for anything acoustic. I would almost rather have some sheen to trim off than going in with less top end but that's me. I havn't done the mod either, however my model is more recent and I think ART has dome some of their own improvements on more recent models.
Intel 5820K O.C. 4.4ghz, ASRock Extreme 4 LGA 2011-v3, 16 gig DDR4, , 3 x Samsung SATA III 500gb SSD, 2X 1 Samsung 1tb 7200rpm outboard, Win 10 64bit, Laptop HP Omen i7 16gb 2/sdd with Focusrite interface. CbB, Studio One 4 Pro, Mixcraft 8, Ableton Live 10 www.soundcloud.com/starise Twitter @Rodein
|
Beagle
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 50621
- Joined: 2006/03/29 11:03:12
- Location: Fort Worth, TX
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/15 14:25:45
(permalink)
I have the ART MPA II and a MOTU Ultralite MK3 Hybrid (which has 2 preamps). there are differences between the two preamps, absolutely - I would be surprised if someone said there weren't (or rather I'd think they didn't know what they were doing ). but I would not say that the MOTU preamp is "better" - only different. the MPA is designed to add tube distortion to the input, so if you're trying to compare which one sounds "better" it might be that the MOTU preamp sounds "cleaner" and that would definitely be correct. I use the MPA for most things, but if I want a clean sound I'll use either my True Systems P-Solo or one of the MOTU preamps. doing the Burr Brown op amp mod to the ART MPA will not change the color between a clean preamp and a tube/starved plate preamp. It will change the sound of the MPA, but it will still not sound as clean as the MOTU's preamp because it's not supposed to. I suspect you may be disappointed with the Burr Brown mod. If you want true clean preamp, the MOTU isn't bad, but if you want more, get a True Systems P-solo or a Grace m101. that would be money better spent if you don't like the colored sound of the MPA and prefer the cleaner sound of the MOTU.
|
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9871
- Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
- Location: Ohio
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/15 15:07:42
(permalink)
Preamp flavors are aesthetic... so YMMV I have a GAP Pre-73 (Neve clone) that IMO sounds better than the UA-610 (classic tube design). Transient response is significantly better, it's significantly quieter, etc. Had the UA-610 for a long time... then finally sold it. Was never getting used... IMO, There's only a small handful of inexpensive mic preamps worth buying.
|
fireberd
Max Output Level: -38 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3704
- Joined: 2008/02/25 14:14:28
- Location: Inverness, FL
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/15 17:39:51
(permalink)
In ref to the mod(s) for the PRO MPA II. The Burr Brown (TI) OPA2134 chips made a big difference modding Peavey Nashville 1000 and Nashville 112 amps. Replaced all the chips on the preamp board with the OPA2134's and it cleaned up the amps and removed the Peavey "mid honk" that a lot of their amps have. I've also seen a lot of comments about replacing the cheap factory Chinese 12AX7's with better tubes, such as NOS RCA 12AX7's and even the current Tung-Sol 12AX7's, that seem to make a big difference. As far as the Plate voltage, I was under the impression with the High Voltage option it was not operating in a "starved plate" mode? I have a recording session scheduled tomorrow, with a male singer. I'm going to test it again with the male voice and see how much difference there is. I don't use the preamp for instruments. I have Sans Amps that I use for bass and pedal steel and a Roland 80GX amp that I use for my Tele. I don't use any distortion - I record "traditional" country music.
"GCSG Productions" Franklin D-10 Pedal Steel Guitar (primary instrument). Nashville Telecaster, Bass, etc. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero M/B, i7 6700K CPU, 16GB Ram, SSD and conventional hard drives, Win 10 Pro and Win 10 Pro Insider Pre-Release Sonar Platinum/CbB. MOTU 896MK3 Hybrid, Tranzport, X-Touch, JBL LSR308 Monitors, Ozone 5, Studio One 4.1 ISRC Registered Member of Nashville based R.O.P.E. Assn.
|
Beagle
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 50621
- Joined: 2006/03/29 11:03:12
- Location: Fort Worth, TX
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/15 18:44:44
(permalink)
fireberd In ref to the mod(s) for the PRO MPA II. The Burr Brown (TI) OPA2134 chips made a big difference modding Peavey Nashville 1000 and Nashville 112 amps. Replaced all the chips on the preamp board with the OPA2134's and it cleaned up the amps and removed the Peavey "mid honk" that a lot of their amps have. I've also seen a lot of comments about replacing the cheap factory Chinese 12AX7's with better tubes, such as NOS RCA 12AX7's and even the current Tung-Sol 12AX7's, that seem to make a big difference.
yes, I agree with that. from your initial post, however, you're comparing a clean preamp to a tube preamp which, IMO, is not a fair comparison since they're completely different beasts which are designed to sound different. As far as the Plate voltage, I was under the impression with the High Voltage option it was not operating in a "starved plate" mode?
yes, in high voltage mode it is not a starved plate - the "/" in my comment was meant to include both starved plate and full voltage tube preamp designs as a comparison to clean FET designs. I did not mean to infer that the high voltage option was starved plate.
|
fireberd
Max Output Level: -38 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3704
- Joined: 2008/02/25 14:14:28
- Location: Inverness, FL
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/16 06:53:34
(permalink)
Actually it was a fair comparison. I just wanted to see what the difference was between using an external tube preamp and the built in preamps. And, as I initially stated it was very unscientific. I used what I have. I just have a home recording "studio", not a full blown studio (which in that case I would be using all high end preamps and equipment). Before getting the MOTU, I was using a Roland Octa-Capture and the tube preamp seemed to be a plus on vocals.
"GCSG Productions" Franklin D-10 Pedal Steel Guitar (primary instrument). Nashville Telecaster, Bass, etc. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero M/B, i7 6700K CPU, 16GB Ram, SSD and conventional hard drives, Win 10 Pro and Win 10 Pro Insider Pre-Release Sonar Platinum/CbB. MOTU 896MK3 Hybrid, Tranzport, X-Touch, JBL LSR308 Monitors, Ozone 5, Studio One 4.1 ISRC Registered Member of Nashville based R.O.P.E. Assn.
|
fireberd
Max Output Level: -38 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3704
- Joined: 2008/02/25 14:14:28
- Location: Inverness, FL
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/17 10:58:17
(permalink)
After doing a recording session with a male vocal, yesterday, direct into the MOTU I've decided the ART PRO MPA II is surplus and will be sold. I still have a Presonus Tube preamp (not a starved plate tube type) and if I want or need a tube preamp I can use that.
"GCSG Productions" Franklin D-10 Pedal Steel Guitar (primary instrument). Nashville Telecaster, Bass, etc. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero M/B, i7 6700K CPU, 16GB Ram, SSD and conventional hard drives, Win 10 Pro and Win 10 Pro Insider Pre-Release Sonar Platinum/CbB. MOTU 896MK3 Hybrid, Tranzport, X-Touch, JBL LSR308 Monitors, Ozone 5, Studio One 4.1 ISRC Registered Member of Nashville based R.O.P.E. Assn.
|
Jeff Evans
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5139
- Joined: 2009/04/13 18:20:16
- Location: Ballarat, Australia
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/17 20:19:57
(permalink)
Did you use the TRS inputs on the rear of the MOTU. They are the only inputs that bypass the internal Mic pre amp, not the front panel. I guess you did. What concerns me about the ART pre amp is how cheap it is for a two rack space unit like that. Makes me wonder about the quality of things such as the power supply (very important!) the choice of transformers etc.. Choice of components in general. A decent (mono) valve pre could cost ten times that amount! According to the Sound on Sound review of the ART in order to get the VU meters working normally or showing a reasonable deflection the unit had to go into quite a heavy drive mode. That may be generating extra harmonics hence you may be hearing that as extra top end. They said they had to back it off quite a bit in order to get a smoother more rounded sound. You may not be using the ART correctly perhaps. http://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/art-pro-mpa2 I don't disagree with you though. I have got a Yamaha digital mixer too with real nice Mix Pre's and they actually sound very transparent and do not add anything of their own which is sort of the way I like it. In most cases when I patch a quality microphone to them direct I feel I am hearing a very real sound. Any external valve preamp is actually adding distortion to the signal and there is no other way to look at it. People think they have to record through a valve pre but in fact that is not the case. If you do you are imposing that sound over everything you track and it could be said that in some cases it is not the right sound at all.
Specs i5-2500K 3.5 Ghz - 8 Gb RAM - Win 7 64 bit - ATI Radeon HD6900 Series - RME PCI HDSP9632 - Steinberg Midex 8 Midi interface - Faderport 8- Studio One V4 - iMac 2.5Ghz Core i5 - Sierra 10.12.6 - Focusrite Clarett thunderbolt interface Poor minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas -Eleanor Roosevelt
|
fireberd
Max Output Level: -38 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3704
- Joined: 2008/02/25 14:14:28
- Location: Inverness, FL
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/18 07:03:52
(permalink)
Yes, I used the TRS inputs. I'm not driving the ART very hard as the VU meters hardly move (one thing I noticed from the time I got it). I was recording at 24 bit/44.1Khz, -12, in Sonar for the tests. As I noted, I didn't notice the "tube edge" on the Roland Octa-Capture and playing with the Impedance control on the ART sort of "tuned" the vocals. In its place the ART can be a plus, like it was for me with the Octa-Capture.
"GCSG Productions" Franklin D-10 Pedal Steel Guitar (primary instrument). Nashville Telecaster, Bass, etc. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero M/B, i7 6700K CPU, 16GB Ram, SSD and conventional hard drives, Win 10 Pro and Win 10 Pro Insider Pre-Release Sonar Platinum/CbB. MOTU 896MK3 Hybrid, Tranzport, X-Touch, JBL LSR308 Monitors, Ozone 5, Studio One 4.1 ISRC Registered Member of Nashville based R.O.P.E. Assn.
|
GaryMedia
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 217
- Joined: 2003/11/05 23:04:20
- Location: Cary, NC
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/21 22:41:22
(permalink)
CbB Win10 | Mac Pro 12-core 3.33GHz/48GB | TCL 55" 4K UHD | 480GB SSD | 6TB HDD RAID-5 array| 1.5TB SSD RAID-0 array | Midas M32 | 2x Audient ASP800 | UAD-2 Duo PCIe | Adam A7X. http://www.tedlandstudio.com/articles
|
fireberd
Max Output Level: -38 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3704
- Joined: 2008/02/25 14:14:28
- Location: Inverness, FL
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/22 06:37:50
(permalink)
Doesn't look much difference in any of the graphs you have posted. My conclusion is my ART "may" be useful in some applications but not for my home studio use with the MOTU. I am not running it very hot, actually very low level, and the noise floor was not an issue. Just clean audio, as I only record traditional country which has no overdriven instruments, the bass is still used for rhythm not a "lead" instrument, the singers still sing -not yell, etc.
"GCSG Productions" Franklin D-10 Pedal Steel Guitar (primary instrument). Nashville Telecaster, Bass, etc. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero M/B, i7 6700K CPU, 16GB Ram, SSD and conventional hard drives, Win 10 Pro and Win 10 Pro Insider Pre-Release Sonar Platinum/CbB. MOTU 896MK3 Hybrid, Tranzport, X-Touch, JBL LSR308 Monitors, Ozone 5, Studio One 4.1 ISRC Registered Member of Nashville based R.O.P.E. Assn.
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/22 11:15:20
(permalink)
|
fireberd
Max Output Level: -38 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3704
- Joined: 2008/02/25 14:14:28
- Location: Inverness, FL
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/22 14:05:01
(permalink)
I didn't use the starved plate option. I always used the high voltage option (which according to the manual is "regular" amp). I had a Presonus Dual Blue Tube preamp and it was starved plate and really did nothing. It was sold on ebay.
"GCSG Productions" Franklin D-10 Pedal Steel Guitar (primary instrument). Nashville Telecaster, Bass, etc. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero M/B, i7 6700K CPU, 16GB Ram, SSD and conventional hard drives, Win 10 Pro and Win 10 Pro Insider Pre-Release Sonar Platinum/CbB. MOTU 896MK3 Hybrid, Tranzport, X-Touch, JBL LSR308 Monitors, Ozone 5, Studio One 4.1 ISRC Registered Member of Nashville based R.O.P.E. Assn.
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/22 14:52:20
(permalink)
unless it's class A circuit, typically all the tubes do, is add harmonic distortion. me, i think i'd rather have one of each... class A, driven to distortion, or something discrete and clean, so i can change up the sonics. my high end preamp is a A Designs Audio-MP-1, but i also have a cheapy ART DPS, and sometimes i prefer it for it's grungy sonics. but what jim said earlier, rings true to me, there are not many really decent 'cheap' mic preamps, seems the cut off for this is about $500 the RNC RNP comes to mind...
|
fireberd
Max Output Level: -38 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3704
- Joined: 2008/02/25 14:14:28
- Location: Inverness, FL
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2016/06/22 16:52:44
(permalink)
I'll agree you have to pay big $$ for "studio grade" or "audiophile" grade preamp. I don't have a "starved plate" type design anywhere, even for my guitar amps (except for one Carvin amp, all of my guitar amps are solid state, such as the Peavey Nashville 112 steel guitar amp).
"GCSG Productions" Franklin D-10 Pedal Steel Guitar (primary instrument). Nashville Telecaster, Bass, etc. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero M/B, i7 6700K CPU, 16GB Ram, SSD and conventional hard drives, Win 10 Pro and Win 10 Pro Insider Pre-Release Sonar Platinum/CbB. MOTU 896MK3 Hybrid, Tranzport, X-Touch, JBL LSR308 Monitors, Ozone 5, Studio One 4.1 ISRC Registered Member of Nashville based R.O.P.E. Assn.
|
olemon
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 768
- Joined: 2011/10/27 05:35:19
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2017/01/03 18:52:28
(permalink)
I guess I missed this discussion before, including the following from Jim. Jim Roseberry Preamp flavors are aesthetic... so YMMV I have a GAP Pre-73 (Neve clone) that IMO sounds better than the UA-610 (classic tube design). Transient response is significantly better, it's significantly quieter, etc. Had the UA-610 for a long time... then finally sold it. Was never getting used... IMO, There's only a small handful of inexpensive mic preamps worth buying. Good to know...especially since I have a GAP Pre-73 MkII:)
https://www.reverbnation.com/scottholson Platinum, Studio One 3 Pro, Win 10 (x64), AMD FX-8350, ASUS M5A97 R2.0, 16GB, RME UCX, Digimax DP88, Faderport 8, Revive Audio Mod Studio Channel, Vintage Audio M72, Summit Audio TLA-50, KRK Rokit 5 G2 Monitors, Guitars "If you wait till the last minute, it only takes a minute."
|
mudgel
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12010
- Joined: 2004/08/13 00:56:05
- Location: Linton Victoria (Near Ballarat)
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2017/01/07 04:30:33
(permalink)
I have an Art MPA Gold and I've yet to find a source to which it adds anything positive to the signal. Probably heading for eBay.
Mike V. (MUDGEL) STUDIO: Win 10 Pro x64, SPlat & CbB x64, PC: ASUS Z370-A, INTEL i7 8700k, 32GIG DDR4 2400, OC 4.7Ghz. Storage: 7 TB SATA III, 750GiG SSD & Samsung 500 Gig 960 EVO NVMe M.2. Monitors: Adam A7X, JBL 10” Sub. Audio I/O & DSP Server: DIGIGRID IOS & IOX. Screen: Raven MTi + 43" HD 4K TV Monitor. Keyboard Controller: Native Instruments Komplete Kontrol S88.
|
fireberd
Max Output Level: -38 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3704
- Joined: 2008/02/25 14:14:28
- Location: Inverness, FL
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2017/01/07 06:32:18
(permalink)
After several months of using the MOTU without an external preamp (although I still have a couple) I'm still convinced I don't need a preamp for vocals with the MOTU.
"GCSG Productions" Franklin D-10 Pedal Steel Guitar (primary instrument). Nashville Telecaster, Bass, etc. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero M/B, i7 6700K CPU, 16GB Ram, SSD and conventional hard drives, Win 10 Pro and Win 10 Pro Insider Pre-Release Sonar Platinum/CbB. MOTU 896MK3 Hybrid, Tranzport, X-Touch, JBL LSR308 Monitors, Ozone 5, Studio One 4.1 ISRC Registered Member of Nashville based R.O.P.E. Assn.
|
Pragi
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1173
- Joined: 2010/09/19 11:46:59
- Location: Village of the sun
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2017/01/07 07:29:22
(permalink)
Jim Roseberry Preamp flavors are aesthetic... so YMMV I have a GAP Pre-73 (Neve clone) that IMO sounds better than the UA-610 (classic tube design). Transient response is significantly better, it's significantly quieter, etc. Had the UA-610 for a long time... then finally sold it. Was never getting used... IMO, There's only a small handful of inexpensive mic preamps worth buying.
I ´m also using the Gap Pre 73 for years now. It gives a nice colour and tightness used as DI Box for Bass.Also as a preamp for a more neutral SE 2200 mic it´s very useful in giving some overtones and (wanted) dirtyness to the signal.The neutral preamps of the Focusrite Saffire Pro are a good addition for my needs. Don´t see the need to spend thousands of bucks for a another colouring preamp. The GAP is imo a very good one.
|
Cactus Music
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8424
- Joined: 2004/02/09 21:34:04
- Status: offline
Re: Unscientific comparison between a tube preamp and direct into an MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid
2017/01/08 17:27:16
(permalink)
I think your getting with your Motu what I'm after. I had to buy a Joe Meek 3Q because the pre amps on my Scarlett 6i6 are not at all up to my standards. I've played through many pre amps in my time and the Focusrite's were very disappointing. And After reading all the rave reviews too. Possibly Focurite makes nice pres but not for the Scarletts. And the Joe Meek solved the problem, but it's coloured. I still have my Yamaha 01V and I use that via SPDIF but it's just gotta blow up someday soon! So for my next interface the pre amps will be high on the list of priorities. I like what I've read about the Tascam UH 7000, the price is certainly affordable. But it might be time to bite the bullet and jump to that next level with RME or Motu. And I keep reading more and more good things about the Motu's pre's. I have a little Art Tube Pre and I upgraded the tube etc. It's a great little DI box when I do live sound for whimpy pezio PU's but it's terrible for vocals. I'm with you and I look for clean. I strive to record exactly what I'm hearing and if what I'm hearing doesn't sound good I don't record it until that is straightened out. If they could do that in the 50's certainly we can too.
|