I'm going to be doing male voice overs with my Blue Blueberry mic and I need a great pre amp. It'll be going into a RME Babyface.

I'm stuck between the Warm Audio WA12 and the Golden Age Pre73. Which of these would you guys recommend? Since both the Babyface and Blueberry are transparent, I'd like to add a little bit of color and warmth to my sound.

I know the Golden Age is warm and so is the WA12, but which is better in terms of quality and performance?

Thank you for reading. :)

Chandler TG2.

Funny Mike.  But a bit over budget, I think.
 
I haven't used the GA much, but have the Warm.  Great preamp and from what I can tell it uses better components.  the design is APIish, rather than Neve of the GA.  Not that that matters much - both are good designs.  The GA does have the two knob thing going on, tho.  Still, unless I was wanting distortion, I'd stick w/ the warm which has plenty of saturation if you drive it.
 
If you want the two knobs, then save up for the Warm Audio Tone Beast.  Basic warm preamp w/ lots of built-in variables - different op amps, different output trannies and well-built to boot.  Will go from very, single transfomer clean to as dirty as you want.  For $200 more it is about as flexible a preamp as you can get.
 
@

What's wrong with the RME preamps? Too clean?

Gain, I can't get the gain I want with the interface card that pleases me. So I got the cheapest solution that I still liked that I could find. An ART MPAII Tube Preamp that improves the signal greatly going in to the computer. Warm tube signal at around $200.00. The cheaper ones are only 'tube circuits' and I felt if I was going hybrid, I might as well add some real tube warmth. Just got it last week, but so far, I'm extremely happy with it.
(Btw, my interface is a MOTU 24IO) 

AT
Funny Mike.  But a bit over budget, I think. 
 

My Chandler TG2 just happens to be the preamp I seem to bother to re-patch the most often for various things, so I think that means it has become a favorite in my rack. It's the unit I really wish I had more copies of. I can recommend it with honest enthusiasm.
 
:-)

Wish I had one :-(
 

Yeh, inadequate gain is the only reason I've ever been dissatisfied with my interface's built-in preamps. But it's only been ribbons that my interface can't satisfy. Condensers and moving-coil dynamics, no problem. It's not an RME, though, so I don't know about RME. My old mic pre (a cheapo Eureka) couldn't do it for ribbons, either, and I've sold it. Now I get by just fine without a separate pre. That's why I asked.
 
Personally, I like clean, clean, clean. I can always dirty it up later, and often do. But starting out clean leaves all your options open. I'd think that would be a good strategy for VOs, too, given that the track has to fit with a variety of different backgrounds. I'd want to hear it in context before deciding to "warm it up".

:-)
 
I'll offer a differing opinion.
 
I think the term "warm" is often misapplied and perhaps reflects some hopeful thinking because the sound of a modern "clean" (and I don't actually agree they sound clean) generic IC application data sheet circuit leaves some people yearning for something that excites passion. 
 
I've got a variety of preamps that were designed and built by guys that are passionate about the sound of preamps. They each sound really clean yet they all have a little something-something that they do. It's not like they provide some sort of static EQ curve or explicit distortion effect, which is what I think a lot of people assume you'll experience. What they offer is a range of tonality that is linked to impedance and reactivity. You experience a dynamic frequency response. It's not dramatic, it's subtle. If you get used to having something that reacts just the way you want it then you miss it when you use something that doesn't.
 
None of my guests are tech savvy, gear savvy, or brand name aware, but they each respond to different mic and preamp combos and when I find a combination that they enjoy they get a great big smile on their face. I try to sense what they are pushing or searching for in terms of tonality while they perform and I try to give it to them up front so they can be inspired by it as they do their thing.
 
I like the fact that none of my guests have abstracted preconceptions about the gear I provide for them because it reaffirms my thoughts about the idea that the gear does indeed have sound characteristics that can be described. When someone smiles and says something like "wow, I like what that is doing to the low notes" or stuff like that I get a big smile on my face.
 
IMHO, if you make a practice of bringing stuff in with the intention of exploring options later you are undermining the performers ability to exhibit their most personal expression and you are elevating the role of "mix engineering" in a way that may usurp the ability of a performance to seem compelling on its very own merit.
 
In other words, I think having a dedicated preamp and getting to know all about it is a great idea.  :-)
 
all the best,
mike
 
 

Yea, clean and dirty aren't the right words for me, either, Mike, and you give a great analysis.  But it is like dancing about archeticture, using words for sound quality.  Big, euphoric, full - those are words that leap to my mind.  I think the best tho is some hair.  saturation (of transformers and good electronics in general) adds some cilia to the sound, and doesn't cloud or obscure the sound you hear in the room.  It captures it and, when pushed, excites the sound.  Like the patterns in dog's back when it brisles up at the mailman. 
 
With in and out knobs you can get dirty and distorted, just like a guitar amp, but that is a step beyond saturation.
 
But we're getting beyond the thread, here.