Best Compressor EQ Preamp under $800

[BluesHarp]

Im looking for a FAT vintage/warm ( but quality ) unit that will be all I need between a nice mic and the Boss Br1200 recorder I have.

I mentioned under $800 new.. but I will still be looking for it used around the $400-500 range.

Is the Joemeek one Q any good?

Thanks!!!

[BluesHarp]

bump

[Clumsy Fingers]

I'm not 100% certain about the Boss Br1200, but if it has any sort of built-in mic pre (which I'm guessing it does), I can't really see the advantage of using a 'better' one in front of it.

The Meek unit *may* be a sonic improvement, but asking for 3 tools to be 'fat & warm' at that price might be asking a lot, quite frankly. My thought would be to try to find a dealer that would let you try it out for a couple weeks and let you return it if you're not satisfied.

Take it with a grain of salt, but I'd rather wait and save my cash until I was able to buy individual tools that might cost quite a bit more. I've bought too much inexpensive studio gear, only to be disappointed, and faced with the reality that if I want something that will really make a pleasing aural difference, I'll just have to be patient, save the cash, and get something trusted and reliable.


Good luck w/ whatever you decide.

[BluesHarp]

O, I agree 100%. But if I can get some time and enjoyment with recording now for under $2000 untill I can put some real money in it then I am at least going somewhere and I can always get most of my money back with the help of ebay and the emporium. I just want to see what I can do with what I have even though I acknowledge your logic.

So.. no suggestions under $800 to as close to "fat and warm" as possible? Or will using a preamp not improve anything with the boss recorder I have?

Ok, so what DO I need? ( IF I dont need a preamp.. )

[Clumsy Fingers]

I haven't had a look at that particular recorder, but I'm sure there's info somewhere online as to if it has a mic pre or not- I'd guess that it must have one.

I can whole-heartedly recommend the FMR Audio RNC: I'm no expert at using compression, so I use it subtly more often than not. Regardless, I can hear it, and it does nothing but good things to the signals that I'm feeding it. Difficult to describe, but it seems to add focus, and a nice sheen to things.

[guitarist58]

Your Boss has a line in... If you want Compression, EQ and preamp, The ART Voice Channel is pretty well within your budget http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/VoiceChannel
(You won't be able to utilize the digital outs at this point but maybe later)

Some of the budget ART gear gets decent reports (say over at gearslutz.com), especially if you replace the tube with good quality NOS.

Here's a review: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul0...icechannel.htm

[BluesHarp]

From my searching that the Art Voice Channel, Joe Meek OneQ and the Focusrite Voice Master are probably the best choices if I want eq, pre and comp in one box. Ive seen the Art may be better sounding than the focusrite. Havent heard anything bout the Joe M.

Any comparisons on these three???

I did find some great preamp only options. Chameleon 7602, FMR RNP, and the Daking mic pre.That 7602 looks like a warm vintage sounding pre...

[johnwtuggle]

Toft EC-1 is awesome. Pre is good, EQ very useful with nice compression.
It goes right beside by LA-610, which is awesome too.

Toft is the sleeper piece of gear imo.

http://pro-audio.musiciansfriend.com...ELAID=26019420

[LSchefman]

My son (see the "Dad brag" thread in which I regale his awesome feats ) has recorded excellent sounding tracks with the Focusrite mentioned above. Frankly, in the track I wasn't able to tell if there was a big difference between recordings done with it and my far more expensive ISA 220. That says something good, because I like the ISA 220 a lot.

Some of the ART gear (pro VLA II comes to mind) has gotten excellent reviews in Tape-op, but I have no experience with it. I'd still check it out as it appears to be a bargain.

Haven't heard the Toft unit nor read reviews, but it's likely worth a listen. Toft is an excellent designer, who I believe did the classic Trident consoles.

You can get very professional sounding tracks with most of the stuff in modest price ranges these days, provided that (as with even the finest gear) you have a good ear and know the strengths and limitations of the tools you're using.

As for the "fat" and "vintage" terms...really? For $800?

You're better off getting something that does a good job cleanly reproducing the signal, because the vintage sound, done right, is going to be a hell of a lot more expensive, unless you simply want something to grunge up your signal with a tool that won't be able to do anything else well.

"Fat" and "vintage" have become hyped and rather meaningless terms of late. "Fatness" is easy to create cheaply. Build a box that oversaturates signal - that is, a signal that cannot reproduce a wave without clipping and thereby removing high end - design it in on purpose, and for max marketability, use some sort of tube and overdrive it. Will it really give you "the sound?" I have heard a lot of this stuff, and I have yet to hear it do that. For my money, my honest belief is that most of the "big sound you hear on records" comes from gear that uses expensive parts and transformers, etc.

I don't think an overdriven tube or such, in a circuit designed to distort early via clipping the signal, gives you that elusive "enhanced reality" that some of the vintage gear we all like can. It can give you some distorted harmonics, and it can give you a thick and sludgly lower midrange and low end, but I haven't heard it to give you goosebumps the way an original Neve mic preamp can at its best.

There are some really great pieces of gear that DO sound a bit on the "large" side, but these are good reproductions of classic gear, or a few pieces of great new gear, that manage to create a big sounding signal. They are unfortunately more expensive than your price range, because designing and building them right costs. If you want the sound of, say, a Carnhill transformer, you kinda have to buy one or make a great copy of one.

I tell friends asking for advice in this price range, use your mics to color the signal. That way you can get coloration, or a good clean sound, with the same piece of recording gear, simply by choosing the right mic.

[BluesHarp]

Wow.. I can see just how little I know about recording. I am a great musician but that really has little to do with the very technical art of recording. Its something I want to understand better so that I can enjoy the control of the place and time to do it. ( at my home recording/jam room ) Just because I can throw some tracks down on a simple recorder doesn't mean I know diddly about the huge real world of music engineering. But... I dont claim too and my eyes are open. I love music and that's enough of a incentive to learn and I have to start somewhere.

LSchefman: What mic would you suggest? I just purchased a rode ntk tube mic that I upgraded with a amperex 6922.. is there a better "warm and vintage" choice I should have made?

[straticus]

Hey BH,
I have an NTK too. Great mic. What kind of difference did the Amperex 6922 make?

[BluesHarp]

Yea.. well it sounds more musical and less crisp. I wouldnt say it was a large improvement but then again I didnt record anything with either tube just yet. Just dry into the monitors though it gave a better 3d depth and better top end... not so much presence on top. Id like to compare to the mullard and the siemens to see if it can get even warmer. Im not looking for transparency, but a nice vintage character that I can shape.


Heres some good info and some very detailed descriptions of the u.s. gold pin amperex I own and comparisons to the siemens amongst others. Some great 5751 and 12ax7 reviews too. http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/faq/joes-tubes.html

[BluesHarp]

I just bought two Siemens 6922 / E88CC, RCA label tubes on ebay. ( the only ones on ebay too ) These are supposed to be warm indeed by the above reviews.

Still looking for right preamp but the art is looking pretty good.

[Greggy]

Originally Posted by LSchefman

My son (see the "Dad brag" thread in which I regale his awesome feats ) has recorded excellent sounding tracks with the Focusrite mentioned above. Frankly, in the track I wasn't able to tell if there was a big difference between recordings done with it and my far more expensive ISA 220. That says something good, because I like the ISA 220 a lot.

Some of the ART gear (pro VLA II comes to mind) has gotten excellent reviews in Tape-op, but I have no experience with it. I'd still check it out as it appears to be a bargain.

Haven't heard the Toft unit nor read reviews, but it's likely worth a listen. Toft is an excellent designer, who I believe did the classic Trident consoles.

You can get very professional sounding tracks with most of the stuff in modest price ranges these days, provided that (as with even the finest gear) you have a good ear and know the strengths and limitations of the tools you're using.

As for the "fat" and "vintage" terms...really? For $800?

You're better off getting something that does a good job cleanly reproducing the signal, because the vintage sound, done right, is going to be a hell of a lot more expensive, unless you simply want something to grunge up your signal with a tool that won't be able to do anything else well.

"Fat" and "vintage" have become hyped and rather meaningless terms of late. "Fatness" is easy to create cheaply. Build a box that oversaturates signal - that is, a signal that cannot reproduce a wave without clipping and thereby removing high end - design it in on purpose, and for max marketability, use some sort of tube and overdrive it. Will it really give you "the sound?" I have heard a lot of this stuff, and I have yet to hear it do that. For my money, my honest belief is that most of the "big sound you hear on records" comes from gear that uses expensive parts and transformers, etc.

I don't think an overdriven tube or such, in a circuit designed to distort early via clipping the signal, gives you that elusive "enhanced reality" that some of the vintage gear we all like can. It can give you some distorted harmonics, and it can give you a thick and sludgly lower midrange and low end, but I haven't heard it to give you goosebumps the way an original Neve mic preamp can at its best.

There are some really great pieces of gear that DO sound a bit on the "large" side, but these are good reproductions of classic gear, or a few pieces of great new gear, that manage to create a big sounding signal. They are unfortunately more expensive than your price range, because designing and building them right costs. If you want the sound of, say, a Carnhill transformer, you kinda have to buy one or make a great copy of one.

I tell friends asking for advice in this price range, use your mics to color the signal. That way you can get coloration, or a good clean sound, with the same piece of recording gear, simply by choosing the right mic.

The Seventh Circle mic pres use Carnhill transformers (i.e., the N72 Neve inspired model), and you can build a 2-channel kit of Neve-like goodness for $978 plus shipping (price includes chassis, power supply, and wiring harness). API influenced circuits are also available. Good stuff. I would take that over a sub $800 all-in-one channel strip anyday, and get better material to disc as a result.

[BluesHarp]

Those kits look like fun to build and although im good with a soldering iron Im not sure what other specialty tools, equipment or knowledge I would need to have to successfully put it all together. It would be a nice project for sure..