Awesome site with sound clips (mic/preamp-comparisons)

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

clintrubber

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
5,982
Location
The Netherlands
Not sure in which section to post this, but here goes:

Have a listen/look here: http://www.thelisteningsessions.com

I haven't really looked around over there yet, but if I see things like downloadable mp3s of comparisons of various mics, preamps, sources etc I figure people here are interested.

Look at this for instance:
http://www.thelisteningsessions.com/session2-pf.htm

And:
The Microphone Preamplifiers & DI's

The following microphone preamplifiers have been confirmed and will be included on The Listening Sessions:

A Designs Audio MP-1
A Designs Audio MP-2
A Designs Audio REDDI
Amek Pure Path
Amek 9098
AMS Neve 1073
AMS Neve 1081
Aphex Tube Essence
API 512C
API 212L
API 3124
API 528C
Aurora Audio GTQ2
Avalon VT-737-SP
Behringer UltraGain Pro Mic2200
Behringer Tube Ultragain T1953
Benchmark Media 420
Brent Averill 1272
Buzz Audio MA-2.2
Buzz Audio SA-1.1
DACS Clarity MicAmp
Dan Alexander Dual Class A
D.W. Fearn VT-1
Demeter HXM-1
Drawmer 1969
Drawmer MX60
Drawmer Tube Station
Earthworks 1022
ELBERG MP8
Focusrite ISA 428
Focusrite Voicemaster Pro
FMR Audio RNP 8380
Grace 101
Grace Lunatec V3
Great River MP-1NV
Great River MP-2
Groove Tubes Vipre
Groove Tubes Ditto
HHB Radius 40
Joe Meek MQ3
Joe Meek VC1QCS
Joe Meek VC6Q British Channel
Joe Meek VCTwinQcs
Joe Meek JM828
John Hardy M-1
Mackie VLZ
Manley SLAM!
Martech MSS-10
M-Audio Audio Buddy
M-Audio DMP3
M-Audio Tampa
MCI 500
MCI 600
Millennia HV-3D
Millennia M-2B
Millennia TD-1
Neve 33122 - Brent Averill version
Neve 1272 - Brent Averill version
Oram MWS
Phoenix Audio (UK) DRS-2
Presonus Eureka
Rane MS 1b
Requisite Audio PAL Plus
Requisite Audio Y7 MkIV
RME Quad
Sebatron vmp-2000e
Sound Performance Lab 9844 GoldMike
Speck MicPre 5.0
Studio Projects VTB-1
Studio Projects VTB-2
Summit Audio 2BA-221
Summit Audio TD-100
Sytek MXP-4Aii
TC Electronic Gold Channel
TL Audio 5051 Ivory 2
TL Audio C1
TL Audio PA-1
Tube Tech MP-1A
Vintech Dual 72
Ward-Beck Pod4

This site will be known to some people over here, but it was new for me.

Have fun,

Peter
 
I love the listening sessions, the audio geek in me drools.

But a long listening session, my sublimated belief that "the gear doesn't matter as much as the performance" is always reinforced!

I don't think they level match very well. (?) Or is it just the frequencies emphasized by a particular amp resonating in my headphones? (See how the guitar seems to be louder with the MP1NV than the Studio Projects and Speck?)

Still very fun in an audio geek kind of way,

Kato
 
[quote author="kato"]...I don't think they level match very well. (?) Or is it just the frequencies emphasized by a particular amp resonating in my headphones? (See how the guitar seems to be louder with the MP1NV than the Studio Projects and Speck?)...[/quote]Level matching in these type of ?listening? test can be a funny thing. I?ve heard several people comment about improper level matching of the samples at TLS, but even on the 3D Audio CDs where all levels were matched (by Dan Kennedy, I think?), some samples still sound louder than others.

The thing is, certain mics and pres compress the audio more than others. So, if you match according to peak levels, the mics/pres with less dynamic range will always sound louder and fuller. In light of that, it would seem that the thing to do would be to somehow match according to the RMS levels rather than the peak levels, or at least some combination of the two.

Just thinking out loud?
 
Yeah, it's a real mess when you are trying to compare. The ABX guys are ultimately right, but what they miss is the fact that you just can't do that in a working situation. And, you and I both know that there are differences.

By this, I mean, in a test for ABX proof, you have to eliminate all but one variable, then make choices. In the real world of recording, you have quite a number of variables that change simply by changing the mic.

You put a 57 into a Mackie, you put a 57 into a GR, and I'll guarantee you the GR will sound better in the studio, but in the "controlled" listening tests, the difference seems to be diminished.

Beats the shit out of me why. I can still tell them apart in blindfold tests, by the way, but it's because of my fairly attuned hearing.
 
Subtle timbre shifts are notoriously difficult to account for in level matching---the level interacting with the level-dependent and frequency-dependent characteristics of the ear. Very messy.
 
from Dan K:
You put a 57 into a Mackie, you put a 57 into a GR, and I'll guarantee you the GR will sound better in the studio, but in the "controlled" listening tests, the difference seems to be diminished.

Beats the shit out of me why.
I could imagine this. But if 'in practice' things can turn out so differently, then one gets the impression that those listening comparisons might be waiste of everybody's time & effort. :roll:
Or would it be that the comparison can still indicate 'the same difference', but just in a lesser amount ? This is what you say, right ?

thanks,

Peter
 
I think the bid wig studio guys all have their favorite signal chains worked out for who and what they are recording. Lke Terry Manning for instance. If you read some of his posts as guest moderator, it was always "I use a U67 thru a blah blah blah into a whatever. Same thing every time, year after year.

So I guess you just have to fish and fumble til you get your suitcasre full of tricks packed.
 
Yeah Peter, that's what I mean. The differences seem more subtle in blind tests.

Probably related to the physchological reason that makes you expect to hear a difference when you see one.
Thanks Dan for the info. Thats good to keep in mind when interpreting those tests.

I recall Kevs story here about turning a knob on a not-doing-anything device - and people reacting like 'yes, now it's sounding OK'...

Regards,

Peter
 
One of the problems with level matching is that you have to decide between peak level and RMS level matching. When you have different takes for each preamp, RMS level matching is better, usually. Only when you have identical takes peak level matching is more accurate. RMS level matching is more difficult to accomplish, of course.
 
RMS level matching is more difficult to accomplish, of course.
Should be an easy one-step thing to do for a .wav-editor one would say, yet I can't remember having seen it in CEP etc.

Regards,

Peter

BTW, I regret the 'awesome' in the thread-title a bit....
 
Wavelab can do automatic RMS level matching in stack processing mode when you use the "Meta Normalizer" plugin. It uses a two step process: first it analyzes all files and compares Peak and RMS levels and then it adjusts the files so the highest peak is 0 dB FS and RMS level is the same for each file.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top