Lazy I'm NOT, finding time to get everything done is the problem.Timeline wrote:Not at all true because it's in comparison to each other. This test was to eval the color sound of the preamps only, not a measurement test. The same equipment was used on each test and levels were carefully checked.
I think it's a VERY cool idea and really respect them for doing it. I wish more engineers would take the time to do this for us cause it seems most sales people are a too lazy I guess.
In fact, I'm working on doing these sorts of samples but with mixing (2) concerts, getting ready to track another concert, busy with helping design a new product, getting ready for our GEARFEST event and oh yeah...getting ready to get married, I'm just busy right now. 
BUT to your point---you said "the test was to eval the color sound of the preamps only". EXACTLY, that was my point. How can you accurately test the sound and coloration of the pre if you're starting with a microphone that itself introduces color and tonal changes? All this tells someone is how THAT MIC sounds through THAT PRE. Now if someone is looking to get a great sounding combination, I totally understand this test--but that's not what it was about. For example, take an AKG C414BULS and run it through a Grace 101 mic pre, it's going to sound horrible! BUT take that C414BULS through a Universal Audio Solo610 and it might sound quite good. Each mic and pre has it's own sound, so the only way to determine the sound of the pre is to remove the sound of the mic. THIS is why Earthworks mics are used in such testing, because they are unbelieveably accurate with ZERO coloration, ZERO phase issues and ZERO distortion unless you're hitting unimaginable audible levels. This is why I use my Earthworks through EVERY pre I take home and record dead space, instruments, etc through the pre to listen to THAT PRE'S SOUND. Of course, this doesn't matter if I don't have converters that properly record the signal and play it back. I use the Digi192I/O which is a phenominally accurate converter! Of course, that doesn't matter if my monitors aren't brutally accurate---which my ADAM S-series is. And if I want to test the real sound of a converter, I'm going to use a GML pre so I have NO coloration on the mic, NO coloration on the pre, and I'm using top-grade MOnster Cables for my connections so I lose nothing in the cabling.
Okay---so what if I want to judge the true sound of say a guitar cabinet? I'll put my Earthworks right up on the amp--because even though my Royer sounds better, that's not what I'm after. Now if I wanted to just figure out what's th better sounding mic? Well, I'd not use my TC30 for that
I read a forum thread somewhere where someone was using a Shure SM57 to listen to various pres and determine what pre sounded best. I was STUNNED that someone could honestly think an SM57 is an accurate judge--but more stunned that others were listening and believing it. If you want to listen to the sound of the pre, you need to not let the microphone's sound get in the way, your converters need to be passive in and out and your monitors need to be brutally accurate to the finest details. Otherwise, there are flaws in it. Testing for a product's exact sound is different than trying to figure out what makes a great combination of tonal preference. So anytime I see a micpre shootout and it has anything less than an Earthworks mic and that shootout is to determine what pre sounds best.....then it's bogus, no matter who does the shootout. Now if that same shootout was to decide what mic sounded best with each pre, sure---I'd follow it.
No offense, but I do these kinds of shootouts almost DAILY..... I hear a lot of manufacturers tell me how their product is the bestestest thing ever, I try it out and realize it's just like everything else or in some cases, is TOTAL CRAP---and I'll tell it direct to the face of their designer what I think of it and go back to my desk and move about my day. There is sooooo much stuff I do behind the scenes, so believe me---I'm NOT lazy. And I know you were just poking fun at me, that's cool
I just have been through so much of this stuff that I know what can ruin or enhance a test. This is why I jump in on "listening to monitors" every time I see a thread about it, because that doesn't work either.
) Speaking in color metaphors, if you start with a mic that has a blue overcast, then the pre that will sound the most natural will be the one that subtracts blue. The test will be skewed towards pres that are deficient in blue. If you really want to do an accurate pre shootout, you want everything else in the chain to be as neutral as possible. I know that I disagree with Brad often, but this time he's right.
