Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000
| grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101760] |
Tue, 23 December 2008 18:51  |
Mike Audet
Messages: 294
Registered: December 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Guys,
I just spent my first couple of hours with a grace m101. It's definitely
the best mic preamp I've ever owned. I learned a lot from comparing it to
my older ones, too. I recorded the same thing on acoustic guitar through
all three mic pres with a 4050 pointed at the neck joint from about 10 inches
away.
The m101: bright, full, but the biggest thing I noticed was how you could
hear every nuance of the pick hitting every single string. It was like the
sound had more texture than I'm used to. There is a percussive dimension
that is missing or lesser on the other mic pres.
The Presonus Tube Pre: Brighter than the m101 and not as full. All that
texture/percussive quality of the m101 is missing with the Tube Pre. It's
like a whole dimension of the sound is missing - because it is. It sounds
plastic, like a sock is muffling all the percussive content of the sound.
The ADA800: It's not as bright as the other two, but its fuller than the
Presonus. As for the texture dimension, it's about half way between the
Tube Pre and the m101. This surprised me because I expected it to come in
last. The Tube Pre was an upgrade to my ears above the Mackie XDR preamps
that I used to have, and the mic pres in the ADA800 are significantly better
than the Tube Pre.
I'd recommend the m101 to anyone. You can never eq back in what the Tube
Pre leaves out. Way cool.
I hope this mini review is useful to someone.
Mike
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101762 is a reply to message #101760] |
Tue, 23 December 2008 21:44  |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
For me, confirmation that the 2 ADA8000's I bought when they first came out
are still a good value. I thought the same thing when I got the first one
you were expecting. Something along the lines of, well, it'll probably suck
but I need the extra ins to catch a load of keyboard inputs and the such. If
it's even remotely close to a 101, I'm thrilled man. I'm not shocked about
the Presonus, most of their stuff I've tried has been less than stellar, but
I am a little surprised the Behr slapped it that badly.
Very cool man, any chance you can put up some comparison files?
AA
"Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote in message news:4951958b@linux...
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> I just spent my first couple of hours with a grace m101. It's definitely
> the best mic preamp I've ever owned. I learned a lot from comparing it to
> my older ones, too. I recorded the same thing on acoustic guitar through
> all three mic pres with a 4050 pointed at the neck joint from about 10
> inches
> away.
>
> The m101: bright, full, but the biggest thing I noticed was how you could
> hear every nuance of the pick hitting every single string. It was like
> the
> sound had more texture than I'm used to. There is a percussive dimension
> that is missing or lesser on the other mic pres.
>
> The Presonus Tube Pre: Brighter than the m101 and not as full. All that
> texture/percussive quality of the m101 is missing with the Tube Pre. It's
> like a whole dimension of the sound is missing - because it is. It sounds
> plastic, like a sock is muffling all the percussive content of the sound.
>
> The ADA800: It's not as bright as the other two, but its fuller than the
> Presonus. As for the texture dimension, it's about half way between the
> Tube Pre and the m101. This surprised me because I expected it to come in
> last. The Tube Pre was an upgrade to my ears above the Mackie XDR preamps
> that I used to have, and the mic pres in the ADA800 are significantly
> better
> than the Tube Pre.
>
> I'd recommend the m101 to anyone. You can never eq back in what the Tube
> Pre leaves out. Way cool.
>
> I hope this mini review is useful to someone.
>
> Mike
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101763 is a reply to message #101760] |
Tue, 23 December 2008 23:18 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote:
>The m101: bright, full, but the biggest thing I noticed was how you could
>hear every nuance of the pick hitting every single string. It was like
the
>sound had more texture than I'm used to. There is a percussive dimension
>that is missing or lesser on the other mic pres.
This, IMO, is related to SPEED... lots of times you hear people
talk about preamp color or tone or what have you, but not very
often do you hear about how fast or how slow a preamp is, and
how that factors in to what you hear. Sometimes "slow" is good
(like Neve-ish type pre's), as it can slap down certain unwanted
aspects or transients (like sibilants, to a degree); but
sometimes you want a super-fast preamp to bring out the clarity
or "glassiness" of something. The Grace is faster than a
shithouse mouse, and will definitely let you hear detail you
may not have heard before, if you haven't previously had
anything able to reproduce at that kind of level of definition.
Oh, and Happy Holidays to everyone! :)
Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101781 is a reply to message #101760] |
Thu, 25 December 2008 11:21 |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
My experience with the Grace is similar to yours. I did a comparo with
an Old School Audio pre (think API) on a female vocal a few years ago
and found it very pleasing. To my ears, it had a tiny bit of something I
hesitate to call distortion, but cannot think of another word for, at
the very top end, but it was extremely slight and overall I liked the
Grace a lot. Extremely open.
Mike Audet wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> I just spent my first couple of hours with a grace m101. It's definitely
> the best mic preamp I've ever owned. I learned a lot from comparing it to
> my older ones, too. I recorded the same thing on acoustic guitar through
> all three mic pres with a 4050 pointed at the neck joint from about 10 inches
> away.
>
> The m101: bright, full, but the biggest thing I noticed was how you could
> hear every nuance of the pick hitting every single string. It was like the
> sound had more texture than I'm used to. There is a percussive dimension
> that is missing or lesser on the other mic pres.
>
> The Presonus Tube Pre: Brighter than the m101 and not as full. All that
> texture/percussive quality of the m101 is missing with the Tube Pre. It's
> like a whole dimension of the sound is missing - because it is. It sounds
> plastic, like a sock is muffling all the percussive content of the sound.
>
> The ADA800: It's not as bright as the other two, but its fuller than the
> Presonus. As for the texture dimension, it's about half way between the
> Tube Pre and the m101. This surprised me because I expected it to come in
> last. The Tube Pre was an upgrade to my ears above the Mackie XDR preamps
> that I used to have, and the mic pres in the ADA800 are significantly better
> than the Tube Pre.
>
> I'd recommend the m101 to anyone. You can never eq back in what the Tube
> Pre leaves out. Way cool.
>
> I hope this mini review is useful to someone.
>
> Mike
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101791 is a reply to message #101762] |
Thu, 25 December 2008 22:36 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Presonus has made some good pres and some not so good pres. The M 80 was good,
and some of the newer ones are good. Which Presonus do you have? And keep
in mind the Grace is a $600.00 pre and some of the Presonus tube pres are
$75 to 149.00, I would expect there to be a difference.
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>For me, confirmation that the 2 ADA8000's I bought when they first came
out
>are still a good value. I thought the same thing when I got the first one
>you were expecting. Something along the lines of, well, it'll probably suck
>but I need the extra ins to catch a load of keyboard inputs and the such.
If
>it's even remotely close to a 101, I'm thrilled man. I'm not shocked about
>the Presonus, most of their stuff I've tried has been less than stellar,
but
>I am a little surprised the Behr slapped it that badly.
>Very cool man, any chance you can put up some comparison files?
>
>AA
>
>
>"Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote in message news:4951958b@linux...
>>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> I just spent my first couple of hours with a grace m101. It's definitely
>> the best mic preamp I've ever owned. I learned a lot from comparing it
to
>> my older ones, too. I recorded the same thing on acoustic guitar through
>> all three mic pres with a 4050 pointed at the neck joint from about 10
>> inches
>> away.
>>
>> The m101: bright, full, but the biggest thing I noticed was how you could
>> hear every nuance of the pick hitting every single string. It was like
>> the
>> sound had more texture than I'm used to. There is a percussive dimension
>> that is missing or lesser on the other mic pres.
>>
>> The Presonus Tube Pre: Brighter than the m101 and not as full. All that
>> texture/percussive quality of the m101 is missing with the Tube Pre.
It's
>> like a whole dimension of the sound is missing - because it is. It sounds
>> plastic, like a sock is muffling all the percussive content of the sound.
>>
>> The ADA800: It's not as bright as the other two, but its fuller than
the
>> Presonus. As for the texture dimension, it's about half way between the
>> Tube Pre and the m101. This surprised me because I expected it to come
in
>> last. The Tube Pre was an upgrade to my ears above the Mackie XDR preamps
>> that I used to have, and the mic pres in the ADA800 are significantly
>> better
>> than the Tube Pre.
>>
>> I'd recommend the m101 to anyone. You can never eq back in what the Tube
>> Pre leaves out. Way cool.
>>
>> I hope this mini review is useful to someone.
>>
>> Mike
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101792 is a reply to message #101791] |
Thu, 25 December 2008 21:35 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
We didn't use the sub $200 crap at Tisway. It was the digimax, original
release model. Up against any of the other stuff there, it felt like a toy
and unfortunately held up about the same way. I had Mackie XDR, Millenia and
Demeter to hold it against and it wasn't even close on any aspect. I also
have a Blue Tube in my recording rack when I want nasty/grit. It does a
pretty good classic 60's/70's bass DI thing, but I understand it's a cheap
piece and I expect little from it in the way of prestine, of course. I've
also used the 8 channel comp/limit deal they have out currently, ACP88. What
a pile of crap that thing is, yikes...
Have they improved the Digimax that much over the first release?
AA
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:49546d5c$1@linux...
>
> Presonus has made some good pres and some not so good pres. The M 80 was
> good,
> and some of the newer ones are good. Which Presonus do you have? And
> keep
> in mind the Grace is a $600.00 pre and some of the Presonus tube pres are
> $75 to 149.00, I would expect there to be a difference.
>
> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>For me, confirmation that the 2 ADA8000's I bought when they first came
> out
>>are still a good value. I thought the same thing when I got the first one
>
>>you were expecting. Something along the lines of, well, it'll probably
>>suck
>
>>but I need the extra ins to catch a load of keyboard inputs and the such.
> If
>>it's even remotely close to a 101, I'm thrilled man. I'm not shocked
>>about
>
>>the Presonus, most of their stuff I've tried has been less than stellar,
> but
>>I am a little surprised the Behr slapped it that badly.
>>Very cool man, any chance you can put up some comparison files?
>>
>>AA
>>
>>
>>"Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote in message news:4951958b@linux...
>>>
>>> Hi Guys,
>>>
>>> I just spent my first couple of hours with a grace m101. It's
>>> definitely
>>> the best mic preamp I've ever owned. I learned a lot from comparing it
> to
>>> my older ones, too. I recorded the same thing on acoustic guitar
>>> through
>>> all three mic pres with a 4050 pointed at the neck joint from about 10
>
>>> inches
>>> away.
>>>
>>> The m101: bright, full, but the biggest thing I noticed was how you
>>> could
>>> hear every nuance of the pick hitting every single string. It was like
>
>>> the
>>> sound had more texture than I'm used to. There is a percussive
>>> dimension
>>> that is missing or lesser on the other mic pres.
>>>
>>> The Presonus Tube Pre: Brighter than the m101 and not as full. All that
>>> texture/percussive quality of the m101 is missing with the Tube Pre.
> It's
>>> like a whole dimension of the sound is missing - because it is. It
>>> sounds
>>> plastic, like a sock is muffling all the percussive content of the
>>> sound.
>>>
>>> The ADA800: It's not as bright as the other two, but its fuller than
> the
>>> Presonus. As for the texture dimension, it's about half way between the
>>> Tube Pre and the m101. This surprised me because I expected it to come
> in
>>> last. The Tube Pre was an upgrade to my ears above the Mackie XDR
>>> preamps
>>> that I used to have, and the mic pres in the ADA800 are significantly
>
>>> better
>>> than the Tube Pre.
>>>
>>> I'd recommend the m101 to anyone. You can never eq back in what the
>>> Tube
>>> Pre leaves out. Way cool.
>>>
>>> I hope this mini review is useful to someone.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101794 is a reply to message #101792] |
Thu, 25 December 2008 23:30 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The Presonus FireStudio mic pres have gotten some good reviews compared to
other pres, by users. Of course this is second hand information, so, ymmv.
I was wondering what Presonus mic pre Mike was using?
I've used ACP88s in the past and I would say that the results were not bad.
I can tell you that they source different parts on different runs of the
product, so this will effect the sound. Aaron, what compressors would you
use to get some drums pumpin for around the same price, if you needed 8 channels?
http://www.presonus.com/products/Detail.aspx?ProductId=5
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>We didn't use the sub $200 crap at Tisway. It was the digimax, original
>release model. Up against any of the other stuff there, it felt like a toy
>and unfortunately held up about the same way. I had Mackie XDR, Millenia
and
>Demeter to hold it against and it wasn't even close on any aspect. I also
>have a Blue Tube in my recording rack when I want nasty/grit. It does a
>pretty good classic 60's/70's bass DI thing, but I understand it's a cheap
>piece and I expect little from it in the way of prestine, of course. I've
>also used the 8 channel comp/limit deal they have out currently, ACP88.
What
>a pile of crap that thing is, yikes...
>Have they improved the Digimax that much over the first release?
>
>AA
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:49546d5c$1@linux...
>>
>> Presonus has made some good pres and some not so good pres. The M 80 was
>> good,
>> and some of the newer ones are good. Which Presonus do you have? And
>> keep
>> in mind the Grace is a $600.00 pre and some of the Presonus tube pres
are
>> $75 to 149.00, I would expect there to be a difference.
>>
>> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>>For me, confirmation that the 2 ADA8000's I bought when they first came
>> out
>>>are still a good value. I thought the same thing when I got the first
one
>>
>>>you were expecting. Something along the lines of, well, it'll probably
>>>suck
>>
>>>but I need the extra ins to catch a load of keyboard inputs and the such.
>> If
>>>it's even remotely close to a 101, I'm thrilled man. I'm not shocked
>>>about
>>
>>>the Presonus, most of their stuff I've tried has been less than stellar,
>> but
>>>I am a little surprised the Behr slapped it that badly.
>>>Very cool man, any chance you can put up some comparison files?
>>>
>>>AA
>>>
>>>
>>>"Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote in message news:4951958b@linux...
>>>>
>>>> Hi Guys,
>>>>
>>>> I just spent my first couple of hours with a grace m101. It's
>>>> definitely
>>>> the best mic preamp I've ever owned. I learned a lot from comparing
it
>> to
>>>> my older ones, too. I recorded the same thing on acoustic guitar
>>>> through
>>>> all three mic pres with a 4050 pointed at the neck joint from about
10
>>
>>>> inches
>>>> away.
>>>>
>>>> The m101: bright, full, but the biggest thing I noticed was how you
>>>> could
>>>> hear every nuance of the pick hitting every single string. It was like
>>
>>>> the
>>>> sound had more texture than I'm used to. There is a percussive
>>>> dimension
>>>> that is missing or lesser on the other mic pres.
>>>>
>>>> The Presonus Tube Pre: Brighter than the m101 and not as full. All
that
>>>> texture/percussive quality of the m101 is missing with the Tube Pre.
>> It's
>>>> like a whole dimension of the sound is missing - because it is. It
>>>> sounds
>>>> plastic, like a sock is muffling all the percussive content of the
>>>> sound.
>>>>
>>>> The ADA800: It's not as bright as the other two, but its fuller than
>> the
>>>> Presonus. As for the texture dimension, it's about half way between
the
>>>> Tube Pre and the m101. This surprised me because I expected it to come
>> in
>>>> last. The Tube Pre was an upgrade to my ears above the Mackie XDR
>>>> preamps
>>>> that I used to have, and the mic pres in the ADA800 are significantly
>>
>>>> better
>>>> than the Tube Pre.
>>>>
>>>> I'd recommend the m101 to anyone. You can never eq back in what the
>>>> Tube
>>>> Pre leaves out. Way cool.
>>>>
>>>> I hope this mini review is useful to someone.
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101795 is a reply to message #101794] |
Thu, 25 December 2008 23:12 |
Wayne
Messages: 206
Registered: July 2008
Location: Las Vegas
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I looked into the PreSonus stuff because of price. I currently own the
Eureka and it is satisfactory. By turning up the saturation knob I was able
to smooth out the harshness of my Mackie 160vlz (1990 circa) pres. The
Eureka also has a compressor, VU meter and 3 band parametric and with
minimal use of these two items I have tamed my vox. It's a single channel
unit. The newer FireWire, Digimax FS and D8 use a X-MAX pre and per their
rep it's their newest as of a couple months back.
Wayne
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:495479ee$1@linux...
>
> The Presonus FireStudio mic pres have gotten some good reviews compared to
> other pres, by users. Of course this is second hand information, so,
> ymmv.
> I was wondering what Presonus mic pre Mike was using?
>
> I've used ACP88s in the past and I would say that the results were not
> bad.
> I can tell you that they source different parts on different runs of the
> product, so this will effect the sound. Aaron, what compressors would you
> use to get some drums pumpin for around the same price, if you needed 8
> channels?
>
>
> http://www.presonus.com/products/Detail.aspx?ProductId=5
>
> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>We didn't use the sub $200 crap at Tisway. It was the digimax, original
>>release model. Up against any of the other stuff there, it felt like a toy
>>and unfortunately held up about the same way. I had Mackie XDR, Millenia
> and Demeter to hold it against and it wasn't even close on any aspect. I
> also
>>have a Blue Tube in my recording rack when I want nasty/grit. It does a
>>pretty good classic 60's/70's bass DI thing, but I understand it's a cheap
>>piece and I expect little from it in the way of prestine, of course. I've
>>also used the 8 channel comp/limit deal they have out currently, ACP88.
> What a pile of crap that thing is, yikes...
>>Have they improved the Digimax that much over the first release?
>>
>>AA
>>
>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:49546d5c$1@linux...
>>>
>>> Presonus has made some good pres and some not so good pres. The M 80 was
>>> good,
>>> and some of the newer ones are good. Which Presonus do you have? And
>>> keep
>>> in mind the Grace is a $600.00 pre and some of the Presonus tube pres
> are
>>> $75 to 149.00, I would expect there to be a difference.
>>>
>>> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>>>For me, confirmation that the 2 ADA8000's I bought when they first came
>>> out
>>>>are still a good value. I thought the same thing when I got the first
> one
>>>
>>>>you were expecting. Something along the lines of, well, it'll probably
>>>>suck
>>>
>>>>but I need the extra ins to catch a load of keyboard inputs and the
>>>>such.
>>> If
>>>>it's even remotely close to a 101, I'm thrilled man. I'm not shocked
>>>>about
>>>
>>>>the Presonus, most of their stuff I've tried has been less than stellar,
>>> but
>>>>I am a little surprised the Behr slapped it that badly.
>>>>Very cool man, any chance you can put up some comparison files?
>>>>
>>>>AA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote in message news:4951958b@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Guys,
>>>>>
>>>>> I just spent my first couple of hours with a grace m101. It's
>>>>> definitely
>>>>> the best mic preamp I've ever owned. I learned a lot from comparing
> it
>>> to
>>>>> my older ones, too. I recorded the same thing on acoustic guitar
>>>>> through
>>>>> all three mic pres with a 4050 pointed at the neck joint from about
> 10
>>>
>>>>> inches
>>>>> away.
>>>>>
>>>>> The m101: bright, full, but the biggest thing I noticed was how you
>
>>>>> could
>>>>> hear every nuance of the pick hitting every single string. It was
>>>>> like
>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>> sound had more texture than I'm used to. There is a percussive
>>>>> dimension
>>>>> that is missing or lesser on the other mic pres.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Presonus Tube Pre: Brighter than the m101 and not as full. All
> that
>>>>> texture/percussive quality of the m101 is missing with the Tube Pre.
>>> It's
>>>>> like a whole dimension of the sound is missing - because it is. It
>
>>>>> sounds
>>>>> plastic, like a sock is muffling all the percussive content of the
>>>>> sound.
>>>>>
>>>>> The ADA800: It's not as bright as the other two, but its fuller than
>>> the
>>>>> Presonus. As for the texture dimension, it's about half way between
> the
>>>>> Tube Pre and the m101. This surprised me because I expected it to
>>>>> come
>>> in
>>>>> last. The Tube Pre was an upgrade to my ears above the Mackie XDR
>>>>> preamps
>>>>> that I used to have, and the mic pres in the ADA800 are significantly
>>>
>>>>> better
>>>>> than the Tube Pre.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd recommend the m101 to anyone. You can never eq back in what the
>
>>>>> Tube
>>>>> Pre leaves out. Way cool.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope this mini review is useful to someone.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101797 is a reply to message #101794] |
Fri, 26 December 2008 02:45 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In that same price range? A pair of dBX 1046's probably.
Purty sure Mike said he was using a TubePre model.
AA
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:495479ee$1@linux...
>
> The Presonus FireStudio mic pres have gotten some good reviews compared to
> other pres, by users. Of course this is second hand information, so,
> ymmv.
> I was wondering what Presonus mic pre Mike was using?
>
> I've used ACP88s in the past and I would say that the results were not
> bad.
> I can tell you that they source different parts on different runs of the
> product, so this will effect the sound. Aaron, what compressors would you
> use to get some drums pumpin for around the same price, if you needed 8
> channels?
>
>
> http://www.presonus.com/products/Detail.aspx?ProductId=5
>
> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>We didn't use the sub $200 crap at Tisway. It was the digimax, original
>
>>release model. Up against any of the other stuff there, it felt like a toy
>
>>and unfortunately held up about the same way. I had Mackie XDR, Millenia
> and
>>Demeter to hold it against and it wasn't even close on any aspect. I also
>
>>have a Blue Tube in my recording rack when I want nasty/grit. It does a
>
>>pretty good classic 60's/70's bass DI thing, but I understand it's a cheap
>
>>piece and I expect little from it in the way of prestine, of course. I've
>
>>also used the 8 channel comp/limit deal they have out currently, ACP88.
> What
>>a pile of crap that thing is, yikes...
>>Have they improved the Digimax that much over the first release?
>>
>>AA
>>
>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:49546d5c$1@linux...
>>>
>>> Presonus has made some good pres and some not so good pres. The M 80 was
>
>>> good,
>>> and some of the newer ones are good. Which Presonus do you have? And
>
>>> keep
>>> in mind the Grace is a $600.00 pre and some of the Presonus tube pres
> are
>>> $75 to 149.00, I would expect there to be a difference.
>>>
>>> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>>>For me, confirmation that the 2 ADA8000's I bought when they first came
>>> out
>>>>are still a good value. I thought the same thing when I got the first
> one
>>>
>>>>you were expecting. Something along the lines of, well, it'll probably
>
>>>>suck
>>>
>>>>but I need the extra ins to catch a load of keyboard inputs and the
>>>>such.
>>> If
>>>>it's even remotely close to a 101, I'm thrilled man. I'm not shocked
>
>>>>about
>>>
>>>>the Presonus, most of their stuff I've tried has been less than stellar,
>>> but
>>>>I am a little surprised the Behr slapped it that badly.
>>>>Very cool man, any chance you can put up some comparison files?
>>>>
>>>>AA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote in message news:4951958b@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Guys,
>>>>>
>>>>> I just spent my first couple of hours with a grace m101. It's
>>>>> definitely
>>>>> the best mic preamp I've ever owned. I learned a lot from comparing
> it
>>> to
>>>>> my older ones, too. I recorded the same thing on acoustic guitar
>>>>> through
>>>>> all three mic pres with a 4050 pointed at the neck joint from about
> 10
>>>
>>>>> inches
>>>>> away.
>>>>>
>>>>> The m101: bright, full, but the biggest thing I noticed was how you
>
>>>>> could
>>>>> hear every nuance of the pick hitting every single string. It was
>>>>> like
>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>> sound had more texture than I'm used to. There is a percussive
>>>>> dimension
>>>>> that is missing or lesser on the other mic pres.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Presonus Tube Pre: Brighter than the m101 and not as full. All
> that
>>>>> texture/percussive quality of the m101 is missing with the Tube Pre.
>>> It's
>>>>> like a whole dimension of the sound is missing - because it is. It
>
>>>>> sounds
>>>>> plastic, like a sock is muffling all the percussive content of the
>>>>> sound.
>>>>>
>>>>> The ADA800: It's not as bright as the other two, but its fuller than
>>> the
>>>>> Presonus. As for the texture dimension, it's about half way between
> the
>>>>> Tube Pre and the m101. This surprised me because I expected it to
>>>>> come
>>> in
>>>>> last. The Tube Pre was an upgrade to my ears above the Mackie XDR
>>>>> preamps
>>>>> that I used to have, and the mic pres in the ADA800 are significantly
>>>
>>>>> better
>>>>> than the Tube Pre.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd recommend the m101 to anyone. You can never eq back in what the
>
>>>>> Tube
>>>>> Pre leaves out. Way cool.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope this mini review is useful to someone.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101829 is a reply to message #101762] |
Mon, 29 December 2008 03:50 |
Mike Audet
Messages: 294
Registered: December 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Aaron,
Sorry about the delay. I've been at holiday functions for the past week.
here are the samples:
http://ensoniq.ca/preamps/
Cheers!
Mike
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>For me, confirmation that the 2 ADA8000's I bought when they first came
out
>are still a good value. I thought the same thing when I got the first one
>you were expecting. Something along the lines of, well, it'll probably suck
>but I need the extra ins to catch a load of keyboard inputs and the such.
If
>it's even remotely close to a 101, I'm thrilled man. I'm not shocked about
>the Presonus, most of their stuff I've tried has been less than stellar,
but
>I am a little surprised the Behr slapped it that badly.
>Very cool man, any chance you can put up some comparison files?
>
>AA
>
>
>"Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote in message news:4951958b@linux...
>>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> I just spent my first couple of hours with a grace m101. It's definitely
>> the best mic preamp I've ever owned. I learned a lot from comparing it
to
>> my older ones, too. I recorded the same thing on acoustic guitar through
>> all three mic pres with a 4050 pointed at the neck joint from about 10
>> inches
>> away.
>>
>> The m101: bright, full, but the biggest thing I noticed was how you could
>> hear every nuance of the pick hitting every single string. It was like
>> the
>> sound had more texture than I'm used to. There is a percussive dimension
>> that is missing or lesser on the other mic pres.
>>
>> The Presonus Tube Pre: Brighter than the m101 and not as full. All that
>> texture/percussive quality of the m101 is missing with the Tube Pre.
It's
>> like a whole dimension of the sound is missing - because it is. It sounds
>> plastic, like a sock is muffling all the percussive content of the sound.
>>
>> The ADA800: It's not as bright as the other two, but its fuller than
the
>> Presonus. As for the texture dimension, it's about half way between the
>> Tube Pre and the m101. This surprised me because I expected it to come
in
>> last. The Tube Pre was an upgrade to my ears above the Mackie XDR preamps
>> that I used to have, and the mic pres in the ADA800 are significantly
>> better
>> than the Tube Pre.
>>
>> I'd recommend the m101 to anyone. You can never eq back in what the Tube
>> Pre leaves out. Way cool.
>>
>> I hope this mini review is useful to someone.
>>
>> Mike
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101834 is a reply to message #101829] |
Mon, 29 December 2008 10:15 |
|
|
For the money, the ADA800's can't be beat.
"Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote:
>
>Hi Aaron,
>
>Sorry about the delay. I've been at holiday functions for the past week.
>
>here are the samples:
>http://ensoniq.ca/preamps/
>
>Cheers!
>
>Mike
>
>
>"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>For me, confirmation that the 2 ADA8000's I bought when they first came
>out
>>are still a good value. I thought the same thing when I got the first one
>
>>you were expecting. Something along the lines of, well, it'll probably
suck
>
>>but I need the extra ins to catch a load of keyboard inputs and the such.
>If
>>it's even remotely close to a 101, I'm thrilled man. I'm not shocked about
>
>>the Presonus, most of their stuff I've tried has been less than stellar,
>but
>>I am a little surprised the Behr slapped it that badly.
>>Very cool man, any chance you can put up some comparison files?
>>
>>AA
>>
>>
>>"Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote in message news:4951958b@linux...
>>>
>>> Hi Guys,
>>>
>>> I just spent my first couple of hours with a grace m101. It's definitely
>>> the best mic preamp I've ever owned. I learned a lot from comparing
it
>to
>>> my older ones, too. I recorded the same thing on acoustic guitar through
>>> all three mic pres with a 4050 pointed at the neck joint from about 10
>
>>> inches
>>> away.
>>>
>>> The m101: bright, full, but the biggest thing I noticed was how you could
>>> hear every nuance of the pick hitting every single string. It was like
>
>>> the
>>> sound had more texture than I'm used to. There is a percussive dimension
>>> that is missing or lesser on the other mic pres.
>>>
>>> The Presonus Tube Pre: Brighter than the m101 and not as full. All that
>>> texture/percussive quality of the m101 is missing with the Tube Pre.
>It's
>>> like a whole dimension of the sound is missing - because it is. It sounds
>>> plastic, like a sock is muffling all the percussive content of the sound.
>>>
>>> The ADA800: It's not as bright as the other two, but its fuller than
>the
>>> Presonus. As for the texture dimension, it's about half way between
the
>>> Tube Pre and the m101. This surprised me because I expected it to come
>in
>>> last. The Tube Pre was an upgrade to my ears above the Mackie XDR preamps
>>> that I used to have, and the mic pres in the ADA800 are significantly
>
>>> better
>>> than the Tube Pre.
>>>
>>> I'd recommend the m101 to anyone. You can never eq back in what the
Tube
>>> Pre leaves out. Way cool.
>>>
>>> I hope this mini review is useful to someone.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101856 is a reply to message #101836] |
Thu, 01 January 2009 00:15 |
|
|
Well, most mast marketed products today are made in China. So, there's little
R&D for the so-called reputable companies.
I mean, how much R&D goes into re-creating a Neve 1073 eq?
TC <tc@spammetodeathyoubastards.org> wrote:
>Of course, since Behringer never has to spend any money on R&D. It's
>already been done for them.
>
>Cheers,
>
>TC
>
>LaMont wrote:
>> For the money, the ADA800's can't be beat.
>>
>> "Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote:
>>> Hi Aaron,
>>>
>>> Sorry about the delay. I've been at holiday functions for the past week.
>>>
>>> here are the samples:
|
|
|
|
| Re: grace m101 vs Presonus Tube Pre vs. Behringer ADA8000 [message #101858 is a reply to message #101856] |
Thu, 01 January 2009 12:53 |
audioguy_editout_
Messages: 249
Registered: December 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Well, I agree with the China thing, the R&D department at Behringer
consists of a photocopier!... but re-creating a classic can be harder
than you think!
I have been working on small production runs of REDD mic Pre's and
Altec/RS124 compressors... reverse engineering some of the parts like
transformers can be quite a challenge. In one instance, the fellow I am
doing this for had to have the metallurgy done on the transformer plates
to figure out the balance of nickel and iron etc. This is key to the
sound of the units. Many of the recreations are using components that
are "close" and as such don't sound exactly like the originals.
David.
LaMont wrote:
> Well, most mast marketed products today are made in China. So, there's little
> R&D for the so-called reputable companies.
>
> I mean, how much R&D goes into re-creating a Neve 1073 eq?
>
> TC <tc@spammetodeathyoubastards.org> wrote:
>> Of course, since Behringer never has to spend any money on R&D. It's
>> already been done for them.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> TC
>>
>> LaMont wrote:
>>> For the money, the ADA800's can't be beat.
>>>
>>> "Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote:
>>>> Hi Aaron,
>>>>
>>>> Sorry about the delay. I've been at holiday functions for the past week.
>>>>
>>>> here are the samples:
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Dec 21 21:52:35 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.05230 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
