I very much like the way SOS posts online mp3s to accompany articles in the magazine, and
I really appreciate the mic pre comparison in October's edition. Two things, each
accompanied by a question:
* The differences between ALL of those pres are
pretty subtle, so the conclusion that wants to be drawn is 'well, it doesn't make much
difference which pre I use then'. Is there anything obviously wrong with this kind of
thinking? (I've heard people say 'well, you won't hear much of a difference between this
pre and that pre on ONE recorded source, but when there are ten or twenty miked sources in
the same mix, the difference will become much clearer'.)
* The very slight
preferences and dislikes I had between the various pres were pretty much completely
different/opposite the voting in the 'key to the pres' thread above. Now, I have a huge
capacity for self-doubt, so I'm wondering if this is due to years of my using and
listening to compromised/crummy sound in my home studio - kind of like 'don't waste the
good wine on him - he's been drinking cheap Merlot for so long he actually prefers it'.
Okay, I know you can't assess what I like, but to what extent do you think it's just a
matter of personal preference for this or that (slight) coloration, and to what extent is
it a matter of there being a real difference in terms of clarity and beauty?
Thanks to SOS for both the article and the samples. Years ago, I actually bought a CD
of a mic pre shootout organized by a guy in the US called Lynn Fuston, and on that
occasion as well, I heard little to no difference between the various recordings, but
again, it was just one source being recorded. Anyway, this reinforces my impression that
either there's little difference between pres, or that I don't have the ears to hear it.