So if you wanted to buy a reasonably priced mixer,
and get really good mic preamps for recording mainly
the piano, which one would you all recommend?

This is instead of buying expensive, dedicated mic preamps.

I would only need 2-6 channels.

Or perhaps there is a 2 channel USB audio interface, that is
reasonably priced, but has excellent mic preamps, that
you could all recommend?

Thanks in advance....

On 8/14/2021 5:10 PM, Paul Dorman wrote:
> So if you wanted to buy a reasonably priced mixer,
> and get really good mic preamps for recording mainly
> the piano, which one would you all recommend?

Depends on what you consider reasonably priced, and whether you already
have an interface that's as good as you want the mic preamps to be.

> I would only need 2-6 channels.
>
> Or perhaps there is a 2 channel USB audio interface, that is
> reasonably priced, but has excellent mic preamps, that
> you could all recommend?

There are many. It's hard to go wrong Focusrite

--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

On 8/14/2021 3:17 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 8/14/2021 5:10 PM, Paul Dorman wrote:
>> So if you wanted to buy a reasonably priced mixer,
>> and get really good mic preamps for recording mainly
>> the piano, which one would you all recommend?
>
> Depends on what you consider reasonably priced, and whether you already
> have an interface that's as good as you want the mic preamps to be.
>

Maybe about $100-200.

I already have a Tascam US-1641, but I have used a Mackie
mixer's preamps in the past, and they were a good alternative.

Maybe I could use something like this one:

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/402VLZ4--mackie-402vlz4-4-channel-mixer

Do the Onyx mic preamps get good reviews here?

>> I would only need 2-6 channels.
>>
>> Or perhaps there is a 2 channel USB audio interface, that is
>> reasonably priced, but has excellent mic preamps, that
>> you could all recommend?
>
> There are many. It's hard to go wrong Focusrite
>

Paul wrote:
===========
> So if you wanted to buy a reasonably priced mixer,
> and get really good mic preamps for recording mainly
> the piano,

** You need to say what sort of mics you are using.
The performance demands on a pre-amp are far less if they are condenser types.

In any case the piano, the room and the playing matter far more.

...... Phil

On 8/14/2021 4:53 PM, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
> Paul wrote:
> ===========
>> So if you wanted to buy a reasonably priced mixer,
>> and get really good mic preamps for recording mainly
>> the piano,
>
> ** You need to say what sort of mics you are using.
> The performance demands on a pre-amp are far less if they are condenser types.
>

The mics will be a stereo pair of CM3 condensers by Line Audio
Design. I might also use my Audio Technica AT4047 in conjunction,
to get a fuller bodied sound.

> In any case the piano, the room and the playing matter far more.

True. I'm looking for my first Yamaha grand as I type!

:)

Paul Dorman <quiller123@gmail.com> wrote:
>So if you wanted to buy a reasonably priced mixer,
>and get really good mic preamps for recording mainly
>the piano, which one would you all recommend?

I have always liked the APIs. They are not super expensive, the preamps
are not super transparent but they are clean and not grubby.

>This is instead of buying expensive, dedicated mic preamps.
>
>I would only need 2-6 channels.

Although you probably won't find a shortloaded API these days, you can
still buy a cheap 500-series rack and put some API preamps into one. It's
like having a console without the EQ or bussing. If you need a buss, you
can get a small master module too.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 8/14/2021 7:51 PM, Paul Dorman wrote:

>>> So if you wanted to buy a reasonably priced mixer,
>>> and get really good mic preamps for recording mainly
>>> the piano, which one would you all recommend?
>>
>> Depends on what you consider reasonably priced, and whether you
>> already have an interface that's as good as you want the mic preamps
>> to be.
>>
>
>     Maybe about $100-200.

$100-$200 per channel for mic preamps of any decent quality hasn't been
seen for a long time. It's more in line with the price per channel of an
inexpensive "better quality" mixer.

>     I already have a Tascam US-1641, but I have used a Mackie
> mixer's preamps in the past, and they were a good alternative.

Anything wrong with the TASCAM? If you're looking for a "better than"
you need to specify in which ways you would like it to be better. "Sound
quality" doesn't count.

>     Maybe I could use something like this one:
> mackie-402vlz4-4-channel-mixer

What would you do with it? Just use the preamps ahead of the TASCAM
1641? I doubt that the Mackie preamps would offer any improvement over
what's in the TASCAM.

>     Do the Onyx mic preamps get good reviews here?

It's rare that anything gets reviews here any more. Most everyone agrees
that Onyx preamps are OK, but nothing exceptional.

What problem are you trying to solve? Or do you just want to spend some
money and see what kind of improvement you can make? As Phil said, the
mic preamps are the least likely thing to affect the sound than the
piano, mics, mic placement, and player.

>
>
>
>>> I would only need 2-6 channels.
>>>
>>> Or perhaps there is a 2 channel USB audio interface, that is
>>> reasonably priced, but has excellent mic preamps, that
>>> you could all recommend?
>>
>> There are many. It's hard to go wrong Focusrite
>>
>

--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

"Paul Dorman" wrote in message news:sf9v5k$6sa$1@dont-email.me...
<snip>

I'm looking for my first Yamaha grand as I type!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

If you're going the used route I would look for the C series of grand
pianos.
The C7 is a great piano if you have the room. If you're short (no pun
intended) on space the C3 is also a great piano.
I am a piano tuner and have quite a few customers with both models.

Good luck!
Poly

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 8/15/2021 2:45 PM, polymod wrote:
>
>
> "Paul Dorman"  wrote in message news:sf9v5k$6sa$1@dont-email.me...
> <snip>
>
> I'm looking for my first Yamaha grand as I type!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
> If you're going the used route I would look for  the C series of grand
> pianos.
> The C7 is a great piano if you have the room. If you're short (no pun
> intended) on space the C3 is also a great piano.
> I am a piano tuner and have quite a few customers with both models.
>

Agreed 100%. I have space for a 6-7 footer, so I am
looking for a used C3-C6.

They are fantastic instruments!

:)

On 8/15/2021 7:49 AM, Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 8/14/2021 7:51 PM, Paul Dorman wrote:
>
>>>> So if you wanted to buy a reasonably priced mixer,
>>>> and get really good mic preamps for recording mainly
>>>> the piano, which one would you all recommend?
>>>
>>> Depends on what you consider reasonably priced, and whether you
>>> already have an interface that's as good as you want the mic preamps
>>> to be.
>>>
>>
>>      Maybe about $100-200.
>
> $100-$200 per channel for mic preamps of any decent quality hasn't been
> seen for a long time. It's more in line with the price per channel of an
> inexpensive "better quality" mixer.
>
>
>>      I already have a Tascam US-1641, but I have used a Mackie
>> mixer's preamps in the past, and they were a good alternative.
>
> Anything wrong with the TASCAM? If you're looking for a "better than"
> you need to specify in which ways you would like it to be better. "Sound
> quality" doesn't count.
>
>>      Maybe I could use something like this one:
>> mackie-402vlz4-4-channel-mixer
>
> What would you do with it? Just use the preamps ahead of the TASCAM
> 1641?  I doubt that the Mackie preamps would offer any improvement over
> what's in the TASCAM.

I've used my Mackie 1402-VLZ preamps ahead of the Tascam, and I
thought the sound was a bit brighter, and clearer.

But my 1402 is busy with another job, so I was looking for a
2nd unit.

But I understand your point: I could probably make the Tascam
preamp signals work fine, with a bit of post production EQing.

>
>
>>      Do the Onyx mic preamps get good reviews here?
>
> It's rare that anything gets reviews here any more. Most everyone agrees
> that Onyx preamps are OK, but nothing exceptional.
>
> What problem are you trying to solve? Or do you just want to spend some
> money and see what kind of improvement you can make? As Phil said, the
> mic preamps are the least likely thing to affect the sound than the
> piano, mics, mic placement, and player.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> I would only need 2-6 channels.
>>>>
>>>> Or perhaps there is a 2 channel USB audio interface, that is
>>>> reasonably priced, but has excellent mic preamps, that
>>>> you could all recommend?
>>>
>>> There are many. It's hard to go wrong Focusrite
>>>
>>
>
>

On 8/15/2021 9:53 PM, Paul Dorman wrote:

>
>     I've used my Mackie 1402-VLZ preamps ahead of the Tascam, and I
> thought the sound was a bit brighter, and clearer.
>
>     But my 1402 is busy with another job, so I was looking for a
> 2nd unit.
>
>     But I understand your point:  I could probably make the Tascam
> preamp signals work fine, with a bit of post production EQing.

You might be fooling yourself as to which signal route is better - with
or without the TASCAM in line. It depends on how you're connecting the
mixer with the interface. If you connect the Insert Send of the Mackie
channel to one of the analog inputs (11-14) on the TASCAM, you will have
bypassed the TASCAM's mic preamp and will only be hearing what goes
through the Mackie.

If you connected them some other way, you could be hearing both preamps
in series, and/or you could be slightly overdriving the TASCAM input,
giving you a slightly brighter sound because of increased harmonic
distortion.

Take some time to experiment. If the TASCAM, with or without some
post-recording treatment, sounds fine, make use of it. The simplest
signal path that works is the best one to use.

--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

On 8/16/2021 6:20 AM, Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 8/15/2021 9:53 PM, Paul Dorman wrote:
>
>>
>>      I've used my Mackie 1402-VLZ preamps ahead of the Tascam, and I
>> thought the sound was a bit brighter, and clearer.
>>
>>      But my 1402 is busy with another job, so I was looking for a
>> 2nd unit.
>>
>>      But I understand your point:  I could probably make the Tascam
>> preamp signals work fine, with a bit of post production EQing.
>
> You might be fooling yourself as to which signal route is better - with
> or without the TASCAM in line. It depends on how you're connecting the
> mixer with the interface. If you connect the Insert Send of the Mackie
> channel to one of the analog inputs (11-14) on the TASCAM, you will have
> bypassed the TASCAM's mic preamp and will only be hearing what goes
> through the Mackie.

I was only hearing the preamp of the Mackie, via pre-fader/pre-EQ
Tip-send from the back channel insert connections.

>
> If you connected them some other way, you could be hearing both preamps
> in series, and/or you could be slightly overdriving the TASCAM input,
> giving you a slightly brighter sound because of increased harmonic
> distortion.
>
> Take some time to experiment. If the TASCAM, with or without some
> post-recording treatment, sounds fine, make use of it. The simplest
> signal path that works is the best one to use.
>

True.