Apr 24, 2010 11:41 am In that price range, M-Audio's DMP3 (you can probably get a pair of them).
Preamp within $200-300 U.S
Posted on Apr 24, 2010 07:33 am
pipedreams
Marijuana Czar
Member Since: Oct 01, 2009
Hey I'm gonna upgrade my sound quality with a decent preamp but dont know how to differ between them all, theres so many to choose from!
Can anyone suggest a good one? from experience or word of mouth?
[ Back to Top ]
Apr 24, 2010 11:41 am In that price range, M-Audio's DMP3 (you can probably get a pair of them).
Apr 24, 2010 11:30 pm ok well im confused, currently i plug my guitar into the line in on my mixer, which goes into my daw where i use GR4,
yesterday i was told that GR4 IS a preamp. i thought it was like a simulated amp..? do i not need a preamp if im using GR4?
i thought i needed one coz my mixer doesnt have pre's on the line in, only on the xlr connections n they're mic preamps
Apr 25, 2010 02:12 am what sort of mixer do you have?
it basicly comes down to, are you getting the volume you need when you use GR?
do you have to crank the vol everywhere to get the level up?
a pre amp is great if you wanna get one, but unless you buy a good one, youre better off not bothering if you are getting the line level you need.
you might as well buy an interface if youre considering buying a pre at the price you mentioned.
you'll get similar qual pres in an interface, for about the same price as the Maudio pre.
so in a nutshell, find out if youre getting a good line level into the DAW, or find out if youre mixer has decent "line level" pres.
if the answer is no, then consider either buying an interface or a good quality pre amp.
cheap pres as i mentioned are a bit of a waste of money as an interface contains the same quality pres.
Unless of course you can only afford a cheap pre and thats it.
Apr 26, 2010 01:43 am nah im gettin good volume after i put GR4 on as an effect
& i have a (dont shoot me) behringer xenyx 1204, and like you said.. it probs doesnt have preamps on the line ins.
and by audio interface do u mean something like the UCA 202? coz thats what came along with my mixer. does that part of the set-up rly matter that much? i just thought it was a device to pass over the signals to the PC
Apr 26, 2010 02:47 am you'd be best posting a snipet of a guitar track so we can have a listen. will make it easier to sort it out for you.
if your getting enough line level then we will look at some other things.
Apr 26, 2010 12:14 pm LINE inputs usually have a bit of gain
Look at this PDF:
www.behringer.com/EN/down..._P0555_V_YY.pdf
on the last page is a block diagram. It shows mono input channels, have the LINE input feeding into the OP-AMP (triangle thing) along with the trim dial on the side.
So this means you have gain control for your preamp for LINE inputs. So if you turn up the gain till you have good signal on that channel, then you're set. You wouldn't need another cheap preamp. Ok, maybe cheap is harsh, but you don't need another 'inexpensive' preamp =).
Instead, you may want to invest in a better interface, than the uca202.
For 2 bills, the UX2 has 2 XLR preamps, plus line inputs, inst inputs, and amp modeling. yum. all your bunnies in one basket =)
Apr 26, 2010 11:38 pm right so the lines ARE being preamped good to know
but how is the ux2 better than a uca202?
they both do 48khz, and the ux2 has 2 xlr channels when i have 4 on my mixer/uca combo already?
plus, if i got the ux2, there would be nowhere to plug my monitors in.
if someone could show me the difference i might think about upgrading coz i dont see it
Apr 29, 2010 05:24 pm UCA is a VERY cheap piece of gear, so the maker will use the cheapest components available. This means that the converters will be very low quality. I'd offer that the converters in the UX2 would be much better than the ones in the UCA.
I'd also offer that the preamps in the UX2 would be better than the ones in the B Mixer. This is subjective, and I don't have empirical data to prove it, but that's my feeling on it.
The UX2 will probably provide better drivers (ASIO & WDM) than the ones for the UCA (windows based, i believe). This will probably improve your latency, and also improve stability.
The UX2 comes with the pod farm type of stuff, so you can do a boatload of modeling inside your PC. This can be done other ways, but the stuff in the Line6 packages are quite nice, and easy to use.
Your 4 inputs are valid for your mixer, but the UCA only sends 2 channels to your PC, just like the UX2, so you're not gaining inputs.
You could, however, use both at the same time, theoretically, for 4 inputs; 2 from mixer -> uca202, and 2 into UX2.
Don't just assume this 4 input thing will work, as getting 2 devices to behave and do what they're told can be problematic. I've done it, but it took me awhile. I used ASIO4ALL, btw.
Your monitors (or monitoring solution) would plug into your UX2 outputs.
|
Related Forum Topics: |
If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.