Making a comparison between products is always a nerve-wracking undertaking, the variables involved are many, and the judgment is influenced both by personal taste and by previous experiences with similar devices. When, as in our case, the test involves a solid stage and a tube PRE, things get complicated, you end up colliding with two different currents of thought, regardless of the type of source input. Could there ever be a winner between two products that, although they are genetically heterogeneous, still belong to the same manufacturer and the same price range? Arm yourself with a bag of popcorn, a good cold drink and let's face this jungle of different opinions.
The topic concerning the preamp is certainly of considerable importance. The preamplifier occupies by definition the second "link" of the audio chain, but this does not mean that it can be considered less important than the microphone, its function is decisive, in fact the delicate task of giving body and volume to the signal of any source is up to them. be this microphone or line; the result of this processing is then fed to your devices, mixers, recording systems (analog or digital), or final amplifiers. It is fair to specify, at least in theory, that the term preamplifier would not be entirely correct, it is in effect, for the functions described, an amplifier. "PRE”To amplifier only for convenience, to avoid confusion with a possible subsequent stage of final amplification. It goes without saying, precisely because of its delicate and sensitive task in the audio chain, that one should not skimp at all in its purchase. A tonal research is admissible, perhaps interfacing certain types of microphones with certain types of preamplifiers, in order to obtain a specific sound “character”, but in any case it must be “series” equipment; serious is not necessary synonymous with extremely expensive, the important thing is to have a pleasant timbre, of that "sound" that does not deviate excessively from our way of listening and producing music. The products taken into consideration by the test concern the new series SOLO of Universal Audio, model 110 and that 610.
What better occasion to try the 2 new children of Universal Audio and have them baptized by a production for a television drama?
Audio chain
I used 2 computers for this test: The first is a laptop Toshiba M40-232 with 2 Gb DDR ram, Intel chipset, HD 80Gb, equipped with an additional external HD of 300 giga with 16 mega cache; the laptop in question is operated by Cubase SX 3 on which the hardware is housed Kore. For the second PC this is a DAW Mate M1 (Pentium 4, 3.4 Ghz and 2Gb Ram processor) on which a sound card is installed MOTU 896 HD. The test was carried out by connecting the sound sources using a Klotz cable directly on the two preamplifiers, the signal was then sent to an analog input of the sound card on duty; all monitored by two pairs of speakers, the Dynaudio BM6A and by Yamaha NS 10M. The range of microphones available to the studio was considerable, but I still preferred to rely on models of excellent quality: Neumann U 87 e TLM 103, AKGC414 etc… As far as string and percussion instruments are concerned, it is useless to make a list, I used everything that was presented in the studio; whenever a performer of a timbrically interesting instrument happened, he was promptly asked to lend himself to a recording test.
Description SOLO 610
The PRE looks like a very well maintained and heavy small solid travel case with a handle at the top (Fig.1). On the front panel we find two generous knobs GAIN e LEVEL separated by two LEDs Power e Signal. Below, from right to left, we find five lever switches, the first is the MIC / DI input selector followed by the LO-Z / HI-Z impedance switch, in the center we find the lever to activate or deactivate phantom power 48V “+ 48V / OFF”, continuing we find the selector that allows you to cut the low frequencies or to work in flat, LO CUT / FLAT and finally the control for the phase inversion both in input and in OUT / IN output. To the delight of guitarists and bassists who use passive pickups, or for those like me who love to play the Fender piano and wishes to savor it in all its splendor, we find a monophonic line below DI and finally a THRU output that is unaffected by signal processing.
On the back (Fig.2) we find the input for the POWER IN power supply, the ON (I) / OFF (0) selector, an output in XLR format placed between the two switches with LIFT / GND and MIC LINE switches and an audio output in XLR format ; note that all connections boast the Neutrik brand; these small details denote the great quality in the design of the instrument.
.gif)
Male voice ONLY 610
The voice of this rehearsal is expressed in the mother tongue, (ITA) has a songwriting character with blues influences with a slightly rough timbre, which alternates with the clean one, moving from the baritone to the tenor register. After a few "takes" to optimize the input level, we start recording by fixing the input knob on an intermediate position (remember that the (gain) control is responsible for the dosage of the tube harmonics, by turning it clockwise, the signal is enriched, vice versa more linearity is maintained). The overall signal is very clean, giving an exhilarating, full and airy tone at the same time; the central averages from 1.500 Hz ai 2500, the frequencies are not at all annoying, perfectly balanced so much that it even becomes superfluous to equalize (Superb!). Finally, by generously setting the GAIN and optimizing the output with the LEVEL knob, you will immediately notice an increase in the tone paste around the medium-low range, precisely from the 120 Hz ai 400. As for the medium-high, come on 3.000 ai 5.000, these become excessively saturated. With the type of voice in question, already warm in itself, a timbrically excessive result is obtained, the voice is too emphasized, risking losing intelligibility and effectiveness within the mix. This is not to denigrate the goodness of the product but only to highlight how this setting will be very useful for conventional thin, weak or feminine voices. Finally we also analyze the behavior of the filter THE CUT fixed by the house a 100 HZ. One thing I feel obliged to say is that, in this case, the use of the aforementioned filter has proved indispensable; being a microphone Neumann TLM 103, without a low size, all the appropriate anti-popping devices (I fixed the microphone upside down with the center of the membrane towards the tip of the nose to exploit the proximity effect as much as possible) were not enough, with this type of voice the BUMPs on the consonants were still noticeable (Fig.3). With the insertion of the filter of the 610 the problem is solved very well without loss of the overall tonal value, no sacrifice to the natural tonal softness.
.gif)
Cello SOLO 61o
.gif)
For this test, I had the pleasure of recording a very good musician; unfortunately he did not have an excellent instrument for the occasion. The microphone used is the Neumann KM 184 (capacitor) (Fig.4) placed a 40 cm from the bridge. The sound, passing through the 610, has acquired a lot of “warmth”, a term that we technicians often use when we capture a good sensation given by a good sound paste, a balanced blend of dynamics, presence and truthfulness of the sound. I am of the opinion that only a "professional" machine is able to provide these results without making the "manipulations" of a sound engineer too artificial. It often happens to act on an instrument, with an outboard dedicated to compression or preamp, only to realize that you have made the sound similar to that of a common "plug-in" or, worse, to that of a good keyboard preset. . Often the cause can be found in the scarce "human" content of the outboard or in the continuous search for the sound engineer to want to get something out of the machine that he does not have. In my opinion, the 610 is very "alive", almost "human". It manages to highlight all that is beautiful in the sound source without making the final result plasticky and packaged.
Violin and Viola SOLO 610
As for the reprise of the violin and viola (Fig.5), instruments that move on almost similar registers, I used an AKG C414 microphone with an omnidirectional polar figure, in order to examine the behavior of the preamp even in ambient shots. Placed at a distance of 70/80 cm from the bridge, also in this case the result was very pleasant. Playing on the GAIN and LEVEL controls I was able to reproduce the sound of these two beautiful instruments in a pleasant way, without distorting or emphasizing the original signal. In this specific case (the rule applies in general to the recording of all acoustic instruments) to make a good shot I had to first choose the right environment and then subsequently position the microphone in the precise point where the ears perceived the most tonal nuances. pleasant.
Classical and Spanish guitar SOLO 610
Managing the sound of a classical guitar has always been difficult for me, as, by definition, the guitarist on duty is always assailed by impromptu perplexities. In our case, the guitarist had a beautiful handcrafted classical guitar at hand, I would have preferred to adopt for this type of recording a bi-microphone technique using AKG 414 ULS positioned in a standard way, one to the right and the other to the left of the guitar, but being able having only one preamp, I opted for a microphone with NEUMANN TLM 103. A classical style performance was performed, the final result was very pleasant, but not exceptional, slightly dirty the phases in which harmonics were performed. Same treatment for a Spanish guitar, dosing in a balanced way the GAIN section with the OUTPUT, I was able to get a good tone even on the arpeggios (Fig.6); however, as the playing speed increased (such as the Innuendo solo by Queen to be clear) the signal gave the sensation of sinning with intelligibility and definition due to excessive harmonic enrichment, therefore I was forced to further decrease the GAIN section to restore the right balance.
.gif)
Handcrafted flute SOLO 610
One of the tests involved an "Artisan Flautino" of the ancient ones, built by Calabrian shepherds. The sound of the flute was beautiful and original, but the instrument, however rural and genuine, was not dynamically detectable: very low. For the shooting of this instrument I opted for the AKG 414 microphone.
Unfortunately I didn't get the desired result, enough presence but slightly distorted sound. This is not the right preamp when we are faced with too weak signals that need a greater and more transparent preamp capability.
Over Head ONLY610
Using this little gem as a drum mic preamp was a really cool experience. For this test I had to settle for a mono shot instead of a stereo one. The drummer on duty is a jazz player, and he kindly gave me some of his time to play just the cymbals, both in standard jazz style, very sober, and in fusion style. To best capture the sound of the cymbals, I placed the AKG 414 microphone right in the center at a distance of about 50 cm from the cymbals (Fig.7): the result turned out to be very interesting. I must say that the SOLO 610 has done this task in an excellent way, as few professional PREs can give. It pre-amplified the signal with great dignity without distorting the attack, typical benefit of machines with tube circuitry, and without ever losing the content on the highs; only when the drummer has pressed the signal with more rapid rhythms has begun to lose its transitory acuity, has it not been useful to change the position of the microphone recording.
.gif)
Conclusions ONLY 610
Summing up, we can say that we are in the presence of a professional outboard, great for those who do not have large budgets available. The PRE circuitry is extremely clean, the rustle is non-existent, you do not hear any kind of hiss or background noise, both when you tend to overdo the preamplifier, and when you try to strengthen a signal that is too weak. The machine is very simple and intuitive, easy to use even by a not very experienced sound engineer, perhaps just starting out with a professional instrument. I was very impressed by the sound quality, honestly I was expecting something different, a more “dirty” sound, which usually fascinates an audience with a bad ear; often to deceive an inexperienced listener is a signal very rich in harmonics but very distorted, in fact a very saturated sound, especially in the medium and low frequencies, helps to give body to even weak or "empty" voices. I must say that the 610 has a really beautiful sound, a perfect match between dynamics, "warmth" and "deep cleansing", besides it manages to carry out its task with skill and has the requisites to bring even the candidates to an acceptable level " weaker level ". He gave me the impression of a kind machine, quite accommodating, flexible for almost all families of instruments, and when asked, he knows how to bring out a strong and decisive character but never abusive. Its "sound" is very pleasant, I can say that it is one of the few tube machines of my knowledge that manages to give a good response to fast transients such as eg. a drum cymbal or metal percussion sounds in general. The great strength of this model is being able to emphasize and moderate the low and medium frequencies without losing intelligibility in the sound, you can feel a silky grain on the upper part of the spectrum without loss of content, even between 8000 and 10000 Hz This is usually a prerogative of machines that are economically unapproachable for many users, the advantage is, as I said, that the intervention of the equalizer is often superfluous. The vintage-looking "knobs" are very sensitive to every slightest movement, even the LO CUT lever acts discreetly without creating a drastic hole in the bass, let's say that it softens them instead of cutting them, thus leaving the sound always warm and full of harmonics. Finally, let's not forget the excellent DI section and all the relative advantages for instrumentalists who use direct signals without passing them through a microphone source (Fig 8). If a position wants to be given to our SOLO 610, I would recommend it to all those who have problems with the voice, both if it does not pierce the mix, and if it presents a sense of "emptiness" with poor expressiveness, for On the other hand, those who want to give "body" to their works, I strongly advise against combining this preamp, as it is a tube product, a tube microphone too, as it would generate a mixed and coarse signal. Here ends the first part of the PRE comparison, what awaits us next month? On one side of the ring we met and appreciated a great champion whose name already inspires terror “SOLO 610” and on the other side we have his little brother “SOLO 110”. What will be the strengths of the latter? What tactic will he use to defeat and knock down his opponent?
See you on the next episode…
.gif)
Making a comparison between different products is always a nerve racking experience, the variables at stake are many, and opinions are influenced both by one's personal taste and by previous experiences with similar devices. When, as in this case, the test is involving a solid state power Pre and a valve one, it gets even harder, you end up dealing with two different schools of thought, regardless of any type of applied source. Will there ever be a winner between two products which, although they are “genetically” heterogeneous, they still belong to the same manufacturer and at the same price range? Arm yourself with a popcorn sack, a good drink and let's face together this jungle of different opinions.
The preamplification subject is indeed considerably important. The preamplifier holds by definition the second link in the audio chain, but no less important than microphone for that, its role is decisive, in fact it's the one in charge of the delicate work of giving substance and volume to the signal of any kind of source, be it a microphonic or a line one; this processing result then feeds your devices, mixers, recording systems (both analog and digital) or rather final amplifiers. It's good to remind that the term “preamplifier” is not correct for it is an amplifier, to all intents and purposes and for all its functions already described. The convenient “PRE” suffix is there only to make a difference, not to confuse a potential final amplification phase. So, for this very delicate and sensible job through the audio chain, one should not skimp on buying a preamplifier. It's justifiable to do timbre research, interfacing various kinds of microphones with specific preamplifiers, in order to achieve a specific sound “nature”, but anyways we'll have to be dealing with “serious” equipment; serious does not necessarily mean extremely expensive, but the thing is that the timbre we can use should be pleasant, that the sound should not depart from our own way of listening and producing music. The products we have been testing are from the new SOLO series by Universal Audio, the 110 and the 610 model.
What better time to try out the two Universal Audio's little sons and have them baptized by tv fiction production?
Audio chain
I used two computers for this test: The first one is a 2 Gb ram DDR Toshiba M40-232 laptop, intel chipset, 80Gb HD, supplied an additional external 300 Gb HD with 16 mb cache; the laptop in question is controlled by Cubase SX 3 which is hosting the Kore hardware. As for the second PC, it's a Mate M1 Daw (Pentium 4 CPU, 3.4 Ghz and 2Gb Ram) on which a MOTU 896 HD soundcard is installed. The test was made by connecting the sound sources through a Klotz cable directly to the two amplifiers, then the signal has been sent to an analog input of the audio soundcard on call; everything through two pairs of monitors, such as the Dynaudio BM6A and the Yamaha NS 10M monitors. The list of available microphones inside the studio was remarkable, but anyway I preferred to go for high quality models: Neumann U 87 and TLM 103, AKGC414 and so on… As for the string and percussion instruments there's no need to make a list, I used everything that the studio had to offer; whenever a different timbre instrument performer came across, he was always asked to lend himself to a recording test.
Description SOLO 610
The Preamplifier is made by a small and solid travel suitcase showing a very well designed look and heavy with a handle on top of it (Pic.1). On the front panel there are two big knobs (GAIN and LEVEL) separated by two leds (Power and Signal). On the lower side, from right to left, we find five position switches, the first one is the input MIC/DI selector followed by the input LO-Z/HI-Z impedance selector, in the middle there is the switch to enable and disable the 48V phantom power (+48V/OFF), then the low cut filtering switch (LO CUT/FLAT) offering the flat option, and lastly the phase reverse impedance switch for both Mic and DI inputs (OUT/IN). For the guitar and bass players who enjoy passive pickups, or for those who love to play the Fender piano like me and wish to taste it in all its splendor, the lower side features a DI monophonic line and a THRU output which is not affected by the signal process.
On the back side (Pic.2) there is POWER IN input, the ON/OFF switch, an XLR output between the two LIFT/GND and MIC LINE switches and an XLR audio output; It is important to note that all the connections boast the Neutrik brand; these little details show the high quality design for the instrument.
Male voice SOLO 610
The voice for this test is in native language (Italian), with a singer-songwriter appeal and with blues influences featuring a slightly raw timbre which alternates to the smooth one, moving through a baritone to a tenor register area. After a few takes just to set the input levels properly, we start to record setting the big input knob on an intermediate position (remember that the gain control is in charge of the valve harmonics, turning it clockwise, the signal results richer, on the contrary, anticlockwise, a more linearity is kept). The overall signal is very clean, giving back an inspiring as well as rich and open timbre at the same time; as a result, from 1500 to 2500 Hz on the middle range, the frequencies aren't troublesome at all, so perfectly balanced that it is not worth equalizing (Amazing!). Lastly, by setting the GAIN heavily and controlling the output through the LEVEL Knob, we can immediately notice a timbre fiber growth around the lower-mid frequencies, to be more precise, from 120 to 400 Hz. As for the upper-mid, from 3000 to 5000 Hz, they become excessively rich. Dealing with a warm voice like this, what you get is an extremely rich sound in terms of timbre, the voice results too much emphasized, risking in losing intelligibility and effectiveness within the mix. This is not said in order to belittle the quality of the product but only to highlight the fact that this setting will be very useful for thin, week or conventional female voices. Lastly let's analyze the THE CUT filter behavior set by default on 100Hz. One thing I ought to say is that, in this case, using the above-mentioned filter has been crucial; as the microphone used is a Neumann TLM 103, with no low-pass, all the convenient anti-pop filters (I fastened the microphone upside down with the center of the membrane facing the nose tip in order to take advantage of the proximity effect) were not enough, with this kind of voice the bumps caused by the consonants were still audible (Pic.3). By using the filter of the 610 the problem is finally settled with no general timbre loss, not wasting any natural timbre smoothness.
Cello SOLO 610
For this test, it was my pleasure to record a very good musician; unfortunately he didn't have an excellent instrument for the occasion. The microphone involved is a Neumann KM 184 (condenser) (Pic.4) placed at a 40cm distance from the cello bridge. The sound, through the 610, gains a lot of “warmth”, a term that we engineers use when we get a good feeling from a nice sound, a balanced mix in dynamics, presence and truthfulness about the sound. I believe that only a professional device can get this kind of results without making you feel the sound engineer's work as too much “manipulated”. It often happens to work on an instrument with a built-in preamplification outboard, and realize that the sound you're getting is similar to a plug-in or, even worse, to a good keyboard's preset one. It's usually the outboard's fault and its lack of “human” content or rather for the engineer's never-ending search for something that the instrument does not offer. In my opinion, the 610 is very “alive”, almost “human”. It is able to pick out all the beauty there is inside a sound signal avoiding a plastic and man-maid result.
Violin and Viola SOLO 610
As for the violin and the viola recording (Pic.5), instruments dealing with an almost similar register area, I used a AKG C414 omnidirectional microphone, in order to see how the pre would behave within environmental recordings. Placed at a 70/80 cm distance from the bridge, also in this case I got a nice result. Playing with the GAIN and LEVEL switches I was able to reproduce the sound of these two amazing instruments, without twisting or emphasizing the original signal. For this particular test (the rule is applicable for general acoustic instrument recordings), to get a good recording, I had to choose a proper environment first and then place the microphone in the exact point where the ear could get all the nicest timbre nuances.
Pic.4 – Neumann KM 184 microphone
Classical and spanish guitar SOLO 610
Dealing with a classical guitar sound has always been very hard for me, because, the guitarist on duty is, by definition, always overtaken by doubts, In this case the guitarist had a very nice hand-made classical guitar at hand, I would have preferred to choose a microphonic technique through AKG 414 ULS placed in the usual way, one on the right and the other one on the left of the guitar, but having just one pre, I went for one NEUMANN TLM 103 microphone. The performance was in classical style with a pleasant final result, though not so excellent, with slightly unclean phases where harmonics had come in. I did the same thing for a Spanish guitar, equally balancing the GAIN section through the OUTOUT, I managed to get a rather good timbre even for the arpeggio parts (Pic.6); when the increasing performance speed (as for the solo during Queen's Innuendo, for example) the signal gave the impression to be lacking in definition and intelligibility due to an excessive harmonic enrichment, therefore I had to reduce the GAIN section to set the appropriate balance back again.
Hand-made penny whistle ONLY 610
One of the tests has involved a hand-made penny whistle, one from the past, which have been built by the Calabrian sheperds. The beautiful and unique sound of this instrument, however rural and genuine, gave a rather undetectable result in terms of dynamic: really low. To record this instrument I chose the AKG 414 microphone.
Unfortunately I didn't get the result I expected, average presence but the sound was a little bit distorted. This is not the right preamplifier when we are facing too weak signals which need a higher and clearer amplification capacity.
Over Head ONLY610
The use of this little treat as a microphonic preamplifier for drums has been a really interesting experience. I had to do with a mono recording despite of a stereo one for this test. The drum player is a jazz one this time, and he kindly spared some time to play just cymbals, both in a very stripped-down standard jazz and in fusion style. In order to capture the cymbal sound properly, I placed the AKG 414 microphone right in the middle at a 50cm distance from the cymbals (Pic.7): the result was very interesting. I must say that the SOLO 610 did its job flawlessly, in a way that only a few preamplifiers can do. Its work on the signal was really respectable, without distorting the attack, which is a typical valve device benefit, and with no loss at all on the higher range; Only when the drum player started to play harder and faster, the signal started to lose a bit of its temporary sharpness, there was no use in changing the way the microphone was placed.
Conclusions SOLO 610
To sum it up, we can say that we are in the mere presence of a professional outboard, perfect for those who don't have high budget at their disposal. The preamplifier circuitry is extremely neat, the noise is nonexistent, you don't hear any type of background noise or breath, both when you manage to go hard on the preamplification and when you try to make a too weak signal stronger. The device is very simple and intuitive, easy to use even by a not-so-expert sound engineer, making his first steps with a professional instrument. I have been struck by the sound quality, honestly I was expecting something different, a “dirtier” sonority, which is something that mostly amazes the ears of an uneducated audience; a very rich-in-harmonics sound, but very distorted, is what listeners with little experience deceive, in fact a very rich sound, especially on the mid and low frequencies, helps shaping weak or “empty” voices too. I must admit that the 610 sounds amazingly good, a perfect combination between dynamics, “warmth”, “background cleanliness”, moreover it does its job dexterously and it's got the skill to bring also the “weakest in levels” candidates to an acceptable result. It gave me the impression to be a kind device, rather undemanding and easy-fitting to almost every kind of instruments, when it's asked, it can pull out a strong and determined temper, but never overdoing it. It sounds really nice, I can affirm that it's one of the few valve devices I know which is able to offer a good fast transient response as for example a drum cymbal or metal percussion sounds in general. The strong point about this model is in the ability to emphasize and tie the low and medium frequencies fairly without losing in sound intelligibility, you can hear a silky grain on the higher spectrum side with no content loss, even between the 8000 and 10000 Hz. It's something that usually only high-priced devices own. The benefit stands, as I said, that it's often unnecessary to use the equalizer. The “super knobs”, vintage looking, are very sensitive to any little movement, even the LO CUT switch acts discreetly without creating a whole on the low frequencies, let's say that it softens them instead of cutting them, letting the sound stay warm and rich in harmonics. All told, let's not forget of all the benefits that musicians who work with direct signals -without having them pass through a microphone- (Pic.8) can take advantage of. If I had to suggest the SOLO 610 to a specific target range, I am thinking of anyone who has got a troublesome voice, both in the case of weakness and “emptiness” about expressivity, instead, for those who wish to give “substance” to their works, my advice is not to combine this pre, being it a valve one, a valve microphone too, it would create a raw and thick signal. The first part of comparing preamplifiers has come to the end, what should we expect for the next month? On one side of the ring we've met and learned to appreciate a big champion whose name is yet a threat “SOLO 610” and on the other side we have his little skinny brother “SOLO 110”. What would be the latter's strong points? Which strategy will it carry out to defeat and knock out his opponent?
Until next time…
Italian to English translation: Humbert of the Judge
