OT - Is a pre-amp necessary?

goshep wrote on 7/4/2006, 11:56 AM
I have an M-Audio Delta 1010 card and have been skimming previous threads for mic recommendations. Some of you have made mention of using a pre-amp. Aside from supplying phantom power, what are the advantages to using a pre-amp? I'll be using the mic for VO/narration primarily. If the benefits include adjusting tone, can this be accomplished with software EQ?

Heck, if you're gonna respond, why not throw me your best $300-$400 mic recommendation too.

Thanks all.

Comments

farss wrote on 7/4/2006, 12:23 PM
From what I can see reading the specs the 1010 is only line level in so yes you will need a mic preamp. Put it another way, the 101 expect -10/+4 dB and mics are around -60dB output i.e. you need something with 50dB gain between the mic and and the 1010.

Plenty to choose from out there.

As for mic recommendations, I've used a Rode NT1A for VO and lots more, very low noise mic at a reasonable price although the 1000 seems to sound a little better and you seem to have the budget for it.
For serious VO work and to perhaps cut down time in post consider the Aphex Model 230, I'd say only if you're doing a lot of VO work though. What it does cannot be undone so you need to be familiar with it.

Bob.
john-beale wrote on 7/4/2006, 12:37 PM
Voice-over work is often done with large-diaphragm condenser mics, and these normally require +48V phantom power. This would be provided either by a mixer console with phantom (I use the adequate and super-cheap Behringer UB802, http://www.zzounds.com/item--BEHUB802 )

or a separate preamp with phantom power (here's a collection of them:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=search&Q=&ci=1649 )

or separate phantom-only supply, such as the Rolls PB223. http://www.zzounds.com/item--RLLPB223

Mic preamps do not normally have any EQ controls. That would be part of a mixer or better yet, in the software where you can test things and undo a setting you don't like. Some people like to use tube preamps that intentionally distort the audio to give a "warm" tube sound. You can also use software plug-ins to do this sort of thing.

You can get decent large-diaphragm mics for around $200 these days. (these are intended for studio work, not on-location fieldwork). The Rode NT1A, for example has the lowest self-noise dBA rating of any mic I'm aware of.
http://www.zzounds.com/item--RODNT1A

At the $300 price level, you might look at the Rode NT1000 or possibly Sure KSM27 mics; these seem popular for voice.
http://www.zzounds.com/productreview--RODNT1000
http://www.zzounds.com/productreview--SHUKSM27

If you want a "big name" mic, Neumann has legend all its own:
TLM103: $1000 http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/TLM103/
U87A: $2300 http://www.zzounds.com/item--NEUU87AISETZ

Different mics do have different sounds. In theory, any good-enough mic can be made to sound like another mic using "mic-modelling" plug-in software, although I don't know how well that works in practice. Mic choice is sort of a religious issue for some, everyone has their favorite. You can find lots of reviews on-line for various mics.

Laurence wrote on 7/4/2006, 12:46 PM
My current audio interface / preamp is a Line 6 UX2 Toneport. I play guitar and the guitar instrument processing is just wonderful, but it also does a great job as a mic preamp, complete with EQ, de-essing as well as variety of DSP, many of which can be used pre or post record. Not only is it my favorite audio interface, but it also costs less than $200. I just love it. My second choice costs three times as much and isn't anywhere near as good!