digi 002 pre's vs. art tube mp

[Edson]

I just ran a test, using the pre's directly on the 002 and then running the same test with applying the ART Tube MP.

My question is does anybody recommend one over the other. When I ran the test I couldn't personally tell a difference, so I'm wondering if I should use the TUBE MP or just run directly into the 002?

Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Edson

[Edson]

anybody??

[Park Seward]

If you can't hear the difference, why are you asking if one is better? Use your own ears.

[M.Brane]

Are the 002's pres really that bad?

[Edson]

I am using my own ears, I just wanted to reach out and get other opinions out there, and if people really thought the ART tube MP really warmed up the vocals.

[Phil Jeffers]

Are the 002's pres really that bad?

No they aren't, but the tube ART pre would be clearly better (better specs and sound better - especially for something like vocals).

[MissHiss]

Use the tube MP. It does warm up the vocals. It's a mushy, sweet preamp, sounds amazing on vocals with the 414. It isn't a matter of what sounds "better" than what by some abstract technical standard, because the MP would be at the bottom of the totem pole most of the time. It's a matter of what sounds "appropriate" and what enhances the aesthetic comprehension of the sound source and the performance. The MP can do that for vocals better that the preamps in the 002. Sure, the MP is noisier, it has seemingly inferior high frequency performance, and yet it's definitely better for vocals. Ignore the naysayers. I am confident in what I say here.

[Phil Jeffers]

Hmmnnn... the 414. Now there is one of the best mikes of all time.

[grindx]

I like the TLII version better than the ULS, they weren't as brittle.

[M.Brane]

It's a mushy, sweet preamp, sounds amazing on vocals with the 414.

Yeah I guess the $50 MP would sound pretty good with a $1K mic in front of it.

Those of us with more budget-oriented mic lockers tend to avoid "mushy" pres.