Thanks for the continued support my dude!

Definitely something that doesn't make an extreme difference. I'd say money is much better spent first on microphones and sound treatment for your room.

Thank you!

Definitely! I use the studio channel mainly for vocals. The tube saturation cuts off a lot of the harsh high end and and makes a much warmer sound overall.

Yeah I really like the wa412 on drums. I usually so kick, snare, and overheads on that

Warm preamps are the BEST. No need to look for anything else. I love mine WA12 MK2 (black).

I do like the Clarett a lot but I actually liked the warm the best for drums. It has a similar "tone" button that adds some top end opened like the air on the Clarett. I like it especially for overheads

Yeah I like the presonus on vocals a lot. and the AML's are spectacular. The focusrite with 8 preamps, for the money, is a really solid investment. and allows me to expand my I/O for mixing.

NOT!

Agreed. I love the AMLs. I'm looking to get the EQ add-ons for them soon. The studio channel is great. I mainly use it for vocals

That's a really good point. I also thought about that alot seeing as my "higher quality" preamps are still technically running through the presonus interface. So that has to have something to do with the quality. I've heard that using the line inputs via TRS and turning the gain all the way down on the presonus will bypass the preamps. But I've never known this to be certain. Regardless there is a definite tonal difference. I've never heard of the RME but sounds like a really nice piece of gear!! There's no doubt A/D converters have a lot to do with the quality. I'm looking to upgrade to the presonus quantum. Being a studio one user I tend to navigate toward Presonus products.

@@gweeds334 Really a matter of isolating the weak link in the audio chain. It will only sound as good as that weak link (if Presonus can be said to be weak). It was just something that was on my mind as I was listening to your demos.

And exactly how do they get that WARM sound? Is is EQ or is it Even Harmonic Generation.

I wouldn't say its an upgrade but rather an alternative tool to pair with the quantum 2626. You would not be able to use the Studio channel on its own as it is not an interface. It's only a mic pre with built in compression and EQ. I mainly use it when I record vocals. It adds a lot of saturation and tonal qualities that you can't achieve with the XMAS preamps. You would send the microphone to the Studio Channel and into the Quantum 2626 and into your DAW. The XMAX pres on the Quantum 2626 are VERY comparable to the Clarett. Very clean with a lot of headroom. Hope this helps! please let me know if you have any other questions. Im happy to help.

@@gweeds334 Thanks for the input! I was going to sell my 2626 (that I bought for $400 flat. great deal) to find the new Clarett+8pre which is $999. so I could get better pres and converters. but now I'm thinking that's a waste! I could save that money and buy quality standalone mic pres. I like ISA mic pres. $350 per channel on the used market.... The Aphex 207 is catching my ear too

It's a great unit! On vocals especially being able to add a little compression before going into digital is a nice advantage

It's the best all around for sure!

Yeah they're very subtle differences. They're there though.

I'm pretty sure the input gain and output trim are on separate circuits. The reason they are both maxed out is because I have my preamp level on my interface all the way down. Both WARM and AML were pushed to the max without clipping.

Definitely!

Ha. Me too! I'm a die hard presonus user. I've been using Studio one since V2 and my band just invested in the Studio Live 32 board for live shows. The focusrite is a quality product, that's for sure!

Yeah the AMLs really shine. Apart from the kick I thought lacked a little low end. And yeah the audiobox lacks a lot. Which is the main reason for investing in the other preamps.

Pretty surprising. Do you mean that AML sounded very lean with the kick? Why do you think this is? Neve are known for having a ton of lows aren’t they?

Agreed. The warm sounds really good on drums as well.

I forgot to mention, thanks for taking the time to do the review. I was interested in hearing the wa-412 compared to other preamps and your video did just that.

Absolutely right. Well said. A lot of people will scoff at higher end gear saying that you don't need to spend a lot of money on gear. And while that's true, you don't NEED to, all the gear you use adds up to an overall final product. Glad you found the video useful. I really like the 412 on drums but prefer the AMLs on most everything else.

@@gweeds334 with all that said, it all depends for the sound that you're going for. There's a time and place for even crappy equipment. Heck, look at Jack White... wildly successful successful partly because of crappy gear. Haha.

@@gweeds334 yeah, that's why I was interested in hearing some examples. Being an API clone, the wa-412 theoretically should sound awesome on drums. Glad you confirmed it. Also, makes sense that a lot of other sources sound pretty good on the aml's. Neve style circuits tend to soften the attack ever-so-slightly.... making things sound warm and fat. API style circuits tend to be slightly more aggressive on the attack and that's why many people like them for the modern drum sound and such. Speaking of aml, I recently put together a pair of their pultec clones. They definitely sound pretty good but I'm reserving my opinion until i have opportunity to compare them against a real pultec or higher-end pultec clone. I would be interested in hearing some other AML equipment.

While there can be a lot of truth to what you’re saying, legends like Michael Wagner or Beau Hill can get a killer “radio ready” production from the gear that’s available today to the average home studio musician. As a matter of fact, Beau Hill just mentioned that in a recent interview. That’s the beauty of purchasing gear today….you don’t absolutely HAVE to have a $50K SSL console to accomplish a great sounding recording. Would it make things easier?…..potentially. Because of the technology, and high-end plugins, etc… we have access to today, knowing your gear’s potential is *infinitely* more important than what gear you own.

For sure. Preamps are definitely not all the same! In this instance they were decently close because they were all using the same microphone. But there are noticeable differences. As for guitar amps especially it depends a lot on the circuit and how it reacts with the output amplifiers. I love my blackface fenders 😊

What do you really know about vacuum tube mic preamps? or vacuum tube triodes? I know a lot. I design and produce a few vacuum tube mic preamps. Before that I upgraded junk consoles. A vacuum tube mic preamp is a voltage system that creates EVEN Harmonics. This varies with the amount of drive put to the tube. Saying they are similar is a mistake. Fundamentally, they are different and need to be used differently. They need to be designed and built differently. Your video here, misses the point completely. You know there is a massive difference in your Fender amps and some solid state guitar amps. The difference in sound is Day and Night. Presonus is junk. I have known people who tried and tried to use them if only for voice and they failed to get a consistent decent sound. In a recording studio application it is much worst. It costs more to build high end tube mic preamps because of the parts required. I think you are misleading your viewers, mostly because you are not experienced in the use of high end Pro Audio vacuum tube mic preamps. Simple solid state preamps are designed to be affordable to musicians. They are cheap. To a studio person like me, they are junk. To purchase a Pro Audio vacuum tube mic preamp like the one I make, It will cost you about $3,800 and up for a single channel. That is what Mackie was about. I knew him. Affordable to musicians who had no money. That is why his consoles suck. They are cheap for a reason. I have been in this businesss for a long time. Since the late 1960s. I am a published silicon valley engineer. I am also a musician. When you learn about the differences you will start seeing audio in color. That is a metaphor. Right now, your world is in Black and White. Go to the URL MosswareProAudio. Don't Google it, dot the typical extension. Read what I say there about how my vacuum tube mic preamp. I am not differentiating my design from low end designs. I am comparing it to Pro Audio designs that cost in the area of $5,000. Take a look, then tell me what you see.

The motivation of these companies here is to make money. Very different from making music. Fender was about making both.

Why don't you open up the schematic for the Presonus (just as an example) and tell me how many tube stages are used per individual channel? The designs I looked at only had one, in the cathode follower output. They can say it is a vacuum tube preamp if they do that. In Pro Audio mic preamps THE ENTIRE AUDIO PATH is vacuum tube. It is a very different sound. People who don't know this are being robbed.

It's definitely the most versatile. And sounds great for drums and guitar. I haven't tried many vocals through it but those probably sound great too.