828 high enough sample rate for good mic pre?

[B. Carron]

I am currently using a Motu 828 with Digital Performer and I have been looking to upgrade my mic pres from the new Mackie pres to something nicer like the Avalon 2022 or the Aphex 207. I will be recording a lot of acoustic guitar (steel string and nylon string) in jazz style. I like the smoothness and richness that a friend of mine gets out of his Avalon.

Anyway, I was told that an 828 does such a bad job at converting the sound that I will not hear much of a difference between the different mic preamps. They said the Motu 896 will do a little better job but I really will not hear a difference until I use something like the Apogee converters. Is that really true? Do I really have to spend that much more money on a better converter before I can upgrade my mic preamps?

Any thoughts?

[michaelhoddy]

The converters in the 828 aren't too hot. Even if you spring for something like one of the Lucid AD's, (around $750) it will help to bring out the subtleties of a great mic pre. Even with the 828, the Avalon would be an improvement. You'll just notice the full extent of it with better conversion.

[Ernie5]

Well then -- are there any opinions about the converters in the 896 or the Digi001?

[alabamian]

I have an 828 and a Mac, and I bought the DBX 376, which is a lower end Mic pre-amp than the ones you are looking at, but the DBX box does include AD converters, which I now use instead of the built-in converters on the 828, and the sound quality seems much better. I use an AT 4033 mic recorded at 24bits, 44.1 khz for vocals and acoustic guitar. I qualify the improvement in sound because the perceived increase in quality could be due to the fact that now I have a decent compressor and such before the signal gets to the computer, while when I was using just the 828 I did not.

[Ted]

I don't think that the 828's preamps are so bad that you won't be able to hear the difference between preamps. They may not be the best on the market (and I wouldn't expect them to be at the price) but they're not bad at all. I use an 828 myself and although I generally track as much as I can through my Apogee Rosetta, I've used the 828's converters on a number of occasions (usually when recording drums or a number of instruments at once) and I've gotten some great results. I've certainly been able to differentiate between the various preamps I've used.

Having said that, I do prefer my Rosetta, and the 896's preamps are an improvement over the 828's as well (even at 44.1 or 48 kHz). You will get more out of your equipment with better converters (and cables, and everything), but to say that the 828's preamps aren't good enough to hear the difference if you upgrade other parts of the chain is an overstatement.

For a different view on the quality of the 828's converters, check out this review:

http://www.proaudioreview.com/par/april02/MOTU_828.shtml

-Ted

PS Alabamian, to get a better idea of how much of the improvement you hear is the converters and how much is the preamp/compressor, try recording via the analog and digital outs of the 386 simultaneously and compare the different tracks. I'd be interested in hearing what you think.