When I hit the chorus, it might hit 6dB or more of compression, but just for a short time.
It's full and nice and present, without being sibilant or harsh. But, for now, it has no processing in the DAW at all and sounds really nice. They often have these hyped lower mids that will make a vocal way louder than it sounds on the good monitors, so I may have to put an EQ on it and high pass up a little more in the end. I've yet to check this last attempt on smaller speakers though. So it's kind of like a natural bass maximizer sort of effect I think, thicker but not bassey. It's kind of like what I've seen folks like Charlse Dye do with plugs, which is use a valve or tape saturation plug to fatten it up, which creates overtones that give the illusion of more bass, then roll of the actual bass frequencies. Probably at 9dB down, it doesn't come fully up to level again until over 400Hz I'd guess, but with pushing the pre-amp input, and singing quite close, both of which emphasize the lows, that works out well and gives it a full sound that's not overly bassey. This is getting me a pretty nice sound, and it's convenient since I can see the meters and monitors and easily can reach the keyboard for the engineering parts of hte job. I've ot the Pearlman on Omni and it's just to the right of my mixing position with a bass trap a few feet behind it. Put the compressor module on limit and set it up to clamp down only on the louder passages. So far, the best result I've gotten, using the Pearlman TM-1 mic I have, is +5 on the pre-amp input gain to fatten it up, set hte pre-amp output about 5'ish, +1.5dB at 10K and down 9dB at 200. I've been learning more a bit at a time, to see what works best. It requires more control in the singing since you are so close that any pops and sibilance will really be obvious, though sometimes that's a good thing. Use a good LDC mic and have the singer sing up close and very breathily. That's more a mic and singing technique thing. Is that more attributable to the preamp section or the compressor section?
I hear all of these big time recordings where the vocals are big and "breathy".
My real hope is to get the more professional "up close" sound for vocals.
You'll get a great sound introducing something like the LA-610 into your signal chain - but you really have pair it up with the right mic for the vocalist to get that pro vocal nirvana you are looking for. And, the LA-2A is really one of the go-to studio comps for VOX, among other things. That said, I've looked seriously at the LA-610 a few times.I know the compressor isn't exactly the same as the LA-2A, but apparently it's pretty close. Have to be careful when tracking with compression obviously - can't do much about it once you've printed it to disk. I'd like to get a nice tracking compressor like the Crane Song Trakker which can really emulate a number of units quite well, at least from what I've read. I bought the Bock 195 a while back and and paired it with a really nice mic pre and my vocal sound definitely esclated to the 'pro' level. There are of course models that are usually well suited for all types - but those are $$$. It is important to have the right mic for the right vocalist. My initial $.02 - for whomever may stumble on this and find themselves in the same predicament.Agree with Dean here. I still like my Amek and Great River pres better. Didn't seem too colored to me at least compared to my older Great River.
If you want a great DI box only, get the U5.
If the extra mic pre is a plus to have, get the 610. The U5 just has more options for the DI role because of the 6 passive EQ selection. The 610 is a great multi purpose box, mic pre / DI. The 610 has one good Guitar and one good Bass sound. I got a good variety of Guitar and Bass sounds with the U5 and its EQ's. The U5 with the EQ's really shines and adds a lot of flexibility. The 610 doesn't suck and works almost as well. With no EQ it is a bit better, richer and fuller low end, than the 610 but not by too much. I haven't tried my old school HiZ mics in it yet but the U5 will work for HiZ too. To bad cause it would be a really cool preamp with mics. The U5 only has 1/4 input - there is no mic preamp on the U5. The Solo 610 is also a microphone preamp. EQ position 3 sounds very much like the Solo 610, in fact I couldn't tell the difference. The U5 has six passive eq's built into it or you can run no eq. Didn't seem to matter what order they were in. I was able to run into one and take the thru output into the other. I checked them out side by side last night with a Fender P bass and a Strat. So I picked up a Solo 610 and an Avalon U5.