Alembic F-1X vs Noble preamp - FIGHT!

[whitelines]

I'm going to put my Alembic F-1X up for sale tomorrow and decided to make some sample recordings to let people hear it so they could revel in tube-y goodness. Then I thought that maybe I should compare it against a Noble preamp to make sure I would not regret the sale.
Spoiler alert: they both sound like good tube preamps to me, and pretty similar, but listen for yourself and take the poll if you like.

Details:
Four audio files. I recorded the same (Eagles) bass line using both preamps with a 80's E-series Japanese Precision with rounds and also with a 61 P with Pino EB flats.
Bass plugged directly into preamp, then straight to Apollo interface to Logic Pro DAW. No EQ, no compression, no effects, no sauce.
Alembic F-1X was set to what they specify as flat (2-10-2), while the noble was set where I usually use it with a little bit of bass and treble boost. See pics.

 

[whitelines]

eagles bassline was from this transcription: One of These Nights Bass Transcription

 

[red_rhino]

Nice comparison. Both preamps sounded great, but my preference was the FX-1. Just a tad more lively than the Noble to my ears.

 

[SharpCat]

Hate Cats?!?

 

[John D Harris]

The F-1X is more versatile than the Noble while competing in the same sonic zip code.

To me the comparison is not fair because of how you EQ the Noble ("set where I usually use it"?) compared to the flat setting on the F-1X.

I don't know if the Noble has a flat setting, but it should be set flat for the comparison to be meaningful.

It was nice of you to make the recordings though.

 

[woodyng2]

I’ve Never gotten to try the Noble, but I had an early f1-x for a while, and later a Demeter vt-bp 201, which I preferred.
Both sounded great, but the Demeter was a bit more user friendly for me.

 

[John D Harris]

I’ve Never gotten to try the Noble, but I had an early f1-x for a while, and later a Demeter vt-bp 201, which I preferred.
Both sounded great, but the Demeter was a bit more user friendly for me.

I've heard Noble's, but I've never played through one either.

I auditioned the F-1X and the Demeter VTBP-201S and the Aguilar DB659 when I was buying my first serious bass rig.

I ended up buying the Demeter, it just sounds magical with Bergantino Cabinets.

 

[tb-player]

I’ve owned the Noble but not the Alembic. Based on your audio recordings, I don’t know if there’s enough of a difference to matter. In a mix, the average listener will not be able to tell what you’re playing through. So go with whatever costs less.

 

[gtirard]

Very nice demo, thank you.

I like them both, with a slight preference for the Alembic.
The difference between the two is much bigger than what I would have thought!

It's interesting that you play the 4 separate performances directly in the preamps, rather than reamping.

I would have thought it would be better to reamp the same recordings with each preamp, because it removes any bias due to difference in playing.

But:

• Your playing dynamics seem to be very consistant, so I don't think it introduces any bias
• One of the things I've noticed with tube preamps is that they "feel" different when you play through them, so it might influence your playing, so it's part of the question. Therefore, I think it's relevant to capture that feel by recording directly from the preamp like you did.

Last, even if I prefer slightly the tone of the Alembic, I wouldn't like to be obliged to start with a flat EQ with these extreme settings (2-10-2), so if I has to choose between the 2, I would probably buy the Noble instead.

 

[el murdoque]

Very nice demo, thank you.

I like them both, with a slight preference for the Alembic.
The difference between the two is much bigger than what I would have thought!

It's interesting that you play the 4 separate performances directly in the preamps, rather than reamping.

I would have thought it would be better to reamp the same recordings with each preamp, because it removes any bias due to difference in playing.

But:

• Your playing dynamics seem to be very consistant, so I don't think it introduces any bias
• One of the things I've noticed with tube preamps is that they "feel" different when you play through them, so it might influence your playing, so it's part of the question. Therefore, I think it's relevant to capture that feel by recording directly from the preamp like you did.

Last, even if I prefer slightly the tone of the Alembic, I wouldn't like to be obliged to start with a flat EQ with these extreme settings (2-10-2), so if I has to choose between the 2, I would probably buy the Noble instead.

The Alembic has a sort-of Fender tone stack, so the mids are cut only. The Noble has a James/Baxandall tone stack which is boost only and no mids control. The flat setting on the Noble would be 0 - 0, so it's also quite extreme.


I personally only listened to the flatwound recordings and on those, I preferred the Noble. There is a little bit more of a third dimension to the sound. I cannot properly put it in words - but while the Alembic sounds very good, the Noble sounds very good and you get the feeling that you can almost reach out and touch the notes.

 

[frankie5string]

I’ve Never gotten to try the Noble, but I had an early f1-x for a while, and later a Demeter vt-bp 201, which I preferred.
Both sounded great, but the Demeter was a bit more user friendly for me.

I've used the Noble quite a bit... It's not really what I would call a character DI. It's ultra clean active DI, with bass and treble boost, and a LF rolloff.

I prefer the F-1x sounds.

The F-1x has a lot more character hiding in various knob positions - it's not "like" a Fender Tone stack, it IS basically a Fender tone stack with additional pre and post eq preamp stages. It also has a tube-buffered low-impedance effects loop for guitar-level effect boxes. So there's something like 3 preamps built into the signal path to keep everything up around unity. Then you get a transformer balanced output and a biamped output. Basically doing way more than the Noble.

 

[Iristone]

The Alembic sounds a bit bolder, maybe due to the EQ? The flatwound bass sounds better, though. I wonder if it's the model, or P basses just sounding better with flats (through this type of signal chain)?

 

[gtirard]

The Alembic has a sort-of Fender tone stack, so the mids are cut only. The Noble has a James/Baxandall tone stack which is boost only and no mids control. The flat setting on the Noble would be 0 - 0, so it's also quite extreme.


I personally only listened to the flatwound recordings and on those, I preferred the Noble. There is a little bit more of a third dimension to the sound. I cannot properly put it in words - but while the Alembic sounds very good, the Noble sounds very good and you get the feeling that you can almost reach out and touch the notes.

LOL, now you say this, I realise that although the "flat" settings seem to be different, it's the same result: you can't increase the mids, you can only add more bass and/or treble.

 

[TonyP-]

I'm not much of a Tube guy unless its the REDDI...However this makes me miss my F1-X.
It not blurry like so many other Tube preamps...

 

[LowWay]

I seem to be in the minority so far in that I prefer the Noble in these recordings. And it is taste thing. I just think the signal is EQed more to my tastes for these tracks. I don't think you'd go wrong with either. Recently my noble lost out to the Mantle on my board, but that is because the Mantle is more suited for the genres I'm playing right now. I'm keeping the Noble.

 

[whitelines]

I've posted the F-1X for sale in the Amps, Preamps, and Cabinets classifieds at a reasonable price if anyone is interested.

 

[frankie5string]

I'm not much of a Tube guy unless its the REDDI...However this makes me miss my F1-X.
It not blurry like so many other Tube preamps...

It's funny how so many people forget that the apex of tube audio wasn't fuzzy sounding gear. In my mind, I see that as more of a rose-coloured-glasses thing - taking advantage of a design to make something that everyone tried to fix and throwing it back in as a "throwback."

The same thing happened with film photography. Decades spent to make colour film as fine-grained and pleasing as possible, only to throwback to grainy weird stuff to capture the nostalgia of what every film manufacturer spent decades trying to engineer out.

 

[whitelines]

It's funny how so many people forget that the apex of tube audio wasn't fuzzy sounding gear. In my mind, I see that as more of a rose-coloured-glasses thing - taking advantage of a design to make something that everyone tried to fix and throwing it back in as a "throwback."

The same thing happened with film photography. Decades spent to make colour film as fine-grained and pleasing as possible, only to throwback to grainy weird stuff to capture the nostalgia of what every film manufacturer spent decades trying to engineer out.

both my kids have purchased Polaroid instant cameras!

 

[frankie5string]

both my kids have purchased Polaroid instant cameras!

Have you seen how many little in-between companies Polaroid instant film went through before it finally landed in Impossible's lap? That was hilarious. All of a sudden nobody could make sense of Edwin Land's design until someone finally could.
But - The Spectra line of cameras tried really hard to modernize the Polaroid format and threw all sorts of bells and whistles into the platform before the company died. Just the nightmare of dealing with new environmental regulations for that chemistry was enought to kill a couple of attempts off.

 

[DJ Bebop]

It's funny how so many people forget that the apex of tube audio wasn't fuzzy sounding gear. In my mind, I see that as more of a rose-coloured-glasses thing - taking advantage of a design to make something that everyone tried to fix and throwing it back in as a "throwback."

The same thing happened with film photography. Decades spent to make colour film as fine-grained and pleasing as possible, only to throwback to grainy weird stuff to capture the nostalgia of what every film manufacturer spent decades trying to engineer out.

That was my thing as a kid using tubes. As long as I could keep it clean, like with a high-powered tube amp I was good. If I had to play say a B-15n against a Marshall half stack and had to crank it into distortion, ick , then to see kids going after the sound I hated was weird to me However a B-15 not driven into distortion is a nice tube sound and preamp, to me.