Experiences using Cloudlifter or FetHead on loud sound sources?

[N. Kentucky Bass]

I recently discovered threads on Gearslutz discussing the potential benefits of using an in-line signal booster before a prosumer grade preamp such as on the Zoom H6 digital recorder. Two examples are the Zoom H6 digital recorder and the Triton Audio FetHead. As I understand it, this device boosts the mic signal by 20db or so, which helps lower the noise floor for ribbon and dynamic mics. Result is a cleaner recording because you don't have to boost the signal as much with the recorder's preamp.

I understand this is very useful with low-strength sound sources such as vocals. Examples in the links below seem to prove this point. I'm wondering how necessary it is when recording loud sound sources. For example, I'm planning on using a SM57 on snare drum, RE-20 on kick drum, and MD421 on electric guitar amp. The H6 volume input is currently around 3 or 4 running the mics straight into the H6. Would this be silly overkill to add a FetHead or Cloudlifter?

FWIW, I prefer the form factor of the FetHead as you can plug it directly into the mic w/o requiring an extra XLR cable, plus it's less expensive.

Here are the links on Gearslutz:

Cloudlifter review
Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed

Triton Audio FetHead review
Invalid Link Removed

Link Removed

 

[teleharmonium]

You should generally not need these on loud sources. They are after all relatively recent products, coming to market after ribbon mics had been used for recording music for a long time.

I've recorded acoustic guitar with Beyer ribbon mics without one of these units using 45 db fixed gain preamps many times, so of course I could do the same with louder sources. I record at -18 dbfs average level; if I put a ribbon on a snare or a guitar amp, I have to roll off a few dbs between my preamp and converters.

Theoretically these units are for when you're recording acoustic guitars with low output ribbons and you don't have any high gain mic preamps, but, I mostly use lower gain pres and have never needed one. I suspect people that think they need these are recording too hot.

Or you may decide to use them on louder sources not because you need the extra db, but because the resulting noise floor is lower than using the same amount of gain on your preamp, or because the input impedance that the mic sees is higher on the in line amp than in your main preamp. (In the old days, that issue would have been addressed with an inline stepup transformer. Very high gain tube preamps were available, but those were noisy by today's standards.)

Another thing that comes into play in a modern DAW is when you are using an outboard preamp, and another good mic/line pre is available on your interface. You can dial in, say, 10 db of low noise amplification there to make up the difference. That's perfectly viable if you're happy with the sound of your preamp. It's still the same approach of cascading gain stages in their lower, most linear range rather than pushing one amp hard.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

Thanks for that insight TH! If I were to use this device, it would be to lower the noise floor. I also record at about -18 to -12dbfs, at 44.1kHz / 24bit depth. My recording system is pretty simple: I go from DI or mic straight into a Zoom H6 solid state recorder. It has six XLR inputs. Based on users' comments, the preamps on this are vastly improved over earlier Zoom products. I haven't used those, but I used to have a Marantz PMD661 solid state recorder and the H6's preamps are as good as or better than the PMD661. I copy the captured sound files directly into Presonus Studio One for mixing. I'm just looking for an additional edge of quality with this setup and $99 for the FetHead seemed reasonable. But if the quality delta is indistinguishable with a snare drum, kick drum, or electric guitar, it does seem silly to squander the money.

 

[teleharmonium]

Thanks for that insight TH! If I were to use this device, it would be to lower the noise floor. I also record at about -18 to -12dbfs, at 44.1kHz / 24bit depth. My recording system is pretty simple: I go from DI or mic straight into a Zoom H6 solid state recorder. It has six XLR inputs. Based on users' comments, the preamps on this are vastly improved over earlier Zoom products. I haven't used those, but I used to have a Marantz PMD661 solid state recorder and the H6's preamps are as good as or better than the PMD661. I copy the captured sound files directly into Presonus Studio One for mixing. I'm just looking for an additional edge of quality with this setup and $99 for the FetHead seemed reasonable. But if the quality delta is indistinguishable with a snare drum, kick drum, or electric guitar, it does seem silly to squander the money.

I could see how that could be a solution with that type of portable recorder, but I would suggest trying without it first to see what kind of results you're getting. Reason being, if the application is really only for ribbons on louder sounds, you may find that for very dynamic sounds like snare, when turned up so that the hits are at the right place in the mix, the ambient sound in between the hits is so low that it's not an audible issue. That's a fringe benefit of the huge dynamic range we have in 24 bit recording. And for louder sounds that are (usually) less dynamic and constant like guitar amps, it may be hard to pick out the noise from having the preamp up louder vs. the rest of the noise.

As full disclosure, for most of my own recordings I'm a proponent of leaving in what I call a "room noise floor" which can include some guitar amp hum, so long as it's not excessive. A little constant low level noise can glue a mix together in a natural sounding way, help disguise edits, and generally help the results come across as less polished/overworked and more vintage or natural, which can be seen as a positive.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

I've got one application where I use my RE-20 to do voice-overs for video and teleconference with my PC, and currently the ART TubeMP A-to-D preamp must be boosted WAY too high (as in the 3:00 position for both gain and output). And that's with the +20dB gain switch engaged! I just ordered one FetHead as it appears it should significantly help to cut the noise floor in that application. While it's handy, I'll also give it a go with the respective loud sources to see if that has a useful effect. This conservative strategy seems prudent.

 

[silky smoove]

I like the FetHead on low level sources when I don't want to use a condenser. I had a very soft vocalist in the studio a few weeks back and her voice REALLY lent itself to a ribbon mic, but she was just too quiet to get it done without absolutely cranking the mic pre. The FetHead got the job done nicely. On a loud source, I wouldn't bother with it.

They make a lot of claims regarding dynamic mics sounding more "open" (whatever that means), and all sorts of other jive, but I've not experienced anything other than an improvement on quiet sources, which allows me to have a wider selection of usable mics for a given source.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

I just did six quick-and-dirty tests to audibly measure the impact of using the FetHead with the Invalid Link Removed solid state recorder. I was going to publish the recorded files but discovered the mic on my iPad 2 wasn't working, which blocked use of a decibel meter app to accurately measure the SPL of the recorded sound source. I'll recreate these tests later when I get the iPad mic working and then maybe will publish recorded results.

Meanwhile, here's a verbal description of the tests and findings.

I used an ElectroVoice RE-20 placed six inches from the grill of a Greenboy Audio Fearless 110 3-way bass speaker cabinet. I created the sound with a Rob Allen Solid 4 electric bass (like an early 50s-style P bass with volume knob on full and tone knob on full) into a TecAmp Puma 900 amp. I played a simple walking bassline in the lower registers and recorded it six times. Here was the test pattern:

Low-level sound (Puma preamp volume @ 9:00, amp volume @ 9:00)
Mid-level sound (preamp @ 9:00, amp vol @ 12:00)
High-level sound (preamp @ 9:00, amp vol @ 3:00)

To get a rough sense of these levels, the "low" setting was about the volume of a quiet conversation; "Mid" was about the volume of a louder conversation; "High" was approx a singer not holding anything back. So overall, none of the volumes were "Loud" as in rock band loud.

The first 3 recordings were without the FetHead, the last 3 were with the FetHead.

All recordings were normalized on the Invalid Link Removed @ -18dB using the H6's channel volume knob.

Volume settings on the Invalid Link Removed were respectively:

WITHOUT FetHead (phantom power not engaged)
low @ 6:00
mid @ 5.5
high @ 4.5

WITH FetHead (phantom power engaged)
low @ 2.5
mid @ 2.0
high @ 1.75

Obviously, the FetHead had a fairly dramatic effect on the boost level required by the Invalid Link Removed to normalize the signal at -18dB, and this was a very quiet level at which to track the signal. The intention was to record quiet, and see if noise appeared when boosting the signal in post. BTW, I recorded everything in WAV format @ 44.1kHz, 24-bit depth.

I put the six recordings into my Invalid Link RemovedInvalid Link Removed DAW. Being at -18dB, all the recordings were quiet so I boosted the mix indicators each by +10dB and the master volume by +7.4dB (all faders went all the way to the top). I listened to playback through 1964 Ears V6Stage in-ear monitors (nice full-range quality, six drivers in each ear).

I did not detect any extraneous noise on any recording. Despite my attempts at normalizing the recordings at -18dB, all three WITH the FetHead sounded like the signal was hotter and more robust. The waveforms of the "WITH" recordings were slightly fatter in appearance. In fact, I had to reduce the master volume playback by 3-4 dB as the "WITH" tracks were a bit too loud for comfort. I "liked" the recordings WITH the FetHead better, but there's always the perception issue of louder recordings sounding better than softer recordings.

So based on these very rough tests, the FetHead is perfect for my initial goal of improving voice overs, and especially for using the RE-20 with PC-based videoconferencing as the mic's input device to the PC is an ART TubeMP, and preamp gain and volume levels were already at 3:00 each (including the +20dB boost button pressed in). Whether or not the FetHead will be useful for music recordings is something to be determined later. The instruments I'm micing directly are loud (guitar amp, snare drum, and kick drum) so it's probably moot.

I'm open to suggestions for tweaking the methodology. For sure there needs to be a more scientific measurement of the recorded instrument's SPL in front of the cab.

 

[silky smoove]

Glad the FetHead is working for you. It's definitely a great product that does exactly what it's designed to do. The form factor is also brilliant.

 

[teleharmonium]

They make a lot of claims regarding dynamic mics sounding more "open" (whatever that means), and all sorts of other jive, but I've not experienced anything other than an improvement on quiet sources, which allows me to have a wider selection of usable mics for a given source.

I'm sure this is a reference to the Fethead doing an impedance stepup to avoid loading. If you're using a vintage style preamp with an input transformer and relatively low input impedance, this will help ribbon and some moving coil dynamic mics sound a little brighter than they would otherwise. But if you're already using a more modern preamp design with no input transformer and higher input impedance (like the ones usually built into audio interfaces), or with an impedance switch set to the highest choice, you probably will not hear that kind of change.

 

[Tagruvto]

I've been recording clarinet with a ribbon mic. and love the sound but struggled to get enough gain. I resorted to running it through an outboard mic pre and then to my Focusrite pre. Not ideal - but it worked in a pinch. I have started lusting after the Cloudlifter Cl1. Any regrets with the Fethead?

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

Just had an unexpected (good) experience with the FetHead. Tomorrow we're auditioning a new drummer and I'm recording the session into a Zoom H6. Micing the guitar cab, four mics on the drum kit and Radial JDI for the bass. I decided to use a splitter on the JDI and run an XLR into my studio PA to give the drummer a side cab for bass or headphones depending his choice (don't want to swamp the drum mic setup with bass or guitar signals). The direct signal from [passive] JDI into the PA was too weak to boost without distortion. So I dropped in the FetHead, turned on phantom power and voila - perfect strong signal to accomplish my goal! No extra outboard preamp required. Granted, the JDI is a "quiet" source so it doesn't quite fit this thread's theme. But it's my thread so I can do whatever I want with it.

 

[silky smoove]

Nice!

On a related topic, I've got a new FetHead showing up soon.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

Curious if anyone has feedback on using the Fethead Phantom, which passes phantom power to a condenser mic?

Link Removed

I've got a non-musical application where I'm feeding a Telefunken M60 FET SDC into an old ART Tube MP, then into the USB slot of my computer for the audio portion of videoconferencing. The HD webcam's video is great but audio sucks ... I'm pushing for high quality audio on international videoconferences. Currently, I have to depress the preamp's +20dB gain button AND boost the gain knob +14dB, and the output almost dimed to +4 to get a decent signal. I'm thinking the Fethead Phantom would reduce the noise floor by taking a big load off the preamp.

Real world reactions would be welcome! Thanks.

 

[silky smoove]

I've not used the phantom model myself, but according to all accounts it does the same things as the original Fethead, but passes phantom power on to allow the condenser to remain powered with it inline. Any impedance change issues should be negligible if using a condenser. Assuming you don't accidentally push it into clipping I suspect it will sound the same with or without, minus the 20db difference in gain on the front end.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

I've not used the phantom model myself, but according to all accounts it does the same things as the original Fethead, but passes phantom power on to allow the condenser to remain powered with it inline. Any impedance change issues should be negligible if using a condenser. Assuming you don't accidentally push it into clipping I suspect it will sound the same with or without, minus the 20db difference in gain on the front end.

So you're thinking the sonic quality of voice would be identical with or without the Fethead Phantom? Right now the preamp is basically "dimed" to get the signal strong enough for videoconferencing. I haven't done deep testing to determine if there is an unnecessary high noise floor (and have simply presumed there is). Just trying to get my best "Tom Brokaw" voice into the stream. Interestingly, I did hear a recording of a multi-party videoconference and my voice quality was heads and shoulders better than others. It helps to stand out when you're an independent contractor in a consulting role!

 

[silky smoove]

So you're thinking the sonic quality of voice would be identical with or without the Fethead Phantom?

More correctly; I think the Fethead's impacts will be negligible outside of the gain differences. The preamp you're using being fully dimed will likely have WAY more impact than the Fethead is capable of producing. Since the Fethead will allow you to bring down the preamp you may notice some sonic differences, but I suspect the Fethead itself won't be coloring things much, if at all.

 

[ofajen]

These devices can have two benefits:
1) superior electronic noise level than the following preamp, and
2) allowing the following stage to operate a lower gain may improve the audio performance of that stage.

The second one is actually more likely to be something you notice. Audio response of a preamp will vary with gain. Cheaper units may require component choices that cause this to become more pronounced (often loss of low end response) at the higher gain settings. So, the front end device gets you 20 dB of gain that allows you to run the following stage at less gain and with flatter audio response.

Otto

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

These devices can have two benefits:
1) superior electronic noise level than the following preamp, and
2) allowing the following stage to operate a lower gain may improve the audio performance of that stage.

The second one is actually more likely to be something you notice. Audio response of a preamp will vary with gain. Cheaper units may require component choices that cause this to become more pronounced (often loss of low end response) at the higher gain settings. So, the front end device gets you 20 dB of gain that allows you to run the following stage at less gain and with flatter audio response.

Otto

Thanks for your observation. I've been wondering if I've been losing some of the preamp's "tube warmth" due to cranking its inputs and outputs. Perhaps the Fethead Phantom would reduce the noise floor and let more of the tube warming show through?

 

[ofajen]

Thanks for your observation. I've been wondering if I've been losing some of the preamp's "tube warmth" due to cranking its inputs and outputs. Perhaps the Fethead Phantom would reduce the noise floor and let more of the tube warming show through?

There is some likelihood that the Fethead would lower noise floor when high gain is required. For the louder sources, I'd be surprised if that would be detectable, but probably so in the high gain applications.

If the preamp is cranked all the way up, there is some likelihood that using the Fethead will let it operate in a setting that has better audio performance. Whether that is tube warmth or not, I'm not so sure of.

Otto