ART MPA Gold Mic Preamp

Dialing in sweet tones is easy, but with all the control you have here, there is enough variety to constitute one difficulty point.

Absolutely great!!! BUT, I never plugged it in with the stock tubes. I read several reviews, on many sites, that said they liked the unit, but hated the stock tubes. I have a rack unit system the MPA was going into, and I didn't want to bother hooking it up, since the new tubes were already being shipped to me; I actually ordered new tubes before I ordered the MPA, based on the vast amount of negative reviews concerning the stock tubes.

I do have an ART V3 Tube MP, and I like it... so so. It sounds good, but there is a slight 'hiss' & very little tone control, and that has always bothered me. The MPA Gold is dead quite, but again, I replaced the tubes before hearing the stock ones. I went with a set of Tung-Sol 12AX7 tubes. The MPA comes stock with 12AX7 tubes, but they are very cheaply made Chinese tubes. I took them out, and they did look a little cheap, if you can tell that sort of thing just looking at a tube.

This things so smooth and quiet with these tubes. The sound is really great. Warm when you want it. Gainy if you need it. I play everything from absolute clean to fairly heavy driven, but 99% of the time I set this to warm/clean. I do use it for my guitar live, but when I record I use it on everything from bass to vocals to piano to synth. I pretty much run everything through it before my interface.

Just know this entire review is based on the MPA with Tung-Sol 12AX7 tubes. These tubes are known for their extremely low noise and 3D like sound they add. Very warm and smooth. I can't say enough about them. This review is probably based on the tubes more than the MPA itself.

SIDE NOTE: Not to rant, but invest in good quality cables. I know, they don't seem like much, but move onto studio quality cables like Evidence Audio, not even Monster or Pro Co can compete with the tonal quality you get from excellent quality cables. Yes, Monster is good, but not great. Your rack units will thank you too, along with your ears. Oh, and that means patch cables too (always use TRS or XLR, that's why those inputs are there, to reduce hum/noise).

If your guitar costs more than $1,500 and your amp as much or more, you owe yourself to buy a set of good cables. It's like tires on a car, you can have a $100,000 car, but the tires are the only part that touches the road, and that determines the ride/handling.

I haven't anything to say here. I've had my ART V3 Tube MP for a year or so now, and it still works great. The MPA has one drawback, and it's in this department. My only complaint is that the knobs "feel" really cheap. They are hollow thin plastic. I just wish they were nice hunks of metal like old-school stereo equipment was; hell, the MPA looks like old-school stereo equipment anyway.

No idea.

Given the fact I never played it with the stock tubes, this unit rocks! I just love the feel I get from it. I sold my Fender '65 Twin Reverbs last year, and I have been using all digital equipment w/ a few analog effects and I needed this to get that little something back. Not to mention I am a stereo FREAK! I run two channels as soon as my guitar hits the first effects unit, I need the independence this unit gives you with two channels. The price is damn good too!

By the way, it took me about 5 minutes to change the tubes. Five screws, two twists, a wiggle, pull, push, and you're done.

I bought the ART MPA Gold after reading the other review here at HC that compared it to two other mid-priced tube preamps-- a Behringer and an Aphex; I'd used both and could assess the reviewers' perspective knowledgeably. (By the way, if you can afford to buy a Grace, Avalon, Great River, or UA preamp, go on and do it-- there's a reason high-end studios use them. However, my opinion is that you'll pay $2-3000 more for that last 5% of difference. They're out of my league right now, anyway.)

You'll get a good sound with it right out of the box (if you know preamps and/or read the manual), but getting a great sound out of it requires a second purchase: Good tubes. The stock Chinese tubes that come in it are crap, giving a "scooped" sound that's often excessively sibilant. I've used both 12AX7 Groove Tubes and Orion Radio (Yugoslavian Telefunken) 12AT7's in mine so far; they sound nearly identical to each other, and 'way better than the ones that came in it; with the GT's and Orions, the sound is warm, full, and detailed. Almost any 9-pin U.S.- or European-made tubes will work, I think; just beware of those Sino-Soviet suppositories!

The manual is only 14 pages, large print and double-spaced. There's useful information about the front and rear connections and the functionality of the Impedance knob and Plate-Voltage buttons. There's a signal-path chart, too, but no mention is made of the kind of tubes in it (it comes with 12AX7's, by the way).

The only reason this category is not a 10 is because of the need to change tubes. (All it takes is a #2 Philips screwdriver. Take out 5 screws that hold the top on, twist off the tube caps, gently work the tubes out and the new ones in, then reverse the process. I left the caps off.) Tubes might cost you $40 on eBay.

This is a wonderful-sounding preamp-- after the tube change. S/N is great; very quiet. Improves just about any mic. I've tried it with several of my studio condensers on vocals, and the result is consistently solid warmth with detail. However, since I don't have a 10 to compare it to, I'll stop at 9.

My Fender Strat easily has the best clean sound it's ever had through the front input of the MPA with the Plate Voltage button on High-- really phat and round. That million-ohm load is what instrument pickups need, I guess. Didn't try to distort it....

I've only had the thing for three days, so I can't comment on its reliability. Worked fine right out of the box, though.... Interior construction looks solid. Wouldn't use it on the road: The knobs are too easy to turn by mistake-- just a touch and they rotate.

No dealings with the company....

I play/sing everything from from folk to blues to ballads to rock anthems. I've been recording for over 30 years, released over 20 albums; more than half of those were done in Gnashville and Lost Angeles studios with major labels. I mainly play acoustic guitar and sing, but also play electric and use lots of MIDI stuff. I record into a Fostex D2424LV and listen through Mackie HR824's. The preamp fits in great with my home studio. If it were stolen, I'd probably buy another for the Impedance knobs and the Plate Voltage buttons-- they really do affect the sound in positive ways. I tested it directly against a Behringer Ultra-Voice Digital (just the preamp section) and the preamps built in to a Behringer DDX3216, my main board. The Ultra-Voice really is a P.O.C. compared to the MPA, but the preamps in the DDX are amazingly good. Go figure.

Definitely worth the $300 I paid.

This review is a general comparison between three mid-priced preamps. I have tested side by side ART's MPA Gold, Aphex 207D and Behringer Ultragain T1953. All were tested using a CAD Equitek 200 mic for vocal applications only. As with any review, it should be taken into consideration the nature of the "testing" that was used to formulate the opinion presented. My intent was to replace the Berhinger with a suitably priced, but hopefully higher quality preamp. My focus was soley with regard to my own voice through my primary vocal mic. I operate a project studio that does do commercial work, but cannot justify purchase of $2000-$3000 preamp for the income generated at this time. Perhaps over the next 2 years I will purchase the UA I have my eye on, but at this time I wanted to submit a review with regard to the aforementioned mid-lever preamps. I found very little review information when researching the limited number of mid-level, two channel preamps available and hope this contribution will generate more user input, particulary from different brands like Studio Projects, Presonus, etc. I will post this review under all 3 preamps used.

Ease of use?

Yes, the MPA Gold is easy to operate. The preamp controls do what they are designed to do. Following the manual's suggestions regarding input level is crucial to critical listening with any preamp. All three preamps act differently in the front end and each responds very differently from the others.

As noted before, my concern is focused on my own vocal style and with regard to my own mic; an Equitek 200. To begin with the Equitek is rather hot around 3k and again at about 7k. My vocal style is broad, ranging from a Tom Waits growl to a clean falsetto. To begin with, I replaced the tubes in each preamp with a matched pair of JJ's 12AT's, but not without hearing the stock tubes first. The tube change was an immediate improvement in all 3 preamps, though less so in the Aphex 207D, which utilized a single tube in the processing for both channels. The MPA Gold responded very favorably to the tube change with added clarity and "air", inducing however, a touch of sibilance. The Aphex 207D was much less responsive to the new tube, suggesting how very little the tube is leaned on in the overall signal. It did respond at hotter input levels, but did not compliment my particular mic very well. Additionally, the Aphex began to infuse upper harmonic content into the vocal signal that was unacceptable (more on that later). The Behringer is just plain bright, with a heavy accent on all freq's up around 4-8k, creating way too much sibilance. A little "spit" is OK, but there is a limit.

Overall, the MPA Gold was much more friendly to my particular vocal approach using a CAD mic.

The MPA seems very well designed, though cosmetically it strikes me as a piece of Hi-Fi stereo equipment with its shiny dials and what-not. Internally it is tight on space, but it's easy to access the traditional tube sockets. Other components seem well constructed, though admittedly I'm no electrical engineer. The Aphex 207D is extremely well built and has very tight construction throughout. Even replacing the tube is a unique experience with regard to their choice of retainer. It has a very modern, single rack space design; all controls well designed per each channel allowing for nearly immediate results when "tweaking". The Behringer is overblown on the outside with regard to what is actually, physically inside. The overall box is bigger than it need be, but cosmetically it's retro look is appealling to me. By comparison, though, it is poorly constructed. The glowing tubes in the photos are actually little bulbs, not raging tubes. On my well used T1953, they have failed, as well as two of the VU meter lights. The VU's also stick occasionally.

I can't say I have a solid "Reliability" reference with regard to the MPA Gold or the Aphex 207D, not having had them in my possession for but more than a week. The Behringer has steadily begun to fail over the past 10 months.

Here is my overview of experiences with all three preamps:

Beginning with the ART MPA Gold, it is the one I chose to purchase based on several factors. Obviously, price, for one. I bought it used. I was hoping to stay under $500 and quickly realized that the choices are limited for mid-priced two channel tube pre's on the market. I want a lot out of my $500. Having purchased a used Behringer T1953 as a cheap introduction to tube mic pre's and having worked it to death already for nearly a year, I quickly grew tired of it's tonality and failing components(I must admit though, it does add some nice definition to bass tracks with the JJ's installed).

ART is not my "go to" choice for any gear. I was hesitant. With that said, in testing I found the Variable Impedence to be the saving grace of the MPA Gold. Some call it "b.s.", but I can dial in an wide range of responsiveness from a single mic, which offers a palette of textures to choose from. I heard it as creating a sort of a variation from "dry" to "intimate" to even nearly "aggressive". A subtle gain change is obvious, but the shift in tone from a single mic is rather dramatic. This serves my project studio well considering that I often record female vocals with the Equitek 200, as well as, varied instrumentation. Other mics in my collection will benefit, too. After "tweaking" it to understand that wide scope of possibilities, I found the Variable Impedence option immediately presented a very detailed, intimate sound that I was not hearing from that mic before. The High Plate voltage option also allowed for more headroom on the tubes (again, matched JJ AT's), thus eliminating any perceptable distortion for a very refined, dynamic vocal. The tone is big and round, a touch sibilant with my mic and the JJ's installed (most likely the CAD's fault). The tube change did make quite a difference in sonic quality, as the stock tubes are as one reviewer so aptly suggeseted, "Chinese suppositories". Setup was about an hour to figure out how the preamp basically functioned, and the options were obvious to both manipulate and hear. Some reviews suggest it "colors" the sound too much, but I rather appreciated it's "effect" with respect to my voice and my mic choice.

The Aphex was also very respectable. I really wanted to like this preamp because of it's digital option, but that became the least of my interests at this point with regard to my studio needs (ART MPA Gold "Digital" is around $600 new). The Apehx 207D features an insert point for compressors, as well, which is very appealling. Sonically, however, it seemed to be rather lackluster; keep in mind that this specific to my voice and mic selection. In fact, I heard strangely bizarre harmonic overtones, perhaps even distortion, in the upper frequency regions. Most noticable with falsetto passages, which was very unnatural against my voice, thus rendering it unnacceptable. No matter the level setting variations at both input and output - with which I experimented at great length - the annoying harmonic content was present. It's a great design, the Aphex 207D, one which I really wanted to like. But sonically, I found it unnacceptable with my particular vocal style. I'm certain that it would work in many applications, but I could not control the upper freq. harmonic overtones that were present in my vocal. Perhaps it simply did not respond well to my CAD Equitek 200 mic. Many feel that the Aphex is the most transparent pre on the market in this price range, but I was not impressed at the end of the session. For my voice, even after changing the tube, I thought it was anything but transparent.

The Behringer T1953, is... a pretty sorry piece of gear. Admittedly it does function on a tight budget (paid $130 used). New tubes helped dramatically, but after hearing the other two preamps, the T1953 is "brittle" bright and creates some serious phase issues with my mic. No matter the phase setting, it seems to be voiced rather "shallow" with a lack of definition in the low-mids. This gives it the "scooped" EQ sound and nearly seems to phase with any signal opposing it. I will, however, keep it for a simple tube pre for some direct electric bass on certain tracks. I do think it has a sound that may work well on some specific things like cheap, very dull acoustic guitars or mandolins. I've had fair results on upright bass using kick mics and pin mics. Vocally, though, it is shrill by comparison to both the ART MPA Gold and the Aphex 207D.

My money is on the ART MPA Gold because of the usuable Variable Impedence and plate voltage options. For those concerned with digital interfacing, the MPA Gold Digital provides that option.