Yeah, I remember and you're a good sport for doing this, Baz.
And remember "no prophet is accepted in his hometown".

Anyway, thanks for the review. As a matter of fact, I'm intrigued by the Creamer and wonder how well it would complement my Gordon. So this is perfect timing as far as I'm concerned.

Fe or Ni/Fe? (In other words, A or B version?)



Henk

After some time, with fresh ears, I again very carefully, attentively and with great interest listened to all we have recorded here and also reflected the real sound of the instruments in the room ...

First I thought , I will not share my impressions at all (as suggested by Mr.Bcgood), but in the end, why not So I may share it, if it is of some interest for someone.

As we all know, all the three preamps sound simply great and I would not hesitate to use any of them and be happy.

If we want to distinguish among them, of course, we are talking about very subtle dimensions of sound (as always From that point of view, I somehow perceived quite consistent picture and differences from all the material we made after listening to it few times …

When I compared Gordon with SMP-2 on all the sources, there was definitely a sound difference between the two. From one point of view - Gordon seemed, as if, to capture a bit more of the room, which may be called "more realistic", from the other point of view, it sounded consistently as if a bit thinner or "drier" (and also a tiny bit "sharper") than SMP-2. As if SMP-2 had a bit more "aura", direct focus, "life juice" or "air" around all it captures (be it voice or instrument). I cannot say it for violin, flute etc. from obvious reasons, but when I have my head and ears above the huge monochord with microphones placed at the same level and playing it, I would say the instrument does have that "extra juice" and focused power in reality.

After more listening, I somehow got an impression that I would not just simply say I heard MORE ROOM through Gordon as something that was added (as people usually report) , but I would rather say , I heard MORE ROOM with Gordon, because it somehow lacked something a bit from the immediate nearfield focus as if, so in what remained, the "room" was more apparent. I actually heard the SAME room in SMP-2 samples, but the overall sound included more of the organic immediate focused fullness as well , so comparing to Gordon, the room sound could be seemingly less apparent - but it was not less of it there, it was just a part of a fuller picture as if …

So, which attitude and sound result to prefer, may be a question of personal taste. We are deciding between Audi or BMW ...

Thermionic Earlybird - it is a bit different animal … a kind of first class sweet delicacy from high end master store. It does not have that natural space, fullness and depth as SMP-2 or Gordon do , but has an extra bit of very aristocratic velvet warmth and sweeteness (but not too much). Great, wherever one feels to add that kind of decent touch and sweet odour For me the very best tube preamp I tried so far (and I tried them quite a lot).

It may not take long before I will get the opportunity to try the new Pueblo preamp (that was already discussed here). I am very curious and look forward to it ...

Ivo, for a single, acoustic instrument the Forssell really does impress. But supposing you had both the Gordon and Forssell and you had to record multiple acoustic instruments in a reverberant room, e.g. a small church. With two condensers only. Which would you expect to take the cake?



Henk

I just ordered another Gordon 5 to get enough channels for a surround microphone (Josephson C700S) and the API spot-mic lunchbox has two empty slots yearning, perhaps, for a Forssell SMP-500. But ne thing at a time.

I hope you'll get your hands on a Pueblo Audio to compare it with these other nice preamps. So far all the reviews are positive.

Sweet Odour!

thanyavermuh, Ivo

Just to be clear I never once suggested that you not share your impressions at all.

I simply said that I wasn't eager to read your review as I felt it would be unfairly biased in favor of the SMP2 since you sell them.

To me its like asking a BMW dealer what they like better an Audi or a BMW. I think we all know the answer to that question! : )

I respect your general view, but as the one who really knows me, i.e. the subject in question, I do not find your presumptions applicable here ... But you are welcome to take whatever you want from what is said here (by whomever) ... As for me - I trust and respect people who do not hide behind being anonymous ... otherwise it is too easy to say whatever

Ivo, I sent you a PM this morning.



Henk

First of all bcgood are my initials and secondly since Gordon doesn't have any dealers I'm obviously not promoting Gordon other than I'm a fan of them.

I am a fan of all of them

True. And you can more distinctly hear how different mic patterns capture desired room sounds and leave out the rest.

I just listened to the only track recorded simultaneously with both preamps. No difference for my ears. Which makes me think that the very noticeable difference I heard from the guitar duo track has nothing to do with the preamps.

What are your monitoring with?

I do not think that my monitoring chain is of concern:

Atoll DAC 200 ----> SPL Phonitor ---> Beyerdynamic T1
....................|--------------------> PSI A17-M

The biggest difference is that the Forsell track is 0.5 dB louder. Here attached both tracks after RMS level balancing and conversion to 44 kHz x 16 bit (r8brain, quality setting: very high).

((( )))

Reduce the sample resolution for critical listening? That's another puzzle.

Maybe a check will do. Even with my (modded)speakers of the internetcomputer I hear the Gorden sound that I know and the Forsell has more high with sometimes an unpleasant esses. You 're sure you used the same settings in R8brain for both files?

If the sonic difference due to the preamps is much reduced when converting the audio from 96 x 24 to 44 x 16 to the point of being no longer audible, I don't care about it !

Yes I converted both files in a row.

A good preamp like the Forsell cannot have more highs than another good preamp like the Gordon: they both are flat within better than 1 dB (Gordon claims 0.01 dB from 2 Hz up to 300 kHz). Any difference in spectral level shall be caused by the source: both microphones cannot be exactly at the same position.

Ivo recorded at higher resolution for a reason.
Else, I suppose, we could just listen to MP3s heh

Just thanking Ivo one more time for another great set of samples.
I admire your passion and pursuit for excellence.

I liked the Forssell better than the Gordon, but only marginally and considering the Forssell is a lot cheaper, it's a no brainer for those trying to decide. I've been using the Forssell for many years and I love it.
HOWEVER as I mostly work with folk/pop/rock/indie my vote goes to the Earlybird on most samples. Man why does it have to be so freaking expensive!!!

Just thanking Ivo one more time for another great set of samples.
I admire your passion and pursuit for excellence.

I liked the Forssell better than the Gordon, but only marginally and considering the Forssell is a lot cheaper, it's a no brainer for those trying to decide. I've been using the Forssell for many years and I love it.
HOWEVER as I mostly work with folk/pop/rock/indie my vote goes to the Earlybird on most samples. Man why does it have to be so freaking expensive!!!

In this post are several WAVs clips I recently captured in live concert with Gordon 5 preamps and a Josephson C700S surround microphone.

https://gearspace.com/board/9155718-post90.html

I like the depth you can get from one mic. It's due in no small part to a faithful preamp stage.

Ivo, it would be great if you could share the results of your comparisons of the Forssell, Gordon and Pueblo with us! And it won't hurt to include Pendulum...

Thanks!

Best wishes,
Rumi

If that ever happens, please let us know the results!

As you can see, I am in "mic pre comparison mode".

Ivo, your recordings are very informative, and knowing how much time and effort those involve, I would like to thank you very much for all the help you have been for us over the years.

Hello everyone, I am the thread starter.

I was so happy to come back online today after some time away and notice how wonderfully this thread unfolded. Michael and Ivo and others certainly put in a lot of work and it is greatly appreciated.

I ended up picking up a Forssell used at a great price but to me price was never the main issue as I need to trust the preamp to record a Nikolaus Schimmel 7 foot grand piano I mortgaged my house for!!

The sound is marvellous. Grand pianos (unless you take their lids off) tend to sound cramped and the Forssell does a wonderful job at helping the sound feel more lifted and free. Mic placement is key but the smp-2 really helps to my ears.

By the way it also sounds wonderful on acoustic guitar but then again I don't mind a little fret noise and I love a hi-fi sounding steel string.

At the end of the day I love that good gear helps us worry less about gear and just make music.....I'll still take a stunning chord change over any gear, any day.....but the best gear makes the most of that harmonic musical moment.

And so...my Forssell helps me make music.

All the best!

Just a fun bump to see if anyone is still enjoying these pres or had any new comparative experiences.

We'll be comparing Gordon, Pueblo, NPNG, Forssell, Pendulum, DAV and some other preamps tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, along with some mics (Wagner, Flea etc.). I will upload samples to the thread I have started a while ago about those preamps: Gordon vs. Pueblo (vs. Forssell, Pendulum, NPNG, Audio Upgrades...).

Bumping an old thread, but the Forssell SMP-2b model is out now. Does anyone know of the difference ? I can’t find it online

I inquired about this a while back and this is what Fred wrote:

"The 2b uses exactly the same audio circuitry and power supply as the 2a.
The 2b has improved input and output protection from hot patching phantom
power and mis-patching the output to a phantom powered input. It has more
accurate level indication on musical sources, uses lower torque gain
switches, and has new PCB layouts for the channel boards, the motherboard
and the switch board. Other than that, exactly the same as the 2a".

I had a 2a on loan for a while and it remains the most impressive clear open preamp I have experienced especially for acoustic music. At the top of my wish list.

As a practical result, SMP-2b has yet a bit more sophisticated sound than SMP-2a in most aspects, I tested it in detail. Life is an evolution Except vocals, I don't use any other preamp than SMP-2 on everything. Simply amazing.