while chatting with Wireline this morning we briefly touched on this topic as well
it is ever so easy to get caught up in grabbing the latest and greatest pre out.
i am a 500 format junkie, and if it was not for a limit on my credit card i would be in way over my head!
but
i also recommend you have a few of the same pres so things set better, as well, get pres that complement what you already have, and work well together, they do not all play well.
so i just thought it would be nice to rehash, and get abused yet a bit more

I know some folks will try to burn me at the stake again, but....IMO the more similar the signal chain for each voice the more cohesive and real sounding the end result will be...hence a console.

If money were no object, it would be 12 Pacificas (24 total) going into 12 Great River EQs, with 24 1176s along the way...but since I live in a semi-real world, I make due with what I have....If a project is going to have a bunch of tracks shot all at once, I'll use the board pres...if a piecemeal endeavor, I use the ADesigns...I really haven't used the APIs or OSAs lately at all...

There is, again IMO, enough difference between the tolerances in a console and its EQ to add just enough slight differences while still maintaining the cohesion that (IN MY OPINION) can most easily be gotten with a single source power supply....even a pair of 500 chassis goodies (which I love BTW) will have two different power supplies....which may or may not be in sync.

I don't even know why I think this, but it seems to make sense....maybe someone with a lot more IEEE qualifications can assist? The point is that to me, the VERY best sounding records of all time had one flavor of pre, one flavor of EQ, and in many cases one flavor of compression...I think there is a correlation between how out of sync music sounds today compared to another era and the methodology used to get there....

I know...I know...

If you have quality gear with flexible gain-staging and you have a means of eq variation that works (equalizers, mic selection, mic placement), well, yeah, then I don't see a particularized need for a choice or pre's. Options are nice, but in my mind it's a lot of different ways to skin the same cats. Yeah, different means get somewhat different results, but as long as it doesn't impede capturing performances, so what? My thought--once you have the pres sufficient for your tracking needs, buy instruments, since switching between a Les Paul and a Rickenbacker makes a heck of a lot of difference. I will not stop buying affordable dynamic mics, though.

Bear

one of the main reasons i was so excited about the A-Designs 500 format.
a selection and i know things are all going to set well.

did i mention i love this dancing puppet: )~

i think it is like mixing color with pastels: (~ just dose not work for me.
i would rather have a console, or just one flavor of pre, makes life a lot easier, at least for me.
now, i truly have have nothing against a selection of pres, ( i have far to many ), but, sometimes i think we get caught up in a unnecessary case for more gear.
i just can't help but feel, many times a much better recording would result from less choices.

Could not agree much more...the majority of the 500 format pres all seem to play very nicely together...hence my passion for them as well...I do have the 1st 6 inputs of the console set to receive the line level outs from the Pacifica and 500 chassis....

In the end, its all as good as the person performing the music - all I try to do is stay out of their way, and the best method I know for that is to have better than just good gizmos...

Besides...I admit it: I am a lazy butt, and would rather not have to make too many adjustments that cause me to bend over and take off my trifocals to see what I'm doing...(seriously)

For the 20 years or so that I've been recording, my main mic has been the AKG D202 dynamic. It has a woofer and a tweeter and I own 3. Most of my recordings have been through a Studiomaster 16-4-2 mixer , including my mics.

Now I use Neumann mics with an "Aphex" 107 mic pre. The guy who sold me my Neumann KM184 told me the "Aphex" is a little noisy. What do I know? Sometimes I use the mic pres in my "Mackie" mixer. I had an "ART" "pro" tube preamp but hated it. I don't trust anything with "pro" in the name, so I sold it.

Whenever anyone tries to sell me an expensive high end mic pre, I just tell them I use Neumann mics and it doesn't matter what mic pres I use because they always sound magnificent.

I love those D202, and if you want unload yours, let me know...

As for the KM184, try them into a super hig speed pre such as Forsell, Benchmark, etc...the difference is not small...the Aphex/Neumann combo is a good one...with a different pre (even just ONE higher end unit) the combo will become great, if not perfect.

Just an opinion

always strive to have the best signal chain ones wallet will allow, it may seem subtle at times, but it all adds up.
but, even with the best of the best, in the end, their is nothing, if their is nothing to record: (~

I sort of belong to the class of guy who believes in finding one or two things you like in terms of pre and stick with it. I know Ken loves the Pacifica. It just didn't do anything for me. Now, that doesn't mean it's no good. It just means I didn't like it. Ken loves as do a lot of people. My favorite is the Great River NV series. I love them. I got to give it up to Dan Kennedy and Fletcher. I feel you can record anything through them. So, I'd shove as many GR NV series 500 format pres into my rack as space, budget and needs allowed.

If you get outside the 500 series format, then my fave combo is the NV series and the A Designs tube pres. I'd like two channels of the A Designs and probably six channels of the Great River. I could live with those choices for a couple of decades.

I've always approached it from the quality bar perspective.

You hit a certain point with the pre's where they hit quality, from there, it becomes preferences you develop to make your life a happy place. There are certain pre's I like on certain sources for certain reasons. Sure you can make a record with all the same pre's, but if you are thinking ahead about where each source is going to fit into the overall mix, you can help yourself by putting it in that direction to begin with. I feel I'm in a position of luxury, having many different models of mic pre available.

Once you've hit the quality bar, I would say that your choice of microphones, and microphone positioning are going to have a bigger overall effect on your recordings than what mic pre you've chosen. This is from an engineering and sonics perspective. Song comes first of course =)

$.02