Originally Posted by Gordon Scott
Originally Posted by Simon - PG Music
... adding more electronics to the signal chain is not necessarily better.
I thought precisely the same, though the subject line is about lack of gain.
Gain can be added "in the box". Digital gain adds precisely zero noise (though it does of course amplify whatever noise is already there).

I've personally found that some of these inline boosters add more noise than simply adding a gain plugin - for example, a few of the ones I tested provided 20db of gain, but also provided more than 20db of noise.

Originally Posted by Gordon Scott
FWIW, I once had a Hi-Fi store demonstration have me doubting my assertion that cables cannot be directional, until I realised that their own bias was causing them to turn the volume slightly higher for the "correct direction".
Directional cables exist and can be beneficial. Consider ground loops - lifting ground at one end of the cable can remove the ground loop, but in some cases there can be a measurable reduction in noise having the lifted end at one end vs the other end.

Originally Posted by Mike Halloran
Canare Star-quad
Canare star quad is fantastic cable, and star quad in general is one of the few ways one cable can be "better" than another.

Originally Posted by rayc
If you REALLY love the sound of your low sensitivity microphone then I can understand the desire to add the inline but why not address the real problem by getting a better interface? Naturally people's experience, equipment, understanding, taste, objectivity and hearing will vary.
This is what I almost always recommend. I use an SM7B directly into my Scarlett mk3 without any sort of booster, and it sounds fantastic. On the very rare occasion that I'm recording something too quiet for an SM7B, I simply use a more sensitive microphone - but that's typically under circumstances where an SM7B wouldn't be appropriate, even with a booster.

Originally Posted by justanoldmuso
i might try the 5 buck micpre again that uses the ina op amp.
I suggest this one. Have built a few myself over the years, including some more "deluxe" ones with phantom power, pad, high pass, and balanced output. We compared them against high end preamps from API, Avalon, SSL, and UAD - and the INA217 preamp held its ground easily in a double blind comparison with a dozen audio engineers and students participating. Most people felt the "character" was closest to the Avalon, and it was quieter than all of them.

Pad, phantom power, and high pass are easy to figure out. For balanced output I used a DRV134PA chip which requires very minimal components to provide balanced output (and is tolerant of shorting one output to ground in the case of unbalanced output).

FWIW I also tried using some of the other single-chip preamps like the SSM2017 and SSM2019, but I've had every single one of those chips eventually fry.

Originally Posted by Gordon Scott
They have and many are very good performers, but they would need to be used with 48V phantom feed

48v isn't a big issue here, since typically the 48v is run through a pair of 6k8 resistors which drop a chunk of that voltage and also limit to a maximum of ~14ma. If the circuit is drawing more than a few milliamps, that can easily drop the voltage to ~30v which I'd say most decent op-amps can handle - and if not, add some resistance to pull the voltage down a bit more (or a zener, but that can add noise).

I'd imagine that having signal on the power rail could be more of an issue for op-amps than for discrete JFETs or BJTs - perhaps this is why they're not widely used in 48v inline preamps.

I work here