Quote Max The Mac:

---

Oh well.....

it's not really important, in the grand scale of things I suppose.... indeed, there's a reasonable argument to say our entire industry is really irrelevant to the basics of Life on earth .......

Max

---

Not to these ears.

--------------------
Yeah!

Quote grAInger:

---

are you really, saying rode mics are more prone to this than ANY other mic ? come on ...

---

No, I did not say this at all, don't put words into my mouth.

I am not saying Røde are bad, in fact the opposite. But it was your use of "exellent" that got my goat, rather than the correct term of "very good value for money" - which they are.

But top quality does cost money and you get what you pay for. The top manufacturers products cost what they do because of the design and engineering involved - you are not "paying for a name" because the price is artificially hiked (which is what you are implying), but for the engineering and manufacturing costs involved. If a major manufacturer could drop the price and maintain quality he would - I know.

--------------------
John - Sound-Link ProAudio
President - Federation Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

But if there wasn't any cheaper gear, how would people get a start in the industry? Im in the market for some half decent monitors - maybe the new Yamaha's, or some Events. There is no way i could afford a full blown set of Genelecs (though as it happens I might have to consider the 8020's, because i dont have that much space). Another something Im looking for is some more pre-amps. Now, I could go and buy a TL Audio valve one, for say £500 odd, or i could get a Behringer, or SM Pro Audio one, for under £200. No, i wouldnt get the best of quality, but I simply couldnt warrant the expense of Pro gear.

On a side note, while browsing through the DIY forum I found some nice DIY mic-pre's, based on designs like Neve and the like. If people put together some nice, fairly good quality kits for a reasonable price, that would allow us bedroom studio owners to get a nice unit, while actually learning how they work, and would reduce the competiton in the pro market, as the pro stuff would be for people who just needed a unit there and then. ucapps.de also has some amazing DIY midi controller projects, and is a great way of learning about midi and such, and comming out with a control surface/synth/sequencer at the end of it! Go DIY!



(Reading back on that it might not make much sense - i ramble a lot sometimes, but yeah, i cant afford pro stuff )

john, im not putting worms in yr mouth, i was in fact asking you WHAT you were saying, grow up ... the term i used was 'exceptional' and i still stand by that, why mention the rode mic buzzing with humidity then, what does that have to do with anything if its something that all mics are prone to ?

max ... oddly i agree 100 percent with your central point - gear should not be made which is uneconomical to repair, blimey that IS a long way from this thread intit ?

groove tubes r a bit dearer than rode arent they ? i bet they dont have 6db self noise either ... ive heard the pre alesis gt mics which admittedly, are bloody good, bloody noisy and bloody expensive

and im sorry double helix, anyone who seems to be saying its better for people to pay someone to make them sound more like other people wont get my vote either, sorry.

cheers
grainger

there was a time when i had a strat copy and a fostex x-15 4-track, and i thought to myself - when i write a really good song, i'll save up and go to a studio.

Then i had an alesis mmt-8, a u110, a telecaster and a fostex x-15, and i thought to myself - when i write a really good song, i'll save up and go to a studio.

Then i had a kawai Q80, a u110, a telecaster and a bass, a zoom multi-effects box and a fostex model-80 8-track, and i thought to myself - when i write a really good song, i'll save up and go to a studio.

Now I have an oldish mac running logic, a few keyboards, some guitars, some ok budget mics and a few better-end-of-budget pre amps, and i still think to myself - when i write a really good song, i'll save up and go to a studio; even though it would be a 'vanity' recording- I'm well past kidding myself that there's a spot on TOTP with my name on it.

But the sad fact is, I'm really happy writing and recording my own music, and the pleasure i get from it justifies the expense for me, but i'm also not kidding myself that my songs are as good as and of my heroes, and i'm not kidding myself that the quality is as good as a professional studio.

Having said all of that, however, looking through the flyers and websites for local studios, quite a few (budget but) commercial studios have gear not much above what i'd consider 'project', but must be attracting enough business to make it worth while.

Circular and personal post, but i wanted to say it anyway- I suppose that's why I write songs in the first place. At least it's not all about a girl from yorkshire who broke my heart by not sleeping with me in 1988.

jon

Quote grAInger:

---

the snobbery was in the last sentence. of course rode make exceptional mics, compare them to whatever you like and they sound good. to ignore that is blind snobbery in my book, sorry

---

That is such total bollocks it almost does not merit a considered response.

Rode mics are "good". That's it. To call them exceptional is ridiculous. That's putting them in the same league as a valve Neumann M49 (£6 - 7k if you can find one) or say a Brauner VM1 or a Soundfield (both well north of £5k). This is not a "snobbish" statement - I wish I could afford any of these! - just a factual assertion that you get what you pay for.

And yes, I'll put my U87s up against any Rode product any day of the week. It's no contest and you are living in cloud cuckoo land if you believe otherwise.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Quote grAInger:

---

john, im not putting worms in yr mouth, i was in fact asking you WHAT you were saying, grow up ... the term i used was 'exceptional' and i still stand by that, why mention the rode mic buzzing with humidity then, what does that have to do with anything if its something that all mics are prone to ?

---

What John said was:

"Røde are excellent value for money, but I have heard a Røde mic. crackling away due to moisture in the air under normal acoustic conditions and goes very crackly if the humidity rises (as lots of other AF condensers do, of course, nothing against Røde per se)."

He was talking about ALL AF condensers, which are a cheaper condenser design with a pre-charged capsule. He used Rode as an example since it was being discussed.

Quote:

---

and im sorry double helix, anyone who seems to be saying its better for people to pay someone to make them sound more like other people wont get my vote either, sorry.

---

I definitely agree with you here grainger. Getting a (good) unique sound is a great thing, and going to an established studio doing work-a-day recording can provide that.

But that is a bit simplified to make a point, isn't it? Most of what is unique about music is about the composition of the song and choice of instruments, not the recording technique.

But as I said, your point is well-taken. A good home recording is truly a thing of beauty, no doubt about that. My problem is finding a lot of them...most of the ones I hear nowadays are "less than steller" made by folks that think they sound good (and I am not talking about compositional quality here!).

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Quote Max The Mac:

---

Equipment from ANY manufacturer which by it's very design and market placement, is defined as utterly uneconomic to service or repair, simply SHOULD NOT EXIST. In the short term it is pandering to the greed and the materials acquisition instinct of the public, who always want a free lunch, or at ;least the illusion of something close to it....

---

so if big automated factories makes it possible to make a £20 mp3player and still make a living from it, they just shouldn't or what?? its obvious that making 1000000 copies a time makes the unit cheaper.. but noone's got a factory that can repair a million units a time so that price stays the same, right?

plus i dont know what some of you guys here assume, but most people who posts here to get some cheap equipment do know the more expencive stuff is better!
most even write something like they need equipment to get them started...

i really dont understand the problem here? no one in their right mind would spend £200 on a ball and shoes just to check out if that soccer thing is any fun.. but everybody know a leather ball from a sports store is better than a plastic ball from the toy store! its obvious!!

and this goes to everything a man can buy.. we know the cheapest aint the best, but this doesnt mean we got unlimited cash to spend on everything we like.. but we still wanna do what we wanna do with the recources we got..
we all want a mercedes, but most people just need to get from point A to point B (and back) every day..

and we also all know that a lot of brands is just that.. brands.. a lot of crappy companies advertise so much they have to double the price to make a living from it..

and its not that i wouldnt like having a £1500 pre-amp, but if i were to spend that kind of money on anything, i'd like to be really really shure that i really needed it and could use it for the next 20 years.. and cheap gear is an exelent way to figure out where to go later... plus chances are that if your a musician and gets so good that you need "super equipment", its probably easier to get a record deal and have them pay your studiotime...

and in the end, why do you care?? let the masses buy cheap crap.. it'll just make your own music sound even better (compared to theirs)

and its not the audiocompanies fault.. its the cd-burner..

the vikings played soccer with a pigs bladder, but they still thought it was fun...

cheers DH .. thanks for explaining what john was saying without being offensive, i know im out of my depth here but whats an AF condenser ?

but no one ever said anything about recording as 'good' as a studio in yr bedroom, god ive been down these threads before. we are talking about home recordists who ask for advice on this forum about cheap gear, remember ...

the byre's got a lot to answer for here ... you naughty man ..

steve, u can toss yrself off as much as you like, this is from the guy who thinks the beatles sounded good, they were boring old gits who just copied everyone else, badly. just like you, your post is so predictable i think anyone else could have come up with it .. neumann stink, they cost too much. who do you think you are with the only definitions, i have already said rode ARE exceptional because of the price, the sound and the low self noise ... i think thats enough

good night
grainger

Quote grAInger:

---

steve, u can toss yrself off as much as you like, this is from the guy who thinks the beatles sounded good, they were boring old gits who just copied everyone else, badly. just like you, your post is so predictable i think anyone else could have come up with it .. neumann stink, they cost too much. who do you think you are with the only definitions, i have already said rode ARE exceptional because of the price, the sound and the low self noise ... i think thats enough

good night
grainger

---

Wow. I bet that stings. Try to let this ruin christmas Steve.

Would just like to add that a mate of mine has actually had an indie release using £5 computer speakers and £10 mike.

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Just look at the MP3 explosion. It is amazing how many folks can't hear the difference between an MP3 and an audio CD recording.

We have created a generation of "good enough"...in more ways than one.

---

a lot of people's ears just dont care... the pop consumers.. most normal people just turn on the radio or mtv and listen to whatever's on.. they dont know shite about the "sound", the just like that song with that "da du du dum in the da da da love you something something" part..

its a common "elitist" mistake to either think that everybody else used to be wise, but pop culture (or whatever appliable) made em forget.. or to think that theyre god on their subject and everybody else is stupid..

me.. im god..

Quote grAInger:

---

steve, u can toss yrself off as much as you like, this is from the guy who thinks the beatles sounded good, they were boring old gits who just copied everyone else, badly. just like you, your post is so predictable i think anyone else could have come up with it .. neumann stink, they cost too much. who do you think you are with the only definitions, i have already said rode ARE exceptional because of the price, the sound and the low self noise ... i think thats enough

---

I think it's more than enough too (from you), but would point out that two of the three mics I cited are not Neumann, which kind of puts your compendious knowledge of the topic in some kind of perspective for the benefit of other readers does it not?

I don't recall this thread being about the Beatles or my (presumed) opinion of them before now. Your own considered (?) opinion however speaks volumes and needs no further comment.

You want to keep digging, you're doing just fine...

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

If memory serves me correctly (which it does with infalable accuracy). Did not the Beatles record a composition "Ticket to ride" in the mid twentieth century. And would not the "she" refered to in this composition have "rode" using her ticket.

Further proof of the incredible foresight of these composers. Clearly yet another hidden reference. This time to the future of mass microphone manufacture. Fascinating.

--------------------
Yeah!

Quote Steve Hill:

---

Quote grAInger:

---

steve, u can toss yrself off as much as you like, this is from the guy who thinks the beatles sounded good, they were boring old gits who just copied everyone else, badly. just like you, your post is so predictable i think anyone else could have come up with it .. neumann stink, they cost too much. who do you think you are with the only definitions, i have already said rode ARE exceptional because of the price, the sound and the low self noise ... i think thats enough

---

I think it's more than enough too (from you), but would point out that two of the three mics I cited are not Neumann, which kind of puts your compendious knowledge of the topic in some kind of perspective for the benefit of other readers does it not?

I don't recall this thread being about the Beatles or my (presumed) opinion of them before now. Your own considered (?) opinion however speaks volumes and needs no further comment.

You want to keep digging, you're doing just fine...

---

Hey guys! should we just put you in a small room with a big, dirty stick???

Now, I like Rode mikes to the point where I have written an extensive review of one of their models on this site. I think describing these mikes as exceptional value for money might be the fairest thing. There are, on the other hand, much better mikes which are typically considerably more expensive.

If somebody told me I HAD to record something with a Rode mike, would I break out in a panicky sweat...? Of course not. If I saw an NT5 on a tray with KM(1)84's or M300's, or if I was lucky C42s would I be reaching for it first...? No I wouldn't.

--------------------
Google less; read more!

I understand and sympathise deeply with the perception that the 'pros' get all sniffy and snobbish when a Newbie asks what monitor he should buy for £200 a pair, or if a Behringer channel strip or mic for £60 is better or worse than some other similarly priced items. The reason is not (just?) that we are a bunch of arseholes who just want to indulge in some kind of testosterone-driven pissing contest, but because most of us have made the mistake of buying that kind of gear at one time or another. Even an amateur with no higher aspirations to musical greatness ends up having to replace that kind of stuff fairly soon - usually because it fails completely.

There would appear to be a fundamental misunderstanding about how all electronic equipment is made. Unless you are talking about small items with just a handful of components being built in very small numbers, all production is automated.

That's right, even big mixing desks from SSL and AMS-Neve.

If you place an order with SSL for a K-Series 60-frame, that does not mean that droves of men with tweed jackets with leather elbows bought at Dunn & Co, all don white smocks, strap on bi-focals and fire up the old soldering irons. All production today is performed by pick-and-place machines. The same type of machine that puts the parts into your high-end mixing desk can also be seen placing the parts into (or rather on) a Behringer Eurodesk in Shanghai.

The difference in manufacturing costs is largely the cost of the components. In modern manufacturing, labour is not a significant cost. Typically, a 19" rack unit takes between 10 mins and one hour of labour to build, depending on a whole host of variables like complexity, design and how difficult and thorough the QC has to be. QC for modern digital equipment is also mostly automated. That means that a labour intensive item built in high-wage Germany could have as much as £20 labour costs per piece, whereas an item built in Indonesia could have labour costs as low as 10 Cents.

So why does an item built in Indonesia cost far less in Germany than a similar item built in Germany? Common sense tells us that a microphone that takes an hour to assemble in Indonesia (wage cost per piece $1) should be far more expensive than the same type of microphone assembled in Germany (wage bill per microphone £20). After all, the Indonesian microphone has to spend three months at sea in a 40-foot container, it involves more paperwork, it incurs import duty and because it takes months to reach market, ties up more capital. So despite the slight advantage in lower wage costs, the cost of moving it halfway around the World, having to have some kind of office or representation in Indonesia, financing it for that journey and paying import duty should far outweigh the £19.50p extra that the manufacturer has to pay for labour.

The truth is of course that the two items are not the same, they are not even close to being the same. To find out what the difference is, you have to take them apart and look at the components that go into them. If you try to repair something like an amp or desk from Behringer the chances are that the jack sockets will not survive removal. They are so flimsy, that you can rip them apart with your fingers. The same is true for every component inside the box. It is built to the very lowest quality standard possible.

What you have in your hands is a minimal product. A product that is built to just work and no more. Just as some channel strips are there to exploit the upper reaches of the so-called 'snob effect' (only the very best will do) there are products that seek to do the opposite. It could be a Casio home organ to give to a child because you have to give it something, but seek only to spend £100. Its' function is to work at Christmas and make some sort of noise. The child will have broken it by Boxing Day, so any expenditure on a better model would be foolish.

In a similar fashion, the complete recording studio at home is of course not a complete recording studio. It is no more a complete recording studio then a one-chip hand-held video camera and some editing software will allow you to record a game show in 'broadcast quality.'

These products are the price they are, not because they are built in a particularly economical or rational manner, but because many Far Eastern manufacturers have made cheap production their speciality. This does not mean that it cannot perform its function. I hear that the Behringer Composer thingy is good on vocals and I do use their EQs and headphone amps. But then I bough their Eurodesk for quick and easy monitoring in the room and the second time I switched it on, it went up in smoke.

And there we have the problem with the minimal product. Even if they do what it says on the can, they fail very often.

You see, the law of diminishing returns (when relating to quality) works at both ends of the quality spectrum. At the high quality end, there is only so far that you can go before the product gains little or no genuine increase in quality. Indeed, ultra high quality in, say frequency response, may result in other new problems as op-amps start to work in radio frequency ranges. In other words, if you go too far, the utility of the product actually falls.

At the bottom end of the quality scale, the same applies. A desk or amp that breaks or distorts the signal also has no utility. There is a level of quality below which you cannot go. If you do, the utility suddenly becomes zero.

Obviously, as the quality of the product is reduced by introducing ever cheaper components, the utility is reduced, but not by as much as the fall in cost. The product still works, it therefore still has utility. In order for a manufacturer to offer the cheapest product in his market, he must learn how to reduce the cost of manufacture to a point as close to, but above, the point of total loss of utility.

Put simply, the manufacturer has to make the product as cheaply as possible, using the cheapest components, without a significant number of products failing completely.

(The remarks written earlier about the falling standards of some 'quality' cars such as Mercedes are a typical example of a result of the law of diminishing returns when seeking even greater quality. These cars have become more and more complex, to the point where their complexity starts to create new problems that they did not have before. If you buy a car with ABS, EPS, AC, Sat-Nav, hands-free telephone with voice recognition, computer controlled gear-changes, ant-theft alarms, remote central locking, distance warning cruise control and frequency seeking digital radios, you can expect these features to fail one day too.)
____________________________________________________________________________


I posted originally to make some people think - and not just about audio gear, but everything they buy. For some reason, the 'Shanghai syndrome' seems to have made some people believe that basic economic principles have somehow disappeared or have been altered in some way. There is a genuine belief that certain types of equipment are for ever going to get cheaper and cheaper, in much the same way that some people believed in 1999 that shares in Cisco and Sun would for ever rise.

Every few years a new technology or a new production method comes along and there is a retail feeding frenzy. In the 50's it was plastics. In the 60's we had the 'tranny' generation. In the 80's it was digital and now it is production in China and the Far East in general. Each time this happens, the unscrupulous jump onto the band waggon to sell snake oil.

PVC and nylon are not better than Bakelite or Formica and they in turn were not better than wood. Transistors are not better than valves. Digital is not better than analogue. Virtual synths or recorders are not better than hardware. Products made in China, Malaysia and Indonesia are not better than products made in Europe or the US. They are different, that's all.

This time, rather than a new technology, it is access to a new area of production with a depth of knowledge and component suppliers that have specialised in ultra cheap production. This means that low and medium technology products can be produced in very large numbers at lower cost, but also at a lower quality.

At one end of the quality scale there is a Fiat Uno which is built to survive its guarantee period and no more and at the other a Mercedes SL that now has every feature known to mankind, most of which nobody needs and many of which will fail. Between these two extremes you will find many good cars.

At one end of the monitor market you can buy a pair of Behringer Truths for £80. At the other end, you can commission a made to order set of Genelec wall-mounted speakers with complete room treatment and installation for £50,000 and more. Both are (in my opinion) fairly useless for recording and mixing music, but between these two mad extremes there are many good monitors you can buy.

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

Quote The Byre:

---

... but between these two mad extremes there are many good monitors you can buy.

---

So, which ones out of many good monitors are the best?
Can I buy something for £200 a pair that are good enough?

Let’s discuss it in circles.

--------------------
Digital Emotions

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah...... It's ok to like Behringer, it's ok not to like Behringer. That may or may not be the issue?

I gave up about 763 words back. And another, just to make sure.

good morning ... steve, have you ever used the mics youre on about ? even if you had, why would you compare them to mics costing 200 quid ? if you think this is a serious discussion you must be mad. i dont see why i got jumped on for saying rode mics are exceptional, but if you like that kind of playground game carry on.

mr byre, thanks for yr considerable post. agreed there is some crap out there, i didnt realise you were only on another behringer bash, the sarcastic thread title seems to be having a general go at newbies expectations. i just tried to open it up to include all this other cheap gear. rode mics, alesis monitors, joe meek pre's all do the job exceptionally well (for the price !) even certain bits of behringer kit. its really childish to compare any of it to gear costing 30 times as much, but its also pretty boring to keep telling newbies they have to save up or sell their children to get this gear cos they will never make anything worth doing otherwise.

joe meek make the 3q for 130 quid and it uses mostly the same components as their high end stuff costing 4 times as much because they are already tooled up and with the inclusion of a wall wart and a smaller case they can afford to do it ... alesis do the monitor 1 for 100 quid because theyve sold tons of them in the last 10 years or more. i only recommend gear ive used to newbies, and i will carry on doing so ...

as for the beatles, they didnt even know how to tune their own guitars or roll their own spliffs ...

cheers
grainger

Hi all, I beleive we are shooting ourselves in the foot asking for cheaper and cheaper gear in the end the competition to cut corners and drive down prices just floods the market with second rate gear. I would rather spend a bit more than buy something thats ultra-cheap and that will probably break down or not do it's job properly.

Take care !

Tony.

Tony, That's a very nice summing up of what The Byre was trying to say. He just said it with a few more words...;)

What's more, it is a sentiment that quite a few people ( myself included ) have felt for a while now and Andy was the first to have the guts to start the ball rolling. Kudos to Andy for that. Wish I'd had the balls to, but I knew ( ok .. suspected ) what the response would be and have been pleasantly unsurprised to see that I was right in my expectations.

Sadly, the SOS forums actually _are_ fairly tolerant of the budget end of the gear spectrum. Even someone like the Byre is a pussycat compared to some of the other boards out there. Don't take my word for it though, go round a few of them with the comments that have been posted here and see what the response is. It's a harsh old world and I do think that sometimes people don't appreciate what they have.

So let's at least keep it civil round here, eh?? Leave the mud slinging to professional ladies in bikinis ...

Still missing the point I see

Quote grAInger:

---

as for the beatles, they didnt even know how to tune their own guitars or roll their own spliffs ...

---

I don't know the authority for that statement, but it is fair to say that after you have earned the first few million, you can pay people to do these things for you. You may not like them but that doesn't make a few hundred million other record buyers wrong.

The same applies to your view that all Neumann mics "stink". Any commercial studio or broadcaster would respectfully (or perhaps not respectfully) disagree.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Some great responses here...Andy, Grainger, Tony, Dave B...

Lower-priced gear has its place for those just starting out, I agree, but as Andy (The Byre) and Tony (arpangel) mention, you can take this idea just too far, and end up producing crap with the promise of the "something for nothing" miracle.

I agree with grainger that there are some "useable" pieces that don't cost an arm and a leg, and I'd have to agree that Rode is one of those companies making products that fit into that category... *however*, I would not call them "exceptional" either, but that is my opinion. I have had an NTK and an NT2 (I sold both), and still own a pair of NT5s that get occasional work, so I am familiar with the company. I do hear that some of the newer models sound better than their earlier stuff, but at this point, I am pretty much convinced that my personal needs don't include Rode at this point. 'Nuff said...

Quote:

---

So let's at least keep it civil round here, eh?? Leave the mud slinging to professional ladies in bikinis ...

---

Best advice I've heard all day!!!

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Quote grAInger:

---

... i know im out of my depth here but whats an AF condenser ?

---

Basically, AF condenser microphones use the capsule as a capacitor to store charge. With one fixed plate and the other free to vibrate in sympathy with the sound, the capacitance varies, and the charge moves in or out of the capsule accordingly. This is measured by the head preamplifier and an audio signal results. All well and good, but the capsule is inherently in a high impedance circuit (over 1Giga-Ohms) – it has to sit there with stored charge until the diaphragm moves and any changes in the charge are perceived as audio. In a humid atmosphere the stored charge finds it easier to escape on water molecules in the air rather than through the input of the preamplifier, hence noisy and reduced output, and misery all round. The high biasing voltage also attracts dust particles to the diaphragm, reducing its efficiency and linearity. Most condenser microphones use this technology and some manufacturers are better than others at minimising the effects - I have heard huge differences between manufacturers, some so noisy in humid conditions that they are unuseable, while others just give off a few crackles now and again. In dry conditions most are quiet, but I have heard some that give the odd crackle, even under these conditions.

The RF system (as used in Sennheiser MKH microphones) uses the capsule (a low impedance capsule) in a completely different way: as a tuning capacitor for an RF oscillator – which inherently employs it in a low impedance circuit where a high frequency signal is being passed through the capacitor all the time. Changes in capacitance (caused by sound moving the diaphragm) alter the resonant frequency of the circuit (circa 8MHz) and so its frequency becomes proportional to the audio signal. A simple RF demodulator restores the output to a conventional audio signal. More complex and sophisticated (but still very rugged), this system is highly immune to the effects of humidity and is thus the preferred design to be used out of doors (or when moving from outside to inside on a cold day!).

--------------------
John - Sound-Link ProAudio
President - Federation Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Lower-priced gear has its place for those just starting out, I agree, but as Andy (The Byre) and Tony (arpangel) mention, you can take this idea just too far, and end up producing crap with the promise of the "something for nothing" miracle.

---

i aggree, but as i see it (only been browsing the page for a couple of months) most people dont ask for the cheapest gear.. and if u only want the cheapest you dont need advice.. you just need to know how to look at a price tag, right?

plus the people who do ask for advice (for cheap gear) is mostly looking for gear to get them started.. they didnt have shite to do with behringer getting all crazy and mass producing dung... theyre just confused cos the cheap gear market is so biig and full of dung...
noone expects to find £100 supergear.. no big studio is asking for advice on £300 monitors...
but if we do need a £100 mic and theres 30 to choose from and we do know that in this world today a lot of products are just mass produced garbage made only to make a profit, some advice can be very nice..

we're amateurs doing amateur stuff on amateur gear, ok?

Quote KidCracken:

---

we're amateurs doing amateur stuff on amateur gear, ok?

---

But I know loads of amateurs who have better gear than the professionals - because they buy it themselves and want to get the best long-term value for money.

Amateur doesn't necessarily mean cheap - often the reverse

--------------------
John - Sound-Link ProAudio
President - Federation Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

WRT John's point - I know a couple of 'professional' studios that are jealous of about half of my kit and the rest is on par. And this is after a few years of lean times.

Sometimes, being an amateur means that you have more ready cash to 'invest' in gear.

I would generally agree that you get what you pay for, although after working in the textile industry, I learned a few interesting things, which go against that rule completely - and many industries are the same.
Brand names are also used in pricing as a percieved expectation of quality.
My problem with mics is the fact that the source can vary so much, particularly with singers.
Give me any mic (U87 for example) and I'll use it on most things and it'll be great I'm sure.
I'm a bit scared to buy one because my musical partner in crime has a very mid/high frequency voice and when I look at the U87 plot, it's saying "NO" to me.
I have great results with some really good singers I know with my so called 'budget' mics and the recordings don't have to made 'better' in any way (if you know what I mean). It's about capturing good performances.

Music and recording is part art, part science and we don't always want a perfect reproduction of the source, based on our artistic ideas.

There can be a bit of snobbery also with certain products. Having a good mic and preamp is one thing, but being really anal about tiny differences in different preamps is the talk of hi-fi snobs, rather than creative musicians and producers.
{says the guy who was explaining some anal recording banter to someone last night - which he had no idea what I was talking about}

Remember that old saying - "the best pen doesn't write the best book".

--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.

John

So the "AF" bit stands for "Audio Frequency" as opposed to "RF" for Radio Frequency? Whilst giving a very nice and full explanation (thank you), you missed expounding on that abbreviation.

Quote John Willett:

---

But I know loads of amateurs who have better gear than the professionals - because they buy it themselves and want to get the best long-term value for money.

---

yea but theyre not newbies looking for gear to get them started...

i want nice gear too! and i do know what kind of money i have to spend to get it.. but it could take me years to save up for it.. and ofcourse i want to do stuff right now! so in the mean time im very happy with my £120 set of mic, pre-amp and mic stand.. this way i can even buy some great mic and use it straight away!

using my impression of your opinion i would have to save up for years to buy a set of nice gear just to get started..

why not use this time practicing my skills (bot technically and vocal) on cheap gear?

plus.. if some of you guys got better equipment than studios then why the heck are you amateurs???

make money, money doesnt make you...

Quote KidCracken:

---

plus.. if some of you guys got better equipment than studios then why the heck are you amateurs???

make money, money doesnt make you...

---

Because they arent professinal musicians likely, and do earn money in other professions hence the ability to buy great gear for their hobby!

This applies to all sorts of things, not just amateur music, sport for example, you must know musicians who as well as spending every last penny on instruments and music gear, ALSO try to buy the best they can on mountain bikes, road bikes, skis, whatever... I know many people who do! in fact I do - GREAT, where's the snow?!

Quote Wonkey Wabbit:

---

John

So the "AF" bit stands for "Audio Frequency" as opposed to "RF" for Radio Frequency? Whilst giving a very nice and full explanation (thank you), you missed expounding on that abbreviation.

---

Oops! That'll teach me to copy/paste

--------------------
John - Sound-Link ProAudio
President - Federation Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

As you mention KidCracken, there are lots of pieces of gear around that fit into the lowest price category, but sometimes, the "what $100 mic should I buy?" questions come from folks that really expect there to be differences between them. At that price, who really cares? Just pick one, they all sound pretty much the same, and were probably made in the same factory, but just have a different brand name on the front.

To over-analyze a buying decision at that price point is really next-to-meaningless since they all sound about the same, and are all going to be in the waste basket in a year or three anyway.

As some folks say around here, stop stressing, and go make some music! I see posts like this where someone replies to the "$100 mic question" with a list of 2-3 mics to try, and then the original poster comes back with "OK, thanks, now who else? Or which one is going to give me the most low-end detail and sounds most like a U47?" These are the posts that crack me up the most, not the guy or gal that just wants to get some of their ideas down on tape, and need something to get started.

Now it is fair enough to ask the question, but once some suggestions are given, these over-analyzers then continue to press for details that don't really exist, or ask things like "I am looking for a vocal sound like 'Green Day' with a $100 mic, which one is going to give me that sound?" Don't laugh, 'cause you know its true!!!

Then when someone responds that you need to spend a whole lot more money to get where you want to go, all the calls of "snobbery" come flooding out!

Agreed that this is not *everyone*, but I am amazed at some of the questions and expectations that exist at the lower end.

One of the posts above said something like "with low-end products, we all know what we are getting, but need a place to start...". I'd have to say that from my experience on several forums, these folks are in the minority, and that there are many more folks that seem to think that $100 will get them a mic that will give them the 'Green Day" sound, and they just need the secret "inside scoop" from the pros to tell them which magic product to buy. "Ah yes, the magic U47 clone for $100 that *noone else knows about!!!" Once again, the "something for nothing Wal-Mart mentality" that is so prevelent here in The States has permeated this industry as well.

I honestly have nothing against low-priced gear, and nothing against those wanting to make their own music on a budget. I think that is great! But as KidCraken states, just look at the price tag, and pick out the lowest-priced option, realize what you are getting for your money, and go make music!

Someone else said something like "If you are such a snob, then don't bother reading/answering the 'I need a $100 mic' threads." This is pretty much what I do, not because I don't want to encourage those folks just starting out, only because I have nothing constructive to add. If I say "pick one", I get nasty replies from those who are positive that Model A sounds *much* better than Model B (but who have probably not really compared them directly, and if they have, it was probably on cheap monitors where you can't really make critical decisions), or I get flamed for being a gear snob, which is not my intent at all!!!

I have always abided by the rule that "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is..."

This is a great discussion, and there are lots of great opinions here. It is all good...

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Quote drumon:

---

This applies to all sorts of things, not just amateur music, sport for example, you must know musicians who as well as spending every last penny on instruments and music gear, ALSO try to buy the best they can on mountain bikes, road bikes, skis, whatever... I know many people who do! in fact I do - GREAT, where's the snow?!

---

wich brings me back to;

Quote KidCracken:

---

yea but theyre not newbies looking for gear to get them started...

---

Quote KidCracken:

---

yea but theyre not newbies looking for gear to get them started ... using my impression of your opinion i would have to save up for years to buy a set of nice gear just to get started..

---

No, I was not saying that.

But making people aware of certain things mean that they can make more intelligent decisions and spend what they have more wisely.

When I started I did not have much money - I invested this in a good tape machine (Tandberg) and some not too expensive mics (Unisound) and monitored on good headphones (AKG K60). The mics were too cheap and quickly got changed for something better (Beyer M67).

My earliest recordings still sound good played back on the latest equipment.

Gradually, over the years, things got added to - but the Beyer mics are still in my kit and are not a disgrace 35 years on. The headphones lasted me about 15 years before I upgraded, the tape deck lasted a similar time before I got a better machine and became a reserve as it was still good.

Getting started now on a low budget I would probably look at a good second-hand mic. rather than a Chinese cheapo. Monitor on headphones until you can afford good monitors and get an inexpensive recorder (as these are technolony which changes every 5-minutes). You can still have quality at a low price if you spend wisely.

--------------------
John - Sound-Link ProAudio
President - Federation Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

wich brings me back to;

Quote KidCracken:

---

yea but theyre not newbies looking for gear to get them started...

---

---

True, I went off on a tangent. Apologies

However, I'm aware of many "amateurs" in all sorts of things who can afford to buy "better" gear for their first whatever-it-may-be, because they have the time to research what will help them to improve at their hobby and end up buying impressive equipment to steepen their learning curve, which if you want to do something well, whether it be your profession OR hobby is a challenge we all want to rise to!

But yes, its not really what this discussion was all about to begin with, but it is relevant.

Quote Doublehelix:

---

As you mention KidCracken, there are lots of pieces of gear around that fit into the lowest price category, but sometimes, the "what $100 mic should I buy?" questions come from folks that really expect there to be differences between them. At that price, who really cares? Just pick one, they all sound pretty much the same, and were probably made in the same factory, but just have a different brand name on the front.

---

well even though you dont reccomend any model i find that very good advice...

as i see the market today (for any product) there can be a huge difference in quality no matter where in the price range you look.. and therefore i assume this is the same with audio gear... so if i were a total newb how should i know that all cheap mic's are the same?? probably by asking.. and where can i get answers from a lot of people?

and yea i know a lot of people on the net are arrogant and/or plain stupid.. but i still think this place is a lot more "mature" than many other sites i know...

so my advice is.. if people asking are just naive, please be nice and guide them... and if they flame you for not giving the "right" answer, please put on your mental /ignore

There can be a place for many pieces of gear in a recording environment, regardless of price.
Recording is about capturing performances and being creative in the best way you can, but using your ears (not your eyes).
If you end up using a 100 quid mic on some source and it sounds good and fits in well - most importantly - it is played well) then that's all fine.
To suggest that we can only record with 2 grand mics etc... IS pure snobbery and completely wrong.
I'd love a cupboard full of 'top' mics - instead I have few 'project studio' ones which can do a very good job.

PS. On the Green Day bit - remember that the high sonic quality from a good condensor might not actually be used for a band such as this - and probably wouldn't sound good, unless it was dirtied up a bit.
The Chillies apparently use an SM57 for vocals. That's a $100 mic.

In some circumstances, the perfections of hi quality recording just don't work work, but it does depend on what you're doing and what you want to achieve.

The proof is in the pudding, and if someone with average mic's has better recordings than someone with mics valued at 10 times that, what does that tell you?

--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.