Elsewhere in the guitar forum, Mac the Max (or is that Max the Mac?) wrote

Quote:

---

I've got to say, that talking to some of the designers and engineers, it's a bit of a revelation....
many of them are really quite unhappy about the need to do things in a given manner in order to compete almost solely on price rather than actual performance....or life span. equipment more and more often has to be just thrown away and replaced instead of repaired when it fails ..... because the cost cutting designs made them economically unserviceable.... Respected, world renowned companies, known for their quality of product and of service, are literally forced to bang out cheap knock offs of their designs, build them in China, and ship em round the world back to, for example the uk, knowing that if it goes wrong within warranty, they'll merely throw it away and give you another one..... because it's not economically viable to pay a service engineer to open the box and have a look....
amongst other things... hardly sound ecological sense is it??
I'm still a consumer, just like anyone else.,... even if I make my living at it... and so I do appreciate the downwards trend in pricing over the last 20 years...
but there's a point where it should have stopped, with a view to both long term ecological sustainability, and product serviceability as well as sound quality...... and the Behringer phenomenon is at least partly responsible for us passing that point without even blinking.

---

and at the same time this Music Technology forum is filled day-in-day-out with the same questions like "What monitors for £200?" or "Can I get a new multitracker for under £500?" and the usual "Is the B1 for £100 as good as a Neumann U87?" and so on.

Those of you who expect something for nothing, let me point out that you are actually getting less for your money when you look at the cheapest option. It works like this:

It costs as much to deliver a Mercedes for £50,000 as it does to deliver a Fiat for £5,000. Both cars take up as much space in the showroom and both cars involve as much paperwork. All together, it comes to about £500. That means that 10% of the Fiat is paperwork and delivery, but only 1% of the Mercedes. Also Fiat cars are very heavily advertised, so it is fairly safe to say that a similar amount falls on each and every car in advertising. Now the car company and the dealer have about £1,000 extra costs for both in after sales service. Fiats are cheaply built and therefore make heavier demands on after sales service in proportion to their costs. Mercedes customers are more demanding and the costs for an individual repair are far higher, but because the car is better built, it is less likely to break during the guarantee period.

All that means that the Mercedes dealer and manufacturer have £48,000 to spend on building the car and turn a profit and the Fiat manufacturer and dealer between them have just £3,000.

The same is true for audio. It costs the same to put the electronics in a metal box, print the box, put a mains cable in with the box, put that box in a styrofoam packing with a manual and a guarantee card and put all that in a package and tape the package shut and then ship that package to the dealer, whether it is a Universal Audio compressor for £1,700 or a Behringer Tube Composer for £80.

Both are 19" silver boxes with two-tone print and both have black knobs. One is built here and therefore labour costs will be higher, but the other is built in Shanghai and the transport and capital costs will be higher. The only difference between the two is the profit per unit and the cost of the build of the assembly inside that box.

The RRP of these two items is £100 and £2,000 respectively. (I took the Thoman / Music Store-Cologne price for the first prices.)

That means that the shop pays £60 and £1,200 for these two items. If we assume that each costs about £20 to paint, box and ship, that gives Universal Audio £1,180 to build its compressor and turn a profit, but Behringer has just £40 to build its compressor and have a profit.

Because of the higher handling costs and the commercial dangers of having to bulk buy, the cheaper an item is, the higher the profit has to be for the retailer. The extreme case is nylon Jack-plugs. They cost about 10p each in boxes of 1,000 and one sells them for a Pound (or some figure like that, I could look it up, but you get the idea!)

In pro-audio, one tends to buy from a dealer that gets either a handling fee or a small commission. He cannot reckon with a 60 / 40 mark-up (net to gross) as with guitars and synths, lights and drums. These are more expensive items and prices are high enough as it is without looking for normal retail mark-ups. Economically, they behave more like cars and less like carrots! Right at the top, big mixing desks are bought from the manufacturer and are commissioned months in advance with a 10% deposit (or whatever is agreed). It is not unusual for the manufacturer to make a loss on a big mixing desk, but he needs these sales to help establish and maintain his name and marque.

I am not advocating, or even implying, that you should quit buying cheap marques and only buy Avalon and Neve designs. The law of diminishing returns means that there has to be a common-sense barrier somewhere in the price range. There is BS at the top too.

But the next time you buy something cheap, ask yourself some questions. Questions like "Is it cheap because the shop is discounting boxes to clear old stock? Or is it cheap because it is slightly soiled? Perhaps it's cheap because the manufacturer is discounting to keep the doors to the factory open. It may even be that it is cheap because the competition has been too expensive for far too long - after all, a passive DI box is just a transformer and three plugs in a case, a headphone amp is just a couple of modules, a passive speaker distribution controller is just switches and wires."

But it could be that it is cheap because there is nothing of value inside it.

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

All of which I would agree with and then, every now and again, I come across a cheap, little gem.

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

Yeah, but then again Behringer is a God-send for people who dont want to shell out thousands just so they can make a quick demo of their band. The way I see it is that Professionals pay higher prices, and get better products, and beginners pay lower prices, and get budget quality stuff, but it will get them going.

For example, for my "home studio", I have an ST Audio 8 i/o PCI interface, and it cost me about £100 on ebay. I *could* have bought a Delta 1010, but it would have cost me more than twice the price. Yes, my ST Audio device is a little tempremental at times, but for the amount I use it, it does the job very well. The M-Audio on the other hand would be a lot more stable, therfore essential for someone who will use it day in day out.

I think people should just expect to get what they pay for and no more, exept for CME controller keyboards, because their amazing for the money

Gareth x

It boils down to the music. Does the end result sound any good. Yes?. Cool - doesn't matter what technology you used. Its all given way too much importance IMO. I've heard crap recorded on top gear and genius recorded on crap.

Excepting that I have yet to come across a piece of Behringer kit that sounded anything like useful, this includes exactly 6 pieces of Behringer kit that I bought in the triumph of hope over common sense over the years and sold again pretty much immediately. Having said which, I made a profit on all of them, (with the exception of a small desk which I gave away to a friend), so someone must like 'em.

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

I'm sure you've seen this before but no harm giving it another outing - I think it's from a poem by John Ruskin (1819 - 1900) but can't be sure:

Quote:

---

It’s unwise to pay too much. But it’s worse to pay too little.

When you pay too much, you lose a little money, that is all. When you pay too little you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought was incapable of doing the thing it was bought to do.

The common law of business balances prohibits paying a little and getting alot. It can’t be done.

If you deal with the lowest bidder it is well to add something for the risk you run.

And if you do that, you will have enough to pay for something better.

There is hardly anything in the world that someone can’t make a little worse and sell a little cheaper — and people who consider price alone are this man’s lawful prey.

---

--------------------
getting better all the time..

Quote Phil Marcus:

---

It boils down to the music. Does the end result sound any good. Yes?. Cool - doesn't matter what technology you used. Its all given way too much importance IMO. I've heard crap recorded on top gear and genius recorded on crap.

---

Phil

There is a certain amount of this, however you do reach the stage when you're asking Django to play a rubber band guitar, which you wouldn't do to him, so why do it to yourself.

More importantly, for those of us for whom it is still about the raw music, your comment holds true, but for those of us who are being asked for product, be it engineering expertise or audio product for the "wholesale" end of the music market, people don't want your music to sound professional, they require it.

Basically, there is a point where your money might be better spent on a few beers and a decent curry. If the budget you were about to spend doesn't even stretch to that, then it is likely that you need to save more before making a buy.

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

Oh sure, I respect that. But there are plenty of musicians out there who achieve professional results from seemingly crap gear. I mean, monitors like the Absolute 2s are frowned upon by many and yet I know a few tv composers who've used them. A mate of mine does a lot of field recording for foley in the states and amongst his equipment is a fifty quid Behringer mixer!. He swears it works just great.

I long subscribed to the opinion that cheap gear = cheap results but this past couple of years I'm really beginning to doubt it and the standard of equipment for such a cheap cost is really quite extraordinairy now. And a fair few people I work with are making some great recorings on humble gear.

Everyone knows that you can't get a decent mic for a tenner, you need at least double that!!!

Behringer is ok for the poorer musician. The beginner on a budget? Some of their gear is ok, adequate, does the job, maybe not great, but decent enough.

So maybe not commercial studio standard, but at home, fine.

It may break down quicker than some brands, it may not?

What's better a little behringer mixer or no mixer? "No mixer" a few cry, tell that to the struggling musician who can only really afford little cash.

erm .. what rubbish, sorry .. what about the fact that if you sell a million of a unit you can do it cheaper than if you sell ten ? .. the alesis monitor ones for 100 quid are the same monitors (probably better) as the alesis monitor ones they used to sell in the 1990's for 300 quid (which were award winning monitors and were used in almost as many pro studios as the cheaper yamaha ns10's), its just that theyve sold millions of pairs in that time and they can afford to knock them out much cheaper.

what about rode mics, they came out of the blue to show you can make an exceptional mic for less than 200 quid. as you keep saying mics and monitors are 'mature technology' that means it can only get cheaper.

the only behringer kit i have at the moment is the src2496 da/ad for 80 quid it does an excellent job that other boxes do for 3 or 4 times that price at least

i dont think any pro studio would buy behringer or maybe even alesis or rode, and that is part of why the pro studio will charge so much for its time .. but this equipment is absolutely fine for people to get a quite accurate idea of what their music sounds like

i really think you are suffering from some snobbery somewhere behind your self-justification for wasting so much cash, mate sorry ...

cheers
grainger

I'm quite sure the Max and The Byre are perfectly aware that this phenomenon isn't confined to music gear... pretty much all domestic electronics and white goods are routinely chucked rather than repaired.

I'm all for carefully designed, hand built gear but, frankly, there's precious little of it around.

Also, taking The Byre's idea a bit further.... I can't afford a merc. What's more I wouldn't expect to have a merc as my first car... Just as a U87 is hardly a beginners mic purchase.

There's always been compromise between the design and marketing, it's nothing new.

Ironically Mercedes quality control had a total breakdown recently and the company was obliged to recall 1.3 million cars due to faulty engineering - not just one fault either, several different ones!

But I'd still take a 2nd hand one over a new Fiat anyday!

and the old monitor ones, as many people DO know, are significantly better than the new ones....

--------------------
Battenburg to the power of 20 - said by Richie Royale in a moment of genius. 4pm. Wed 16th Nov 2011. Remember where you were....

Quote grAInger:

---

erm .. what rubbish, sorry .. what about the fact that if you sell a million of a unit you can do it cheaper than if you sell ten ?

---

Exactly. Economically, Behringer can do many things FAR more efficiently than LA Audio or Thermionic Culture. They buy parts in bulk, transport in bulk, and manufacture in bulk using cheap labour and automated processes.

Not to mention the fact that a large portion of the cost of equipment is R&D, not parts or manufacturing. Behringer can spread these costs over many thousands of units, smaller companies can not. Furthermore, Behringer R&D costs are far FAR smaller to begin with, because they just copy someone else's design! (They do have to pay lots of lawyer bills though...)

I know people who have made part-for-part clones of SSL compressors for a FRACTION of the cost. Try that with a Behringer and you'd be paying more for parts than the whole thing costs in the shops.

But who's comparing Behringer to LA Audio etc anyway? It's not like people are sitting in their studios going: "hmm Behringer Composer or Thermionic Culture Phoenix... Which would be the more economic compressor to buy?".

Hey,
At the end of the day, if the singers Crap and song is crap...its gonna be crap. I met an amzing singer once and we recorded a wicked sounding demo on my Fantom an emu 04 04 and a battered sm58. Ive moved up a bit now, but I've had some singers come into my studio who simply make it impossible to get the results that we got on that little demo......I just did what you told me, pushed a little 12k......swept out a bit of "honk"...sounds sweet. though my Rodek2 rules!!! I love it!

--------------------
Sorry, never could do joined'e'uppy writing...
[url=http://www.mcorbitmusic.com]

It's like never ordering the cheapest wine on a restarant wine list (after costs, tax, storage, serving-staff costs etc that £10 bottle means you get about 25 pence worth of wine. Buy a £12 bottle and you get £2.25 worth of wine, i.e. something nine times "better").

The real issue is service. I have a couple of Samson Q5 headphone amps. Not exactly high end stuff, but serviceable, and £100+ for a headphone amp is not exactly a junkshop price either. One needs a new power supply. I can't get one. The thing was discontinued all of a year ago (approx) and everybody just shrugs in a "what do you expect" kind of way.

Sound Technology are trying, but I am not hopeful. I know I can cobble together an alternative 16v AC supply, despite Samson's dire warnings of the consequences of using anythnig but their own product, but that's hardly the point, is it? I can't really imagine getting this kind of response from Neve or Neumann or indeed a lot of people in the middle ground like say TLA or Dbx etc.

My personal guideline these days is to treat any "budget" gear as throwaway items, because if it goes wrong you are almost certainly out on a limb.

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

Whats better? to sit and sing/play by yourself or to record your own stuff and listen to it and hear where you could do better?

sometimes this subject is treated like its only a case of making radio-ready music..
how big a part of musicians actually make a living off it you think?? 0.005% maybe? and maybe 10% of these have their own pro studio, the rest goes to a commerial studio.. assuming my numbers is right, the "pro-quality is the ONLY way" approach would only apply to 0.0005% of all musicians, right?

plus, i dont know about audio gear, but in a tv-store (here in denmark) it cost £50 just for the store to look at your broken equipment.. then the cost of repairing and spare parts is added.. this easily totals at least £100.. if we just assumes the numbers is similar in an audio-store and a cheap mic costs £50 then whats the point of repairing it??

Edited by KidCracken (30/10/05 02:28 PM)

I think the real issue here is in the marketing of budget products *and some wise soul has already mentioned it applies to everything, not just music recording*...

I think we all accept that high end products are subjectively better than budget ones most of the time *except in a few bizarre cases*

I think we all accept that its possible to make great music with budget gear if you know how.

I think we all accept that there is a crossover point between home and pro setups at which better quality results can be achieved, and that that point varies for each individual artist and project...for example countless amazing sounding electronic records are made at home, whereas it would just not be possible to produce Norah Jones in a bedroom etc etc.

So I'm thinking that the reason this topic seems to come up again and again is that Joe Public is constantly being told that if he has a mac and a samson usb mic, he has a recording studio in a box, and that his results will be 'professional'. He is not only told this, he's PROMISED it. So it's no real surprise therefore that the huge numbers of people who love music and want to make it at home, come onto these forums to find out why they're not 100% satisfied with their results...and that's when they find out that *disregarding the artists for a second* great results come from experience...and that excellent results come from experience coupled with the right tools.

Perhaps if budget gear manufacturers used slogans like "Sounds really half decent actually" and "surprisingly ok for the money" or "not the best thing you've ever heard, but not the worst either" we'd be furter along the road to making music and accepting the limitations of our budgets.

J

Quote grAInger:

---

...what about rode mics, they came out of the blue to show you can make an exceptional mic for less than 200 quid. as you keep saying mics and monitors are 'mature technology' that means it can only get cheaper.

---

NO - mature technology means that it does not get cheaper, it can only get more expensive.

If the technology is mature it means that most of the developments have taken place, all the ways to manufacture more efficiently have been done. You can't make it cheaper and the price will therefore go up with inflation. An MKH 40 that cost just under £400 when it was introduced in 1985 now costs over £1,000 - that's mature technology - and if you bought one in £1985 for £395 it has cost you £19.75 a year and much cheaper than a cheap Chinese mic. you throw away when it goes wrong after a year and have to buy a new one!

And Røde, no, they are not exceptional; just good value for money at a reasonable price. You get what you pay for. You can't compare a Røde NT5 with a Neumann TLM 184, for example. You get what you pay for.

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

sorry john but i think thats wrong, Rode make exceptional mics for less than 200 quid which you CAN obviously compare to a neuman and maybe the neuman is a touch better for certain things (though i bet the neuman is noisier) and its up to the individual to decide if that touch better is worth a grand or not.

ive also got joe meek 3q pre amps .. ive seen them compared favourably to machines costing 10 times as much, mebbe someone should tell the reviewers they CANT do that

and as for 'mature technology' of course it will get cheaper, by volume of production.

what complete snobbery

grainger

If an item, has matured like john says, and costs X amount, not matter how many they make it will still cost that same X and will increase with inflation, as John said.. it might become cheaper for a while if they flood the market (make smaller profit on many), but there's only so far that can go with 'Mature technology' because there will be that point where they either raise the price or make a loss!!

I wouldn't say John was being snobbish in anyway! Think he had a fair point!

hi, sorry, but nothing works like that, if you sell more you can do it cheaper and cheaper. i bet they sell a hell of a lot more pre amps, mics, compressors etc etc than they did 20 years ago. so its only right that companies like rode and joe meek find they can do it much cheaper than the established names who are clinging onto their profits

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

cheers
grainger

> If an item, has matured like john says, and costs X amount, not matter how many they make it will still cost that same X and will increase with inflation

I don't agree. That's assuming a manufacturer adds X% profit to each product they make, and continue doing this for the life of the product. This clearly isn't the case for a number of items, many of which despite being out for years still have price cuts.

Then of course their's outsourcing overseas to cut prices, something many manufacturers have done with existing mature products, which have had subsequent reductions in price.

I'm sorry Grainger, but I respectfully have to side with John on this...

I've used Rode mics a lot, and they're a quality product at a great price...I would recommend them to anyone looking in that price bracket...but they are overly bright to the point of being a little harsh on some sources...even the lovely classic II which I've had the pleasure of using a great deal is very bright...I absolutely loved it at first for doing the warm valve plus airy sound, but over time I found the top end to be a problem and it's an issue throughout the rode range, as well as with most of the other cheaper mics. Dont get me wrong, if I went to a job where it was Rode mics and nothing else I wouldn't fuss about it, but they're not exceptional. They're solid and decent.

J

A motor industry CEO once told me that in the £20k price difference between a £35k Porsche Boxter and a £15k Ford, about £10k is attributable to higher quality components, engineering etc., and £10k down to the greater expense of low volume production.

--------------------
Couple of our songs here http://www.mixposure.com/song.php?songid=9706

I know for a fact that some of the cheaper behringer products were used in the recording and mixing of certain commercially successful albums cause I was making the tea in the studio whilst it was being done. There was also an SSL desk in the mix as well....

The Byre's point seems to be that most things of a lower cost are going to be detrimental tot he recording process...and he's probably right - but there are more important factors that contribute more to the recording than just the gear....performance/attitude/knowledge/band dynamics etc etc - Sure - you would get a "technically" better recording at the Byres than at my studio ( by a factor of about 100) but mines cheaper and allows my fellow band musicians and I to record what we create.....we'd then use someone like the byres facilities to technically better our recordings - but we'd have done most of the groundwork in the rehersal room/on the behringer dx3216/in the local pub before committing to a pricey but worthwhile recording.

The behringer phenominon has opened recording to those musicians who would have still been playing live...but now can use the internet and the £1000 studio to get their music out there....cause the A&R men/5 major lables/commecial studios sure aint interested. - Behringer may have been partial;y responsible in creating a "falsehood" that every bedroom recordist can make a pro recording - but they've also re-created the "indy" vibe that takes music back from being a capitalist commodity to returning to its roots......


.....I know what I prefer......you can now go and see bands playing live every day of the week in birmingham now....and the standard of local acts has risen, cause the listener won't accept bad sound like he used to.....the disco's are closing down to make way for places like the acadamy...and the scene is revitalising itself. It MUST be partly due to the fact that you can mike up your band for less than a decent laptop....and sell a cd for £1 and still make your m
oney back....that the parents of 14-16 yr olds will pay for recording equipment cause its in the same league as an xbox 360 and gets those kids out-there making music.

...it's how i started - with a £250 drumkit....and an amega with soundtracker....and although I am one of the 99.9% of musicians who don't make a complete living from music - i've had my moments and entertained some people....

so ....don't bash the behringer (oooeer) to hard....it's meant that people like ssl neve etc have had to buck their Ideas up, and created a senario where we're actually getting better music than ever - we have the BBC with 6 music promoting less than perfectly recorded music - but which shines above the likes of the x-factor in terms of entertainment....which has got to be good - right?

--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/seaapes

Sorry grainger, not snobbery, but you need to listen.

With higher prices you do get the rule of diminishing returns, so twice the price does not necessarily mean twice the quality.

But I have listened to Røde mics and I appreciate their good points and have also heard their deficiencies. They are very good value for money, but you do get what you pay for.

And, personally, I do not like the Neumann as much as I do the Sennheiser. But I listen ...

But having said all this, with "pop" music, you are creating a product, rateher than capturing a performance and go for the equipment that gives you the sound you want...

Snobbery, definately and loudly NO! - but in my own recxordings I always strive for the best I can do.

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

Quote grAInger:

---

... if you sell more you can do it cheaper and cheaper.

---

No - only to a certain extent. Push too far and quality drops.

Røde acheive it by using cheap labour - Sennheiser evolution acheive it by automation.

But the best mics by all the major manufacturers are crafted products and you can only go so far before quality drops.

I spend a lot of money on top quality mics because they give the results, are consistant, and last. In fact, they woork out cheaper. I still have my old Beyer M67s which I bought back in about 1970.

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

ok jack i respectfully accept yr point .. but the 'exceptional' quality of rodes includes their price, you cant say theres much else that beats them overall at the price can you ? besides top ends can always be tamed with a nice eq, but they cant be put back afterwards can they ? also, are there any other large condenser mics that have 6db self noise ? thats pretty exceptional to me

the car analogy gets on me nerves to be honest, but look at range rovers, massive price tag, expensive parts, gas guzzling and as unreliable as any 5 grand runaround

i think the low price of gear nowadays is part of the reason theres so much bloody good music about, if theres more gear around people have the chance to capture ideas with pretty good fidelity in their own time, which only a few years ago would they would have to pay by the hour (and through the nose) for. there is more chance to catch lady lucks occasional inspirations for everyone ... that is NOT a bad thing. (except for those who want to keep it for themselves ... thats what i call snobbery)

cheers
grainger

I don't dispute the essence of what you say - it's the use of "exceptional" and "snobbery" I take issue with.

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).

Using quality mics is not snobbery - if you don't strive for the best quality can only go down.

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

Hmmm . . . Don't I remember a 'debate' involving the figure of £5.36?

--------------------
PA stuff on FB

lol

john, look, in 20 or 30 years the technology of making gold sputtered diaghragms (and all the other components of a condenser mic) has advanced massively, so the price has dropped, nothing has been lost. why SHOULD a mic still cost the same ? nothing else does so why mics ? do you honestly believe any industrial manufacturer doesnt use the cheapest labour that it can ? just for old times sake or what ?

the old adage doesnt always hold true, you do NOT always get what you pay for, sometimes youre just paying for a name

ps im only reacting to the byres original inflammatory post, what is this forum for if not for learners to ask the questions they need answering ? it gets on me tits when a newbie gets jumped on for asking the monitor question again ? if you dont want to read them or answer them then dont ... the situation is changing constantly and each new poster has a set of precise needs including budget.

pps of course i agree with your last point, but the 'best' is for the high end users who can make money out of their purchases. the technology then trickles down to the rest of us.

ppps ive NEVER heard my rode nt1000 crackle with humidity, are you really, saying rode mics are more prone to this than ANY other mic ? come on ...

cheers
grainger

Quote Jack:

---

whereas it would just not be possible to produce Norah Jones in a bedroom etc etc.

---

I would be quite happy to produce Norah Jones in my bedroom . . . err . . . OK . . . I'll get me coat!



--------------------
Scott
--Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?

Quote John Willett:

---

Røde acheive it by using cheap labour - Sennheiser evolution acheive it by automation.

---

Actually, John, if the information contained in Paul White's SOS article on the Røde manufacturing process is truthful (and I can only assume it is), Røde are INDEED now accomplishing the cost savings by using automation rather than cheap Chinese labour, so perhaps your statement is not really fair or unbiased in this case? (Unless you know something I don't, which of course is entirely possible.)

--------------------
Scott
--Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?

have so many missed the point by so far.....

not to mention displayed such a devout ignorance of economics and business practices.


Let me start by saying I labelled a market sector trend "The Behringer phenomenon" I did not actually cite use of their equipment so directly...

And in fact the actual sonic quality was not the whole core of my initial comment, which Byre reproduced and perhaps only slightly misrepresented. BUT it was relevant to the discussion of the moment in the thread I posted it in, which explains the perhaps slightly inaccurate interpretation.

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....

in the long term it is economically and ecologically unsustainable.,..

it's largely fair to say that it does exist in our industry , because of Uli Behringer and his Company's approach to business.

The happenstance that The Behringer gear IS largely fairly poor in many ways is irrelevant to my point...

So Whilst Byre's point is a fair one, it's also missing my point.

Those who doubt the validity of either , or the truth that the Behringer effect exists, should read back in SOS about say 10 years or so....


Compare the prices of equipment then to now, and adjust for inflation and currency valuation....

then look at the quality

to take examples of which i have direct personal knowledge....


Focusrite.,

The Platinum Range.

is their Acknowledged "budget" range, and is credited with having kept them in business... and that it's inception was as a response, directly, to the Existence of Behringer's ranges and their constant downwards pressure on market sector pricing.

Previously the Green range was their "budget range" and the two don't really compare..... in terms of performance OR cost.

The margins are small enough to keep the MD in the position of being tight with every penny , Their service dept doesn't even have a suitable test chamber or equipment to allow proper fault tracing and comparative analysis of Mic pre's for example........ the investment levels required are considered to be unwarranted , given that the huge majority of returned equipment is platinum

TLA

Look back about 10 years to the Indigo and Crimson Ranges, and their list prices (before the then Music village ,now Digital Village, stock clearanced the entire range just prior to the Ivory's announcement.... ) were in the £7-800 + range, NOT the £3-400 range the Ivory series inhabits...

why the change?? (to what many feel is an inferior product i might add (thus the revival of a product in the market position of the indigo series with the "classic" series... )

again, it's the downwards pressure induced by the Discount culture in certain retail sectors, and competition from inferior product on price NOT performance.... combined with the native greed of the average consumer.


look at it like this

you have a choice.
you can buy 2 channels of quality valve compressor for £750 ish...

or 20 Channels of Behringer composer for the same money.

the review of the composer said "it's really very good for the money"

comparing it to the next price bracket up, or maybe the one above that....

and the Review of the Tube device in question also said "it's really very good for the money. "
likewise comparatively assessed against the next higher price bracket type of equipment.... as well as on it's own merits.

which one does Joe bloggs go an buy??

largely the deComposer.... it's sadly Human nature

then buys several other toys as well..


ultimately though he'd probably make better sounding recordings with fewer toys, but of better quality, AND if or When they break down, then there's a reasonable chance of actually having it repaired.... and continuing to get use out of it for many many years. rather than throwing it away and buying a new one.....




It's common human nature to want a free lunch, and in effect that's what Behringer have been marketing.


and why they have such significant sales figures, however, i would add that they haven't been achieved solely by way of creation of new sales, but more by way of stealing sales from other market sectors.... like the more expensive ones....

In the past musicians have still bought Compressors, and EQ, and Reverb and so on, but they've saved longer and harder to do it... and used studio facilities when they couldn't do so any other way....


So now more music gets made..., well probably not as such, we were makiug it before we had access to recording gear as such but certainly More gets recorded for posterity..... which has it's plus sides....



but it has some down sides as well


The White Stripes.

I rest my Case


it's Not NECESSARILY the Equipment I have issue with in terms of the "Behringer bashing" although I do object to many of their rack units... coz their PSU's buzz annoyingly...


SOME of it actually does a creditable job regardless of cost.

But the Ethics, economics and i suppose, the long term ecological implications , now that's entirely another matter.,




Max

--------------------
if you don't know who i am, i aint gonna tell you.

Quote grAInger:

---

ok jack i respectfully accept yr point .. but the 'exceptional' quality of rodes includes their price, you cant say theres much else that beats them overall at the price can you ? besides top ends can always be tamed with a nice eq, but they cant be put back afterwards can they ? also, are there any other large condenser mics that have 6db self noise ? thats pretty exceptional to me

the car analogy gets on me nerves to be honest, but look at range rovers, massive price tag, expensive parts, gas guzzling and as unreliable as any 5 grand runaround

i think the low price of gear nowadays is part of the reason theres so much bloody good music about, if theres more gear around people have the chance to capture ideas with pretty good fidelity in their own time, which only a few years ago would they would have to pay by the hour (and through the nose) for. there is more chance to catch lady lucks occasional inspirations for everyone ... that is NOT a bad thing. (except for those who want to keep it for themselves ... thats what i call snobbery)

cheers
grainger

---

Er yes, I can think of several Mics I prefer to the Rodes at similar prices...



Groove Tubes for one.



"tamed with a nice EQ"

Hmm. which cost several times the price of the Mic's in question, sound economic sense that....

not to mention the potential technical sonic "issues" like phase shifting and such....




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

--------------------
if you don't know who i am, i aint gonna tell you.

Quote Max The Mac:

---

[.. indeed, there's a reasonable argument to say our entire industry is really irrelevant to the basics of Life on earth .......

Max

---

But there wasn't a mic, a recorder and sound guy to record the sucking sound of intelligent life rising from the primordial soup, how would we know it had happened?

--------------------
Andrew

Call it "snobbery", call it what you want, but there is a considerable quality difference between a pair of NT5s and a pair of KM184s. The KM184 sound so much better than the NT5s, it is not even close.

I have both pairs of mics, and have compared them directly many times. A lot of the folks (not all) that think that the NT5s sound as good, have never really heard the KM184s, and really don't know the difference.

It is pretty easy to think something sounds great and "just as good as the big guys" until you actually hear the big guys...then you know what everyone is talking about.

Are the ROde's rubbish? Of course not. They are good value for the money as has been mentioned.

Are they disposable? In my opinion, yes. If they go down, they go in the dust bin.

I am sure I am going to get flammed for the next bit, but I am just trying to stimulate conversation here, so be easy on me!

I understand all the posts claiming that Behringer-like gear has helped "starving" musicians and engineers get their start. This is true...but you could also argue that maybe that is not a good thing in all cases!!!

It has certainly led to a lot of folks with the freedom to do their own thing in their own place, but it has also led (in my opinion) to a lot of people making recordings that don't know what they are doing, and in a lot of cases, it sounds like it!

You could take this a step further and claim that it has hurt the industry overall by taking business away from the project studios, and then from the bigger studios, and the industry is currently in a shambles overall.

Rather than paying our dues, and learning the trade, we can set up shop in our bedrooms with a cheap Behringer mixer, a $75 sound card, a $100 Chinese condenser, a $100 DAW, and $200 monitors.

So for less than $500, you have a "studio-in-a-box". That is all great, but unfortunately, the results can be pretty sad without any knowledge of what is going on. What is really sad, is that a lot of folks think that this sounds great, but a lot of that might be due to not knowing the difference.

Of course, the argument here is that "you have to learn it somehow...". I understand that, but the advent of cheap and cheerful home recording gear has spawned an entire generation of home recordists that think that their bedroom recordings sound "good enough".

It gives freedom at the same time that it hurts those professionals that have made this their career, and the quality manufacturers that just can't compete with the Behringers of the world in a market that can't tell the difference.

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.

Flame suit on...

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

Quote Grim Audière:

---

Quote Max The Mac:

---

[.. indeed, there's a reasonable argument to say our entire industry is really irrelevant to the basics of Life on earth .......

Max

---

But there wasn't a mic, a recorder and sound guy to record the sucking sound of intelligent life rising from the primordial soup, how would we know it had happened?

---

actually , you know what.... you should go looking in the depths of Auntie's archives....

I bet you'd find it

Max

--------------------
if you don't know who i am, i aint gonna tell you.

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.

Interesting points all.

I think part of the problem is obviously the I want it now attitude. But its also the I want it ALL now. The vocal mics, the sequencer, the preamp, the compressor, the effects, the monitors, the drum mics, the 16 channel A/D. They NEED it ALL now. You can afford to get into the "quality, budget, would still use it 10 years from now" area if you are only buying one mic and a preamp" and going on from there.

For example, I try and pick my starting out gear to be useful if/when I upgrade.

Just my two cents.

P-X

--------------------
My Home Studio Build Thread

yea and many of the 80'ies hiphop classics were done on a sm58 and a 4-track tape recorder...

I find this quite funny...
Normally it's the other way around...
A newbie comes over and people much more knowledgable jump over him for asking daft questions.

Now we have non experts in Finance and Economics trying to talk economics of scale, capital cost/depreciation, cost of working capital, business models, the law of ostentatious consumption etc.
For me this is the JP22 thread of the year.
A little knowledge is very dangerous

Quote KidCracken:

---

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?

---

Great post KidCracken (not too bad for a "kid" ). I have no problem with that, as long as the expectations are set up front as to what you are getting for your hard-earned cash.

Think about it (I think Reg said something like this...), for $100, the missus and I can go out to a nice dinner, or maybe I can take all my kids along to a "medium" restaurant for that kind of cash. Doesn't our music gear deserve better than that?

Big Al, you make a good point also (as always). It does not always take a $2K mic to make a great recording, but as you mention, (in the hands of someone that knows that they are doing) something like an SM57 will always sound better than a cheap $100-200 chinese condenser, at least to my ears. It's not really apples-to-apples though, is it? The SM57 is a "decent-quality" dynamic mic from a reputable company, whereas a cheap Chinese knock-off is...well...er...a cheap Chinese knock-off from someone just copying ("aping" if you will...) someone else's design with no clue about what they are doing.

Now, there are exceptions, like SE electronics that are making their own mics in their own factories.

Also, a lot of US and EU manufacturers are starting to design their own mics, and then have them made in China rather than just buy re-branded knock-offs, and this trend will most likely lead to better quality stuff coming out of the far east. There are so many factors that go into the economics of this stuff however (as The Byre and Max have so "succinctly pointed out! ), that "something" still has to give in order for these manufacuters to make money. You have got to cut corners somewhere in order to stay competitive and still make a (small) profit. As The Byre mentioned, costs are high to manufacturer overseas: shipping, paperwork, customs, taxes, tying up your capital while in route, etc.

Face it, there a *lot* of people in China, and that includes a lot of *very* bright people, not just masses of cheap laborers, so it makes sense that things can and *will* change, as long as we are open to it, and not tainted by our prejudices (my own included).

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

Quote Simon (aka UK03878):

---

I find this quite funny...
Normally it's the other way around...
A newbie comes over and people much more knowledgable jump over him for asking daft questions.

Now we have non experts in Finance and Economics trying to talk economics of scale, capital cost/depreciation, cost of working capital, business models, the law of ostentatious consumption etc.
For me this is the JP22 thread of the year.
A little knowledge is very dangerous

---

And do you have any knowledge you'd like to share with the group? It sounds like you do, so why not contribute rather than critisize? (or if they are so far off base, contribute *AND* critisize! )

Are discussions of economics limited to experts only, or are we free to discuss with our limited working knowledge?

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

Quote:

---

Now we have non experts in Finance and Economics trying to talk economics of scale, capital cost/depreciation, cost of working capital, business models, the law of ostentatious consumption etc.

---

I for one, am not aware of a 'law of ostentatious consumption' and I would like to hear about this law.

There is of course the phenomemum of ostentatious consumption which is a part of the 'snob effect' in which luxury goods enjoy a high income elasticity of demand, the higher their prices. But I am not aware of a law. Are we talking about Alfred Marshall or Veblen? I know that many economists have tried to quantify this effect.

Perhaps I have missed something!

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

Be fair to the guy DH.
It must take years of studying in a finance and economic school to be able to apply the arithmetic you learned at primary & high school to the real world.

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

Quote Doublehelix:

---

...a lot of US and EU manufacturers are starting to design their own mics, and then have them made in China rather than just buy re-branded knock-offs, and this trend will most likely lead to better quality stuff coming out of the far east.

---

Yes - in a way.

I know Sennheiser tried this with some products, but they did not pass quality control.

In the end they invested a fortune in automated production and all the evolution series are made in Germany. The costs come way down because only two people run the production line and the automation and high quality control keep the quality high and the price very low - well under half of what the price would be if made in the traditional method.

But it's not quite so easy with high quality condensers.....

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

I think that Simon is probably hinting that The Byre hasn't quite grasped the economics of manufacturing large quanitites. They're much more complex than he's described.

For example - If I was to build a run of 10 units and needed 10 chips of a particular type then I would expect to pay 60p. If I wanted 500 chips then the price would halve. If I wanted 10000 chips then the price would probably halve again. So Behringer would be paying a quarter of the price that a small manufacturer would pay for the same components. It also becomes financially viable for them to build their own custom chips whereas a small manufacturer would have to make do with off the shelf chips.

Companies like Behringer are nothing new (Phonic have been selling cheap audio gear for longer) but Behringer have possibly marketed themselves more aggressively. In the old days a respectable recording musician would probably have dismissed anything from companies like Phonic as rubbish for people who didn't know any better but nowadays they're being taken more seriously for some reason.

cheers

James.

--------------------
JRP Music - Audio Mastering and Restoration.
http://www.jrpmusic.net

I think when we talk of Chinese this and Chinese that, we assume poor quality and sweat shops, but as you correctly said, China has some smart folk.
If you can put a man in space, surely you could build a mic, although I'm perfectly aware that singing and being an astronaut isn't the same thing.

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

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Quote Simon (aka UK03878):

---

I find this quite funny...
Normally it's the other way around...
A newbie comes over and people much more knowledgable jump over him for asking daft questions.

Now we have non experts in Finance and Economics trying to talk economics of scale, capital cost/depreciation, cost of working capital, business models, the law of ostentatious consumption etc.
For me this is the JP22 thread of the year.
A little knowledge is very dangerous

---

And do you have any knowledge you'd like to share with the group? It sounds like you do, so why not contribute rather than critisize? (or if they are so far off base, contribute *AND* critisize! )

Are discussions of economics limited to experts only, or are we free to discuss with our limited working knowledge?

---

The contribution was inside my answer..
These (and others would affect price point)..

Customer models are quite interesting - and I have done a few (it's not my speciality - Finance/Business Intelligence and BPR is..) - especially as you role in the QA returns..
That is if we build gear with slightly cheaper parts - we are going to loose market share because of unreliablity issues.
To be quite honest you are never going to be a millionaire selling 19inch studio bits of kit are you...
(If you don't believe me read that Rupert Neve interview in Tape Op - where he can't even afford to have around his old Neve modules - he ask to ask Fletcher to borrow them...)...

So you have a very small monetary market which has a fast turnaround time with technology... do you build resiliance into the kit..
In a harsh business sense - why the hell would you...
It's not like a house that's going to be around in 30 years time...
Uli Behringer is not going to stick Elmas and Sowter/Lundahl transformers inside his bits of kit - why the hell shoudl he
If he can get away with using electronic balanced connections via opamps and Alps or Lorlin (or OEM versions) switches then he will

Top down budgetting/Strategic Enterprise Management is also very very important
What difference does this make...
A Lot..
This is where the strategic plan decides how much money we have to build things... rather than the traditional approach of profit and cost centres telling management how much they need to spend.
Thus the strategic aims of the company are in line with the day to day tactical aims.
Thus cash management and the availability of working capital is sorted...
I could go on for ver - but youse will all be bored

Quote The Byre:

---

Quote:

---

Now we have non experts in Finance and Economics trying to talk economics of scale, capital cost/depreciation, cost of working capital, business models, the law of ostentatious consumption etc.

---

I for one, am not aware of a 'law of ostentatious consumption' and I would like to hear about this law.

There is of course the phenomemum of ostentatious consumption which is a part of the 'snob effect' in which luxury goods enjoy a high income elasticity of demand, the higher their prices. But I am not aware of a law. Are we talking about Alfred Marshall or Veblen? I know that many economists have tried to quantify this effect.

Perhaps I have missed something!

---

You do make me laugh mate...

Edited by Simon (aka UK03878) (31/10/05 05:03 PM)

Quote James Lehmann:

---

Ironically Mercedes quality control had a total breakdown recently and the company was obliged to recall 1.3 million cars due to faulty engineering - not just one fault either, several different ones!

But I'd still take a 2nd hand one over a new Fiat anyday!

---

Strangely enough I did; now had it for three years with no major problems at all.

--------------------
Gear List: reverse only.

Quote James Perrett:

---

I think that Simon is probably hinting that The Byre hasn't quite grasped the economics of manufacturing large quanitites. They're much more complex than he's described.

---

Sort of guilty as charged! I certainly did not go into detail about why certain companies and countries specialise in the production of certain types of goods. And as you state there is more to manufacturing in bulk than just automation and being able to transport in bulk.

One of the important factors is an infrastructure geared to your manufacturing needs. In order to use cheap components, one must have a supply of same. One must have formen and plant managers who understand how to keep down costs and all that it implies.

But Big Al raises an even more important point and that is it is not only the Chinese that can manufacture very cheaply. Both the US and Germany are able to do the same in some fields. In audio, the only example I can think of is PA amplifiers. You will not see any Chinese PA amps heading this way, as there are a couple of German companies that have made building ever-cheaper amps their life's work.

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

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Great post KidCracken (not too bad for a "kid" ). I have no problem with that, as long as the expectations are set up front as to what you are getting for your hard-earned cash.

---

well im only a "kid" in this biz...

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Think about it (I think Reg said something like this...), for $100, the missus and I can go out to a nice dinner, or maybe I can take all my kids along to a "medium" restaurant for that kind of cash. Doesn't our music gear deserve better than that?

---

yea it does, but you still gotta eat every day right?

but i promise i'll replace my lousy cheap chinese gear soon... and i promise my kid brother will be more than happy when i give it to him...

Quote Simon (aka UK03878):

---

Now we have non experts in Finance and Economics trying to talk economics of scale, capital cost/depreciation, cost of working capital, business models, the law of ostentatious consumption etc.
For me this is the JP22 thread of the year.
A little knowledge is very dangerous

---

Um... speak for yourself, but I was a partner in PricewaterhouseCoopers for 22 years, specialising in business recovery and insolvency. And I don't disagree with what Andy and the other "ersatz economists" are saying around here

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

Quote:

---

I could go on for ver - but youse will all be bored

---

Excellent my friend! Great contribution, I knew you had it in you!

I especially liked the part about Uli Behringer not wanting to put high-end transformers in his gear, and "why should he". Excellent point. He is certainly doing "something" right.

Some of this stuff will indeed be obsolete long before it breaks, but I also think that some of the points here were dealing with the quality of the sound, not just the reliability or the economics.

Mr. Behringer has made a lot of money in a very small and competitive market, and although some say he has flooded the market with crap, he has certainly been successful with it, and you can't argue with success.

My (very) limited knowledge of economics tells me that if his products were really that bad, no one would buy them and they would go out of business, but instead, they appear to be thriving in a VERY SMALL market. As you mention, Rupert Neve can't even afford one of his own modules!!! Pretty scary, eh?

Now, does anyone want to talk about Molecular Genetics or Biochemisty?

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

Quote:

---

yea it does, but you still gotta eat every day right?

---

Ahh..rubbish!!! Give me a nice rack of Neve modules and I could live on that for a month!!!

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

Simon (aka UK03878) Quote:

---

You do make me laugh mate...

---

First of all, Simon, I am not quite sure why you (and one or two others here) feel a need to be rude. If anyone here wants to contribute than please feel free to do so, but perhaps it would be a good idea if we could discuss the price of budget equipment without childish polemic.

Simon, you imply a higher knowledge on this subject, but have given us a 50-word essay on stratigic management as it applies to Uli Behringer. I am not clear as to what this has to do with the wisdom of buying a $100 microphone. Perhaps you could explain.

Quote Simon (aka UK03878):

---

if we build gear with slightly cheaper parts - we are going to loose market share because of unreliablity issues.

---

Which is what is happening. That is why we are discussing this topic.

Quote Simon (aka UK03878):

---

So you have a very small monetary market which has a fast turnaround time with technology... do you build resiliance into the kit..
In a harsh business sense - why the hell would you...
It's not like a house that's going to be around in 30 years time...

---

And that is the crux of the issue. In the past, most audio kit was built to last 30 and longer.

I think most of us here are fully aware of why Uli Behringer and others build things the way they do. It was my contention that the customer should be aware of what is going on and be aware that he / she too should think economically. A $100 microphone certainly will not be around in 30 years time, but a $1,000 mic will be.

Quote Simon (aka UK03878):

---

Top down budgetting/Strategic Enterprise Management is also very very important
What difference does this make...
A Lot..
This is where the strategic plan decides how much money we have to build things... rather than the traditional approach of profit and cost centres telling management how much they need to spend.

---

Nothing new there. The 'Aldification' or 'Aldifizierung' of the market has been taking place for some time and many German companies have been learning the Aldi lesson. That lesson is, as you imply, that at a certain price, we can sell far more of a type of product by opening up new sectors of the market.

This means that production can no longer claim to 'need' a certain level of costs to produce an item. The market dictates what that price has to be and production has to come up with a method of manufacturing at that price if we are to serve this new market.

But taken too far, this leads to products that do not do what it says on the can. And that is what was being discussed.

And I am still hoping for an expanation of the law of ostentatious consumption. I genuinely have never heard of such a law, so if you or anybody else could enlighten me, I would be grateful.

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

Quote The Byre:

---

But taken too far, this leads to products that do not do what it says on the can.

---

this has nothing to do with cheap.. ever heard slogans like "the best a man can get"?

but i know what you mean...

http://www.fivefish.net/diy/behringer/default.htm

Inside a behringer mixer, if anyone is interested.

Quote Steve Hill:

---

Um... speak for yourself, but I was a partner in PricewaterhouseCoopers for 22 years, specialising in business recovery and insolvency. And I don't disagree with what Andy and the other "ersatz economists" are saying around here

---

Ahhh. one of my competitors...
I have nicked a few projects of you and you have nicked them of me... (and staff)

To Mr Byre - okay - I used the word "law" when I should have used the word "Goods"..
But thats okay - it's all debate (I have a thick skin - I should - I am currently being hassled by a load of Bulgarians who keep telling me that they need some weird accounting requirements unheard of for about 20 years in more Central European countries)
If my comment was inflammatory - I do apologise
Anyway - I am off to do some stuff for a big company in Russia and China (I am currently 1/3 of the way through a 61 country roll out) - when I finish I will try and give some indication of how the hell Chinese business practices work.
What I do know is that China should not be thought of a single market - everything is controlled via the provinces.
Normally countrys legal and statutory requirements are at the Federal, Republic, Country level.
I think this is quite interesting - you have different provinces "battling" for your custom - offering sweet deals etc..

Quote The Byre:

---

This means that production can no longer claim to 'need' a certain level of costs to produce an item. The market dictates what that price has to be and production has to come up with a method of manufacturing at that price if we are to serve this new market.

But taken too far, this leads to products that do not do what it says on the can. And that is what was being discussed.
.

---

I think this can be expanded on more thoroughly as it leads us right to the crux of the matter.
Without going into a grandmother and eggs scenario.
And this is a highly simplified scenario.
Businesses can be though of as being big building societies for Investors/Shareholders.
A company needs to return money to people who invest their in them - through dividends against shares
A lot of the capital to invest in companies comes from our own pockets - our Pension plans.
Now what makes a pension plan want to invest in our company and not in a building society - simple - they get a better return and they get capital growth on the value of their investment.
So they will look at our company and look at others in the market.
In the market in our sector the analysts expect growth of say 5%.
Now we as a company have to do something to achieve or exceed this growth...
This is where product development or extension into new markets for existing products now comes in to achieve growth.
As I said - a highly simplified version of what may happen some companies (it does in some fo the ones I work for)
Now comes the creation of Sales Operational Plans for new products to try and achieve the growth target.
It could be new products and/or cost cutting (Global Supplier Discounts, FM-ing out non essential services, capital investment of obsolete gear...)
Anyway - as I said - a highly simplified version..

Quote Simon (aka UK03878):

---

Ahhh. one of my competitors...
I have nicked a few projects of you and you have nicked them of me... (and staff)

---

Don't blame me for your staff problems, I left PwC five years ago and got a proper job running a studio for starvation wages (plus I do a few days p.m. of consulting to pay the rent)! And yes, I too have done the Central Europe/Russia "capitalism 101" roadshow for far too long!

I have a couple of 25 year old U87s, a 40 year old Urei LA4 and some other nice bits and bobs in my studio. These things work fine. They have a market value now which is way in excess of the retail prices when they were new. The U87s would sell for about two-thirds of the cost of a new one (which is, arguably, not so good). If any of these things broke (a) they would be worth repairing, and (b) it is possible to get them repaired economically. Theoretically they will never end up in a bin.

Some companies obviously adopt the "throwaway" culture and would prefer customers to come back more frequently than every 30 years. But it doesn't work like that - I bought two new Neumann mics last year, because they have my brand loyalty and I know from experience the build quality.

I would buy shares in Neumann, but not Behringer. To be fair, I'd probably buy shares in Rode, who are altogether a more exciting company from an investment point of view (the best you'd be likely to say about Neumann, as an analyst, is "safe" or "staid"), but also seem to have a growing commitment to quality and establishing a sustainable position in the middle ground.

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

Simon, to call something a law when it is in fact a a good or an effect shows that you are not an economist.

An economist would no more call a good a law, than a mathematician would call an equation a formula, or a chemist would call an atom a molecule. When I first read that, I thought perhaps there is such a law, but I knew it was not any law of economic theory that I had heard of, so I thought it is either some crazy Marxist-Leninist 'theory' that the wild outreaches of the Left regard as absolute and as a 'given,' or that you are a sociologist and that this was some beatnik fringe law that has become flavour of the month.

My next guess was that you were a student who had come across the phrase 'ostentatious consumption' (AKA conspicuous consumption) in a lecture and now he was bursting to display his new-found knowledge.

But anyway, now we know that you are an accountant - and nothing wrong with that, after all they know where the money actually is and therefore earn money (unlike most economists).

But I digress . . .

The question at hand is one of microeconomics (i.e. the behaviour of the individual) given a range of products. I was attempting to get people to ask themselves a few basic economic questions, not as would-be 'ersatz economists,' but as bog standard and dead normal consumers.

(I was hoping to invoke the idea of indifference analysis and marginal utility, but in regards to quality and not quantity and without naming the beast!)

I was trying to point out, without getting long-haired about economic theory, that at both ends of the quality scale, the law of diminishing marginal utility applies. This law states that after a certain point, increases in the quantity of a good yield diminishing increases in utility.

But this is also true of quality. The most expensive car is not the most useful car. It is not even the most reliable car. Mercedes have shown us that if you take a medium priced brand and evolve the it into a series of plastic gin-palaces packed full of electronics, they become progressively unreliable and your traditional customer base leaves you. Like the Rolex Oyster, they leave the conservative middle classes and enter the choppy waters of vulgar and ostentatious consumption. The function of these products is not to get you from A to B or to tell the time, but to display your wealth. Their utility in traditional terms is very low.

Put in simple terms, if you are building a safe, economic and reliable car that is built to last, additional features do not add proportionately to the car's utility.

If we are dealing with traditional economic theory as it is taught to intermediate and graduate level, indifference analysis deals with quantity and not quality. Quality is dealt with in replacement, preference and 'basket of goods' theory (e.g. cake and milk replaces bread and water as incomes increase). Today's consumer is therefore mostly taught to think in those terms. In other words cake is better than bread. So the consumer buys cheap cake rather than good bread.

I am trying to get people to realise that a similar effect takes place at the other end of the quality scale as well.

If, after a certain point, increases in the quality of a good yield diminishing increases in utility, it is also true that after a certain point, decreases in the quality of a good yield disproportionate decreases in utility.

Simply stated, if you build it cheaply enough, it either falls to bits or does not work properly.

Elsewhere, there is a thread about someone trying to split-feed from a Behringer desk to a 24-track recorder. The only problem is that the direct outs on the desk are not direct outs at all, but taps taken from the fader. This means that the desk cannot be used for recording as every time the fader gets moved, the record level changes. The desk is useless for the task.

It looks like a 24 input desk, it has the words 'Mixing Desk' written on it and for the time being at least, it will perform some or most of the functions of a mixing desk. But it cannot be used for the task at hand. Its utility in this instance is zero.
_______________________________________________________

And to tick a few boxes:

No, Rupert Neve is not pan-handling under the arches of London Bridge, but running a successful company in Texas.

You cannot buy shares in Neumann as it belongs to the Sennheiser family.

You cannot (as far as I am aware) buy shares in Behringer either. It too is a private company.
______________________________________________________

This bit has nothing to do with any of the above -

And yes your 50-word essay on growth and investment in companies is over-simplified. But it also only applies to public companies. Most companies in pro-audio are either totally private or dominated by private ownership with limited public stock issues. It is often the case that UK competitors and analysts do not understand the goals of the typical German private company that lead them to be slowly undermined by the Behringers, Sennheisers, Bertelsmann, Lidls and Aldis of this World. You could add to that Thomann and Music Store. Both privately owned and with little or no borrowings, they grow slowly and organically. They do not go into voluntary liquidation from one day to the next, they do not lease their cars or rent their shops. Staff does not come via an agency with a head office in the Gambia. Doing business is not for them some kind of juggling or high-wire act between angry shareholders, disapproving boards of governors, demanding banks, angry customers and falling liquidity.

When I earlier wrote of the 'aldification' of the market, I was referring to the retail business model that has been the most hotly debated in Europe. To understand Behringer, you must understand Aldi. To understand Music Store, you must understand Aldi. The owner of Music Store even had a a big Aldi sign right behind his head in his office and the 2002 catalogue even had an Aldi sign on page three.

Your view of growth does not tally with my view of growth. Growth as a result of borrowings and market share at any price is just a bullfrog full of air. It is Morrison taking over Safeways. It is a man with a dead man on his shoulders. He is neither larger nor taller. He just weighs more.

The Behringer model will be very different.

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

Quote The Byre:

---

But anyway, now we know that you are an accountant - and nothing wrong with that, after all they know where the money actually is and therefore earn money (unlike most economists).
.

---

Close... that was my training but I have gone into a more exotic field since then. (exotic being a fairly loose term)

The only problem with the Aldi analogy is that Aldi actually sell many products which are actually better than the known brand of the bigger supermarkets.
There are thousands of food brands across the world and just because Asda or Tesco choose not to sell it, doesn't mean it is bad.

Eg. I have an Austrian aunt who commented that the coffe in Aldi is the main brand in Germany.

I also won an Aldi hamper and the quality of the produce inside was far superior to my local Morrisons and more akin to something you would buy in a deli.

Back to cheap goods...

When I worked for a well-known textile company, we were putting good quality T-shirts out the door for less than 2 quid. Reebok were branding them and selling them for 20 quid.
A golf brand were branding a £4.50 sweatshirt for 80 quid.

Yes, they were good quality, but come on......

How much do you reckon a U87 leaves the factory for?

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

Quote BigAl:

---

I have an Austrian aunt who commented that the coffe in Aldi is the main brand in Germany.

I also won an Aldi hamper and the quality of the produce inside was far superior to my local Morrisons and more akin to something you would buy in a deli.

---

And there you have the answer to the conundrum, "Quo vadis Behringer?"

1. Aldi owns its own manufacturing plant and is the largest manufacturer of coffee in Europe. It also supplies other stores with coffee.

2. Aldi began after the War as the cheapest of the cheap. It was regarded as a type of shame to have to shop at Aldi. Only very poor people shopped at Aldi. Already some 20 years ago, word got out that some of the products were not only cheaper than the competition, but also better. Slowly, it made its way up the quality ladder until today just about everybody shops at Aldi.

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