how much have you spent/made with your recording gear
- Thread starter mr average
- Start date
mr average
Banned
Well...I don't think that's really the point of what we do with music and audio.
If we all just focused on what the average listener hears or likes to hear...we should just stop all this recording stuff right now.
That's like saying why are people wasting their money on a BMW when a $15k compact gets them from point A to B the same as the BMW...etc.
We can go on and on with many other examples of higher quality/price VS lower, and where a lot of people would opt for the higher quality/price if they could, because it's worthwhile to them...so I don't know why that doesn't apply to audio, and I fail to see the relevance of "no one notices that I used a $59 mic".
IMO, we can't compare what we do and why... with that which the general public hears, sees and understands.
I don't know where other people work from...but I don't look at this as simply trying to reduce everything down to the lowest/cheapest common denominator.
It's like once a month this similar discussion gets churned up in the home rec world...some sort of indirect (or even direct) denial of anything that costs more than a few hundred bucks, as being hyped and unnecessary, or something like that...and it's always coming from the point of low/no budget perspectives, which is a self-serving argument.
Everyone would buy a Neve console...IF...they won the lottery...but because they can only afford a $59 USB mic...then the need for expensive, high-end gear is all just a myth for the most part.
I do not have a lot of money to throw around. I have to do the best I can with my budget. As long as it meets my standards then I am happy to spend less money than trying to 'improve' it by spending more. The dirty little truth is that after not much money all you get is different not better by spending more.
Fortunately I do not care when people put down my stuff as being too cheap. I get results with it. I am happy. They need to fix their own problems not try to feel superior because they spend more money.
mr average
Banned
It's also very Darwinian. Most old people and those with poor vision can't see your posts. And that eliminates us from the discussion.
actually those with poor vision and who are old can see them better which is why i use it
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Hey...we've all been "poor" at one point or another, but that doesn't mean we have to feel guilty when there is money to spend, just because someone else doesn't have it.
You can debate what "little" difference there is between cheap stuff and the higher-end gear...I don't much care about those discussions, because like I said, most of the people the "debunk" high-end gear are the ones who can't afford it...so there's some built-in bias in those arguments.
If the day comes when pros with experience and credibility en mass start rejecting higher-end gear as just mythical hype...I'll take note, but until then, and apart from the odd person here and there...I don't see that happening where the rubber meets the road...only on home rec sites.
Not sure who is putting you down for being too cheap...???...and you seem rather chip-on-shoulder about it, so much so that you need to do these polls to see where you and others stand, but underneath it all, you seem to be looking for an opportunity to put down anyone that has money and buys higher-end gear.
So maybe it's you feeling the other way around...and not that anyone is acting superior because they spend more money than you.
That said...I myself will never feel guilty about having and spending money on audio gear when others don't have it and if/when I do...that's what money is for.
Oh...and why on earth is this poll/thread in the Newbies forum...? They are the last ones who would have a realistic opinion about anything audio, because they are "newbies".
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
I can't see myself knocking anyone for spending a bundle on the good stuff. I've made my opinions known on occasion where arguably "poor judgement" was involved (spending $2500 on a mic and listening on $500 "monitors" is usually that type of thing) and I'm not one for "snake oil" (my monitoring chain easily tops $10k - but my speaker cables don't).
Beyond that, there are several layers of what and why to spend on what.
One layer -- I still do a fair amount of live tracking and what not. Depending on what the expectations are, I may use "in house" gear - or I may bring my own. Do the recordings through my stuff sound better than the "house" stuff typically? You bet your a$$ they do. Is it a $15k difference that everyone is going to rave over? Probably not. If the goal is an archival recording to use for YouTube videos and sponsors, the house gear is fine. If they're going to make a live album for public release, maybe I'll bring a better set of converters or some nicer preamps. Just like purchasing the gear, it's a calculation that needs to be made.
Then there are internal / external expectations -- Are these *your* expectations or a *client's* expectations? If you're recording your stuff and you're happy with it, it doesn't matter a darn what you use as long as you get what you want out of it. But when you have clients that have higher expectations - or simply the expectations of the "higher-end" gear, you have to satisfy those expectations. I'm presenting more than a weird skill - The goal is to present a system that's arguably better and more detailed than possibly any system they'll ever hear their recording on. They want nameplates that make them comfortable. They expect gear they aren't going to find at the local Banjo Shack. It's a package. And although I do know a few people who buy a bunch of expensive gear that don't exactly have the skills to back it up, the vast majority of the time, it's someone's expansion of talent and skill that leads to upgrade gear. And again - far be it from me to knock the folks who want to get the good stuff that might not *YET* know what they're doing with it. Dad always told me (actually he was speaking of tools, so this applies) - "Get the best you can afford and if you can afford it, get the best. That way, you can't bitch about it later." Having the best hammer doesn't make you the best carpenter - But the best carpenter probably has a pretty sweet hammer.
Then there's the whole "knowing" thing (call it skills, call it talent, whether studied or innate). There are people I know that have been at this for years, that do it for hobby, that can't hear the difference between [this and that]. Maybe they don't have the listening skills (there are some people who don't understand that critical listening is a skill - and a perishable one at that), maybe they have crappy monitors (many speakers I know that say "Studio Monitor" on them would fall into this category for that matter), maybe a combination. You need to know the limitations of your skills and hope that your gear exceeds those limitations.
All of that out of the way -- This is an awfully good time to be involved in this stuff. There is some seriously decent *and* freakishly cheap gear out there. There are $400 mics that compete with $4000 mics. There are $300 preamps that compete with $3000 preamps. IF you have the listening skills - and a monitoring chain that is accurate and consistent enough to utilize those skills - in a space that's accurate and consistent enough to utilize that monitoring chain - you can do a whole lot with nearly nothing. Or you can spend a bunch of money on kick-ass hand-made boutique gear and do even a little more.
In any case, buying cheap isn't always a horrible thing. Not knowing your limitations is much worse.
Beyond that, there are several layers of what and why to spend on what.
One layer -- I still do a fair amount of live tracking and what not. Depending on what the expectations are, I may use "in house" gear - or I may bring my own. Do the recordings through my stuff sound better than the "house" stuff typically? You bet your a$$ they do. Is it a $15k difference that everyone is going to rave over? Probably not. If the goal is an archival recording to use for YouTube videos and sponsors, the house gear is fine. If they're going to make a live album for public release, maybe I'll bring a better set of converters or some nicer preamps. Just like purchasing the gear, it's a calculation that needs to be made.
Then there are internal / external expectations -- Are these *your* expectations or a *client's* expectations? If you're recording your stuff and you're happy with it, it doesn't matter a darn what you use as long as you get what you want out of it. But when you have clients that have higher expectations - or simply the expectations of the "higher-end" gear, you have to satisfy those expectations. I'm presenting more than a weird skill - The goal is to present a system that's arguably better and more detailed than possibly any system they'll ever hear their recording on. They want nameplates that make them comfortable. They expect gear they aren't going to find at the local Banjo Shack. It's a package. And although I do know a few people who buy a bunch of expensive gear that don't exactly have the skills to back it up, the vast majority of the time, it's someone's expansion of talent and skill that leads to upgrade gear. And again - far be it from me to knock the folks who want to get the good stuff that might not *YET* know what they're doing with it. Dad always told me (actually he was speaking of tools, so this applies) - "Get the best you can afford and if you can afford it, get the best. That way, you can't bitch about it later." Having the best hammer doesn't make you the best carpenter - But the best carpenter probably has a pretty sweet hammer.
Then there's the whole "knowing" thing (call it skills, call it talent, whether studied or innate). There are people I know that have been at this for years, that do it for hobby, that can't hear the difference between [this and that]. Maybe they don't have the listening skills (there are some people who don't understand that critical listening is a skill - and a perishable one at that), maybe they have crappy monitors (many speakers I know that say "Studio Monitor" on them would fall into this category for that matter), maybe a combination. You need to know the limitations of your skills and hope that your gear exceeds those limitations.
All of that out of the way -- This is an awfully good time to be involved in this stuff. There is some seriously decent *and* freakishly cheap gear out there. There are $400 mics that compete with $4000 mics. There are $300 preamps that compete with $3000 preamps. IF you have the listening skills - and a monitoring chain that is accurate and consistent enough to utilize those skills - in a space that's accurate and consistent enough to utilize that monitoring chain - you can do a whole lot with nearly nothing. Or you can spend a bunch of money on kick-ass hand-made boutique gear and do even a little more.
In any case, buying cheap isn't always a horrible thing. Not knowing your limitations is much worse.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Right...the argument isn't against buying/using inexpensive gear...there's some good stuff out there...and a deal is a deal.
I love when I get something really good for really cheap.
I just find the very often the arguments against buying/using higher-end gear are mostly made by folks who simply can't afford to go that route, so they feel better if they can dismiss any need or value in it.
mr average
Banned
We dismiss the need for really expensive gear because it adds no special value over moderately priced gear when it comes to sound quality.
You may or may not get some features making it easier to use, or you may or may not get more reliability, but mostly you get some fancy name
plate that you can show off and brag about that adds no value sonically.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Right...OK.
It's all about paying thousands for fancy name plates.
It's that kind of blanket bias that smacks more of trolling for effect...than having any merit based in reality.
It basically implies that all studio pros are liars, and they have all intentionally agreed to mislead recording newbs to get them to buy expensive name plates.
The funniest thing is that most of the people who can't afford the high-end gear, and who dismiss it...have never actually used it with any regularity (since they can't afford it)...yet they are so absolutely full of opinions about it!
Massive had it when he mentioned "monitors". So, so often we see the noob is just concerned with the "front end". Microphone, AI and often with bolting on a pre amp to "improve" that. They do not see and will not believe it when told that their recordings can only be as good as the quality and accuracy of the monitoring system. Why? Possibly because anything aproaching accurate monitor speakers start at $500 a pair. Yes, good headphones can do most of it but not all. Room treatment is seen as pointless, they would rather spend $400 on another mic or "tooob" pre amp than rocfkwool.
My view is that modestly priced kit can be excellent but there are limits, anyone who thinks a $59 mic is the equal of a $590 one is in cloud cuckoo land (but, but the $59 mic MIGHT work for something, sometime)
As I built the recording system for my son I was careful to buy the best I could afford, which was not a lot. I read endless reviews until I fixed on my Tannoy 5As. They don't go loud nor low but I think they are as accurate a monitor as I can get for the money. I intend to upgrade to better, like the Result 6, if and when financies allow. The car will surely have to go in a couple of years so that will free up a couple of £k a year.
My first interface was the Behringer BCA200. An unrealiable crock of it with crap drivers but when it did work it produced very good results. The mic pres were a revelation in terms of low noise. I had built mic amps over the years, mainly with valves and transformers and transistors and transformers but the Berry ones beat 'em. Some years later I built a transformerless pre based on the "THAT" IC, that was very good (and the bits cost about a tenner!).
Next up when the BC2K broke for the final time, was an M-A Fast track pro. Good interface with very low latency (son had gotten into MIDI and Cubase) but the mic pres were too noisy for dynamics on AC guitar. Saved up and bought Sontronics LDC and later a pair of AKG P150s.
My view is that you CAN make excellent recordings without spending a fortune but you have to be prepared to spend SOME money and be smart about it. One thing for sure, a $150 interface will give you way better technical quality than tape!
Dave.
My view is that modestly priced kit can be excellent but there are limits, anyone who thinks a $59 mic is the equal of a $590 one is in cloud cuckoo land (but, but the $59 mic MIGHT work for something, sometime)
As I built the recording system for my son I was careful to buy the best I could afford, which was not a lot. I read endless reviews until I fixed on my Tannoy 5As. They don't go loud nor low but I think they are as accurate a monitor as I can get for the money. I intend to upgrade to better, like the Result 6, if and when financies allow. The car will surely have to go in a couple of years so that will free up a couple of £k a year.
My first interface was the Behringer BCA200. An unrealiable crock of it with crap drivers but when it did work it produced very good results. The mic pres were a revelation in terms of low noise. I had built mic amps over the years, mainly with valves and transformers and transistors and transformers but the Berry ones beat 'em. Some years later I built a transformerless pre based on the "THAT" IC, that was very good (and the bits cost about a tenner!).
Next up when the BC2K broke for the final time, was an M-A Fast track pro. Good interface with very low latency (son had gotten into MIDI and Cubase) but the mic pres were too noisy for dynamics on AC guitar. Saved up and bought Sontronics LDC and later a pair of AKG P150s.
My view is that you CAN make excellent recordings without spending a fortune but you have to be prepared to spend SOME money and be smart about it. One thing for sure, a $150 interface will give you way better technical quality than tape!
Dave.
rob aylestone
Moderator
When you cannot afford the best you buy cheaper brands and convince yourself it is as good or better and you found a magical product nobody else considers or knows about. When you can afford the magic brand product you buy it and inevitably the thing just works and is less exciting than you thought, something of an anticlimax.
On the gear front, I've been trying to remember my purchases over the years, and even my mixer buys go into the top spend box. Some I'd even forgotten about.
Soundtracks topaz
Soundcraft ghost
Yamaha gl32
Soundcraft lx7
Peavey 32ch
Behringer X32
Midas M32
And I just found in the store my 1970s Shure mixer that I bought as a teenager.
Funny how some lasted a very long time and others were much shorter lived. The Yamaha and the ghost were the longest running and the ghost was scraped last month and the Yamaha will be gong in the summer. I think the Shure is approaching antique status so I'll hang on to it. When I was 17, some of my buys were saved for and used parents funds, but at twenty my buys then would have been on borrowed money. I didn't start serious sound kit buying till the 90s.
I've also done exactly the same thing with video kit with video cameras. I still have the sony 300 betacam I used when doing video work. It cost me a HUGE amount of money, paid for itself quite quickly, and I just can't scrap it as it's worth nothing, but still works. I also cannot bear the weight on my shoulder. Modern video folk have no idea how nice and light their kit is now.
On the gear front, I've been trying to remember my purchases over the years, and even my mixer buys go into the top spend box. Some I'd even forgotten about.
Soundtracks topaz
Soundcraft ghost
Yamaha gl32
Soundcraft lx7
Peavey 32ch
Behringer X32
Midas M32
And I just found in the store my 1970s Shure mixer that I bought as a teenager.
Funny how some lasted a very long time and others were much shorter lived. The Yamaha and the ghost were the longest running and the ghost was scraped last month and the Yamaha will be gong in the summer. I think the Shure is approaching antique status so I'll hang on to it. When I was 17, some of my buys were saved for and used parents funds, but at twenty my buys then would have been on borrowed money. I didn't start serious sound kit buying till the 90s.
I've also done exactly the same thing with video kit with video cameras. I still have the sony 300 betacam I used when doing video work. It cost me a HUGE amount of money, paid for itself quite quickly, and I just can't scrap it as it's worth nothing, but still works. I also cannot bear the weight on my shoulder. Modern video folk have no idea how nice and light their kit is now.
dwillis45
Número sesenta nueve
I believe everything that everyone just said. Because in the end, it's all a question of perspective. Even the idea that it's all a question of perspective, is a form of perspective.
Bottom line: More is good, less is more, and talent is the great equalizer. Or is it the entire signal chain taken as a whole? Or your room? Or your ears?
Personally, I believe it's all about the monitors. That was my most recent expense ($1500) and though it didn't drive me into poverty, I did feel a sense of guilt and remorse. Plus, the more I listen to them, the more I understand the concept of marginal utility. Two weeks from now, I will be recommending them for all studios, and in 20 years they will be at the thrift shop. I won't see that happen, though, because my estate or my caregivers will have taken them there. Like I said above, it's all about perspective.
Bottom line: More is good, less is more, and talent is the great equalizer. Or is it the entire signal chain taken as a whole? Or your room? Or your ears?
Personally, I believe it's all about the monitors. That was my most recent expense ($1500) and though it didn't drive me into poverty, I did feel a sense of guilt and remorse. Plus, the more I listen to them, the more I understand the concept of marginal utility. Two weeks from now, I will be recommending them for all studios, and in 20 years they will be at the thrift shop. I won't see that happen, though, because my estate or my caregivers will have taken them there. Like I said above, it's all about perspective.
mr average
Banned
Right...OK.
It's all about paying thousands for fancy name plates.
It's that kind of blanket bias that smacks more of trolling for effect...than having any merit based in reality.
It basically implies that all studio pros are liars, and they have all intentionally agreed to mislead recording newbs to get them to buy expensive name plates.
The funniest thing is that most of the people who can't afford the high-end gear, and who dismiss it...have never actually used it with any regularity (since they can't afford it)...yet they are so absolutely full of opinions about it!
I go with facts.
Trolling is what people claim when they know they are wrong. Just like Russiagate or Saddams WMDs, some things are just propaganda to meet one side feel better.
After spending a very moderate amount of money the gear gets different not better. Do the specs look better? Of course.
Do the things sound better? Only to those who buy the Veblen effect too.
The bias is from the deep pocket snobs who cant get good results with their gear so assume they need to spend more money.
My 15 year old chevy runs fine and is reliable. Do I need a new BMW or some fancy SUV to go get groceries or go to the dentist? All I would do is end paying a lot more personal property taxes.
If I wanted to race I would buy a race car. But how many people really race and how many of us are just driving to get somewhere.
Who's 'we' when you talk about dismissive?
While your statement might be true for some, it doesn't apply universally.
If one is doing it for a living, clients expect proffessional results. They expect proffessional gear. Proffessional gear comes with a fancy nameplate, and clients expect that. It instills some confidence and can make ir break you getting the job over someone else.
For pleasure and hobby, fancy nameplates are not needed, but I'll bet 95% still drool over them in private.
mr average
Banned
Who's 'we' when you talk about dismissive?
While your statement might be true for some, it doesn't apply universally.
If one is doing it for a living, clients expect proffessional results. They expect proffessional gear. Proffessional gear comes with a fancy nameplate, and clients expect that. It instills some confidence and can make ir break you getting the job over someone else.
For pleasure and hobby, fancy nameplates are not needed, but I'll bet 95% still drool over them in private.
that is a royal we for all ordinary folks
naturally if i did it for a living i would buy the tools that were cost effective to making me more productive
you can get pro results with inexpesive tools . it just takes longer and more work .
and yes the nameplate fools clients who cant judge how good your work is so they use a surrogate.
i know one master house that had a picture of protools on a screen on their web page.
truth was they used another DAW completely. clients never knew or cared. but that 'pro'tools logo helped their image.
many people drool over the fancy name plates. then most of us realise that we have limited budgets and many things competing for that money.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
For pleasure and hobby, fancy nameplates are not needed, but I'll bet 95% still drool over them in private.
Exactly my point. When you can't have it, you deny its value publicly....but secretly you really want it.
I mean look at this thread.
Why the need to start a poll about how much people have spent on gear in order to create a platform from which to argue against the need to spend on more gear....?
It is pretty revealing, and you see both frustration when anyone talks about their high-end gear, and underlying anger at those people because they can afford it.
Anyway...once again I ask why is this thread in the Newbies forum...?
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Ah...so then it's exactly like I've been saying.
This isn't about the gear...it's about the lack of money to afford the high-end gear...and the curiosity how much others can afford to spend on it.
rob aylestone
Moderator
The facts of business life are so different from these views, that rightly or wrongly, clients DO put emphasis on areas that may well not matter.
In the video side of the business, cameras are critical. For some clients, they expect to see broadcast shape, shoulder mounted cameras. I have gained work from other businesses local to me who use DSLRs. I happen not to, although I have two for stills. I get paid because the cameras look like cameras people see on TV. In my lighting world, for my own use, I have piles of Chinese moving head equipment - because lots of lighting looks good - twenty moving heads look better than 4 for the same price from premium brands. Sure - the Chinese ones are less capable, less repairable and don't last as long - but when I put in a rig, it looks spectacular, and the clients are happy. I can't, however hire them out. Nobody wants to hire out Chinese lighting equipment. If you hire, you want Martin, Clay Paky or Robe. With sound, I bought a Midas M32 last month (end of year funds spare). I already have an X32, but the Midas is already going out more than the Behringer - daft really as bar some pre-amp and physical changes, it's the same thing. I have a regular 5 month contract each year, and the X32 is going into a theatre, while the M32 goes out touring with a PA.
I have some Shure and Sennheiser wireless systems - I also have some cheaper ones. Quite clever ones from china that have IR tuning and reporting features, and these I'm perfectly happy to use heavily in the theatre, leaving the 'branded' ones for impressing people, or more accurately - NOT making people think I'm a cheapskate. Snob value really matters.
I'm pretty cool with this - The two mics in my studio that I've used today are an Chinese LDC and an AKG 414, and I'm really happy with what they both did. If the singer wanted a photo taking, then sadly, I'd want it taken in front of the 414, not the Chinese one. Silly, but that's how it is. (for me)
In the video side of the business, cameras are critical. For some clients, they expect to see broadcast shape, shoulder mounted cameras. I have gained work from other businesses local to me who use DSLRs. I happen not to, although I have two for stills. I get paid because the cameras look like cameras people see on TV. In my lighting world, for my own use, I have piles of Chinese moving head equipment - because lots of lighting looks good - twenty moving heads look better than 4 for the same price from premium brands. Sure - the Chinese ones are less capable, less repairable and don't last as long - but when I put in a rig, it looks spectacular, and the clients are happy. I can't, however hire them out. Nobody wants to hire out Chinese lighting equipment. If you hire, you want Martin, Clay Paky or Robe. With sound, I bought a Midas M32 last month (end of year funds spare). I already have an X32, but the Midas is already going out more than the Behringer - daft really as bar some pre-amp and physical changes, it's the same thing. I have a regular 5 month contract each year, and the X32 is going into a theatre, while the M32 goes out touring with a PA.
I have some Shure and Sennheiser wireless systems - I also have some cheaper ones. Quite clever ones from china that have IR tuning and reporting features, and these I'm perfectly happy to use heavily in the theatre, leaving the 'branded' ones for impressing people, or more accurately - NOT making people think I'm a cheapskate. Snob value really matters.
I'm pretty cool with this - The two mics in my studio that I've used today are an Chinese LDC and an AKG 414, and I'm really happy with what they both did. If the singer wanted a photo taking, then sadly, I'd want it taken in front of the 414, not the Chinese one. Silly, but that's how it is. (for me)
mr average
Banned
money is always a factor
but if you really need something you buy it or do without
my bandwidth is only 100k cps
some preamps go to 1 megacycle
would a gigacycle really be any better ?
i only need 20+ kcps input for mikes
i am already way past diminishing returns
could somebody somewhere hear the difference?
maybe. but so what. 99+% of the people cant hear it
and 99.99% of those dont care anyway
did you never listen to old lps
what about cassettes
or even 78s
wax cylinders were before my time
they were all enjoyable in spite of the obvious flaws
which diminished rapidly until now no normal person hears any flaws unless the operator making a recording was incompetent
indeed. too many people try to put in flaws to duplicate that old sound, or to intentionaly add distortion or other noise to 'improve' music.
dwillis45
Número sesenta nueve
LOL. You are as bad as I am. I just unloaded a 16 year old truck in favor of a somewhat newer 2004 sedan.
And I got the sedan for free from an old lady in a nursing home.
dwillis45
Número sesenta nueve
Perhaps because much of HR is composed of dead and rotting wood. It's a shadow of it's former self and a lot of the individual forums are just old threads and a few Ghosts. This place is at least somewhat alive.