T
toorglick
New member
Que: stupid, defensive response from DJL which will propel this thread for several more pages of flaming and vitriol.
D
DJL
Self Banned
Exactly... and I don't see anything wrong with us talking about this subject on this bbs either.acorec said:
ADDED: But I must admit that I never thought about them making any modifications.
Last edited:
ausrock
Well-known member
Except for one fact............you don't have one shred of fact to give credence to this "discussion", and to continue with it is an exercise in ignorant futility.
Oddly enough DJL, this seems to be the usual scenario surrounding much of what you contribute to this BBS.
Oddly enough DJL, this seems to be the usual scenario surrounding much of what you contribute to this BBS.
D
DJL
Self Banned
Humm, then I wonder why Ted said this?alanhyatt said:
Ted Perlman said:
Grow up Alan... I was going step down to your level and flame you for the above child like comments... but that would make me no better than you, so I'll just report it instead.alanhyatt said:
still4given
Got my ticket!
DJL said:
It's not the talking about it that is a problem, it's the insuations that someone is being sneaky or dishonest that is the problem. You don't own both those mics and you weren't there to hear them at the show. You have no desire what-so-ever in buying a C1. It is clear that you just want to cause trouble. Why don't you stay out of the Studio Project threads since you don't like them? You're not adding anything constructive.
alanhyatt
PMI Audio Group
DJL said:
I resent you trying to discredit Ted Perlman by trying to twist words to satisfy yourself. I never said the C1 and U87 did not sound very similar...I said they are not identical. As for "my" child like comments DJL, that is calling the kettle black, so you need say nothing more.
noisedude
New member
But of course, if I wanted to show how my low-price mic could hang with an industry standard, I'd just put one of each up and see what people thought. Until Alan posted, I had no idea. I wasn't whistling up on this!noisedude said:
H
Harvey Gerst
New member
I tried to post this earlier, but apparently, it didn't take.
When you put up mics for people to listen to at music shows, you usually get the comment, "I can't tell anything from this", because they have no frame of reference for any comparisons. People don't walk around shows carrying guitars or saxophones; they test mics by talking into them. Same situation if you're selling mic preamps, eq's, or compressors; they test them by talking into them while playing with the knobs and listening over headphones.
Alan is no dummy. He's also a pretty good engineer, with a nice locker full of microphones, from before he went into the mic selling business. He knew that the U87 is probably used on 80% of the records out on the market, so he put his U87 up there to give people a "frame of reference". Did he know some people probably wouldn't hear any difference at a noisy trade show? Of course he did, but I'm betting that wasn't his original intention.
When they came out with that review where Ted said, "exactly the same, no difference", I'm sure it caught Alan off guard, but as I said, he's no dummy. Of course, he's gonna use that review on his website. I know if I were in Alan's shoes, I'd sure as hell use it.
Now did Alan tamper with the mics to make them sound identical? I don't think so and here's why:
First of all, I believe the U87 belongs to Alan personally, and modifying it would be pretty easy to hear any differences that were made, so the U87 was probably stock.
So what's left? Did he cherry pick his shipment of C1's to find one that sounded identical to his U87? Keep in mind, we're probably talking about 500 or so mics in that first shipment, maybe a 1,000. Maybe, but I sincerely doubt it, since one of the instructions he probably gave 797 (when the mic was being designed) was to "voice it similar to a U87".
Alan may have pulled 4 or 5 mics from the shipment, made sure they were all working, and directly compared them (to make sure they were fairly consistant with his U87), but I doubt if he did any more than that.
Getting ready for a trade show is a big time-consuming project. You worry about a lot of things like having the literature in time, making sure your exhibit doesn't get lost, and a million other things. Trying to trick the public ain't one of them. If somebody buys the mic based on the fact it sounded similar to the U87 at the show, it better sound pretty damn close when they get it home.
No, it was never identical to a U87, but at a noisy show, listening briefly over unfamiliar headphones, some of the differences will be obscured and masked. As Ted said, once he got it into his studio, he started to hear the differences and actually prefered it to the U87.
When I listened to it, I compared it to the TLM103 and to the Marshall V67G, and said they were all decent mics and useful. I said I could live happily with either the V76G or the C1 without any problems.
Why didn't I compare it to the U87? Simple; I don't own one; and the U87 is a multi-pattern, dual-diaphragm mic with filter switches, so it wouldn't be the same sound. I compared the C1 in my tests to other similar single-active diaphragm mics without switches.
So did Alan cheat, or do something unfair, by putting his mics next to the U87 at a trade show? I don't think so, since I've done a ton of these shows for a lot of manufacturers and a "frame of reference" helps make sales. Did he know some people wouldn't hear any difference upon just a quick listen at a noisy show? Of course, but if it helped get them to buy one and try it in their own studio, there's no fault there.
And the mic had better be able to deliver the goods when they got it home. So far, it has, from all the reports I've heard. It's a decent mic and a very good value. (Personally, I like the T3 better, and I think that's the real winner in his line.)
Trying to "rig" a show or a demo doesn't pay, and it can really backfire on you. The best Alan could hope for at a trade show is not having the mics crap out right when someone important is listening to it (which is about as embarrasing as it can get).
Alan has been around this business about as long as I have. You learn early on to sell what you have, warts and all. Try to oversell it and you'll lose, everytime. If you find a problem, you correct it - on the next run.
The C1 is what the C1 is. Some people will love it; some won't - that's the nature of this business. Alan is not a part of some big plot to decieve people - that's just not his nature. Is he a "super salesman"? You bet, because he believes in what he sells. I respect him for that.
When you put up mics for people to listen to at music shows, you usually get the comment, "I can't tell anything from this", because they have no frame of reference for any comparisons. People don't walk around shows carrying guitars or saxophones; they test mics by talking into them. Same situation if you're selling mic preamps, eq's, or compressors; they test them by talking into them while playing with the knobs and listening over headphones.
Alan is no dummy. He's also a pretty good engineer, with a nice locker full of microphones, from before he went into the mic selling business. He knew that the U87 is probably used on 80% of the records out on the market, so he put his U87 up there to give people a "frame of reference". Did he know some people probably wouldn't hear any difference at a noisy trade show? Of course he did, but I'm betting that wasn't his original intention.
When they came out with that review where Ted said, "exactly the same, no difference", I'm sure it caught Alan off guard, but as I said, he's no dummy. Of course, he's gonna use that review on his website. I know if I were in Alan's shoes, I'd sure as hell use it.
Now did Alan tamper with the mics to make them sound identical? I don't think so and here's why:
First of all, I believe the U87 belongs to Alan personally, and modifying it would be pretty easy to hear any differences that were made, so the U87 was probably stock.
So what's left? Did he cherry pick his shipment of C1's to find one that sounded identical to his U87? Keep in mind, we're probably talking about 500 or so mics in that first shipment, maybe a 1,000. Maybe, but I sincerely doubt it, since one of the instructions he probably gave 797 (when the mic was being designed) was to "voice it similar to a U87".
Alan may have pulled 4 or 5 mics from the shipment, made sure they were all working, and directly compared them (to make sure they were fairly consistant with his U87), but I doubt if he did any more than that.
Getting ready for a trade show is a big time-consuming project. You worry about a lot of things like having the literature in time, making sure your exhibit doesn't get lost, and a million other things. Trying to trick the public ain't one of them. If somebody buys the mic based on the fact it sounded similar to the U87 at the show, it better sound pretty damn close when they get it home.
No, it was never identical to a U87, but at a noisy show, listening briefly over unfamiliar headphones, some of the differences will be obscured and masked. As Ted said, once he got it into his studio, he started to hear the differences and actually prefered it to the U87.
When I listened to it, I compared it to the TLM103 and to the Marshall V67G, and said they were all decent mics and useful. I said I could live happily with either the V76G or the C1 without any problems.
Why didn't I compare it to the U87? Simple; I don't own one; and the U87 is a multi-pattern, dual-diaphragm mic with filter switches, so it wouldn't be the same sound. I compared the C1 in my tests to other similar single-active diaphragm mics without switches.
So did Alan cheat, or do something unfair, by putting his mics next to the U87 at a trade show? I don't think so, since I've done a ton of these shows for a lot of manufacturers and a "frame of reference" helps make sales. Did he know some people wouldn't hear any difference upon just a quick listen at a noisy show? Of course, but if it helped get them to buy one and try it in their own studio, there's no fault there.
And the mic had better be able to deliver the goods when they got it home. So far, it has, from all the reports I've heard. It's a decent mic and a very good value. (Personally, I like the T3 better, and I think that's the real winner in his line.)
Trying to "rig" a show or a demo doesn't pay, and it can really backfire on you. The best Alan could hope for at a trade show is not having the mics crap out right when someone important is listening to it (which is about as embarrasing as it can get).
Alan has been around this business about as long as I have. You learn early on to sell what you have, warts and all. Try to oversell it and you'll lose, everytime. If you find a problem, you correct it - on the next run.
The C1 is what the C1 is. Some people will love it; some won't - that's the nature of this business. Alan is not a part of some big plot to decieve people - that's just not his nature. Is he a "super salesman"? You bet, because he believes in what he sells. I respect him for that.
D
DJL
Self Banned
Well I use to own both mics before I sold the C1... and I never said anyone did anything dihonest or sneaky... but humm, now that you put it that way and seeing how Alan is acting so uptight, maybe there is more to this story than what meets the eye?still4given said:
noisedude
New member
I shouldn't worry about moderation, we don't have anyone who does that.
If anything, the problem with the proliferation of these mics is that people with less than experienced ears have no idea which to choose! There's all the SPs, then the two largest music chains in the UK are creaming themselves over SE, then all the very similar-looking Red5, ADK, Behringer etc etc mics.
But maybe great ears doesn't help, if there can be this much debate over one comparison between two mics.
If anything, the problem with the proliferation of these mics is that people with less than experienced ears have no idea which to choose! There's all the SPs, then the two largest music chains in the UK are creaming themselves over SE, then all the very similar-looking Red5, ADK, Behringer etc etc mics.
But maybe great ears doesn't help, if there can be this much debate over one comparison between two mics.
noisedude
New member
That was all I meant. Of course, you're completely right. I have only been to consumer exhitions but when a guy shoves a Taylor acoustic in my face and goes, "Will you listen to this?" and I go, "Pardon, can't hear you", you know your assessments aren't gonna be even a fraction of 100%.Harvey Gerst said:
And yes, if you can get a famous AE on record with a comment like, you plaster it everywhere you can. Let's face it, anyone searching on the C1 on the web is gonna find enough independent reviews and comments to back it up.
D
DJL
Self Banned
Good post Harvey... and I don't see anything in it that I disagree with. I just remember what I thought when I first read Ted's comment about the U87 and C1 being the same... and the first thing I thought was... Ted can't hear anymore, or he was on the PMI payroll. I wonder how many other people thought the same thing as I when they first read what Ted said? Anyway, then I thought about it more... and I bet Ted's hearing is just fine and he doesn't need the money... so maybe there was more to this story than what meets the eye.Harvey Gerst said:
ADDED: Not to open another can of worms... but your statement reminded me of an old question that I asked Alan a long time ago and he never answered.
and now I'm hoping you can shine some light on it, or maybe Alan will now answer it.... who was the C1 design engineer? Thanks
Last edited:
alanhyatt
PMI Audio Group
Thank you Harvey...Well put.
At Studio Projects, we do not go through 5 or six mics to try and find a closer sounding mic to the U87, which is one I bought from Coast Recording brand new. As some of you know, we sell off our mics at shows, so that means we need another model for the next show. When it is time for the next show, we just grab one off the shelf. That is why I am so confident to offer $1K to anyone who can prove otherwise. They are always just a mic taken from stock.
I have nothing to lose here, I have everything to gain. Getting caught in that kind of deception would put me out of business. I may be a good salesperson, but I am not stupid, and I think we make a great mic. Not everyone will like them, but you can say that about pretty much every mic.
DJL, If you persist on accusing me of cheating, I think there are enough people on this group to witness defamation of character and slander. Believe me, you are on a fine line with this one to which you do not want to get tangled in. Just ask TFPro. So I suggest you bring up the proof, or back off on this one before you cross over the legal line... This is a warning, not a threat, but don't think that if it gets out of hand it won't become one.
I do not cheat or deceive people at trade shows.....
At Studio Projects, we do not go through 5 or six mics to try and find a closer sounding mic to the U87, which is one I bought from Coast Recording brand new. As some of you know, we sell off our mics at shows, so that means we need another model for the next show. When it is time for the next show, we just grab one off the shelf. That is why I am so confident to offer $1K to anyone who can prove otherwise. They are always just a mic taken from stock.
I have nothing to lose here, I have everything to gain. Getting caught in that kind of deception would put me out of business. I may be a good salesperson, but I am not stupid, and I think we make a great mic. Not everyone will like them, but you can say that about pretty much every mic.
DJL, If you persist on accusing me of cheating, I think there are enough people on this group to witness defamation of character and slander. Believe me, you are on a fine line with this one to which you do not want to get tangled in. Just ask TFPro. So I suggest you bring up the proof, or back off on this one before you cross over the legal line... This is a warning, not a threat, but don't think that if it gets out of hand it won't become one.
I do not cheat or deceive people at trade shows.....
H
Harvey Gerst
New member
Hey Alan, watch it! I also like the SP mics and have said so on numerous occasions. And I've blasted several of the Marshall mics, as Brent will tell you.alanhyatt said:
noisedude
New member
Yeah - I bet PMI slipped Ted Perlman a free shockmount for his new C1DJL said:
Easy though ... although it would in some ways be quite cool to have our very first homerec BBS lawsuit, it'd end all hope of actual microphone/recording discussion here, probably permanently.
alanhyatt
PMI Audio Group
Harvey Gerst said:
Harvey,
You are taking it out of context. It was not meant to say you only liked Marshalls. You have blasted them as much as you have said you liked them, and it was in that context that I said you liked them...So do I for that fact. It was not meant to say you only like Marshall's or only say good things about them. I was just making a point and used your name, Robbs, and Ted's to do so.....There was no ill intent. The relationship was a credible name associated to saying nice things about a specific brand of mics.
D
DJL
Self Banned
Alan, I think your reading more into this than there is... I never said you did anything wrong... however, if you want to take me to court I will take everything you own from you.alanhyatt said:
H
Harvey Gerst
New member
Alan, note my full statement:alanhyatt said:
So what's left? Did he cherry pick his shipment of C1's to find one that sounded identical to his U87? Keep in mind, we're probably talking about 500 or so mics in that first shipment, maybe a 1,000. Maybe, but I sincerely doubt it, since one of the instructions he probably gave 797 (when the mic was being designed) was to "voice it similar to a U87".
The next statement that I made was a "worst case conjecture" on my part:
Alan may have pulled 4 or 5 mics from the shipment, made sure they were all working, and directly compared them (to make sure they were fairly consistant with his U87), but I doubt if he did any more than that.
I've done enough shows to know that most manufacturers just grab the stuff off the shelf for a show, if it's a standard item. On the other hand, bringing a new "working prototype" is probably the scariest thing in the world to a manufacturer at a trade show. When that craps out, it becomes "just something we brought to show you what it's gonna look like", and you're now looking to kill the design engineer (who's now behind the drapes, trying to make the damn work again).
Been there, done that, got a whole closet full of T-shirts.
noisedude
New member
This just went a step too far.DJL said:
alanhyatt
PMI Audio Group
noisedude said:Yeah - I bet PMI slipped Ted Perlman a free shockmount for his new C1
Easy though ... although it would in some ways be quite cool to have our very first homerec BBS lawsuit, it'd end all hope of actual microphone/recording discussion here, probably permanently.
I do not wish to sue anyone...Let me make that clear. However, if I am accused of being a cheat or deceiving the public at trade shows, then I have to defend myself. I asked him to stop those types of statements, and I believe he will. He can say what he wants as long as it is not libel.