chessparov said:
In the future Chessrock, if you want to say anything with that kind of edge to it, feel free to PM me so we can discuss anything
you like in more detail. I prefer to praise in public, and (constructively) criticize in private when possible, unless blatantly provoked.
Look, I have nothing against the VTB-1. I think it sounds fine, and now that the price has dropped, I might even consider it to be a no-brainer if you're looking for a good-performing single channel. But there's still nothing to indicate it's a step above anything else out there in it's general price range -- particularly the Mackie and Soundcraft boards, the DMP3, etc.
Yea, I can be an asshole at times. Particularly on this thread, and for that I apologize. But I like this board, and it's important to me that we hold ourselves to some standards, here. Like for one, I think it's important, when talking about gear, that we at least try and speak as objectively and accurately as possible.
I'll give you a few examples:
Things like: "I've tried product A and product B, and have used both on several sources at both higher volumes and lower volumes, and to me, product A seems quieter to my ears. Particularly at the higher volumes." -- This kind of statement seems legit to me, provided you have that kind of experience with both product A and B.
Here's another, even more honest and objective view: "I've never worked extensively with product B, but I own product A, and from what I've read about product A's design (from RAP, Gearslutz, etc.), they tend to be quieter, particularly at higher gains, than those with product B's design. Also, I happen to like the manufacturer of product A, and I think they make great microphones."
These are the kinds of statements that can help keep our board free of bullshit . . . and free of the need for guys like me to be assholes.
When you make blanket statements like "Product A is quieter than product B, particularly at higher gains," you are moving away from opinion territory, and are now talking about objective, tangible, measurable figures. And I'm sorry for being an asshole, but I think we should all be careful about these things before we go throwing them around lightly. Do your best to check them out first, because they could be wrong.
Now as far as the whole discreet versus chip, a/b versus a versus whatever . . . none of that stuff really holds a lot of meaning at the $200 and under level. Simple, well-implemented chip designs can be much quieter and will spec even better than some of the more expensive discreet designs. etc. etc. etc. I'm sure we're all aware of just how meaningful specs are in the scheme of things -- if we were to base everything on specs alone, then the Mackie board would probably kick ass over the API's, Tridents, etc. Not to mention the tube and transistor-based "color" standalones. --On specs alone, mind you.
That being said, I can't think of too many pieces of equipment I've ever worked with that are as quiet as the M-audio stuff. Particularly at higher gains, and I'd bet if you put it up against the most expensive stuff out there, it would hold it's own. Now, as far as it being
linear at the higher gains -- that's debatable. And let's not get started on it's headroom, and what I'm assuming is likely a sluggish slew rate.
(To qualify, these are measurable figures, which I am going purely off of what engineer-types have said about them, so don't quote me).
But the damn thing has got to be about one of the quietest things out there, which is why I was so curious as to how you derived your conclusions. I suspected they were opinions based on very little experience as opposed to factual, so I called you out. In the furture, to avoid conflicts, let's try and qualify things before we throw opinions (and, in this particular case,
guesses) out as facts.
