I Love This Quote - Oh So True

  • Thread starter Thread starter Recording Engineer
  • Start date Start date
R.E. et al.

I've enjoyed your opinions and certainly following this chain, but I am a little confused and would like some additional comments on your opinion.

In another posting you quoted scott from r.a.p stating that
"""NT1s are made with the Shanghai U87-clone capsules, I believe. If you don't like the way one sounds, try another, because they all sound different. --scott""

Then in this chain you quote scott again:
""Audix, Meek, ADK, Marshall, and a couple other companies all sell microphones that are made in the Shanghai factory with the same U87 clone capsules""

You also recommend the NT1 many times, for that only 1 purchase, $200 mic.

Questions:
Do you endorse scott's comments, or just replayed them?
Is it possible your NT1 sounds great, but another might not?
Do you see my confusion?
Did I miss (or misinterpret) something?

I read the r.a.p review of the Marshall $200 offering, and if there are common components to the NT1 ... (chills!) :D

gordon
 
Mocktwo:

Thank You for the comments.

Yeah know, before I pressed submit for that "Rode NT-1" post, I thought people would be confused of why I posted that, but I did it anyway.

Actually, I wanted to post it in the same thread as that other Scott Dorsey quote, but I had forgotten where it was.

"Do you endorse scott's comments, or just replayed them?" I think for the most part, people know when I endorse quotes or not. In this case, I don't think either apply. It was simply an informative quote I wanted to pass on because I found it rather interesting.

"Is it possible your NT1 sounds great, but another might not?"

It is certainly possible. I'll tell you I've heard many stories and history stories on lots of various microphones; some are obviously true, some a little hard to follow, some not very hard to believe, some at little hard to believe, some you don't want to believe, some will shock you...

One of the many I've heard on the NT-1 is that the lower serial numbered mics tend to sound better and more consistant. Then, the price was dropped to $200US, modifications were made, and consistancy dropped too. Not very hard to believe if the capsule is the same Shanghai U87-clone capsule used in those other mics mentioned since the capsule has the most influence on a mic's quality; I think.

"Do you see my confusion?"

Yeah; and don't think I wonder why. It gets confusing to me too. All the same mics, distributed by different companies, with different names, in different housings. Then again, that may not be true.

Some companies say they do modifications (but don't say to what part, or how much, or what company actually performs or designs the modifications, but don't say what company designs or makes those housings for them, or what company actually performs the exchange, or what mic it was originally) and puts them into their own housing ; but who knows if they really even do any modifications.

Some companies say they don't do any modifications but do change the housing (but don't say what company designs or makes those housings for them, or what company actually performs the exchange, or what mic it was originally).

Some companies say they have another company make microphones for them but don't do anything at all themselves other than distribute microphones with their company's name and logo on it (some say the actual company who makes the mics, and some don't; but neither say whether or not it's just a identical mic in a different housing).

Some companies won't say a damn thing.

And who actually does and says what? Hell if I know!

"Did I miss (or misinterpret) something?"

Nahhh. I just didn't expand in that post to explain what I meant. Did I enough, this time?
 
Mocktwo:

Thank You for the comments.

Yeah know, before I pressed submit for that "Rode NT-1" post, I thought people would be confused of why I posted that, but I did it anyway.

Actually, I wanted to post it in the same thread as that other Scott Dorsey quote, but I had forgotten where it was.

"Do you endorse scott's comments, or just replayed them?" I think for the most part, people know when I endorse quotes or not. In this case, I don't think either apply. It was simply an informative quote I wanted to pass on because I found it rather interesting.

"Is it possible your NT1 sounds great, but another might not?"

It is certainly possible. I'll tell you I've heard many stories and history stories on lots of various microphones; some are obviously true, some a little hard to follow, some not very hard to believe, some at little hard to believe, some you don't want to believe, some will shock you...

One of the many I've heard on the NT-1 is that the lower serial numbered mics tend to sound better and more consistant. Then, the price was dropped to $200US, modifications were made, and consistancy dropped too. Not very hard to believe if the capsule is the same Shanghai U87-clone capsule used in those other mics mentioned since the capsule has the most influence on a mic's quality; I think.

"Do you see my confusion?"

Yeah; and don't think I wonder why. It gets confusing to me too. All the same mics, distributed by different companies, with different names, in different housings. Then again, that may not be true.

Some companies say they do modifications (but don't say to what part, or how much, or what company actually performs or designs the modifications, but don't say what company designs or makes those housings for them, or what company actually performs the exchange, or what mic it was originally) and puts them into their own housing ; but who knows if they really even do any modifications.

Some companies say they don't do any modifications but do change the housing (but don't say what company designs or makes those housings for them, or what company actually performs the exchange, or what mic it was originally).

Some companies say they have another company make microphones for them but don't do anything at all themselves other than distribute microphones with their company's name and logo on it (some say the actual company who makes the mics, and some don't; but neither say whether or not it's just a identical mic in a different housing).

Some companies won't say a damn thing.

And who actually does and says what? Hell if I know!

"Did I miss (or misinterpret) something?"

Nahhh. I just didn't expand in that post to explain what I meant. Did I enough, this time?
 
Mocktwo:

Thank You for the comments.

Yeah know, before I pressed submit for that "Rode NT-1" post, I thought people would be confused of why I posted that, but I did it anyway.

Actually, I wanted to post it in the same thread as that other Scott Dorsey quote, but I had forgotten where it was.

"Do you endorse scott's comments, or just replayed them?" I think for the most part, people know when I endorse quotes or not. In this case, I don't think either apply. It was simply an informative quote I wanted to pass on because I found it rather interesting.

"Is it possible your NT1 sounds great, but another might not?"

It is certainly possible. I'll tell you I've heard many stories and history stories on lots of various microphones; some are obviously true, some a little hard to follow, some not very hard to believe, some at little hard to believe, some you don't want to believe, some will shock you...

One of the many I've heard on the NT-1 is that the lower serial numbered mics tend to sound better and more consistant. Then, the price was dropped to $200US, modifications were made, and consistancy dropped too. Not very hard to believe if the capsule is the same Shanghai U87-clone capsule used in those other mics mentioned since the capsule has the most influence on a mic's quality; I think.

"Do you see my confusion?"

Yeah; and don't think I wonder why. It gets confusing to me too. All the same mics, distributed by different companies, with different names, in different housings. Then again, that may not be true.

Some companies say they do modifications (but don't say to what part, or how much, or what company actually performs or designs the modifications, but don't say what company designs or makes those housings for them, or what company actually performs the exchange, or what mic it was originally) and puts them into their own housing ; but who knows if they really even do any modifications.

Some companies say they don't do any modifications but do change the housing (but don't say what company designs or makes those housings for them, or what company actually performs the exchange, or what mic it was originally).

Some companies say they have another company make microphones for them but don't do anything at all themselves other than distribute microphones with their company's name and logo on it (some say the actual company who makes the mics, and some don't; but neither say whether or not it's just a identical mic in a different housing).

Some companies won't say a damn thing.

And who actually does and says what? Hell if I know!

"Did I miss (or misinterpret) something?"

Nahhh. I just didn't expand in that post to explain what I meant. Did I enough, this time?
 
Mocktwo:

Thank You for the comments.

Yeah know, before I pressed submit for that "Rode NT-1" post, I thought people would be confused of why I posted that, but I did it anyway.

Actually, I wanted to post it in the same thread as that other Scott Dorsey quote, but I had forgotten where it was.

"Do you endorse scott's comments, or just replayed them?" I think for the most part, people know when I endorse quotes or not. In this case, I don't think either apply. It was simply an informative quote I wanted to pass on because I found it rather interesting.

"Is it possible your NT1 sounds great, but another might not?"

It is certainly possible. I'll tell you I've heard many stories and history stories on lots of various microphones; some are obviously true, some a little hard to follow, some not very hard to believe, some at little hard to believe, some you don't want to believe, some will shock you...

One of the many I've heard on the NT-1 is that the lower serial numbered mics tend to sound better and more consistant. Then, the price was dropped to $200US, modifications were made, and consistancy dropped too. Not very hard to believe if the capsule is the same Shanghai U87-clone capsule used in those other mics mentioned since the capsule has the most influence on a mic's quality; I think.

"Do you see my confusion?"

Yeah; and don't think I wonder why. It gets confusing to me too. All the same mics, distributed by different companies, with different names, in different housings. Then again, that may not be true.

Some companies say they do modifications (but don't say to what part, or how much, or what company actually performs or designs the modifications, but don't say what company designs or makes those housings for them, or what company actually performs the exchange, or what mic it was originally) and puts them into their own housing ; but who knows if they really even do any modifications.

Some companies say they don't do any modifications but do change the housing (but don't say what company designs or makes those housings for them, or what company actually performs the exchange, or what mic it was originally).

Some companies say they have another company make microphones for them but don't do anything at all themselves other than distribute microphones with their company's name and logo on it (some say the actual company who makes the mics, and some don't; but neither say whether or not it's just a identical mic in a different housing).

Some companies won't say a damn thing.

And who actually does and says what? Hell if I know!

"Did I miss (or misinterpret) something?"

Nahhh. I just didn't expand in that post to explain what I meant. Did I enough, this time?
 
Thanks R.E. I appreciate the responce. :D
I have a high serial #44448, but so far with my limited experience with mics ... I'm happy. :)

Next purchase ... I'm off to the Sound Room!! :cool:

Gordon
 
Sorry for the quad-posting, the server went psycho on me.

And as far as having a low or high serial numbered NT-1, I've heard reports of people finding this to be so for the most part, but also have heard just as many reports who haven't found this to be true.

I guess that leaves but one thing let to do; try before you buy if you're concerned.
 
Speaking of phallic mics, my vote is for the Shure SM58. (The Oktavas are surprisingly small, sn).

The way most people sing live into a 58, almost swallowing the ball...on second thought...when it is an attractive female singer, it is really a thing of beauty...

Mark
 
banned.....i'm not sure i follow why i should be banned.

i admitted my first post was poorly written, but i think if anyone should be banned it's you guys who told me to shove a mic up my ass and that i had no integrity in my left nut. i think that's alot more inappropriate than me making a comment about brainwashing, which was obviously taken more seriously than was intended, and which i retracted anyway.

i think if you look around i've tried to help people out around here alot more than i've pissed off the so called r.e.
i actually tried to make a post asking for reviews on a mic, and was harrassed by him, so i think now we're even.

i'd like to ask anyone else reading this post, what was r.e.'s initial comment here meant to be?
i know it was a quote, but he posted it, and commented on how true it was.
was it posted for everyone to say "oh yes, you're right, that mic totally sucks?"
or was it meant to be argued?
i guess i made the mistake of arguing with someone who you're just not allowed to argue with.

my first response wasn't just based on his statement on this post, but from reading everything he'd written on this mic discussion.

it's like, someone asks a question, and no matter what the question is about, he's talking about octava mics from the sound room ONLY. i guess after seing it fourty-five times, i thought i'd comment on him being brainwashed. i thought it was funny.

sorry it was such a sore spot there, r.e.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ns:
um, there must be money involved in you promoting the same mic over and over and over-i was far from the first person to mention it.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
i don't think you understood my sm-57 comment...
 
Just read the whole thread front to back for the first time. Clarified some stuff for me. I'm seriously thinking of replacing my C-1000 with an Oktava now. Banned? Nah... You both get prizes for locking horns though.

Do it again - it's been useful - but start a different thread, as this one's getting a tad long. Oh! And a new topic would be useful, too! :)
 
Ban NS?...Nah...This is a discussion forum, isn't it? Although I don't think NS has "Helped many people here" with only 20 posts, if he sticks around, he may learn enough to help others...I made the "Left Nut" comment in defense of the integrity of Taylor Johnson, who's too busy helping his customers and perfecting their mics to ever read this thread.
I apologize, NS, fot the comment towards you. I know Taylor personally, and you should give him a call some time, or check out www.oktava.com...You'll dig this man.
I like the AKG 3000, and I'm not sure why RE chose this quote either, but I like RE and his knowledge of mics...

Let's all have one big group hug now.
DJ
 
So what's the record for the longest thread on this BBS? Are we there yet?
 
Mark W:

"The way most people sing live into a 58, almost swallowing the ball...on second
thought...when it is an attractive female singer, it is really a thing of beauty..."

That was funny.

So what's the record for the longest thread on this BBS? Are we there yet?"

We have a while I think. S8-N has the record.

ns:

"banned.....i'm not sure i follow why i should be banned."

I was voting for you to be banned because it seems your intent here was nothing but to disrespect and piss-off everyone. Sorry though, you still haven't me (even though you keep on insisting you have). What's the matter? You haven't accomplished your goal yet?

"but i think if anyone should be banned it's
you guys who told me to shove a mic up my ass"

Go read what I wrote about that again.

"i think if you look around i've tried to help people out around here alot more than..."

Yeah, I did notice you have about twice as many more posts now than you did last time I was here. What, did you do it to justify that you shouldn't be banned after you read I voted for you to be banned? Believe me, I'd like to think not, but right now, I wouldn't be suprised.

"i've pissed off the so called r.e."

Every other thing you say has been disrespectful. It's no more than a user name. You're actually going to sit there and try to use that and any other little thing to insult me?

"i actually tried to make a post asking for reviews on a mic, and was harrassed by him,
so i think now we're even."

And I gave you my opinion. How do you justify me harrassing you?

"i guess i made the mistake of arguing with someone who you're just not allowed to argue with."

Yeah, I guess you're right. An example of that would be that I prefer the D112 over the 52 while sonusman likes the 52 over the D112. My, what an arguement we had when I that came up.

Man, you haven't been around here long enough to read my 9 hundred something posts to know what you're talking about.

Let me guess, you'll come-back with the crap they'll all the samething of promoting Oktavas and The Sound Room...

"it's like, someone asks a question, and no matter what the question is about, he's
talking about octava mics from the sound room ONLY. i guess after seing it fourty-five times, i thought i'd comment on him being brainwashed. i thought it was funny."

Well did you miss why? I've posted that just as many times too. As I've said before, I have the info if you have the money (for the mics, ofcourse). How much do most people here want to spend when they ask for mic suggestions?

"sorry it was such a sore spot there, r.e."

You're right. People being disrespectful and downright insulting to people is very much a sore spot for me.

"um, there must be money involved in you promoting the same mic over and over and over-i was far from the first person to mention it."

Well I've mentioned how it really is on my part many times. If you don't want to except it, fine.

"i don't think you understood my sm-57 comment..."

Well then why don't you clear that up for us all?
 
this is my final post on this thread, i promise. i'm not clearing anything up for you dude, you can read all the posts and figure out for yourself what i'm talking about.

my helping out people here has been going on longer than my arguing with you has...i think everything gets dated here, so knock yourself out.
 
How is that? Do you have a different user name to further hide your identity?

You know my only user name, my real name, the city I live in, and my e-mail address.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top