Ed Dixon said:
Gear is dead last in the items that affect recorded quality, with artist performance, recording engineer ability, and recording sound environment being the more important factors. If any of these three are lacking, then the world’s best gear will not make much difference.
Gear is not dead last, it's equal in importance to the other factors. Not more important, not less important, equally important. If you have the other three factors, but lousy gear, what you have is a great performance and a compromised recording. All factors are equal.
I also agree with the poster that said he only feels like he wasted money when he bought cheap gear. Exactly how I feel, after years of gear buying and using experience. Virtually every bargain basement prosumer piece of gear I've ever owned has had to have been bought over and over again. Either because it broke down, never functioned up to a decent standard, or my ears outgrew it. Better gear lasts longer, and in the long run costs less.
That's the idea that I can't seem to get across on these message boards: buy better and save money in the long term. People keep accusing me of gear snobbery, but a gear snob is the *last* thing I am. I'm trying to be helpful with these posts, but there is often an odd defensive posture taken by some. There's no need for that, this is not personal.
Again, buy better and save money in the long term. It works like this:
Purchase price is only one factor in figuring the cost of a unit. Most people look at this as one lump sum. In that way of viewing things, a lower dollar figure equals a lower price. But in practice this is not how it works. The reason being that gear is used *over time*. So time is a factor in the cost of the unit.
You need to amortize the cost of the unit over the period of time that it will be used. This changes the "value" equation quite a bit.
A bottom fishing prosumer unit will cost less up front, but its period of usefulness will be shorter due to a variety of factors, adding to its cost per year. The better piece of gear will cost more upfront but have a longer period of usefulness, lowering its cost per year. Great equipment, and I mean the really great stuff, is basically a lifetime purchase, so in some ways the most expensive gear becomes the least expensive when you consider the time factor.
I have spent thousands and thousands and thousands on budget gear that I have eventually had to upgrade. All that money was indeed wasted. I have kicked myself many times for not putting out more money upfront on the better gear, because in *every* case I would have saved money had I done that. Spending money on cheap gear is WASTING money. It is that simple.
So the ultimate moral of the story is: if you've identified a need for your studio, spend *as much* as you can possibly afford to meet that need. Everyone's budget is different, but what's the same is the principles behind getting the best value for your dollar. And that does not necessarily mean hunting down the lowest priced gear.
