New Behringer Gear Released!!!

[Atterion]

Well Ed I guess we can agree to disagree. I'm in no way slandering any brands, I just speak from personnal experience (Especially with the Behringer gear...some of which I still own). And for all the 16 year olds out there, I'm sure the $100 pre will suit you well, but when your ready to move up, seriously think about your purchases.

 

[distortedrumble]

"oakley sunglasses? wouldnt be caught dead in them. if I dont have my gucci or prada sunglasses....i just wont go outside! uh! to think you'd even mention oakleys in the same breath as gucci and prada!? oh god, i need a sip of my evian water."

you're only an elitist snob when you carry around a miniature pooch in a louie vouton bag....until that point..we just like to call ya cocky

 

[Dracon]

So, what do you guys think. I cant wait to get my hands on the new Behringer C-1. Apparently it sounds as good as a ....

Weeeeeeee Ugh, cough, cough! I think I ate a bug.

 

[notbradsohner]

todays new product: the behringer MS-40s

http://www.behringer.com/MS40/

designed to sound exactly like genelics/adams, but for 5000 dollars less! oh wow, and they are digital, that will make a big difference becasue I use a computer to record and everything is digital. Ill take some.

 

[Dracon]

I have no problem with people buying cheap gear. I didn't save up 5 years to buy my high end stuff. What I did was learned from 3 years of "saving money by buying cheap gear" I didn't save any money buying cheap gear. It cost me money.

Oh, man! I thought I was on my way to becomming a millionaire. Now you tell me that all that money I save, I actually didn't save any money????
Just kiddin'
I joke about this with my co-worker at work all the time. His wife is always 'saving money' by buying whatever. We laugh, and I tell him. Dude you should buy like a million of those and then you'd have 5 million dollars saved in the bank. This a get rich quick skeem (? I can't spell oh well).

If you spend $10, there is no money saved. There is $10 spent.

 

[scrubs]

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.

I general, I agree with your sentiments, but what about recording experience? I have only been recording for about 12 years and lack the wisdom of many members of the bbs. I only record myself in my home studio...a hobby...nothing even remotely professional. When I started out, all I had was some crappy songs of teenage angst, a $10 microphone, and a dual-cassette boom-box.

Sure, it would have been great to have started out with only the finest equipment, but that is not always realistic. I went from the boombox to the 4-track and, just recently, got into computer-based recording. I have slowly upgraded my equipment as my budget and needs have dictated. Even yet, I still have mostly cheap gear. However, I have learned from every recording experience and try my best to maximize what I have. So far, I regret very few of my purchases, because they allowed me to acheive what I needed them to at the time. The journey has taught me a lot about recording. But, it's still just a hobby.

Perhaps, someday I will have that $5000 mic and $3000 pre, but it is really, really unlikely (I have other things I like to spend my money on...like hookers ). Even if I had saved up everything I would have spent on cheap gear to this point, I would still only be able to afford a couple of nice pieces of gear. And, I would have missed out on all those years of recording and learning. I mean, what good is saving up for a $5000 mic if I can't afford anything else to record with?

What I am really trying to say is, there are different levels of gear because there are different levels of recordists with different goals. I totally agree with the poster who mentioned that the value of boards like this is to help identify the best pieces of gear at varying price-points. If a poster states he/she can only spend $200 on something, and there are usable products at that pricepoint, we can point him/her in the right direction. Steering people away from horrible gear toward less horrible gear is part of our duty.

That's about all I have to say about that...

 

[jjmanton2]

I dont understand why people think based on what the price tag says instead of their ears. Granted, im only 16, ive been recording for about 2 or 3 years, and i have used a variety of equipment. My stuff is definately on the mid range of the spectrum, but at Church we use real high quality stuff. First off, I will never spend over 600 dollars on a mic preamp. Period. Mainly because i can build one cheaper than that, even using expensive Jensen transformers, and second, because all the somewhat decent mic pres for a few hundred $ are pretty damn good. Do i think that the Neumann TLM running through the allen & heath board at church sounds better than my SP c1 running through a mic pre i made that cost about 15 dollars to build? Sure, it sounds a bit different, but not so much when you listen to the rest of the band. I like my C1 better anyway, it seems smoother and more relaxed. Its hard for me to tell differences in a lot of gear unless I A/B them. What im basically saying is, why do people on here judge things by the pricetag? I would like to see a good band, and a hell of a recording engineer sit down in a 20k studio, record and master, then sit down in a 200k studio, record and master, then compare the results.

 

[distortedrumble]

i spent 45 bucks on my behringer mixer and 99 bucks on the behringer b1....am i satisfied? yes. was it worth it? 15 songs later...sure! i had fun. will i buy better equipment now that I'm more serious? yes. will i be shelling out 700 for a mixer and atleast 700 for a better sound card, 200+ for room conditioning and atleast 350 for new better monitors? I...um....well....thats alot of money to keep up with the jones'.

 

[scrubs]

thats alot of money to keep up with the jones'.

You mean the Michael Jones'?

https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=70931

 

[distortedrumble]

lol somebody named jones...doesnt really matter who

 

[scrubs]

lol somebody named jones...doesnt really matter who

Hey rumble, I see you're in Greensboro. Any snow there yet? They keep bitching on the news that it's supposed to snow a bunch tonight, but I think they're full of shit.

 

[SonicAlbert]

While I agree with the idea behind this post, I don't particularly think it MATTERS if you have a compromised recording. Listen to any great Beatles song or Motown stuff and, while it was probably state of the art at the time, the recordings are less than wonderful today.

The gear they were using at the time was the best available. They weren't using budget gear, only the very best they could get their hands on, build, or modify. That's the key. So the recordings were not in any way compromised by the gear of the time, and in fact they put *equal emphasis* on the quality of the gear as they did every other aspect of the production.

And I think the recordings you mention are still wonderful today. In every respect. Just my opinion.

 

[shredfit]

I too, fail to understand the whole gear snob thing. For example, Studio Projects C1 can REALLY hold it's own next to a U87... Will the U87 sound better? Perhaps, but by how much? Will is sound 5% better 3%, 2%??? I would guess about 3% better... So, NOW a person MUST have the SKILL to get that 3% out of the U87 at about 10 times the cost of a C1...

Will anyone know with a mix going that you used a C1 instead of a U87? I bet not... Not even the golden ears people could tell.

If this is not enough, after we spend hours on a session and mix... get it mastered... and someone buys it. The first freaken thing they do is rip it, and encode it to mp3 at 128kbs(if your lucky) to listen on their ipod...

so then, Does it really matter that you have a U87? (even if you can get a 3% better sound out of it???)

Shred

 

[Ed Dixon]

Sometimes the issue of what 'what one needs' verses 'what one wants' is a factor.

Wanting the best gear is not a bad thing, but in many cases, it is really not needed. For example, consider a typical home user that records material from family and friends. They usually have a room setup somewhere with mics, recording gear, and instruments. They record material there. They quite often have the same PC they use for mixing there in the same room.

However most homes are not sound proof, and few home users go to the trouble to completely isolate the sound recording area. As a result, the normal background noise of birds, cars driving by, kids crying, and other similar things will completely offset minute differences between good gear and the best gear.

The key then is to try and really understand what one needs, as comparted to the normal desire to have the best. You might really want that $5000 mic, but what you really need is $5000 of work done for sound proofing, or better guitar amps, or a different wood floor.

When the dust settles, the users who have the best talent walking in to record, have solved all the recording environment isssues to the professional level (which means that have at least two rooms, one for artists and one for gear), and have honed their recording skill to the equivalent of top pro engineers are then ready for the top gear. My guess is that few that post here have reached that level.

Ed

 

[distortedrumble]

snow? HA! you call that snow? it snowed but it was mainly just a large slushy someone poured all over greensboro

 

[SonicAlbert]

Okay, here's an example:

My brother is a music hobbiest who writes and records music in a basement studio he built. It's actually a pretty decent little space. He was using crap mics and crap preamps for a long time, I just couldn't get him to see the light. His idea of value was picking up deals like "three mics for $69".

Finally, I convinced him to get a decent preamp and decent vocal mic. In his case, a Focusrite Voicemaster Pro and EV RE-20. Neither of these is a budget buster, but the RE-20 in particular is a profesdsional mic that is used all over the world on major recordings and in broadcast.

Well, my brother noticed the difference immediately, and so did the singers he brings in to record his stuff. As in, they commented on the improvement the moment they sang one note. I had set up his mic and preamp settings for him, as well.

Now, those same singers are talking about the possibility of having my brother record their band, of doing some projects with him. This did not come up until he had upgraded his studio to professional level gear. Only then did the possibilities open up. And again, we are not talking about esoteric level gear, just solid professional quality gear.

It doesn't cost that much more to get into the pro level gear, it's really more of a mind-set than anything else. One has to get away from the blinky lights and featuritis that Behringer and others use to pimp their gear. The lower level pro gear may look plain, but they've put the money in the right places. People get too seduced by features.

Look at the Rane MS-1b preamp, Grace 101 preamp, mics like the EV RE-20, Shure Sm-57/58, SM-7B, and other professional mics. These are solid workhorses that sound great and are not that expensive.

It's more a mind-set than anything else, as there are professional tools available for low dollars.

The only person getting fooled by prosumer garbage gear is the person buying it. I do certainly believe that a golden eared, and even not so golden eared person can hear the difference between a Behringer C-1 and U87. It will make a difference in a mix. To say otherwise is to say that nothing therefore makes a difference in the mix. And we know that to be false, as *everything* makes a difference in the mix.

Opportunites didn't open up for my brother until he went to some carefully chosen pro gear, and it didn't cost him that much either. So by sticking with lousy gear, one is really only limiting ones possibilities.

 

[scrubs]

snow? HA! you call that snow? it snowed but it was mainly just a large slushy someone poured all over greensboro

yeah, we got jack here too. what a joke.

 

[Ed Dixon]

Look at the Rane MS-1b preamp, Grace 101 preamp, mics like the EV RE-20, Shure Sm-57/58, SM-7B, and other professional mics. These are solid workhorses that sound great and are not that expensive.

It's more a mind-set than anything else, as there are professional tools available for low dollars.

Components from firms like Behringer, which are low cost orriented, vary by product.

I agree that using good mics is a good thing to do in most all cases. While SM58s are considered pro gear, they are not expensive. I have no experience with Behringer mics, so I can't comment on them. I do know that many non-pro brand mics sound poor.

Things like mixers are a little harder to judge sometimes. At church we have two mixers. One is a simple Behringer 8 channel, and the other a 32 chananel Mackie. I have run tests, using good headphones, with the pro mics connected on the other end. I can't tell them apart, and no one else can either.

Mixers can do lots of things. However in many cases, a basic mixer may well suit the home recording persons needs quite well.

So it goes back to what the user actually needs, and what each gear option offers. Sometimes the high end gear is the right answer, and sometimes the basic gear option is plenty good enough.

Ed

 

[scrubs]

Okay, here's an example:

My brother is a music hobbiest who writes and records music in a basement studio he built. It's actually a pretty decent little space. He was using crap mics and crap preamps for a long time, I just couldn't get him to see the light. His idea of value was picking up deals like "three mics for $69".

Finally, I convinced him to get a decent preamp and decent vocal mic. In his case, a Focusrite Voicemaster Pro and EV RE-20. Neither of these is a budget buster, but the RE-20 in particular is a pro mic that is used all over the world on major recordings and in broadcast. It's a pro mic.

Well, my brother noticed the difference immediately, and so did the singers he brings in to record his stuff. As in, they commented on the improvement the moment they sang one note. I had set up his mic and preamp settings for him, as well.

Now, those same singers are talking about the possibility of having my brother record their band, of doing some projects with him. This did not come up until he had upgraded his studio to professional level gear. Only then did the possibilities open up. And again, we are not talking about esoteric level gear, just solid professional quality gear.

Again, we are in agreement. But, I continue to stress that people have different goals when it comes to home recording, and often enough, those goals are not apparent when they first get involved. Like I said, I only record myself and have no aspirations of recording other artists in my studio. I once recorded my sister, who is also a songwriter. The resulting CD was not that great, but friends and family loved it, and it managed to score her a few gigs. I learned a lot from that experience, but also realized that I would never want to record others for a living.

Hobbies are things you try out. If you like them, you delve further. If not, you give it up. For example, telling someone just starting out on guitar to buy a Martin/Taylor/Larivee/etc. because they will want one later anyway doesn't make much sense to me. Sure, it will have a higher resale value if they don't like it, but the initial investment is often just too much to fathom for someone starting out, and the improved sound/build quality is wasted on a beginner. I say, get the best guitar you can and learn how to play it. If you want to upgrade at a later time, you can. You can always keep that old guitar for camping, or give it to someone else starting out.

For another analogy: I love golf. When I first started playing, it would have been useless for me to spend $1500 for clubs and $50/dozen on balls, when I couldn't hit the center of the clubface anyway, and most of the balls ended up in the lake. Only through experience have I known how/when to upgrade so that I get the most out of my equipment. Give Tiger Woods my first set of off-brand golf clubs and he would still kick my ass any day, even when I'm playing with my Mizunos.

My goal is just to get my songs into a format where I can distribute them to people I know for enjoyment. The vast majority of people who will hear them have no idea what a Neumann is, much less what one sounds like. Sure, I strive to continually improve my sound and recording technique. I am certain I could make higher quality recordings with better gear. However, the improvement in my recordings that could be realized with my limited knowledge really aren't worth the investment. This will never be a career for me. It is simply an outlet.

Quite frankly, most musicians and songwriters don't create material that is worthy of the "best gear" (I certainly don't). But, that's o.k. There is usable gear for everyone.

So, anyway, I still contend that this is a case of "If I knew then what I know now." Experience is part of that learning process, and often enough, without the experience, you never gain the wisdom.

 

[SonicAlbert]

scrubs, you are very aware of your goals musically and your gear choices are in harmony with that. I don't feel like you are kidding yourself about anything, your eyes are wide open. I agree with your post completely regarding hobbiests, etc.

Where there are issues are with people that make outrageous claims regarding the quality of Behringer gear versus high quality gear, or those who claim "it doesn't matter, nobody can tell the difference anyway". Those people are kidding themselves, and potentially leading others down a wrong path.

It's one thing to say "I'm a hobbiest and I don't want to spend top dollar on expensive gear". That is totally cool and 100% understandable. But it's entirely another thing to say "I use hobbiest gear and it's as good as pro gear, and it doesn't matter anyway, and you're a snob". There's a big, big difference between those two attitudes.

However, I totally understand that everybody needs to start somewhere with gear. I know I did. I'm just trying to help maybe *one person* see the light and not waste money on crap prosumer gear, but spend just a bit more on something more pro oriented. That is, assuming that person has serious musical goals in mind.

And you are also completely correct that it is important to have the gear to learn on, and maybe graduate from later. Maybe that is just the way it works.

A few years ago I was writing posts about how the lower end gear I owned was just as good as the expensive stuff. Oops. Now I know better, and I just hope that nobody Googles up my silly old posts. So yeah, there is a learning curve, and maybe it is just not possible to get anybody to jump ahead on the curve before they are ready.

Regarding the thing about comparing the small Behringer mixer to the larger Mackie:

I've found that for some reason smaller mixers sound better, at least when it comes to the lower price ranges (which certainly include Mackie). Maybe it's because there are fewer components to get in the signal path, or maybe the shorter signal path. I don't know for sure, but even among Mackie products I think their best sounding mixers are the small ones.