Oh My God, What Have I Done ? ? ! ! !

  • Thread starter Thread starter chessrock
  • Start date Start date
C

chessrock

Banned
Dear Harvey,

You are a guru and a legend around here.

I am merely a mouthy know-it-all moron who just says things either out of sheer silliness or sheer boredom.

I view my role around this board as such: I am a step above a newbie. My job is to answer questions from people who have the most basic of newbie questions. I do this in order to free the recording Gods like Harvey, as well as dieties like Sonsuman and up-and-coming demigods like Blue Bear to post really knowlegeable, insightful things so they don't have to keep answering every "Best mic under $300?" poll. I guess you could call me a "front-liner."

My frustration over the last few days has been centered around the monotony of some of the questions and answers we see on this board.

If I we all had dimes for every time a newb asks "What's the best mic under $X?" . . . My problem is that a lot of the other "front-liners" seem to exhibit the behavior of robots spitting out: "The V67 is a great mic and you can buy it at Mars for bla bla bla bla bla . . . " Before that it was the SP. So we're basically just as bad ! ! ! And I include myself in this mess.

What I really meant by my post is that I am frustrated at the lack of originality. For example, the AT is a fine mic. So are many of the Rode models. But spoken from a fellow SM-7 and Oktava junkie, large-diaphragm condensers aren't always the end-all be-all. No one microphone or TYPE of mic is the one answer for every newbie, so why not dare to be different ? ! !

Harvey, I will literally cry if you stop posting your opinions on specific gear on this site. Your know-how is pretty much unmatched anywhere on the web, as far as I can tell. But it does bother me when people say "X microphone is a great mic" or any similar comment . . . and their only basis for that statement is they read one of your reviews. It bothers me because people have stopped thinking for themselves. They aren't asking questions like: "What will I be using this mic for?" "What kind of voice do I have?" or "What style am I going after?"

Does that mean I think you should stop posting your opinions? Absolutely not! I just think we should take them in to account, try things out for ourselves, and ultimately form our own opinions. -- Using yours as valuable guidelines, of course.

I value your opinions to no end. I'm sure your son does, too, but aren't there times when he argues with you, or takes on different methods just so he can "sprout some of his own wings?" That's kind of what my post was all about. I was simply trying to encourage people to think a little different. Your name came up because you are the MOST respected around here. I could have just as easily used Sonsuman, Shailat or Recording Engineer, I suppose.

For the record, my post was very silly in it's intentions. Using the term "sheep" and things like dunking our condensers in water were simply goofball statements. Nothing really behind them, just being silly and saying things that pop to my mind in moronic ways. For examples of similar silliness, please see: anything in the cave. :) The problem with the written word is that, no matter how many smiley faces you use, it is impossible to convey a humorous tone. And unfortunately, I made a mistake by not using different verbage or a million smiley-faces.

Were I speaking, the tone I would be using would be similar to Bill Murray in Meatballs, was it? Think of his "It just doesn't matter" speach. Or better yet, think of John Belushi at the end of Animal House. "When the going gets tough . . . "

Harvey, my sypathies go out to you for your recent difficulties. Please accept my sincere apologies, and please do not let the moronic ramblings of an idiot like me spoil your day.

I would leave you my email address, but I am afraid of the hate mail I will most likely receive, and I would hate having to close my account. :)

Regards,

"Chessrock"
 
Look Chessrock,

It ain't all your fault. I got up on the wrong side of the bed today, and it just really hit me wrong. Don't get all gushy on me. I'll try to be a less of a moron about this stuff.

I've been trying to answer the "What's the best X for under $___" for years in the great ether that is the Net, without too much success, until Oktava, and Marshall, and the RNC, and some other great stuff finally came along.

Anyway, let's just forget this whole mess and start again.
 
Irony

chessrock said:
It bothers me because people have stopped thinking for themselves. They aren't asking questions like: "What will I be using this mic for?" "What kind of voice do I have?" or "What style am I going after?"

This is exactly what I laid out when I started the "best condensor <$400" thread - I made a specific statement detailing application - only one person actually made any comment about the information I gave - it was quite frustrating, considering that I was looking for multiple opinions, but with some kind of contextual information to support the opinion.
 
I think Harvey would agree that one mic is not the answer to all our prays. Yes, eveyone hopes that they lay down 3-4 bills and get a mic that sounds as good as one costing 10x's the amount. But what happens after that? A canddy store can never have enough selection, the same can be said for mic's in a studio. Hey I love my C-1, but here it is, less than two months later, and I'm looking for another mic...maybe one of those cheap GT's, or an NTK, or an mxl77s...who knows. The choices are many and knowledge and experience is king...thank you Harvey!
 
Maybe its time we compile a webpage thats sorts all the avaiable mics by prices, quality, use, etc... The same can be done for alot of gear.

If any one is interested in in helping out with this reply or send me an email. I can host the webpage once I figure out whats going on with my webserver(some depenenices with php and mysql are messed up).
 
Chess........shame on you:D (note the grin).

I just did a search to find out what you did......shame on me!!! Actually I did see some humour in that post, although I did see how it could be taken differently.

Harvey,

For Christmas's Sake.....DON'T STOP putting specific reviews up here..........your opinions and judgements based on your years of experience are just too valuable to some of us...........this old dog is learnin' new tricks and finds your wisdom invaluable, possibly more than you can realise........again, many thanks.

Garak,

I suggested a similar thing recently, although I think it would end up a bit like Harmony Central's reviews........maybe.

:cool:
 
Don't you guys know that "stressed" spelled backwards is DESSERTS!!:D

hey...I'll take another piece o' pie....tanks!!

man w/tin ears...
 
It would be cool to have our own Harmony Central type of database with a 1-10 voting system set up for different mic and pre applications.
 
TexRoadkill said:
It would be cool to have our own Harmony Central type of database with a 1-10 voting system set up for different mic and pre applications.
It would. But we'd have to have a rule that says to vote you actually have to have USED the gear, and not just heard or read it was good/bad.
 
TexRoadkill said:
It would be cool to have our own Harmony Central type of database with a 1-10 voting system set up for different mic and pre applications.
The major problem with that is there is no weighting system for referencing the vote. Let's say you have a new recordist who just bought their first condenser mic when all they've ever owned is a $49 Radio Shack ball mic.

"Wow, this new condenser mic lets me hear everything; it's so loud and detailed. I give it a 10 rating. Everybody should go out and buy this mic."

Now assume that 10 more people (with the same limited experience) all say the same thing. This mic goes right to the top of our ratings list.

Flash forward about 6 months. Same recordist, and a friend brings over a pretty damn nice condenser mic, and this guy/girl finally gets a chance to hear their mic alongside a really nice condenser mic.

"Whoa, listen to how pretty the top end is on that new mic compared to mine, which sounds really screechy by comparison. What I thought was detail all this time was just a hyped and peaky top end. Now I understand what those people meant when they flamed me for saying this was the best mic in the world."

So they go to change their rating, but in the meantime, 6 months of influencing other new people has kept this dog at the top of the ratings. See my problem with the data base idea?
 
Harvey I know exactly where your coming from as that was me when I got my MXL2001p.For a couple months I thought it sounded crisp and detailed but without even listening to a better mic the sound of the 2001p became very harsh and grating to me to the point where I just can't stand the mic.I'm definetly going to try that mod,the way I look at it I've got nothing to lose.

I think that personal comments by users even with its flaws is a better resource for knowledge than the reviews in the popular magazines.Evidently the guys at Recording have never met a product they don't like.It was from reading such reviews that "helped"me make puchases of the MXL2001 and the Art Tube Mp along with other waste's of money.Bottom line is everyone makes their own decisions but it is very helpful to hear peoples input.I really don't have a place around here where I can try out gear so hearing what people say really helps,but I also make sure that I buy gear where they have a generous return policy.
 
Yeah, any ratings would have to be taken with a grain of salt. Hopefully over time the true rating would work itself out of the average.

In a certain sense ratings are worthless. There are too many variables to ever really recomend something for somebody else's specific application but you can at least get a consensus to point people in the right direction.

At the very least it would eliminate all the basic posts and let us spend more time getting into more advanced applications.
 
Randy,

Yup, that's exactly what I'm talking about. And you'll find a lot of people who haven't developed their ears yet, or have a limited means of making comparisons, will praise a mic like the 2001 when they first get it. That's why it's so important to understand where the person making the recommendation is coming from.

Everytime I see a posting by someone recommending a particular mic, my first instinct is to ask "What other similar mics do you already have, and what similar mics have you tried?". I usually don't do a post like that, but every fiber in my body wants to.

As you found out, it may take a few monthes to really hear what a new mic is actually doing, especially if you don't have a lot of experience with a wide variety of mics.

And yes, magazine reviews aren't often too helpful, either. That's why when I look at a mic, I try to compare it to similar mics, both above it's cost, and below.

If you had read my review of the Marshall line, you'd have found that I hated the 2001 for its harsh high end, but I found the MXL 2003, the V67G and the V77 to be great mics. I also warned that the higher priced MXL-600 wasn't very good, while the low cost MXL-603 was a great value.

TexRoadkill,

No I don't agree that ratings are worthless, but you hafta know a little bit about the person that's doing the rating. A good example: I love the Coles 4038 ribbon mic; Scott Dorsey, a well respected engineer, hates it with a passion. That's why if I post that I think it's pretty good, I expect Scott to point out what he doesn't like about it.

I don't like the average consensus idea either, since an average consensus of recordists with little real world experience. would still be an uninformed average. It becomes a matter of "the blind leading the blind".

At rec.audio.pro, we get a lot of rigid opinions from people just getting started in recording and we don't much suffer people making sweeping generalizations, with little or no experience. rec.audio.pro is a harsh group that reflects the world of professional recording engineers.

Sometimes we'll get " I don't like digital because it's all steps and you can hear the steps, unlike analog, which is smooth". Those kind of people last about 2 seconds in rec.audio.pro before going down in flames.
 
I can say that microphone selection is like choosing a wine. Not everyone has the same taste buds, there are gulpers, sippers and backwashers. The amount of subjectivity is tremendous. There are so many acoustical factors as well as stylistic factors that go into the analysis of how a mic "sounds" that you wont get the same answer twice. Maybe some additional information should be added and or requested when commenting on a mic's performance. Room size, acoustic treatments, girls, guys, rock, blues, jazz and every other imaginable variation are tid bits that are a must. I would like to see a spread sheet I could sort through that made it easy to find a mic for a specific application. For example: A rock vocalist in a room 8 by 9 with a unusually loud voice(give a spl)along this other vocalist style would benefit from this kind mic. There are lots of mics coming from the same manufacturer for a reason, its because the applications are so vast you need to wittle down the choices. Add the cost variations to maximize the manufacturers bottom line and you've got quite a task.

I should expect you alls to start asking more questions when a newbie pops in with a best under question, whats your style, budget and recording environment. What preamps, recorders and color of hair.

I appreciate this MB for being able to provide 11,000 opinions and all of them contribute to my decisions.


Peace,
Dennis
 
For some products the general consensus can be a good indicater of the value of the product but only if the product is really good or really bad.I have yet to hear bad opinions on the RNC online,not only in this forum but in others(except a couple post from people who thought it was broke cause they couldn't "hear" it working).Conversely its the same,I never see much good said about the MXL2001p(if I would have had access to the internet back then I would never have bought it).

Some things like the AKG c1000s are pretty much evenly divided between love and hate responses so you know that there at least exist the possibility of a problem so this mic I would have to try first even with a generous return policy where I buy.

I really hate the show "Who Wants To Be A Millionare"but its kind of like when they poll the audience,if 80%of the people(whom I'm sure are not all rocket scientists)respond one way or another they are usually right but the closer it gets to a split the more of a wild card it is.
 
Randy Yell said:
For some products the general consensus can be a good indicater of the value of the product but only if the product is really good or really bad.I have yet to hear bad opinions on the RNC online,not only in this forum but in others(except a couple post from people who thought it was broke cause they couldn't "hear" it working).
Okay, since you brought up the RNC, let's talk about it.

When Mark introduced the RNC in late 1997, there wasn't much stir about it till Fletcher of Mercenary Audio mentioned it on rec.audio.pro as being unbelievable for the money, no details, just his opinion.

Since I value Fletcher's opinion highly, I immediately ordered one. Here's verbatim (meaning I just pasted and copied it) one of the earliest discussions of the RNC on rec.audio.pro:

Jan 25 1998

lxh2 <lxh2@netaxs.com> wrote:
Hank, Have you heard the RNC? I would like to know what you think.


walkinay@telis.org (hank alrich) answered:
Tell you next week after it gets here, unless time demands push posting in detail into the week after. I will get a chance to try it on a range of acoustic instruments, electric guitar and voices, and near the weekend, in a mixdown situation

I'm looking forward to this opportunity and will report back. I hope I'll like knowing what I think, too. <g>

Harvey Gerst <hargerst@airmail.net> responded:
Hank,

So far, I've tried it on electric bass with an uneven bass player, and on final vocals. The setup was a Gallien Kruger head thru a two cabinet rig (Top cabinet had two 10" and a tweeter, bottom cabinet had a 15" speaker). I used a 421, miced out about 3' from the rig, pointed at (and even with) the bottom edge of the high end cabinet. All EQ was off. I ran all RNC controls straight up as per Mark's suggestions (Threshold @ -5dB, Ratio @ 6:1, Attack @ 6 ms, Release @ .5 sec, and Gain @ 0dB). Seemed like I had more top end clarity compared to the dbx 166 and it sat well in the mix. No audible artifacts that I could hear, except for the unusual clarity and extra punch.

On the vocalist, I used the Coles 4038, no EQ, and ran the Threshold down to -10dB, and boosted the Gain a couple of dB. Same kinda results - nice clarity, no artifacts, and nice output levels. I couldn't hear it working, but my channel meter said it was doing exactly what it should be doing.

In short, it is a really nice compressor. A nice little surprise, the bypass switch is setup so that the unit goes into bypass EVEN if the unit is turned off and left connected to the channel insert - a small, but really nice "real-world" feature.

Haven't tried it on acoustic guitar or final mixes yet, but it should be really nice. I'm just now running the curves and THD and IM on it, so I can see what's happening. I should have the results this week, but the initial curves look really good (even with 6dB of compression, THD seems to be around .019%, and the response looks pretty damn flat from 20 to 20kHz). I'm gonna widen the limits and see where it starts to roll off. Tell you more later as I find out.

Harvey


Later that week, I went thru the RNC and measured every damn thing that could be measured and I posted my findings on rec.audio.pro. In short, it exceeded its specs by such a wide margin, I thought my test equipment was broken.

Mark told me that after my review on rec.audio.pro, his sales went thru the roof. And initially, it did get some bad reviews, but not many.

So did the RNC become popular by consensus, or as Mark believes, by a really glowing review, from someone with experience, who knew how to test and evaluate equipment?
 
And please, I don't mean to imply that I single-handedly created a market for the RNC, although Mark probably gives me way more credit than I deserve. But carefully read my answer. I listed the conditions, my findings (opinions at the start of the post, absolute measurable specs at the end), and compared it to a similar unit in a similar price range.

My final evaluation went into so many specs, that it would probably bore you all to tears, but I was more thorough than any reviewer I can think of. The bottom line is that my detailed report on the unit encouraged many pros to at least try the damn thing, and their raves about it lead to it's acceptance.

But supposing I just got it and posted, "I like mine, it's better than my Alesis 3630; you should get one too."? Even though a lot of people on rec.audio.pro respect my opinion, it was the sound and the specs that convinced everybody that the RNC was a winner.

At the time, I was just a little bottom-feeder studio in North Texas, but my old background in this business did provide me with some credibility among some of the pros. And anybody who knew anything about testing products could use the procedures I outlined and come up with the same results I got.
 
Harvey Gerst said:
Sometimes we'll get " I don't like digital because it's all steps and you can hear the steps, unlike analog, which is smooth". Those kind of people last about 2 seconds in rec.audio.pro before going down in flames.
Except for Jarl Sigurd!! Somehow, that NG can't seem to get rid of him!!! ;)

Bruce
 
I don't even remember what we were arguing about, Harvey.

Without actually having experience with a particular piece of gear, it is tough and RISKY proposition to consider purchasing. Unfortunately, a lot of us aren't comfortable taking advantage of liberal return policies, either.

For me, a couple of good reviews are enough to grab my attention -- or maybe one review from a source I really trust. From there, if I can hear a few good sound clips that confirm the quality the reviewer spoke of, then I am comfortable making the purchase.

Now there have been several people in recent months who have been generous enough with their time to post some very helpful sound clips. Blue Bear, for example, posted a nice "shootout" of sorts between the Rode NT2 and the Studio Projects C1. And we also got to hear him sing a great Pink Floyd classic at the same time! :) What I concluded is that I liked the NT2 in certain parts and the C1 in other parts.

Even though the audio quality of MP3 leaves much to be desired, I still heard enough to conclude which applications and what types of voices I would recommend each mic for. On that note, what I really think would be useful would be a link where we might be able to collect some of the various mic "shootouts" that have been posted, and where people could post new comparisons.

Recently, I completed a comparison of my voice using three different types of mics: A large-diaphragm Condenser, a small-diaph. cond., and a large-diaph. dynamic. I actually learned a lot from just doing it. And I think others could get a lot out of hearing the difference between the three types of mics, as well.

Combined with a reviewer or two's opinion(s), I think this type of thing can be a most useful tool.
 
Originally posted by chessrock
I don't even remember what we were arguing about, Harvey.

Well, you called me "a dumb-assed, stupid, red-necked, dickweed, who dodn't know his ass from a hole in the ground", and I said I wasn't a redneck. And then it kinda got out of hand from there. :)

Even though the audio quality of MP3 leaves much to be desired, I still heard enough to conclude which applications and what types of voices I would recommend each mic for. On that note, what I really think would be useful would be a link where we might be able to collect some of the various mic "shootouts" that have been posted, and where people could post new comparisons.

Recently, I completed a comparison of my voice using three different types of mics: A large-diaphragm Condenser, a small-diaph. cond., and a large-diaph. dynamic. I actually learned a lot from just doing it. And I think others could get a lot out of hearing the difference between the three types of mics, as well.

Combined with a reviewer or two's opinion(s), I think this type of thing can be a most useful tool.

I wish I was as certain of that as you are. Even when I'm in the same room with the instrument/singer, I may narrow it down to 3 or 4 choices but even then, I'm often surprised at what we finally use. They don't really have a smilie face for the totally bewildered look that often crosses my face when setting up mics.

I have a few mics that rarely suck on anything, but no guarantee that any of them will turn out to be the best choice for anything.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top