apl
Stand Up Comity
The Oktava saga summarized:
http://debris.com/journal/1274
http://debris.com/journal/1280
http://debris.com/journal/1285
http://debris.com/journal/1274
http://debris.com/journal/1280
http://debris.com/journal/1285
R
RedFroDevil
New member
Wow, this is rather upsetting, not just because this has actually happened, but that we still dont have the real story about whats going on here.
IMO, when i buy a mic, i buy it because it sounds good. I buy it because it is a usable tool for capturing the sound of real musicians playing real instruments. I rely alot on the ears and experience of the HR.com group, and they have served me well in my breif existence on this forum. BUT, when we run into a situation where I would order a microphone online, and get something that says it is one thing, but on the inside is actually something else... well... it just makes me think "If I bought a porche, I want a porche engine, porche parts, etc---I dont want a VW engine in my car."
Please flame me to death if I am off kilter on this one...
IMO, when i buy a mic, i buy it because it sounds good. I buy it because it is a usable tool for capturing the sound of real musicians playing real instruments. I rely alot on the ears and experience of the HR.com group, and they have served me well in my breif existence on this forum. BUT, when we run into a situation where I would order a microphone online, and get something that says it is one thing, but on the inside is actually something else... well... it just makes me think "If I bought a porche, I want a porche engine, porche parts, etc---I dont want a VW engine in my car."
Please flame me to death if I am off kilter on this one...
A
acorec
Banned
RedFroDevil said:
I agree. The original Oktava should at least be made by the real company. Made in china will probably fix the QC issues the russian ones reportedly had, but it is outright forgery and should have the ear of any law enforcement types around.
But, look at them there Harleys made a few decades ago. All american they said. Except the japanese forks, fork components, engine components, lights, seats, fenders etc.
Yep, they were the real deal.
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
Well, Redfro, you are not off kilter. I agree with the poster above that the issues between the 2 companies are better settled in court. The origin of the mic's design and the meaning of the distribution contract are obviously in dispute, and frankly, the arguments of the Russians seem more believeable to me. The real questions are:
1. How do the Chinese mics compare to previous Russian models?
2. What does the 10db pad cost, and can you actually get them? If so, where?
3. How good is the build quality of the Chinese mics compared to the Russian models?
The jury has not come in yet on any of the above, but this much seems clear-
1. Having 2 manufacturers in conflict, producing 2 identical appearing mics is a pain in the ass for buyers, and in obtaining service.
2. Neither the build quality or service of the Russian plant has ever been very good, so the Chinese don't have to be that good to beat them.
3. The Russians are saying the contract is void due to contract violations, which may or may not be true, according to international law.
The courts will ultimately settle the trademark and distribution issues. Like many other buyers, what I really want to know is- How good are the Chinese mics, and how close are they to the better examples of the Russian mics many of us have grown to love? Undortunately, only time will tell.-Richie
1. How do the Chinese mics compare to previous Russian models?
2. What does the 10db pad cost, and can you actually get them? If so, where?
3. How good is the build quality of the Chinese mics compared to the Russian models?
The jury has not come in yet on any of the above, but this much seems clear-
1. Having 2 manufacturers in conflict, producing 2 identical appearing mics is a pain in the ass for buyers, and in obtaining service.
2. Neither the build quality or service of the Russian plant has ever been very good, so the Chinese don't have to be that good to beat them.
3. The Russians are saying the contract is void due to contract violations, which may or may not be true, according to international law.
The courts will ultimately settle the trademark and distribution issues. Like many other buyers, what I really want to know is- How good are the Chinese mics, and how close are they to the better examples of the Russian mics many of us have grown to love? Undortunately, only time will tell.-Richie
P
paddyponchero
New member
Richard Monroe said:
http://www.thomann.de/index.html?partner_id=97926&page=thoiw6_artikel-180077.html
J
JPS
New member
This whole Oktava thing is pretty sad. It seems to me that this is pretty much a British company "hijacking" a Russian company. It is fairly common to give "exclusive" distribution rights to companies, but this is usually accompanied with terminations clauses, durations of distributorship and performance goals. So, it seems inconcievable that the Russians would knowingly grant an exclusive distributor to manufacture their product.
However, if in fact the British company was in someway involved in the design of the MK-012, then it may be an unsolvable mess. Usually, contracts also describe how disputes are to be resolved. So, if somebody has access to the contract Oktava signed, they should post it here!!!
However, if in fact the British company was in someway involved in the design of the MK-012, then it may be an unsolvable mess. Usually, contracts also describe how disputes are to be resolved. So, if somebody has access to the contract Oktava signed, they should post it here!!!
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
Yo Paddyponchero. Thanks for the link. At least they admit it's made in China. I doubt Guitar Center will be that up front. Unfortunately, we need a source in the USA, and priced in $US, not Euros.-Richie
crazydoc
Master Baiter
When these Chinese 012's are 2 for $99 at GC (with pad, of course), I'll get a couple and do both an anatomic and physiologic comparison to the Russian ones. 
N
nkjanssen
New member
I've never understood the fascination with these mics. Why on earth would someone want to clone something like this?
P
paddyponchero
New member
nkjanssen said:
I think its got something to do with the cold war, I could be wrong though so don't quote me on that.
L
Loeti
New member
Comparison between old Russian and new Chinese Oktava MC 012s
Hi there,
I am following this thread, and I am amazed that no one has actually written something about the quality of the Chinese made Okatva MC 012s.
We were given all the details about the war between Okatva and McKay, but I am more interested in microphones than in legal wars.
Just a few words about myself: I am a freelance sound engineer from Germany. I am mainly doing mastering, but also live recordings with a single pair of stereo microphones (ORTF).
I am owning a couple of ‘original’ (Russian?) Oktava MC 012s. I’ve bought them in July 1998 from the official German Oktava distributor. The came with 3 capsules, the metal holder and the 10dB pad in a nice wooden box. They look like the ‘Original Oktava produced in Russia’ (see at http://www.oktava.tula.net/fake/), except for the following differences:
- label reads: Oktava MC 012 (in western letters)
- no serial number
- A.S.M. logo
Here is a photo of both types that I own (http://www.jmmp.com/Oktava.jpg) – left side: Original MC 012s – right side: Chinese MC 012s
I find it very interesting, that these ‘old’ Oktavas, which are certainly NOT produced in China, have the A.S.M. label. It seems, that they were produced for and/or imported by McKay!
BIG question: Does anybody actually owns Russian Oktava MK-012s described as in the Oktava link, which has been bought some years ago.
I’ve paid EUR 768 (= US Dollars 970) for two sets. It wasn’t a matched pair, because the distributor told me at that time, that the differences between the microphones were so small, that you could combine any two microphones. The microphones didn’t look great. One had little ditches on the body, and I had to have a (free) replacement of 2 out of the 6 capsules, because they were buzzing. So much for the quality assurance of the original Russian microphones. But I have to say: I did lots of choir and symphony recordings over the last 7 years and they always sounded good to me.
Recently I bought a ‘matched pair’ of Oktava MC 012s from the German shop Thomann for EUR 266 (US Dollars 335). Because I already had the 3 capsules, which came with my ‘old’ Oktavas, I only needed the microphones with the cardioids capsules. The Oktavas that came from Thomann look exactly like the so-called ‘new revised series’ (see at http://www.oktava.tula.net/fake/). So you can imagine my astonishment to find out all about the Chinese production. Because Thomann has a 30-days-money-back trade, I had to decide, whether to keep the microphones or return them for good. To say it in a walnut – I will keep them. Here are my reasons (please notice, that this is MY subjective opinion!):
1. I had made a choir concert recording with the Chinese Oktavas BEFORE I heard about their origins. For me, while I was recording, the sound of the recording was as good as always (usually I am using the ‘old’ Oktavas).
2. At home I’ve made a test with the different microphones: I used a Chinese body and made recordings with my 2 old and 2 new cardioids capsules. http://www.jmmp.com/KRK-V8.jpg
The recordings had 4 parts:
a) sine tone 1kHz at – 6dB
b) sine sweep from 5Hz to 20kHz
c) white noise
d) outtake from Eagles ‘Hotel California’ (Live version)
I’ve also made a recording with one capsule using an ‘old’ body to check differences between the bodies.
I didn’t do absolute measurements; I rather tried to spot differences between the Russian and the Chinese Oktavas. I used Steinberg’s WaveLab with the plug-in FreeFilter to compare frequency responses. Here are the results:
a) the sensitivity differences of all 4 capsules (at 1kHz) are in a +/- 0.5 dB range
b) there is NO significant difference in the frequency response of the bodies; that means all differences are in a +/- 1.0 dB range
c) there is NO significant difference in the frequency response of the old and the new cardioids capsules; the differences between the old and the new capsules are not greater than the differences between the two old capsules.
d) the differences between the two new (matched) capsules are smaller than the differences between the two old (not matched) capsules.
3. Building quality: as mentioned before, I wasn’t impressed with the quality of the original Oktavas. The Chinese Oktavas feel better in quality: the body is a bit heavier (80 grams – the original body weighs 55 grams), the capsules screw on easily and it seems that the contacts of the XLR connector are gold coated. I can’t say anything about the electronic circuits, because I didn’t want to take the microphone apart (because of warranty reasons). Altogether the quality of the Chinese Oktavas looks superior to the original ‘old’ Oktavas.
4. The Chinese Oktavas come with standard (elastic rubber) holders instead of the metal holders. I don’t think this is a drawback. Because the MC 012s have no Low Cut, they are quite sensitive for low rumble, e.g. from the microphone stand. So the rubber holders are a better choice than the metal holders, which give no sound insulation from the stand at all. Anyway, I would strongly recommend to use shock mounts, which are suitable for microphone bodies with 20 mm diameter (e.g. http://www.oktava-online.com/sm.htm or http://www.thomann.de/index.html?partner_id=97926&page=oktava_sm012_mikrofonspinne_prodinfo.html).
5. The -10 dB pad is not included. This isn’t a problem for me, because I never used the pad with my old Oktavas. If necessary, you can order it separately (http://www.thomann.de/index.html?partner_id=97926&page=artikel-180077.html)
6. Last, but not least: the wooden boxes. I have to confess, they really look nice. But I rather would spend my money in the quality of the microphones than in wooden boxes. And there is nothing wrong protection wise with the plastic box of the Chinese Oktavas.
Conclusion: I didn't find IMPORTANT differences between MY 'old' Russian and 'new' Chinese Oktavas.
If you have any questions about my tests, I am glad to give further information. I would really be interested to read about tests with the ‘new’ Russian (labelled with Russian letters) Oktavas.
Bye for now,
Löti
Hi there,
I am following this thread, and I am amazed that no one has actually written something about the quality of the Chinese made Okatva MC 012s.
We were given all the details about the war between Okatva and McKay, but I am more interested in microphones than in legal wars.
Just a few words about myself: I am a freelance sound engineer from Germany. I am mainly doing mastering, but also live recordings with a single pair of stereo microphones (ORTF).
I am owning a couple of ‘original’ (Russian?) Oktava MC 012s. I’ve bought them in July 1998 from the official German Oktava distributor. The came with 3 capsules, the metal holder and the 10dB pad in a nice wooden box. They look like the ‘Original Oktava produced in Russia’ (see at http://www.oktava.tula.net/fake/), except for the following differences:
- label reads: Oktava MC 012 (in western letters)
- no serial number
- A.S.M. logo
Here is a photo of both types that I own (http://www.jmmp.com/Oktava.jpg) – left side: Original MC 012s – right side: Chinese MC 012s
I find it very interesting, that these ‘old’ Oktavas, which are certainly NOT produced in China, have the A.S.M. label. It seems, that they were produced for and/or imported by McKay!
BIG question: Does anybody actually owns Russian Oktava MK-012s described as in the Oktava link, which has been bought some years ago.
I’ve paid EUR 768 (= US Dollars 970) for two sets. It wasn’t a matched pair, because the distributor told me at that time, that the differences between the microphones were so small, that you could combine any two microphones. The microphones didn’t look great. One had little ditches on the body, and I had to have a (free) replacement of 2 out of the 6 capsules, because they were buzzing. So much for the quality assurance of the original Russian microphones. But I have to say: I did lots of choir and symphony recordings over the last 7 years and they always sounded good to me.
Recently I bought a ‘matched pair’ of Oktava MC 012s from the German shop Thomann for EUR 266 (US Dollars 335). Because I already had the 3 capsules, which came with my ‘old’ Oktavas, I only needed the microphones with the cardioids capsules. The Oktavas that came from Thomann look exactly like the so-called ‘new revised series’ (see at http://www.oktava.tula.net/fake/). So you can imagine my astonishment to find out all about the Chinese production. Because Thomann has a 30-days-money-back trade, I had to decide, whether to keep the microphones or return them for good. To say it in a walnut – I will keep them. Here are my reasons (please notice, that this is MY subjective opinion!):
1. I had made a choir concert recording with the Chinese Oktavas BEFORE I heard about their origins. For me, while I was recording, the sound of the recording was as good as always (usually I am using the ‘old’ Oktavas).
2. At home I’ve made a test with the different microphones: I used a Chinese body and made recordings with my 2 old and 2 new cardioids capsules. http://www.jmmp.com/KRK-V8.jpg
The recordings had 4 parts:
a) sine tone 1kHz at – 6dB
b) sine sweep from 5Hz to 20kHz
c) white noise
d) outtake from Eagles ‘Hotel California’ (Live version)
I’ve also made a recording with one capsule using an ‘old’ body to check differences between the bodies.
I didn’t do absolute measurements; I rather tried to spot differences between the Russian and the Chinese Oktavas. I used Steinberg’s WaveLab with the plug-in FreeFilter to compare frequency responses. Here are the results:
a) the sensitivity differences of all 4 capsules (at 1kHz) are in a +/- 0.5 dB range
b) there is NO significant difference in the frequency response of the bodies; that means all differences are in a +/- 1.0 dB range
c) there is NO significant difference in the frequency response of the old and the new cardioids capsules; the differences between the old and the new capsules are not greater than the differences between the two old capsules.
d) the differences between the two new (matched) capsules are smaller than the differences between the two old (not matched) capsules.
3. Building quality: as mentioned before, I wasn’t impressed with the quality of the original Oktavas. The Chinese Oktavas feel better in quality: the body is a bit heavier (80 grams – the original body weighs 55 grams), the capsules screw on easily and it seems that the contacts of the XLR connector are gold coated. I can’t say anything about the electronic circuits, because I didn’t want to take the microphone apart (because of warranty reasons). Altogether the quality of the Chinese Oktavas looks superior to the original ‘old’ Oktavas.
4. The Chinese Oktavas come with standard (elastic rubber) holders instead of the metal holders. I don’t think this is a drawback. Because the MC 012s have no Low Cut, they are quite sensitive for low rumble, e.g. from the microphone stand. So the rubber holders are a better choice than the metal holders, which give no sound insulation from the stand at all. Anyway, I would strongly recommend to use shock mounts, which are suitable for microphone bodies with 20 mm diameter (e.g. http://www.oktava-online.com/sm.htm or http://www.thomann.de/index.html?partner_id=97926&page=oktava_sm012_mikrofonspinne_prodinfo.html).
5. The -10 dB pad is not included. This isn’t a problem for me, because I never used the pad with my old Oktavas. If necessary, you can order it separately (http://www.thomann.de/index.html?partner_id=97926&page=artikel-180077.html)
6. Last, but not least: the wooden boxes. I have to confess, they really look nice. But I rather would spend my money in the quality of the microphones than in wooden boxes. And there is nothing wrong protection wise with the plastic box of the Chinese Oktavas.
Conclusion: I didn't find IMPORTANT differences between MY 'old' Russian and 'new' Chinese Oktavas.
If you have any questions about my tests, I am glad to give further information. I would really be interested to read about tests with the ‘new’ Russian (labelled with Russian letters) Oktavas.
Bye for now,
Löti
crazydoc
Master Baiter
Fantastic post, Loeti - thanks.
So in summary, your impression is that the sonic character/quality of the new "Chinese" version is as good as that of the old "made for export" Russian version, and that the build quality of the Chinese version is superior to that of the Russian one. Correct me if I've misunderstood.
From your post I assume that the new and old capsules and bodies are interchangeable, despite some cosmetic differences (the threads and connecting pins match.) From this I would also assume that the -10dB pads from the old version also fit on the new one, though you didn't specifically address this.
Again, thanks for the first hand, specific information that is so often lacking here.
So in summary, your impression is that the sonic character/quality of the new "Chinese" version is as good as that of the old "made for export" Russian version, and that the build quality of the Chinese version is superior to that of the Russian one. Correct me if I've misunderstood.
From your post I assume that the new and old capsules and bodies are interchangeable, despite some cosmetic differences (the threads and connecting pins match.) From this I would also assume that the -10dB pads from the old version also fit on the new one, though you didn't specifically address this.
Again, thanks for the first hand, specific information that is so often lacking here.
giraffe
i love negative rep
if thats not a commercial, i don't know what is.
giraffe
i love negative rep
Loeti said:
his tests may be correct, but this smacks of an agenda.
L
Loeti
New member
Hi Giraffe & Crazydog,
first of all, I want one thing to be sure: I am NEITHER sponsored by Thomann NOR McKay NOR any other commercial company evolved in the production of the Chinese Oktavas!
1. My only intention in doing and posting my test, was to find out (for myself), if I should keep the microphones or send them back. I couldn’t find any comments regarding the quality of the microphones in this forum. Everybody seems to assume, that because the microphones were produced in China, they must be crap. For reason unknown to me nobody seems to doubt the quality of a Russian production line
If you would throw everything away in your house, which is produced (maybe unknowingly) in China, your house would probably be half empty 
. Also half the microphone discussed and recommended in this forum are manufactured in China. Even if you don’t like them, they have one good thing: they’ve made the old-established companies (like Neumann, AKG and so on) come forward with cheaper versions of their out-of-this-world priced microphones. I don’t doubt, that there is lots of expensive handwork in an Neumann microphone, but I can’t see the reason, why a shock mount has to cost US Dollars 200.
2. I don’t know the quality of the ‘new’ Russian labelled Oktavas. They might be far superior to the ‘new’ Chinese production. But because my ‘old’ exported Oktavas and the ‘new’ Russian Oktavas have so many details in common (I can post more photos to proof this), I assumed, that they are made at the same production line. But this uncertainty is the reason why I want to know, if anybody is able to compare the ‘new’ Russian labelled with the ‘new’ Chinese Oktavas.
3. Most major music stores here in Germany have a 30-day-money-back guarantee. That means, if you don’t like the gear you bought, you can send it back (of course in unused condition and in the original package). So everybody who wants to check out the quality of the Chinese Oktavas should be able to do it this way.
Now to Crazydogs questions:
So in summary, your impression is that the sonic character/quality of the new "Chinese" version is as good as that of the old "made for export" Russian version, and that the build quality of the Chinese version is superior to that of the Russian one.
YES, this is my true opinion.
From your post I assume that the new and old capsules and bodies are interchangeable, despite some cosmetic differences (the threads and connecting pins match.) From this I would also assume that the -10dB pads from the old version also fit on the new one, though you didn't specifically address this
I have made the test with the old 10dB Pad and it fits nicely. In fact, I had no problems putting on the old capsules on the new body, but the other way round.
Thank you for you interest,
Löti
first of all, I want one thing to be sure: I am NEITHER sponsored by Thomann NOR McKay NOR any other commercial company evolved in the production of the Chinese Oktavas!
1. My only intention in doing and posting my test, was to find out (for myself), if I should keep the microphones or send them back. I couldn’t find any comments regarding the quality of the microphones in this forum. Everybody seems to assume, that because the microphones were produced in China, they must be crap. For reason unknown to me nobody seems to doubt the quality of a Russian production line
If you would throw everything away in your house, which is produced (maybe unknowingly) in China, your house would probably be half empty . Also half the microphone discussed and recommended in this forum are manufactured in China. Even if you don’t like them, they have one good thing: they’ve made the old-established companies (like Neumann, AKG and so on) come forward with cheaper versions of their out-of-this-world priced microphones. I don’t doubt, that there is lots of expensive handwork in an Neumann microphone, but I can’t see the reason, why a shock mount has to cost US Dollars 200.2. I don’t know the quality of the ‘new’ Russian labelled Oktavas. They might be far superior to the ‘new’ Chinese production. But because my ‘old’ exported Oktavas and the ‘new’ Russian Oktavas have so many details in common (I can post more photos to proof this), I assumed, that they are made at the same production line. But this uncertainty is the reason why I want to know, if anybody is able to compare the ‘new’ Russian labelled with the ‘new’ Chinese Oktavas.
3. Most major music stores here in Germany have a 30-day-money-back guarantee. That means, if you don’t like the gear you bought, you can send it back (of course in unused condition and in the original package). So everybody who wants to check out the quality of the Chinese Oktavas should be able to do it this way.
Now to Crazydogs questions:
So in summary, your impression is that the sonic character/quality of the new "Chinese" version is as good as that of the old "made for export" Russian version, and that the build quality of the Chinese version is superior to that of the Russian one.
YES, this is my true opinion.
From your post I assume that the new and old capsules and bodies are interchangeable, despite some cosmetic differences (the threads and connecting pins match.) From this I would also assume that the -10dB pads from the old version also fit on the new one, though you didn't specifically address this
I have made the test with the old 10dB Pad and it fits nicely. In fact, I had no problems putting on the old capsules on the new body, but the other way round.
Thank you for you interest,
Löti
crazydoc
Master Baiter
giraffe said:
The paranoia in this forum truly verges on the psychotic.giraffe said:
giraffe
i love negative rep
he's trying to validate plastic mic clips.
let me put it this way.
who cares
people that preach the value of a mic clip as a selling point are trying to sell.
(blind
)
let me put it this way.
who cares
people that preach the value of a mic clip as a selling point are trying to sell.
(blind
)
P
paddyponchero
New member
Firstly thanks for taking the time to reply Löti, good post.
Very few people have these mics and very many people will hold off on buying them until there is more concrete evidence as to their quality. Also judging by your own "astonishment to find out all about the Chinese production" I imagine that you yourself would have been very hesitant to buy these mics.
Regarding the china issue for a few extra dollars I can get a matched pair of C4s with cardioid and omni caps, and a guaranteed customer service. I don't have the money to gamble on an unknown entity.
The russian oktavas are a known quantity, there are many reviews and many, many users worldwide. There are QC problems but considering the good feedback I am willing to take a risk on these an have had no issues with my oktavas.
Loeti said:
Very few people have these mics and very many people will hold off on buying them until there is more concrete evidence as to their quality. Also judging by your own "astonishment to find out all about the Chinese production" I imagine that you yourself would have been very hesitant to buy these mics.
Regarding the china issue for a few extra dollars I can get a matched pair of C4s with cardioid and omni caps, and a guaranteed customer service. I don't have the money to gamble on an unknown entity.
Loeti said:For reason unknown to me nobody seems to doubt the quality of a Russian production line
The russian oktavas are a known quantity, there are many reviews and many, many users worldwide. There are QC problems but considering the good feedback I am willing to take a risk on these an have had no issues with my oktavas.
L
Loeti
New member
Hi there,
Giraffe – I didn’t praise the microphone clips that came with the Chinese MC 012s; and I didn’t recommend the Chinese Oktavas over the Original Oktavas because of the clips! I don’t know what kind of clips you are using for your mics . The Chinese clips (dig this - http://www.jmmp.com/Clips.jpg) are the same kind, that ‘decent’ companies like Beyerdynamic or AKG include with their microphones. They hold the microphones firmly and give a little body insulation from the microphone stand. Anyway – I still would strongly recommend to use a spider shock mount; either the original Oktava or any other suitable. If you have the money go ahead and buy some from Neumann.
And – you should still be able to buy Original Russian Oktavas (Europe: http://www.oktava-online.de/ or USA: http://www.oktavausa.com/) if in doubt with the Chinese quality.
Paddyponchero – thank you for your qualified answer. Yes, I was astonished by the Chinese production first. Because there are two different possibilities:
1. Chinese like to copy famous products (e.g. watches): they look like the Original from the outside, but don’t have the quality build in. In this case the microphone would look like Oktavas, but don’t sound like them.
2. Chinese companies build by order of western companies with the original blue prints. Behringer is a famous company, which designs the products in Germany, but let them build in China. And there is nothing wrong with that.
I also bought deliberately a Chinese Large Diaphragm Microphone (t-bone SC 450) some time ago. I knew it wouldn’t match with a Neumann U87, but for the purpose (speech) I needed it for, it was satisfying.
I am sure the Studio Projects C4s are a bargain as well. Above all they come with spider shock mount, 10 dB Pad and two capsules. But they probably wouldn’t be a good fit with my old Oktavas, which I didn’t want to replace but complement.
I think the main question is, if the Chinese Oktavas are licensed ‘copies’ or not. I can’t give you a legal answer to this question, but from what I have seen and heard, I rather doubt, that the Chinese Oktavas are piracy copies.
Giraffe – I didn’t praise the microphone clips that came with the Chinese MC 012s; and I didn’t recommend the Chinese Oktavas over the Original Oktavas because of the clips! I don’t know what kind of clips you are using for your mics
. The Chinese clips (dig this - http://www.jmmp.com/Clips.jpg) are the same kind, that ‘decent’ companies like Beyerdynamic or AKG include with their microphones. They hold the microphones firmly and give a little body insulation from the microphone stand. Anyway – I still would strongly recommend to use a spider shock mount; either the original Oktava or any other suitable. If you have the money go ahead and buy some from Neumann.And – you should still be able to buy Original Russian Oktavas (Europe: http://www.oktava-online.de/ or USA: http://www.oktavausa.com/) if in doubt with the Chinese quality.
Paddyponchero – thank you for your qualified answer. Yes, I was astonished by the Chinese production first. Because there are two different possibilities:
1. Chinese like to copy famous products (e.g. watches): they look like the Original from the outside, but don’t have the quality build in. In this case the microphone would look like Oktavas, but don’t sound like them.
2. Chinese companies build by order of western companies with the original blue prints. Behringer is a famous company, which designs the products in Germany, but let them build in China. And there is nothing wrong with that.
I also bought deliberately a Chinese Large Diaphragm Microphone (t-bone SC 450) some time ago. I knew it wouldn’t match with a Neumann U87, but for the purpose (speech) I needed it for, it was satisfying.
I am sure the Studio Projects C4s are a bargain as well. Above all they come with spider shock mount, 10 dB Pad and two capsules. But they probably wouldn’t be a good fit with my old Oktavas, which I didn’t want to replace but complement.
I think the main question is, if the Chinese Oktavas are licensed ‘copies’ or not. I can’t give you a legal answer to this question, but from what I have seen and heard, I rather doubt, that the Chinese Oktavas are piracy copies.
R
Robert D
New member
So let me get this straight....there's a Russian/Chinese/British microphone conspiracy going on, and now they've enlisted an operative in Germany? Jeez they must be nervous over at Neuman!
