The $5,000 vs $500 Debate

  • Thread starter Thread starter Giganova
  • Start date Start date
Giganova

Giganova

gimmi your mic!
Hi there --

over the past few years I had a recording setup that I considered rather high end -- for the sole purpose to record me playing tenor saxophone over tracks other guys provide. I guess I am like everyone else on this board: the best is just good enough. ;) The signal chain alone was worth more than $5,000.- (Gefell microphone, good cables, Neve clone preamp, Allen & Heath board, AD/DA converter, RME Hammerfall soundcard).

Since I got married I had to liquidate my studio, which was a hard decision. However, since I felt the urge to record my tenor saxophone again, I recently bought the simplest recording setup one could image, at a budget I still consider "responsible" for a family guy: one "ok" microphone (Rode NT2-A; $350.- new form GC) and a simple USB interface (M-Audio MobilePre; $125.-). Total costs: <$500.-. Right after I bought these two pieces of gear, I plugged them into my notebook and recorded my saxophone straight into Logic (which I still had installed on my computer).

I didn't expect much and was prepared that the sound would suck ... but much to my suprise it sounded absolutly wonderful! I compared the track recorded before with my >$5,000.- setup with that recorded with the <$500.- over and over again, and played it to some very experienced sound engineers -- and noone can hear a difference!

What I am asking is: are we obsessing with high-end gear??
 
Giganova said:
"What I am asking is: are we obsessing with high-end gear??"
Click to expand...

Yes, I think, to a point, many do go overboard. I have heard band demos come out sounding BETTER from a 1000 dollar setup, than a 10,000 dollar studio. True, it will depend on the producer/band/engineer(s) but, once you're at a certain skill level, you can get sound out of many "cheaper" things. Again, in some cases, more is better, and often the opposite will better suit.
e.g.: Individual buys a 1200 dollar tube preamp instead of 600 dollar pre, simply because he thinks it will sound that much better. There really is no gain...

Of course, I'm a n00b and don't know what I'm talking about! :p
 
Hey it's an SOTW brother.....
Where's the recording? I'd like to hear it if you wouldn't mind sharing it. :)
 
Giganova said:
Hi there --



I played it to some very experienced sound engineers -- and noone can hear a difference!

What I am asking is: are we obsessing with high-end gear??
Click to expand...

That's a bit weird. Even without getting into the subjective 'better' or 'worse' discussion, there MUST be audible differences in the files. Even without considering the gear used in the equation, your mic placment/room acoustics differences between the takes should have resulted in clear, audible differences. So i guess, my question is what do you mean by 'hear no difference'. Do you mean they could not say which was better/worse (could be an expected result), or could not hear any differences whatsoever (unlikely unless something is screwed up)?

- oh yeah...yup obsessing about stuff...but obsession/concentration on the details can be a path to learning...and the more you learn, the better you get. Gotta be kept in perspective though.....
 
teainthesahara said:
That's a bit weird. Even without getting into the subjective 'better' or 'worse' discussion, there MUST be audible differences in the files. Even without considering the gear used in the equation, your mic placment/room acoustics differences between the takes should have resulted in clear, audible differences. So i guess, my question is what do you mean by 'hear no difference'.
Click to expand...
Ahh, good point and thanks for asking: I didn't even want to go so far, but the recording with my rather inexpensive setup sounds actually better since I can now use the mic in Figure 8 pattern (the Rode NT2A allows this, the Gefell and Neumann mics which I had didn't), which opened up the sound quite a bit. Also, of course I am a better sax player in the meantime and this is what you clearly hear. What you don't hear are things that are discussed here at length: converters, sample/bit rates, the quality of pres and other more technical things. Maybe I am just much better at recording (e.g., mic placement), but the bottom line is: the entire gear only gets you so far, and it requires surprisingly little gear to get really good results if the music is all right.


Edit: the room was identical and I used the exact same spot in the room b/c I knew that this spot sounds good.
 
I, too, think that some people can get carried away by price tags, and spend much more than they need to. I also agree that in many cases, a tenfold difference in price does not mean a tenfold increase in sound quality.

However, there are other factors. While it is true that an increase in price is caused by higher quality components and better signal path, sometimes you pay a price not for improved sound quality, but for increased reliability and dependability.

Budget gear can deliver very good results (specially in the hands of those who know what they're doing), but by their very nature, these good results may last a comparatively short while (because the faders break, the power supply burns out, or a solder joint cracks).

Other factors affecting price would include the value of reputation and the influence of fashion.

But . . . in general I agree . . . we can be too obsessive about high-end gear.
 
Firstly, I think there's that whole "ohh! Blinking lights!" effect- dropping $1000 on a mic pre is like a street racer buying a wing- chances are thay won't need it, and the performance may not be increased, but they've got it, and damn, it looks cool.

I think another factor here is that a lot of us have aspirations of "going pro". I know that when I buy I unit, I think to myself "If I were a performer, and I saw this unit in a studio that I was paying for, would I be inpressed or not?"
Admitedly, I record other people for a crust, and rarely record myself.

The other thing is that in an open forum like this, where you've got the full spectrum of talent from noob to UberMaster, you're going to have people reading "above their level" to a degree. Sure, I might look into buying a GAMA or a Grace 801, but that's because I record 48 tracks at a time, so I need high-end, 8 channel pres. However, when I ask a question about those units, people who are recording themselves and a guitar will read the thread, hear rave reviews, and go "Hey, something's lacking in my sound... maybe it's because I haven't invested $10k in pres..." To paraphrase Hannibal Lecter- "We covet what we see". And right now I'm coveting the hell out of a GAMA.

So, yes, I think there is some obsession. It depends on what's going into the system, how it's used in the middle, and what you expect to get out of it. If you can't tell the difference from spending 10 times the cash, then you probably don't need to. Most people on this forum would be better off buying 10 times the gear, hence getting 10 times the experience. Then you can sell it all and start again. I know this goes agianst the logic of some of the pros out there like Massive Mastering, who believe that you should sink everything into your pres and monitors, the fact of the matter is until you've got the skills down pat, then you're not going to be able to use the gear. Back to hte car analogy, would you give a person on their learner's the keys to your "fully sick" drag car? Probably not.

(PS: On the topic of using gear that you're not skilled enough to use AND street racers, here's an article I wrote about the stupidity of wings on cars a while back. I was reading it the other day, hence having it on hte brain. It's highly informal, and quite probably offensive, but who the heck cares?
http://www.shagtech.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=111 )
 
Giganova said:
Edit: the room was identical and I used the exact same spot in the room b/c I knew that this spot sounds good.
Click to expand...
This is probably more important than any of the gear, and add the improvement in your playing ability, you have a better recording.
 
Another factor to consider is whether the expensive chain can be useful for a lot more sources than just your saxophone. The difference is what we call a "one-trick pony". A cheaper chain may produce spectacular results for a particular instrument, but it's not universal enough to use for a lot of different situations. For some things, the less expensive chain will be a better match.
 
This isn't intended as a knock on anyone ... but I would guess that most of the guys on this board are probably not in a situation / environment or circumstances that would allow them to take full advantage of an expensive / high-end signal chain.

And to be fair, some of them just aren't there "yet."

What your story tells me is that you've likely got other limitations that are otherwise outweighing any of the benefits derived from such a signal chain; this includes anything from the room accoustics, engineering skill set ... all the way down to the quality and technique of the instrument itself.

The ironic thing is that, once you get all of those other factors up to a certain level ... then you don't necessarily even need high end gear in order to make 'very good' recordings anyway. It just becomes icing on an already-tasty cake.

.
 
I would think that the majority of people who post here are somewhat obsessed with some aspects of their signal chain or the very art of recording itself. That, in my opinion, is a very good thing in the home recording world. Our "obsessions" keep the markets full of the very goodies that fuel debate here daily. I could never have have purchased a studio grade microphone thirty years ago for two hundred dollars. I guess I am still "obsessed" with music and recording in general and that is a good thing. One thing I do not obsess about is microphones. The debates here seem to border on the absurd about a device that in theory and application reacts differently to every voice and room inviroment and the very chain it is forever attached too. I think it's all good.

Chip Evans
 
chessrock said:
This isn't intended as a knock on anyone ... but I would guess that most of the guys on this board are probably not in a situation / environment or circumstances that would allow them to take full advantage of an expensive / high-end signal chain.

And to be fair, some of them just aren't there "yet."

What your story tells me is that you've likely got other limitations that are otherwise outweighing any of the benefits derived from such a signal chain; this includes anything from the room accoustics, engineering skill set ... all the way down to the quality and technique of the instrument itself.


.
Click to expand...

Thank you.

I see this a lot in my travels, and to a certain extent I am guilty of this one myself.

As in my case, I am getting ready to test out some of the TLM line, the U87 and 89, and a series of Gefell.

I'm getting to the point where I am doing enough equity work that I can justify the expense, and sadly, when reading an audition for a client or agency, certain words sell your ability a bit better. One of them would be "Neumann", which in a large part explains the proliferation of models like the TLM103 in the VO industry over the last few years. Add that to the number of people who just want a Neumann in their home studio, you have the saturation of the market that we currently see.

I've seen several studios lose business because they didn't have a selection of Neumann equipment for the client to use. I know that I had a hard time getting certain clients to let me audition from home (as opposed to paying mad $ to travel) for the same reason. Some still refuse, simply because I do not have a "high end" mic sitting in the closet of my home studio.

That said, I often run into people who just got into the game who want to buy the very best. If you can afford it, then it's your money to lose, but for the most part you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the your TLM103 and the NT1A on most recordings (truth told, I still use the NT1A for a good number of commercial VO readings).

Meh, you know what they say about a fool and their money.
 
I dont do mixing, so I need things that just sound phenomenal alone, (most of the stuff I do is minimalist mic techniques>>preamp>>adc>>recorder, 99% classical location recording)
ive tested out a lot of gear in the time ive been recording...I have found that , at least for me, anyway...the more expensive stuff has GENERALLY done a better job for the work that I do. Since I dont care how things sit" in a mix" because I dont mix, absolute fidelity at the front end is extremely important. I think expensive gear is more an issue in classical recording, because out there alone, without compression, reverb, autotune, etc....the strengths and weaknesses of gear really show.. ive found that it really shows badly with some lower priced stuff...Generally.
(Exceptions to this rule...AT 4050s, DAV BG-1 preamps, DPA 4060/4061 mics, Beyer m130/m160 ribbons, and shinybox ribbons) I started out with a pair of c4s and an edirol preamp. I listen to it now and want to vomit....

I guess you can get by with cheaper gear more often if it is masked by other things in a mix and compression, limiting, reverb, other effects, etc???

With classical there is none of that(well, there is, but the overproduced stuff sucks!)

Classical Listeners are particularly picky about quality, more than any genre ive seen...and classical engineers have some of the most expensive gear ive ever seen.
 
Giganova said:
Hi there --

over the past few years I had a recording setup that I considered rather high end -- for the sole purpose to record me playing tenor saxophone over tracks other guys provide. I guess I am like everyone else on this board: the best is just good enough. ;) The signal chain alone was worth more than $5,000.- (Gefell microphone, good cables, Neve clone preamp, Allen & Heath board, AD/DA converter, RME Hammerfall soundcard).

Since I got married I had to liquidate my studio, which was a hard decision. However, since I felt the urge to record my tenor saxophone again, I recently bought the simplest recording setup one could image, at a budget I still consider "responsible" for a family guy: one "ok" microphone (Rode NT2-A; $350.- new form GC) and a simple USB interface (M-Audio MobilePre; $125.-). Total costs: <$500.-. Right after I bought these two pieces of gear, I plugged them into my notebook and recorded my saxophone straight into Logic (which I still had installed on my computer).

I didn't expect much and was prepared that the sound would suck ... but much to my suprise it sounded absolutly wonderful! I compared the track recorded before with my >$5,000.- setup with that recorded with the <$500.- over and over again, and played it to some very experienced sound engineers -- and noone can hear a difference!

What I am asking is: are we obsessing with high-end gear??
Click to expand...

Thankyou!!! Finally someone else who has discovered that you dont need high end gear to get a great sound! Me personally, I spend even less than you. I got a V67G mic and a VTB-1 preamp (<$200) and some BX5a's for mixing, and I could not be happier about the quality of my recordings. I remember in a thread not too long ago someone was asking whether they should get the DMP3 or the VTB-1, and I told them to get the VTB-1 because it is cheaper and they wont hear the difference anyway. To me, the money should not go towards a signal chain, it should go towards acoustics and monitors. I know people who have gotten excellent results using the cheapest gear.
 
I always like seeing this point raised, Giga. I think the biggest issue to consider when answering the question, much like we remind each other when asking about any equipment is this: good enough for what? Hobby or pro? One solo instrument or a full group? Layered or not? Etc.

But your question comes from the same camp as those "blind shoot-outs" that I've always enjoyed so much. Nothing strips away gear snobbery and misconceptions quicker than when we choose a monitor, mic, or anything else based solely on our ears. So often in these blind comparisons, manufacturer and price alone are not fully accurate predictors of listener preference. There always seems to be an "are you kidding?" surprise or two.

That's why forums like this one are so darned helpful.

J.
 
I have one of the cheapest setups imaginable and I get Fairly good recordings and I don"t even know how to use the Stuff for the Most part...

I Got my "BST Lab36 8Ch Stereo Mixer" New for $60 US and it has 6 fairly good sounding Pre"s (not like I have anything to compare it to) and I have 6 Amicliv 1 dynamic Mics for $100 and they are good sounding Mics especially for drums and Cabs....

I got a "Rane ME15 Stereo EQ" for $30 and a "Yahama 2020 Stereo Compressor" for $15 and a "Shure C606" for $15 and a "Peavey EC10 Condenser" Mic for $20 and a "P-4 2.6ghz ,60gb HD ,512mb Ram" for $180.....

So my whole Recording setup cost me well under $1000 with my M-Audio Delta 44 being the Most expensive single Piece of equipment I have becides my Instruments......

So you really Don"t have to sell you Children to get an OK recording set up that is at least Good enough for recording Demo"s......

Cheers
 
Interesting - I have to say that Ive been assessing some of these things too-I have just finished a home recording project -my 1st all digital (well almost) 15 SONG RECORDING -and I have to say there are things about other recordings Ive done ( direct to 2tr tape direct to DAT ) that I like better. I think so long as there are no really bad lumps and bumps in the chain ( most home gear these days is pretty well sorted from the noise etc point of view) -it depends on the room, the players , and some ok mics and technique. I would like to do a recording half as good as anything Rudy v G did with a 4channel desk and 440 2tr ampex (or similar).
 
teainthesahara said:
That's a bit weird. Even without getting into the subjective 'better' or 'worse' discussion, there MUST be audible differences in the files.
Click to expand...

Could be the monitors you're listening to them through. If that's the case, and you're using halfway decent speakers, then chances are the "end-listener" on his or her Ipod or car stereo will never, ever know the difference.

-MD
 
No matter the price tag, the end result remains the same:

Diffusion said:
I could not be happier about the quality of my recordings.
Click to expand...

The rest doesn't matter.

Some people forget that quality is an opinion, and that recording is an art. There is no wrong way, there is no better sound. I know bands who have recorded great sounding hi-fi records, and then as side projects record this technically "awful" sounding record, but you end up loving the distortion, the over compression, and poor room acoustics. It becomes a part of the character of the songs, and if these songs were clear as a bell it just wouldn't work. At least not to me.

This concept is been applied and understood in pretty much all the other art forms except for recording it seems. Painters muckin up paintings for centuries, and they still look great. Think of your sax playing, do you ever squawk but for some reason it sounded really good? or play a breathy passage that might not be the "best tone" but seems perfect for the part?

Gear are only tools to get what you want. And if thats a $100 mic pre and interface, or a $5000 mic pre an interface, then so be it, neither direction is the wrong way.
 
the end result..what was the original goal again?

yes, the end result is all that matters....er...what was the original goal again?

I think technology has opened the doors for great cheap recording tools for the masses.
due to the ear buds hand held Star Trek type audio devices...not only being cheap, but much better than my old Beatle record player with cardboard speakers and a quarter taped to the head.

I ask can you hear a difference between 16bit and 24bit really? really?well.. I don't believe you. and if you can your probably from some other planet like a Conehead or something.

$5000 BOUTIQUE/HI-END
Quality, craftsmenship, materials, scientific and historical jargon means as much as the sound and playability to this group of shoppers.....its insanity really, its just that their rich..rich insane people that try to recite scientific info. to regergetate to their drunk friends at the bar who ..well..er..are drunk.

The 15-16 yr old bands I saw this weekend were more into smashing things and SKA dancing and creating a buzz in the SKA pit...creating a fun time was #1 priority...

my 2 cents......
I highly doubt most listeners, and myself, could tell the difference in the FINAL MIX between $500 and $5000 mics and anything else.
if the end-user is wearing a blindfold...and if they had a few drinks, and playback is an earbud.....and, ..er....

its all bllsht.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top