Under the hood - inside the Marshall V67G and the Sound

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2001 9:06 pm

After this last exchange with Alan Hyatt, I've decided to stop evaluating the rest of the Studio Projects line of microphones. My reasons are listed in my answer to Alan below: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Alan Hyatt: I can understand Harvey's and other's initial reaction of perhaps feeling gypped out of a bunch of screws, but this is simply not the case. This is a case of newer technology at work. I hope this will satisfy the groups concern over this matter.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>"Feeling gypped out of a bunch of screws"? Damn, that's a pretty cheap shot, isn't it, Alan? I open up the mic, I'm impressed with it, but than I find a ring with a lotta holes for screws (just like the ring on the front of the capsule), but only two screws holding it in place. Do I feel like I've been gypped outta some screws?Let's say that I take the wheel covers off my brand new car, only to discover that one of the wheels is only held on with two screws, but the wheel has screw holes for all the missing screws. Do I feel like I've been "gypped outta some screws"? Notice I didn't say in the report "this is fucked", I wasn't sure if that was the way it was supposed to look. And so I called you ASAP to find out if that was normal. And then I immediately commented in all the newsgroups that this was normal; I didn't take any cheap shots at your decision to just use two screws, and I went on to praise the sound of the mic.I'm getting the impression that you don't really want these looked at hard, or real evaluations made, Alan. You're just looking for fast glowing reviews that you can use. I told you up front that I won't play that game.My tests are over on your mics, Alan. Sorry to have wasted your time. I'll send them to Tom Cram at dbx if you'd like, or to Ty Ford, your choice. They'll both provide you with an honest evaluation. Ty is the expert at mic testing.My conclusions? The C1 seems to be a good value, but without listening to a second unit, I won't comment on it's reliability or consistency. If you send the second C1, I'll pass it on to whomever you want to use to continue the tests. Maybe another tester will be more tractable.Respectfully,Harvey Gerst, Bottom-Feeder

Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2001 7:25 am

Right on!Harvey I applaud your integrity. I started out life as a journalist (quickly derailed by music). And you cannot be expected to review a product/business/service with the proprietor countering your every comment. I had this happen once when I was writing for The Park Record. I was reviewing a new art museum/store and the owner came down to the offices to "assist" me. Right in the bullpen, right in front of my peers (my editor was at lunch) he started editing my copy. After a frustrating half an hour, I looked him in the eye and said "I think I'll forgo the review of your store and do a story about this instead." He apologized and hastily left. I don't think that he was intentionally derailing the process, he just got caught up. He needed someone to reel him in. Some people get in "Sales Weasel" mode and can't stop (it's a sickness). However, some people are just control freaks, plain and simple. Time and action will tell which one Alan is. Alan is getting hit from all sides on a lot of different bbs' for a lot of different reasons. Some valid, some not, IMHO. Adversity brings out the best and the worst in people.

Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2001 9:27 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Cram: Right on!Harvey I applaud your integrity. I started out life as a journalist (quickly derailed by music). And you cannot be expected to review a product/business/service with the proprietor countering your every comment. .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Absolutely!! Simon

Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2001 12:42 pm

One of the most frank, honest, non-bullshit notes I've ever read. One of the hardest things to come by is objectivity. Thank you Mr Gerst.

Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2001 9:31 pm

Jees, how stupid to expect there should be screws in screw holes, what were we all thinking. Rolling Eyes

Sounds like just another scheming importer to me, and I'd imagine his input on the mic involved the color and the silk screening. I'm sure he'll be back to selling shoes soon.Bear

Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2001 8:39 am

hey harvey-great stuff -- how about another 'down & dirty' comparison on a few budget TUBE mics? perhaps the Marshall MXL-V77, Nady makes one called the TCM 1100, the ADK 51TC, maybe the Rode one too? whaddya say...?

Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2001 7:41 pm

Big problem with that is I'm not a reviewer, and I don't wanna be. This was for my own information and to share my findings with a few of my friends. I'm ok at testing some stuff, but 5 words from someone like Stephen Paul are worth more than 5 pages of my writing. I run a studio for a living and that's what I like to do.

Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2001 10:10 am

Harvey, no disrespect to Stephen Paul or anyone else but in this instance it is exactly your perspective that were interested in hearing thats why were reading your forum. Please continue to share your impressions and evaluations, for most of us "bottom feeders" this is the kind of reflection were interested in. Thanks for sharing your observation's.

Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2001 10:13 am

P.S. fuck what alan hyatt says, let us hear your thoughts and then we can evaluate the info for ourselves.

Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2001 5:36 am

You know, speaking as a guy who obviously made a purchase decision based on this thread, I want to make something clear.I was already right on the edge about purchasing the V67G when I spotted Harvey's beautiful "take apart" article. My main concern was with the mic's construction (I've heard one), and this thread spoke to that beautifully. One of the most devestating charges brought against the Chinese mics is that they're not well-built. The sight of the Marshall's lovely brass capsule pushed me over the edge and I made a purchase. The Studio Projects mic may, indeed, sound wonderful - I have not heard it, and if I had I would hesitate to express my ignorant opinion in such august company! - no disrespect intended, Mr. Hyatt. I'm sure the epoxied back side of the capsule works just great and the extra holes in the retaining ring might indicate a cost-savings (cheaper to make just one ring and use it on the front and the back, perhaps?) But to a tire-kicker like me it doesn't *look* good. Maybe somebody said, "who cares that the ring has too many holes, it has zero effect on the sound and they'll never see it," but they were incorrect. We saw. It looks kinda ugly.Mr. Hyatt, if possible I'd clean up that capsule JUST a bit so the interior appearance will do justice to all the people who work hard to produce the Studio Projects mics. Maybe do a new set of rear retaining rings for the back of the capsule with just two holes in it? And just so the new models wouldn't be confused with the old you could call it the C-1hg? Might be a nice gesture and a happy ending to this tempest in a teacup.Perhaps the "orignal" C-1's will become collector's items? Certainly there will be people who claim they can hear the screw-holes in the retaining ring, hehehe.Thank you again, Harvey. I hope you don't give up the reviews but you sure deserve a break after all this "screwy" business! We beginners have OODLES to learn from you other than product reviews. I'll shut up now and once again take my seat at the feet of the Master. Very Happy

This topic sponsored by: