I agree that you most often get what you pay for. It seems foolish to think that a $200 compressor can give the same quality results as a $2000 compressor does. It can’t just cost more, there has to be a reason for the higher price… design, quality of parts, etc.

For the independent musician it comes down to making choices. Do you not record anything until you can afford the best gear, or do you maximize your dollar, get the best you can for now and get started?

There really is no wrong answer; it’s what works best for you. But Kurt’s point is well taken and forewarned is forearmed.

Thanks Doug for your reply. But I am not really trying to make a point here. Or soliciting agreement. I am just posing the question and waiting for some responses. Surprisingly, I really don’t have an agenda in regards to this thread. :D I am just trying to get a conversation started. I thought this would be an interesting subject for everyone to get in on. I intend it to encompass mics, mixers, monitors, compressors, reverbs as well as digital converters and DAW programs and platforms. So here it is, is there stuff out there that sounds, works, lasts as good as more expensive gear? Kurt

Kurt, every once in a while, their is a fluke, so to speak. The short radioshack dynamic microphones that went on sale for 14.97 each that are also marketed under the sennheiser name, the SM57, and many others.

Everything is simply a tool. Sometimes a piece of lackluster equipment may be a perfect piece for a certain set-up.

I don't agree we have to line the coffers with the most expensive equipment to get the job done. Some people get spoiled by certain pieces as I have with my 3529 B&K microphones. I have done plenty of really good sounding songs on a black face adat. I think it is the diversity, that the engineer is willing to try on a given piece of equipment, cosidering the limitations.

I use to get awesome sound out of a quadraverb....when the studio I visited only had that, to work with.

As for price range and performance:

If the mics and mic placement is stable.
If the cables are high quality.
If you have good clean voltage and a solid ground.
If your monitor louspeakers and room; work.

The above is crucial to the foundation of good quality sound.

Experimentation is the key.

It seems that my attitude proceeds me :D That’s ok, but really I am not trying to make a point or state a position. No ulterior motive. Just posing a question for discussion. I am not stating my opinion, I am reasonably sure most everyone knows how I feel by now. Nothing to agree or disagree with. This thread is simply a place for discussion of other points of view besides mine. Please discuss…. Kurt

Well, it's not as if their stuff is dirt cheap in price, but I've found DaviSound gear to be top-notch for a steal of a price; especially considering it's hand-made to order and really are a custom company. The TB-6 is the best "deal" (when the price/performance ratio is the highest consideration factor) in their Tool Box lineup. I don't own the TB-6, but I have their TB-3 and it uses the same "Mic-All" preamps as in the TB-6 and TB-10. It's also the same preamps that will be in my console.

Kurt, this is very interesting. In fcat I was thinking the same subject when I created the post about mic pres at this same forum.

I was thinking beforehand: I assume bigger brothers here will hate when I mention Octapre, Digimax, Tl Audio and other nice gear that are not top, but reasonable for the guys like me that are in the middle of the pyramid.

I remember how happy I was hen I got my 02R and my PT24 Mix. I would look at Eq, mix and see lots of nice rooms in the USA using exavtly the sam gear.
Now seems this is stuff is something from project years and so"...
If we compare the late 80´s with the late 90´s. at the end of the 80´s, people were into portastudios, trying to make the hell out of a 4 or maybe an 8 track based cassete studio.
Nowadays, this same niche is into digi 001, Sonar and so. a very giant leap from those years.
Also, at that time, you would have to be extremely rich to be able to open a reasonable facility...
I was examining the Octapre/ Vocal pro a few minutes ago...
i look with good eyes and at the very same time I start rememberring some things people commented here. Buy the best you can, make a considerable leap and so.
However, how much of quality raise versus money invested?
Just to tell you how things are, for the price of an ISA 430, I can buy a brand new 2003 GM car here in Brazil.
!!!!

I think it would just depend on what you think expensive is really now i truly think tube microphones are way too overpriced i mean they are the best but way too expensive it's like hey here have your cake but don't eat it. All the great
converters compressors or in most cases eq's
cannot and will never make up for a great mic
and i think it sucks that i can get a great compressor eq and limiter and preamp all for the same price as an industry standard Tube Mic ala c12,m149,manley
that just sucks
so as i have now trailed off on the whole subject
i in no way think that anything cheap except for the few couple of phenomenons is anywhere as good
think about it
lundahl, jensen, sowter, transformers are amazing
not these 2 dollar little jobbies in a presonus
or behringer
and there are such things as bad tubes
there are soo many differences in say a
Avalon and a cheap DBX I in noway have ever skimped on the most important things
yeah sure i've been known to buy an offsuit
cable or a cheap effects unit
but hey whatever but as far as for my main signal flow nothing but the best
i would rather have an amazing stereo setup
from mic to cable to pre to comp to eq to converter or what ever
than some crappy eight channel all in one jobbie
oh well that's my two cents i'm sick of typing hAhaa!Peace and Love

hey, but you can´t compare Behringer to Presonus.
Today I almost sent to trash an old Behringer patchbay. The same with the Ultracurve ( produced a nasty sound that burned ome expensiv tweeters, etc.

I also do not believe that Focusrite Octapre ( focuswrong, as ya may call it) is so bad as most point in here.

I do not trade my At4050 to some top end $$ mics I have faced years ago.

Re-reading my earlier post I see I did a poor job of expressing my thoughts clearly. Let me try again….

I will confess to being an audio snob and a gear whore. I like to have cool toys, but mostly I need tools that effectively do what I want them to do. All of our discussions about gear really come down to preference. Mac vs. PC is preference. A $500 Beringer compressor vs. a $7000 Weiss compressor is preference, and economics.

Having all the cool gear and no knowledge is pointless. That’s what’s cool about RO. There aren’t any of us here that can’t learn from each other. Excellent! The pursuit of knowledge should be high on our list of things to acquire.

After that, buy what you can afford or bill clients for and get going. The ultimate mission is to be able to effectively communicate thoughts and emotion to your listening audience. If you know how to use your gear to get the results you want, then it’s the right piece of gear for you, regardless of what anyone else thinks of it or their ability to get the results you get.

A crappy song through great gear is still a crappy song…

Doug, Well said! :tu: :tu:

I also second Doug's post. Right on, dude.

I would argue that we have seen "price compression" (OK, pun intended). A decent professional studio (whatever that is these days) can now be nicely equipped with $50k, it used to be a cool half million when I started breathing studio air (as a musician) in the late 70's. The idea of a decent condenser microphone below $200 was simply absurd - dream on. Nice digital reverb units for $200? You gotta be kidding.

But to answer Kurt's question:
I don't believe that there are low priced units that measure up in every way. What has changed, however, is that there are now plenty of what I would call 80- or even 90 percent solutions at very reasonable prices. They can not quite match the really expensive units but they are pretty darn close. In any case they are definitely good enough to create pure magic in the hands of a gifted musician or recording engineer. Just as much as the most expensive equipment will not help anything if the musicians and the songs suck and the recording engineer doesn't have a clue.

In line with this remark I personally believe that the proliferation of inexpensive studio technologies has NOT PRODUCED ANY more high quality music and artists than it used to. Outstanding talent is rare as ever. Being able to operate a turntable or tweak the filter frequency knob of a sequencer unfortunately doesn't qualify in my opinion. Just spend a couple of hours on MP3.com and you know exactly what I am talking about :roll: . Don't mean to be arrogant, I'm nowhere as good an engineer and musician myself as I would like to be. Still, I feel blessed to be able to afford, own and operate a decently equipped studio for all kinds of purposes. I'm still working hard to get to that "pure magic" level ...

Sorry for ranting around the main topic,

MisterBlue.

What has changed, however, is that there are now plenty of what I would call 80- or even 90 percent solutions at very reasonable prices. They can not quite match the really expensive units but they are pretty darn close. In any case they are definitely good enough to create pure magic in the hands of a gifted musician or recording engineer. Just as much as the most expensive equipment will not help anything if the musicians and the songs suck and the recording engineer doesn't have a clue.

Well said MisterBlue!!! I agree wholeheartedly!!!

I think there are areas where it is obvious when lower cost items are used, and for me right now, I am struggling with the A/D conversion and Clock issues (obviously referring to the digital domain here). As Kurt has said time and time again, "Spend your money where it will make the most difference", and that location is certainly one that is debated around here quite frequently!!! For me (at least at first thought, I do reserve the option to change my mind once I think this through a bit more however!), it is:

1) A/D
2) Mic Pre Quality
3) Clock source
4) Mic quality
5) D/A

I love my Rode mics...are they as good as Neumanns? Well, probably not! Certainly not as "smooth" (however you define that term). Do they hit the "80-90% mark as MisterBlue commented...obviously *I* think so, otherwise I wouldn't buy them! Others may have a different opinon.

Let's address software DAWs for a second as an example:

Could you really tell the difference between a mix created with Sonar vs. Protools? Let's just say for a minute that the same engineer was mixing the same recorded material using the sameplug-ins same harware, mics, A/D's, etc., could you really tell the difference?

I contend that there are serious feature differences, and interface differences, but the audio engine differences are slight enough that it would be difficult to tell the differnce. (NO, I am *not* a Sonar fan, I use Cubase SX)

It would interesting to see an A/B comparison of this test, and then take a poll to see how many people could tell the difference between the 2???

Interesting topic Kurt...I could go on and on here, but I'll stop for now to let others on board...

My my...now this is such a pure example of subjective selection.Even with the 'higher end' gear there are vast differences in sound and performance.One is not 'better' than the other simply on price.Is a Millennia mic pre 'better' than a DW Fearn?More like different.The same holds true throughout all price ranges of gear of all sorts.Not just recording equipment, but almost all manufactured tools,electronics,basically everything.Someone,somewhere makes a cheaper version of what professionals in every walk of life would agree mostly,are the accepted 'best' tools in any trade.And these tools of the trade all have limitations.Even the most expensive and seemingly highest quality.My feeling on this as pertains to the recording arts is this.Better gear makes a RE's job a little easier as its easier to obtain a quality sound in less time with less futzing around.The cheaper gear will allow someone with a LOT of experience and knowledge to achieve a high level of sound quality.. probably at least 70 to 95% of the quality afforded by the higher end stuff, as long as they're willing to spend the time to use the gear within its more limited abilities.I myself,am NOT a gear snob...it costs a lot of money to be a gear snob and its really not worth it in the long run.I am a gear lover and find a lot of joy in bringing high quality sounds to a mix with whatever pieces there are around to be used.Its really amazing what you can do with virtually no gear at all if you have the mind and heart for it.

I'm certainly a bottom-feeder in this company, let's just get that clear up front. That said, seems to me we're at a strange moment in terms of the nexis of gear and art. The best gear is now by and large being used predominately in the production of the worst product, and a lot of very good product is coming out of less-than-elite rigs. I'm not just speaking of the quality of the material, but of the production quality.

A lot of things have changed to allow this to happen, including especially the introduction of workable near-pro and budget-pro stuff and a technology shift that makes it possible to record without having a bunch of guys running around just to keep the equipment functioning. Even major label acts are deciding it's better to sink $50K (or less) into a project studio than to work by the hour with the really pricey stuff.

So, Kurt's question -- are we allowing ourselves to compromise (if there is indeed a compromise) our art with substandard tools? I don't see how you could think so. Many of the most artful recordings I've heard in the last couple of years were done in budget studios, a surprising number of them owned by the band themselves. And, no offense to the big boys on this forum, but you've got to admit there's been a serious degrading in the level of innovation coming out of the big studios. (I'm thinking of something like the vanishing of dynamics, of course, but also just the flat homogenization of gear at the most elite level.)

Right. So, one answer is to look at what's actually happened since it became possible to do this stuff with semi- or budget-pro gear. And I think its clear that the real quality in engineering (for music anyhow) has followed artists out of the big budget joints and into barns, basements & warehouse spaces. The gear must be good enough.

telling the truth, every time I go to a Cd store I end up buying mostly stuff from long time groups/band ( Rush, Yes, satriani, Vai, Enigma, U2), no matter which musical style it is.

I just cannot stand the autotune effect on most productions, the same eq sweeping of some analog synth patch, etc.

To me the actual musical scene totally sucks. very boring stuff, insanely compressed. Some cool stuff goes indie, but most do not leave the band´s QG/city or some minor sales via web page.

Madonna, for example, used to sell 10 millions of a single album like the nice Like a Virgin, Immaculate Collection, the same to Mr. Jackson. compare Thriller to the very boring Invincible.
Last month I bought that Cd for just $3.2, something that should be costing like $10.

seems any dude can buy an 01V and a Digi 001 and claim himself as producer, recording engineer.
I am not into prejudice but what I see is a slight banalization of our profession.

Here in Brazil things are not different from what happenes in the USA.

I can count at least 10 Digi 001 systems around my house. Guys charging 50% of what I do with no minimal knwledge of recording is, just after the last cracked plugin.
I can not count how many times someone asked me for a plugin XXXXX. hey, you do not have that yet?
Everybody uses that!
I would answer: i do not steal . would you like someone entering your house and keeping your windows CD ?
I do not intend to be arrogant because these things happen on every level at the pyramid.
The very top guys can also complain about the midguys like me that are into PT mix, 02R.
One thing that does not separate the different $$$$ groups is talent. and that..... makes a HUGE difference.

This has always been the great debate, cost versus quality. I started my career as a performer and had to have the "BIG RIG", Hammond, Rhodes, Moog, Clavinet, Mellotron. Thank God for MIDI and everything after. Every choice I made at that point was based on what it could do for me. My first poly-synth was a Juno-60 because it was cheap, available and I needed a poly-synth fast. My next synth was a good old reliable DX-7. I learned to program the hell out of it and used it for over 15 years. Remember (or maybe not) when everything went solid state? How much do you pay now for one of those pre-solid state processors (mic, whatever) if you can find them? Remember when you couldn't get $5 for your old 808 drum machine?

Don't be caught up in the fads, don't believe that bigger (or more expensive) is better. Keep an eye on your future goals and needs as well as your budget. I'm still using gear I bought 20 years ago because it still sounds great. OK, so I waited and spent a little more than I wanted to most of the time, but the investment has proved worth it. Still love my Symetrix 528 and 501. The Audio Logic MT-44s are as useful as ever. My ASR-10 still sounds just fine. My recordings sound good (Great! Fantastic! Unbelievable! Stellar! You Believe this bullsh*t?) because I picked gear that I was comfortable with and learned it inside and out, backwards and forwards, drunk or sober, ear-fatigued or not. Michelangelo used a hammer and chisel, van Gogh used the most rudimentary of paints and brushes by todays standards. Mozart didn't have MIDI, Beethoven didn't have Pro Tools....

Well, you get the idea. True artistry is the mastery of the tools you possess, not the ones you want. Okay, so the Beatles had the highest technology around, but only on four tracks. I don't think I could do that, can you?

Sorry about the sermon.

If it sounds good, if it feels good, it IS good!
:p:

Great Uncle Bob!!!
Thanks for your nice words!

There is no replacement for knowing how to use gear well, just as there is no replacement for musical skill and talent. However, to get back on track (really liking this thread), I can definitely say there is a difference in the quality of gear.
Example: I will tell you about my compressors. The first compressor I bought was a DBX 266xl ($150). The price was right and the name was reputable, it did the job and, hey, I was 4-tracking.
A few years later I bought an RNC ($125 used) for about the same price. Do I even need to say that the RNC blew the DBX out of the water? In fact it blew it out of the rack, into a box, and all the way across the country to somebody else's rack!
To me the RNC is the benchmark for compressors at this point. I consider all other compressors by their value relative to the RNC. Brand X compressor costs $600, the cost of three RNCs- I ask myself, is the Brand X compressor going to give me the same value as three RNCs? Recently I bought an 1176 reissue for $1300, and I have already determined that IT IS worth seven RNCs.
I have a Valley People 2-610 that I feel is clearly better than the RNC, that cost me $400 used. The Valley People (and the 1176) absolutely worth two RNCs (or seven) because you just can't get the same full tones from an RNC.
The Valley People is no longer in production, so I have to say I can't think of another compressor under $800 I would think is better than the RNC. I would love to hear other opinions on this.
I am rambling here, but I am just letting my thoughts spin out onto the page (er, screen). I hope this contributes. Cheers, Doc

Hi Ya'll

Hey Doc, there is no question that the more expensive pro gear will have better specs and better quality. My sermon was aimed at all the the newcomers who have a bad case of "technolust." Most of the outboard gear in my home studio is either "old" or "budget". Some of the rooms I freelance at have the latest toys and I love using them.

The point I was trying to make is that just having the latest new toy and plugging it in will not give you a better sound. I used to work at BIG NAME MUSIC STORE. All the wannabes just had to have the latest toy used by (name of current chart topper), and then wanted to know why they didn't sound the same. Knowledge and creativity are just as important as the gear itself (as you have already mentioned).
:p:

Hey Doc:

I love the way you assign value to your compressors! Haha...that is great!!! I have done similar things lately, for example with a digital mixer (that I am only using as a Cubase control surface and as a cue monitoring mixer)...

I was looking at several mixers, and I would ask myself...does this mixer really sound TWICE as good as the other one? Or is this feature really worth an extra $1000???

It is an interesting experiment!

One other comment...

I am a big Rode mic proponent, as anyone who has hung out here long enough will attest to! Are they the best mics I could buy? Obviously not! Once again, I will say that if I had enough money, I probably would have bought something else, but since my studio is less than 3 years old, I am still trying to build it up to capacity.

Once it reaches some unknown "critical mass", it will probably be time to start replacing some of the items with their better spec'ed cousins, and this includes the Rode mics. In fact, I have already started this process with a few components, and it is less that 3 years since I started down this road being BEHIND the console rather than in FRONT of it.

I have a feeling that there are a lot of other people that hang out on this board that are in the same boat, and are relatively new to the recording side of things. We are all part of this huge "Home Studio Boom" that has occurred in the last 10 years or so.

We can only look with "wonderlust" at some of the high-end equipment that a lot of you long-time pros have acquired over the years. Is there anyone here that wouldn't prefer a Neumann over a Rode??? Probably not! It all comes down to economics (at least for me), and I have to outfit an ENTIRE studio from my "real job's" income. I have had very little income that has come directly from my meager little home studio, but I have certainly recorded some great music over the last 3 years!!! (Mine and others)

So I guess my point here is that we all have to start somewhere, and the fact that all this inexpensive recording gear that has been flooding the market has its good side, as well as its bad.

The tough part is knowing which parts to purchase when!!! For example, when buying budget gear, do you buy an Alesis compressor or the RNC??? Obviously the RNC is considered a better buy, but this is not always obvious from reading all the marketing fluff that these guys produce!!! That is why a place like this (RECORDING.ORG) is so valuable!!! (so buy some cups and tee-shirts to keep it going!)

As Kurt always reminds me, buying "disposable" gear is a waste of money, and it is better to invest money in something that has resale value.

I agree here to a point...If I was to buy a $2,000 Neumann Tube mic vs. a $500 Rode Tube mic, would I be able to justify the difference in price, considering all the gear I still need to make my studio "fully functional"? With my meager 3 years of behind the console experience, would I be able to do the Neumann justice??? I could use that extra $1500 to buy a lot of needed gear, and I still end up with a great sounding tube mic!!!

Again, the trick is in knowing which "budget gear" to buy when!!!

After spending almost 25 years in front of a console, it is completely different being BEHIND one, and at my age (40-something), I am having a TOTAL BLAST being able to record my own ideas, those of my kids, and those of my friends...all with a meager mixture of "semi-pro" gear...and isn't that why we all do this in the first place????

Years ago, I found myself in a position to work in a couple of stdios with a large selection of gear.Most of it would be considered 'classic' now and would command a lot more than was paid for it originally.The point is, it was mostly 'high-end..
So, i did a couple of projects as recorder operator/go-fer/engineer...and things sounded great.The owner/operator of one of the places decides hes had enough and shuts it down.He takes a vacation to somewhere exotic and gives me the key.I'm not to take anymore work, but i can work on my stuff and keep the gear from rusting.Don't know if any of you have worked on a 2" 3M machine, but if they sit for any length of time, restarting them and making them work properly is not that easy.
Anyway, I had this opportunity to dink on lots of cool gear.I would take our recordings and add all sorts of crap to them and think how good it was sounding.Then I'd play it at home.......the stink...the horror....
Eventually, I went back in and remixed everything with NO extra gear just the board(harrison) and the LEVELS done correctly.all eq was CUT only..
the point being that having gear(as has been said)doesnt mean a thing if you cant use it..now I have my little home set-up and i make really good sounding recordings.....but then i 'KNOW' how to record......
Having a Yen for gear is a wonderful thing..I lust everyday for pieces I would like to own...I will have some of em someday but until then I'm not the least bit disheartened or worried that my recordings arent going to come out sounding pro..
My band is currently in the middle of our album project.we have a lot of bed tracks down now and are starting to add a few features here and there.Its sounds great at this point and mostly through planning,experimentation prior to recording,proper mic selection and placement and keeping a close watch on levels...of course it would be easier if old studio owners with garages full of extra gear would bring it up here for the duration...but thats another story!

Uncle Bob and DoubleHelix,
I would like to synthesize some of your comments here, and come up with the statement that:
"RO is a great resource for figuring out what gear is really valuable and what gear is hype, plus hints and tips on developing the skill to effectively use the gear you have."
Maybe I am being a bit of a cheerleader here, but dammit I'm in a great mood! These threads are exactly what makes this place worthwhile.
Doc

A little guys point of view. . .

I think the trend is moving to what is musical (Simple and Decent) vs. using the best of the best. As a musician I hear something in my head and want to get it to print.

As long as it sounds decent and I am getting the message across that's what counts. Does it grab you by the B@lls and make impact! Can you listen to it repeatedly and not get annoyed.

The listener has always had the final say. In the day of MP3's HIFI is less important. If it doesn't move them, it doesn't matter, no matter what the budget.

The real deal is that the artist is now closer to the canvas. Musicians can now afford the tools to capture their art, insparation, and soul. That is where the difference will be found. Not in the specs!

I have lost the number of times I have seen guys happy to announce that their $0.3 blank CDRs had over 120 mp3 files.

Is this leading to some kind of banalization of Music quality/recording arts? up to which degree is it really democracy?

Oh My God!!!!

Axeman,
You make some good points, but I want to know what kind of guitar (I assume you are a guitarist from your name) you play. I would bet you play a pretty nice guitar, not a "cheap but decent" guitar (that does the job, and allows you to play the music in your head). I would guess you probably play a pretty nice guitar like a Fender or a Les Paul because you wouldn't really be satisfied with the tone/responsiveness/noisiness of a "cheap but decent" guitar.
Well the same goes for most of us! I could use cheap but decent (and believe me, I have and do) gear, but I prefer to use gear that makes my music and the music of my clients sound great.
I don't want you to think I am slamming you, but when I see a comment that "hifi doesn't matter" it makes me levitate out of my chair! I realize you are merely commenting on the current state of the industry, and I judge your comments to be perceptive and well reasoned. I feel it necessary to offer another point of view here that contrasts with your point of view, because I don't fully agree with you.
I believe it is important to have as good-sounding a signal chain as feasible. When People come in to my place I get up and running as soon as I possibly can, because if they sit around plunking/strumming/diddling/yodelling while I futz around for 2 hours they lose the feeling. I check everything for phase and make sure all my levels are good, etc, but 4 out of 5 times I go with my initial miking position and do very little eqing.
I agree with you that capturing a good performance that listeners will FEEL is the most important factor. Good gear that I can depend on allows me to do that very thing. I have found that a good mic and preamp will be more tolerant of my inprecision than a bad mic and preamp.
And that is how I see it. I am not assembling nice gear for the fun of it, but because it makes good sense. Also, people may currently be listening to MP3s that sound like crap, but that won't last in the coming era of DVD-A and SACD. The audiophile movement is just getting started!
Cheers Axeman, Doc

I think that we here are all (or at least most of us) in full agreement that sound quality matters and that the best possible chain is highly desirable. Unfortunately, we all have to deal with harsh reality and that means - for most of us - financial restrictions.

Would I trade my RME ADI8-PRO converter box for Apogees ? You bet. Would I give up my Sytek micpres for Avalons ? Quite likely. Let me know if anyone out there is up for a trade :D .

But I also have a Hammond A-102 and 122 Leslie in my studio which was only a third of the price of a "real B3" and has exactly the same tone wheel engine. Will anybody be able to tell the difference given exactly the same recording setup? I dare you to prove it.

Will even trained ears be able to tell from a recording alone whether B.B.King played an Epiphone Lucille vs. a "real" Gibson (not that he would ever have to ;) )? I have some serious doubts. Why? Because the performance at that point becomes the real differentiator, not the gear. Does anybody think that a Stevie Ray Vaughn concert would have sucked because for some funny reason he had to play a Squier Strat? No way.

The point I am trying to emphasize is that sound quality certainly matters, but there are in a lot of cases also solutions that for half, a third or a quarter of the price of an expensive unit get you a piece of equipment that in the hands of a true artist and engineer will be impossible to tell apart from the "real deal". Why? Because other factors, especially the performance, have a much bigger impact on sound quality than equipment once a certain level of quality is reached.

I do fully agree, though, that creating great recordings becomes much easier with better equipment and that the best possible signal-chain should be the goal.

MisterBlue.

Originally posted by Alécio Costa:
I have lost the number of times I have seen guys happy to announce that their $0.3 blank CDRs had over 120 mp3 files.

Is this leading to some kind of banalization of Music quality/recording arts? up to which degree is it really democracy?

Alecio,

I don't get your point. Can you clarify what you are talking about?

MisterBlue.

Doc,
Yes I do have a nice guitar that sounds good. It cost $1200 bucks NOT $4500. I also have a Marshall, not a Boutique hand built model. I guess what I was trying to get to is that decent to me means widely acceptable. To say it another way, most people wouldn't know the difference. You can't be using junk and you have to know how to use your gear. If they are listening to MP3's it won't really come through to the point where they would say WOW.

Most people wouldn't know if I was playing a Marshall or a hand made FATBOY. The guitar players would for sure but not most.

I like the better gear and I can hear the difference. My ears are getting better. I can hear sonic space, snap in a drum kit and sonic shimmer of a guitar solo in the upper register. I also love technology and I am very picky about my sound. I still get a charge out of many tunes that were recorded on my Tascam 424 which is very LOFI.

In summary, we musicians can now get our hands on the gear and the education that can get us into the ballpark with the big boys. Link that up to capturing the creative process and that's gonna have impact.

Ax

Axeman,
Your clarificaton of "widely acceptable" is helpful. I am sure that you can get good sounds out of your gear. I think it is important to keep the standards high, and like I said the days of crappy sounding MP3s are numbered (either better quality "free" files or less files available).
MrBlue,
It is possible that people might not have noticed that SRV was playing a shoddy guitar, because he had the skill to overcome it, but I am sure HE would have noticed (HE being SRV, not God). The point is that SRV did play really great guitars (go ask Randy Bachman, he owns most of them), not cheap guitars which he could get by with, and presumably he made the decision to play really great guitars because it is more rewarding. In that same sense it is more rewarding to record with great gear.
Big commercial studios are money oriented, and if they could get away with stocking the cupboards with "cheap but acceptable" gear they would. They would be lowering their capital costs. The problem is that the effect is cumulative. Recording a signal through 5 pieces of great gear and 1 piece of lowend gear is usually OK. Recording through 5 pieces of lowend gear and 1 piece of great gear is going to sound a lot smaller. Nobody wants to go to a place that has crap gear cuz it usually tells out in the end.
Read back my earlier posts, because I am not suggesting that money/nice gear is the answer to all ills. Also, not trying to be slamming on this, just I feel strongly. Cheers, Doc

Misterblue, I meant that seems that most people do not give a damn about hi-res /music quality.

Isn´t a chrome casste tape recorded with dolby C much better than these flanged squeezed free mp3´s?
at cassete tape years at least you had to borrow from someone the Cds or vinyl discs so as to make your compilation. So, someone would be really buying the stuff. Now, who pays for ?

Alecio,

you're right. A lot of people really don't give a damn anymore. I also agree that MP3's sound pretty shitty, even at somewhat higher bit rates. Whether they sound worse than tape cassettes ... I would say depends on your tape deck. The only one that I have left sitting around is frankly not that great ... but I know what you mean.

Trouble is that there are some great formats waiting to make it into the market. Acceptance of 5.1 (7.1?) channels at 24/96 on a DVD format would IMHO revitalize the music industry - provided that a viable business model can be found that effectively discourages piracy. This would also get professional studios back into the saddle. Taking lots of home/project studios to high end 5.1 capabilities is in my opinion not too likely to happen. My predictions is that this transition will happen once "connected homes" with surround capabilities become popular. My estimate is that this will be in 2005/06.

Anyway, thanks for clarifying your statement.

MisterBlue.

This is the first time I've seen anyone state that mp3 days are numbered. I would have to disagree on that, the market for space saving format is not getting smaller, they might call it something else, but HDDspace saving it is.
Even if we are nearing the end of the hard drive, with creditcard like storage device taking over. The limiter/bottleneck is the internet bandwidth, and the consumermarked are kids that can not afford buying CD's(not with current prices anyway)can you imagine the average teenager spending hours on downloading 2-3 songs. Thanks(or not) to Kaza, Morpheus etc etc.
So dear Mr Doc, this a dictating factor on the recording process(at least for now), meaning Sm58=U87 :(
I've been looking at engineer Elliott Scheiner recently, he has been specialising in surrond mixing, stereo has come to the end of the road for him. What I'm trying to come across here is, when an artist/band make music, the end justifies the means. The consumer is'nt just one or two formats anymore. This is all a bigger picture nowadays(sadly) and a platform for marketing specialists and other men/women wearing suites :(

I think that you can go overboard with top of the line Gear without even realising you've done it. IF you spend $20.00 on a mic you can expect it to sound like a dog, but then is there really going to be that much of a difference in quallity when you start paying out thousands? I don't know, I think that brand names and hype play a big part. I remember when Digidesgn bought out the 001 and the world went ape shit for the bloody things, now everybody knows that the pre's are crappy and that they are only really suitable for home use, but I have seen them being used in small commercial studios all over Australia! The same with Rode Mics, They sound pretty good for a budget mic but are you really getting the value for money? I have an NT3 that I use for live work, it started out as a bit of an experiment/joke, but now I don't use anything else because it really suites my voice. On the other hand so did an old Neumann but I honestly think I got a better deal.I think there is a limit to how much a company can charge for quality before it becomes a lot of BS, I firmly believe that digidesign and Neumann have both surpassed that limit, when I can buy Motu gear or AKG for a fraction of the price and get comparable results.I think the same can be said for almost any type of product, If you pay peanuts you get monkeys, but sometimes real value pops its head up and word gets out.....

Divo,
Both AKG and Neumann are guilty of marketing less expensive models that aren't up to the level of their better designs like the U87i, the C12 or 414. Remember these companies are both located in industrialized countries with very high standards of living. The have large labor costs that have to be passed on to the customer. Mic companies that have facilities located in 3rd world counties with low labor costs enjoy the benefit of lower costs and can pass that on to their customers.

Ultimately, it breaks down to what the consumer expects and what their tolerance is. It all depends on what your applications are. If you are recording demos at home for yourself, you will most likely be very happy with some budget "prosumer" gear but once you cross into the arena of professional services, you will soon realize that purchasing the best pays in the long run. It becomes an investment that can be recovered, is also good business it terms of satisfying your customers and can give you a leg up on the competition.

You are correct that that little bit of extra quality can cost much more. Unfortunately, it is not a linear curve. The last 10 or 20% of quality can cost up to 10 times as much. IMO however, it is worth it. Kurt

Hold on here! Internet bandwidth is the choke-point on people passing quality files? Isn't the internet the most dynamic and quickly evolving technology ever invented? Either data compression will get better (smaller files) or the bandwidth will grow (bigger pipeline).
Doc

I think people need to use their ears more than wallets, hey Kurt! Don't just swallow the specs and expect to get what you paid for. I'm sure that everybody here has bought something that was supposed to be top notch and later realised that the marketing got the better of them. Thats why we less experienced folk come here and ask you the sort of questions we do. Thank God for RO and the people who come here! I think The big boys here have already saved me a few Grand and a lot of grief. By the way, I decided on the 451's; thanks man..... :c:

The people that get fooled are the ones who think they are going to get something really good for a budget price. Once you get into the high end of things, the companies are reasonably ethical. I have never heard anyone complain about a Neve, API, Avalon, Manley or a Focusrite Red range, stuff like that, sounding bad. Now you do have to watch for the unscrupulous sellers, brokers and used equipment dealers. Used C12's with their capsules replaced with a 414 capsule are a lot less rare that any of us would like to imagine. There is much of this stuff going on and all I can say is buyer beware. But in reality it's the low end market hype, the,"this stuff sounds just like something that costs twice as much" line where unknowing consumers get taken. I just think to myself, "If it really is as good, why don't they charge accordingly? Are these guys out not to make as much as they possibly can? If so, I’ll just hop the bus for “Never Never Land” and forget about all my worries!” No the reason it is cheaper, is because it is not as good. Not that that is bad, mind you. It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish. If you want to record demos of your own songs, then it’s really the song that matters and a great recording is not going to make that much of a difference. But if the bug has bitten you and you want to make great recordings, the only way is to get some great gear. And the things that make the difference more than anything else are the mics, pres and your monitor system. Sure converters can make a difference, but great converters are useless if you are going to use cheap pres and mics. Cart before the horse syndrome. And the fact of the matter is, cheap converters can give you a much better sound with good front end than great converters with bad front end will. Converters come and go within a few short years but quality front end gear can last a lifetime. Kurt

What he said!

.......the dreamer.....the unwoken fool...high on a hill....in eldorado.......