pcrecord, post: 443076, member: 46460 wrote: 'm still clumsy with my english but I'm getting there

You're doin' just fine, Mon Ami' :)

audiokid Boswell @Sean G Kurt Foster kmetal Davedog dvdhawk @Brother Junk bouldersound DogsoverLava and all the other people who regularly contribute to RO....

I think that Marco's video is a prime example of just how incredibly cool RO is. You'd never see this kind of content on GS.
He was friendly, light-hearted, relaxed ...and creative. He took the time to do this video; and that alone speaks volumes for his passion for the craft.

I'm not sure that all newer members who show up here realize that cats like Marco ( and other veteran members) contribute, assist, teach, explain, and help to problem-solve... for no monetary compensation at all.
No one is getting paid to do these things - we do this simply because we love audio, electronics, and the music and sonic art that results from that passion for the craft. ;)

Great video, Marco!

I think what can't be stressed enough for people is how important methodology is to legitimize the value of any process or processes you are evaluating. The ability to identify and fix or isolate variables in any kind of testing or evaluative process is literally the key to its usefulness. The problem is that so few people actually have the mindset to build these into their processes when they make gear videos (or mic videos) like Marco talks about. Certainly companies want to show their products in the best light, and some fan boys do too, but often it's just that people don't have a proper appreciation of all the significant variables at play that make something sound the way it does so they don't account for that in their testing processes. I loved the takeaway at the end --- I think Donny has talked about this too --- rent or borrow a mic you are considering and use it in your own environment under your own unique usage conditions to get an idea how it can or will sound with you and your workflow (and the limitations of your own processes).

Like all things on the internet -- signal to noise ratio is at play -- wheat and chaff -- Marco definitely contributed to the wheat with this video so he gets a gold star for this one.

Great job Marco. Great looking and sounding from a technical point of view.

More importantly you addressed some über important aspects of the shootout. Thanks for putting the room first!! Room acoustics is arguably the most myth filled area of sound especially on YouTube.

Great work!

Thanks for the great words guys !

We pass so much time online, it was a subject I wanted to talk about for a while.
When researching gear videos, 4 out of 10 results are just misleading..
I think it's up to us to guide people or at least put valid content available ;)

well done Marco. (y)

Excellent job, Marco!! (y)

Good job, Marco. (y)

pcrecord, post: 443076, member: 46460 wrote: I'm still clumsy with my english but I'm getting there ;)

Your english is perfect my man.

pcrecord, post: 443076, member: 46460 wrote: What do you think of the video's subject ?

I think any tests that eliminate variables, to give honest results is helpful to everyone. So, the fact that the video was about how a mic shootout can fool you, I love it!

I haven't developed any trust in any one site's opinions about mics. I'm the one who voted to try it in my own studio, bc I've tried a couple other mics, and afterwards, I just end up returning them (to the store or their owner). Maybe it's just that I'm used to the Bluebird, or maybe the BB mates well with the Mbox. But my point is, if YOU were to do Mic shootouts, eliminating the variables, I would definitely give it some weight. I've been wanting to replace the Bluebird with something with higher gain (I'm just casually testing other mics as I can) but I haven't found anything under $400 that interests me.

I think it helps that you aren't selling anything in your video...it's just explaining how people can be fooled. I think it's great. I'll tweet it, and see if anyone actually ever reads my tweets lol

pcrecord, post: 443089, member: 46460 wrote: When researching gear videos, 4 out of 10 results are just misleading..

EXACTLY!!!! Imagine what it does to super-noobs like myself.

DonnyThompson, post: 443079, member: 46114 wrote: I think that Marco's video is a prime example of just how incredibly cool RO is.

I agree. He was also very helpful to me with pm's when I first arrived. It is a great site. I think overall content, and quality of people....it's probably the best site I visit.

DonnyThompson, post: 443079, member: 46114 wrote: He was friendly, light-hearted, relaxed ...and creative. He took the time to do this video; and that alone speaks volumes for his passion for the craft.

Don't forget the sexy accent.

DonnyThompson, post: 443079, member: 46114 wrote: I'm not sure that all newer members who show up here realize that cats like Marco ( and other veteran members) contribute, assist, teach, explain, and help to problem-solve... for no monetary compensation at all.

I can only speak for myself, but I realized from the beginning, that this site was a huge asset.

I've been to two real studios. Both run by incredibly talented people. But they aren't super quick share their secrets. And I understand that. They all knew that I had my own setup at home, and that I had plans to make it more professional, and they don't want to educate the competition. Plus, they would be losing my hourly rate once I can operate on my own. So, I'm not knocking them...everyone one of them is a high caliber person and professional. But teaching me, all the tricks of the studio trade is just not smart business for them...and I get that.

But that vibe doesn't seem to exist here. People are very generous with their time and knowledge, and they don't seem to be concerned about sharing the "secrets." And those secrets, even the small ones, are extremely helpful. I'm extremely appreciative, to all of you, for sharing what you've learned in your decades of experience, to help me get going quicker. This place has been a huge help for me. I've mentioned a couple times that I gain so much here, that I wish I had more to contribute. This place is the nuts.

Brother Junk, post: 443094, member: 49944 wrote: But my point is, if YOU were to do Mic shootouts, eliminating the variables, I would definitely give it some weight.

We could never eliminate all variables in a online video, specially the instrument and the room...
Something that can help is to search for shootouts that has a mic you already have and know very well being lined up other mics.. Even if the preamp can mixed things up if you have a reference point.. it's better than nothing !

Brother Junk, post: 443094, member: 49944 wrote: People are very generous with their time and knowledge, and they don't seem to be concerned about sharing the "secrets." And those secrets, even the small ones, are extremely helpful.

I've gained so much knowledge and confidence visiting RO over the years, I guess it's only fair to give some back.
And as a bonus, I made very good friends to share my passion with. Even if we don't meet in person... friends is the good word !

What were the mics you used in the first example?

I see the point of your video, bc the first listen they sound very similar. After you remove the room (or whatever variable it was) though, they sound different.

Listening in my little room, I prefer the second one but it sounds like it has the potential for sibilance and plosives. But I think I would rather work with the track (and the person to control that) to have that added detail.

Those tracks were actually tests with the T47 and T12 from microphone-parts.com
They both have the same circuit but different capsule. the T12 has a bump in the HF and the T47 has a more vintage sound (and take EQ alot better)
I'm debating if I'm going to order a second k47 capsule to make a pair and keep the C12 clone as a back capsule and even experiment on older cheap mics..

pcrecord, post: 443104, member: 46460 wrote: the T12 has a bump in the HF

can you tell us where the bump is?

pcrecord, post: 443104, member: 46460 wrote: I'm debating if I'm going to order a second k47 capsule to make a pair and keep the C12 clone as a back capsule and even experiment on older cheap mics..

THAT would be a cool experiment.

DonnyThompson, post: 443106, member: 46114 wrote: can you tell us where the bump is?

The schematic says around 5k, but mine for an unknown reason is more around 10k which is less pleasant for vocal... (mine anyway)

pcrecord, post: 443104, member: 46460 wrote: They both have the same circuit but different capsule. the T12 has a bump in the HF and the T47 has a more vintage sound (and take EQ alot better)

pcrecord, post: 443116, member: 46460 wrote: The schematic says around 5k, but mine for an unknown reason is more around 10k which is less pleasant for vocal... (mine anyway)

That bump is what I can hear. It sounds lower than 10k but I'm certainly not going to argue with the guy who has the mics in his hand. I typed this reply yesterday and then decided it was too off topic and deleted it. But I'm going to add it now. (I wish I had left it bc I would have seemed so much smarter lol) Bear with me (this is about those two mics)

This midrange is one of the best in the world. It's a little dark, smooth, rich, detailed. Top Tier A+++ driver (ScanSpeak Revelators)

This midrange is also one of the best in the world. In fact, most people who hear it will tell you they have never heard midrange like that in their life. I agree. Even the HS8's sound colored and lifeless in comparison. These drivers are very critical/analytical. If it's in the music, they expose it. And they aren't relaxed about it like the driver above. It can be a little aggressive. But if you can manage to shave that little extra off the top with eq, crossover point/slope, it's absolutely incredible.

Both sound really good. I'm confident if it was set up right, almost everyone here would agree. But those second drivers can be a b* to work with. They have some breakup around 4khz, it's like a ringing sound. So you either have to filter around it with a passive, or cut it off hard enough that you don't hear it. The problem is, it sounds so damn good, you want to keep every last kHz you can.

But if you can tame the second driver, it's a whole other level of detail. It's the most detailed, and transparent mid-driver I've ever heard. But it can sound "ringy" and it sounds very much like that second mic you used. That second mic, had a similar "ringy" quality to it at what felt like circa 5k, even though yours measures 10k. I'll listen again later.

So, thank you for indulging my speaker analogy. Those two mic sounds remind me of these drivers. They both seem decent, but the second one adds something that the first didn't have. But, it gives you that little extra at a cost.

That second mic, depending on the track, it seems like I would need to take a little something off the top-middle. But if it's doable, (I've never used those mics) I would prefer the second mic. I'd rather remove some shimmer, than try to add detail.

Do you often replace the capsules in your mics? Or is it just a maintenance thing? Or just for fun?

pcrecord, post: 443104, member: 46460 wrote: I'm debating if I'm going to order a second k47 capsule to make a pair and keep the C12 clone as a back capsule and even experiment on older cheap mics..

Just thought I'd give you some news.
I finaly ordered and received a k47 capsule to replace the K12, so I now have a pair of T47. Man I'm very happy ! I did a null test, wow almost a perfect match.
I'll do some stereo tests in the next weeks ;)

The only way I have ever decided on a mic purchase is to do a mic shootout in my own studio. So yes, I rely on mic shootouts, but only shootouts I do myself.

As to mic shootouts others have done, they can be somewhat helpful, but often are not very helpful. I certainly don't rely on them alone to make purchase decisions.