David:
I regret to say you've fallen into a trap set by a usenet troll. The
message you replied to was not sent by by Bob Morein but by a con man
Bob exposed, who tries by stealing Bob's name and sending wretched
messages to assassinate Bob's character. Bob is not a racist or an
idiot, as this fraudulent poster tries to make out. When you see a
message pur****ting to be from Bob Morein, you need to check the
headers to discover whether it is kosher. A post from
"Soundhaspriority <nowhere@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" is not from Bob but from this
persistent criminal trying to harm Bob.
The same warning applies to you, Ian, and all the other guys who
answered the post from the impostor, including some iike Bret Ludwig
who should know better.
HTH.
Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review
On Mar 8, 4:37 pm, David Waelder <davidnews...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On 3/7/08 11:23 PM, in article C3F87C2B.9D135%nowh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Soundhaspriority" <nowh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > I'm a bit of an asshole on this group because I see a widely held
prejudice.
> > Most people aren't even aware that they are prejudiced, but the mikes
they
> > prefer are:
> > 1. Made by Europeans or Americans.
> > 2. Have famous names.
> > 3. Cost a lot of money.
>
> I won't take the bait of prejudice against various ethnic groups and
confine
> my response to microphone selection.
>
> It takes considerable experience to learn the capabilities of a
microphone
> in real world situations. Some mikes seem to perform really well when
> listening in the store or plotting frequencies but will exhibit
limitations
> when being used in challenging situations. No mike is going to sound
great
> on voices in reflective bathrooms or noisy streets but some seem to work
> better than others. I don't have a high comfort level with a microphone
> until I've used it in a considerable variety of situations.
>
> By and large, the performance of mikes from the major players - Neumann,
> Schoeps, Sennheiser from Europe, Sanken and others from Japan - have
> consistently met expectations and have continued to work well over a
long
> period of time. That is, a Neumann KMR 81 can be expected to work today
just
> as it did two years ago. (And, yes, everything benefits from the
occasional
> factory tune-up.)
>
> When I work an assignment, I rely on my tools to produce the best
possible
> results. By using tools of known professional reputation, I remove one
area
> of anxiety from a situation loaded with multiple sources of anxiety. A
> microphone from China (or Izbekistan or even Gary Trudeau's
Berzerkistan)
> may have equivalent performance but I'm not comfortable testing it on
paid
> assignments. I've used the Oktava for gunfire situations and learned
that it
> is remarkably good for its price but not a daily substitute for the
major
> brands. Until the challengers are tested over a distance of ground, I am
not
> prepared to substitute them for tools of known quality. That's not
> prejudice, it's simply applying good sense.
>
> Of course, as skilled people, such as yourself, evaluate new products
with
> critical listening and thinking, I am interested in your observations.
But
> until a product is well proven, I will stick with the usual suspects.
>
> David Waelder
|
