[Mike Rivers]

wrote:

I also have one.

One what? You've been talking "a TASCAM" but they make lots of stuff.

I also have a MOTU

Again, which one? Remember that the benchmark here is a TASCAM US-122.
What "MOTU" is similar
in function to that? No value in comparing apples and barbecue.

I know from listening to the differences that there are differences.

I don't think that anyone will argue with you that there are audible
differences. But
your "advice" was just that there was something better out there than
what he had.
I think he knew that. When he asked about a mic preamp upgrade, what
made you
think that a different converter would solve his problem? If he were to
get, say, a
Lynx card, he'd still need a mic preamp. And if he were recording in a
room with
poor acoustic characteristics, the best converter and preamp in the
world wouldn't
make his recordings sound any better (though it might make it easier for
him to
hear his REAL problem).

So your "advice" was only a statement that there were better converters
available
than what he had, and you suggested some brand names, without any specific
recommendations as to models that would be a suitable solution for him.
You want
to advice him of something to buy? Then be more specific.

What two-channel USB audio interface with a built-in mic preamp and
convenient
direct hardware monitoring can you recommend that's better and is within
his $500
budget? Alternately, what combination of mic preamp and USB interface
would you
recommend that offers the convenience and features he has now and is
within his
budget?

You may know what you like, but you don't seem very good at giving
useful advice.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 1:14*pm, Mike Rivers wrote:
wrote:
I also have one. *

One what? You've been talking "a TASCAM" but they make lots of stuff.

I also have a MOTU

Again, which one? Remember that the benchmark here is a TASCAM US-122.
What "MOTU" is similar
in function to that? No value in comparing apples and barbecue.

I know from listening to the differences that there are differences. *

I don't think that anyone will argue with you that there are audible
differences. But
your "advice" was just that there was something better out there than
what he had.
I think he knew that. When he asked about a mic preamp upgrade, what
made you
think that a different converter would solve his problem? If he were to
get, say, a
Lynx card, he'd still need a mic preamp. And if he were recording in a
room with
poor acoustic characteristics, the best converter and preamp in the
world wouldn't
make his recordings sound any better (though it might make it easier for
him to
hear his REAL problem).

So your "advice" was only a statement that there were better converters
available
than what he had, and you suggested some brand names, without any specific
recommendations as to models that would be a suitable solution for him.
You want
to advice him of something to buy? Then be more specific.

What two-channel USB audio interface with a built-in mic preamp and
convenient
direct hardware monitoring can you recommend that's better and is within
his $500
budget? *Alternately, what combination of mic preamp and USB interface
would you
recommend that offers the convenience and features he has now and is
within his
budget?

You may know what you like, but you don't seem very good at giving
useful advice.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

You have to go back and comprehend it for yourself Mike, I can't do it
for you. I suggested something specific; a MOTU traveler. It's got 4
preamps, plus a lot of other inputs, is a mixer, and sound card all in
one. It's a little over his budget though, which is why I suggested
he go for room treatment and save for it.

You're just clutching at straws and looking for an excuse to nitpick.
Read thoroughly and comprehend before you start to criticize. That
goes for all of you.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 2:47*pm, (hank alrich) wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 20, 11:47 am, Ethan Winer wrote:
On Mar 19, 12:14 pm, wrote:

However, it's subjective, and you can't prove something subjective.

Not so! This is what DBT is for. If you live anywhere near me I invite
you to visit and we'll do some blind listening tests.

You will not be the first "believer" to go down in flames. :-)

--Ethan

Ethan, don't be a hypocrite. *Tell me, what do you use to record and
play back your own music? *Do you use a Tascam or entry level M-
audio? *Be honest now, give it a try.

Ethan has invited you to test your ASSumptions. You haven't the guts to
do it.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

Hank, you seem to be the stupidest of this bunch. Seems like you let
the rest do the thinking for you and jump in to be ass wiper just for
good measure, not even caring if you're right or not.

Ethan, can do his own tests, and answer my questions before he wastes
any more of my time. I know from my own experience what sounds good
to me. If their sound blaster or whatever crap they claim they use is
good enough for them, then why do they have a Lynx? Why didn't they
return the Lynx if the sound blaster, Tascam, M-audio, or whatever was
just as good? Did you think about that, or must I point everything
out for you in advance before you criticize it without any substance
to back it up? Hank add something useful to this conversation or shut
the **** up. Do something useful and get me some more milk for my
fruit loops.

[Fran Guidry]

On Mar 20, 9:14*am, wrote:
On Mar 20, 12:56*am, Fran Guidry wrote:



On Mar 19, 3:07*pm, wrote:

On Mar 18, 10:20*pm, wrote:

On Mar 18, 8:48*pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:

wrote in message



On Mar 18, 7:02 pm, (hank alrich) wrote:
wrote:
You need to work on your comprehension skills Arny. The
Tascam houses his converter and preamp in one unit and
that was my point.

Your problem with that is...?

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

Nothing wrong with that if it sounds good and works well.

Prove that the US 122 doesn't sound good and work well.

Prove that it does. *Are you denying that there are differences in
quality of converters?

Do you realistically think a Tascam is going to sound as good as a
Lynx or MOTU? *If so, why don't we all buy a Tascam and save ourselves
hundreds of dollars? *Why even bother spending more than $150 on any
gear? *Do you have any experience with converters or are you just
talking out of your ass again? *No doubt there are some good deals and
some rip offs, but you get what you pay for more often than not.

I don't have access to all the different possible combinations of
gear, nor the inclination to test every combination, do you? *I'm not
saying the Tascam 122 is bad, I'm not saying it's good, I'm just being
realistic as far as the expected quality from a $150 card. *I think
you're just looking for a fight and falling flat on your face every
time. *Give it up already, you're just making a fool of yourself.

We have to make approximations to suggest a remedy. *The guy asked for
suggestions for improvement, that's my suggestion, take it or leave
it. *No one needs your approval Arny, this is a public forum. You're
just another vitriolic nutcase scumbag looking for attention, that's
all. *I suppose I have some sympathy for you. *Case closed.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

... and i thought frustrated musicians had issues, minga! You guys are
hilarious, really. Thanks for the advice, from some of you. I don't
remember this group being so caustic when i used to post a few years
ago. Must be the economy.

I'm not sure how much time you've spent around r.a.p., but some of the
folks who are commenting are very experienced professional engineers.
Others have documented extensive testing of digital recording
equipment. It takes a few weeks of reading, or a few dozen searches,
to see that a number of the regulars here go out of their way to help
people.

But they don't take ****. No reason to. They have cred, they earned
it, they deliver the goods. They may seem caustic, but basically
they're just having fun with somebody who hasn't a clue where he is.

I've been reading internet discussions about recording for six years
or so. As I've learned from my own experience, I've realized that a
huge percentage of the advice I was given was based on a complete lack
of actual hands on knowledge - people just parroting things they'd
read. But there is a small group who know stuff and are willing to
share it. You've met a lot of them in this thread.

Fran

Well Fran join the herd mentality if that makes you feel comfortable
you ****ing sheep. *Sounds like you're condoning their caustic
intolerant attitudes just so you can be part of the herd.

I was giving valid advice, but just because I'm not part of your
****ing herd, you jump down my throat. *If it was coming from one of
the regulars here, they wouldn't be so intolerant. *They're just
stupid sheep, that's all, they can't help it. *Don't be surprised when
it comes back your way. *Better hide behind your fellow sheep again.

These guys that you're insulting have helped me a lot to make better
recordings.

Do you any samples of your recordings available for us to hear? Do you
have a curriculum vitae for us to evaluate?

Have you attempted any double blind comparisons of prosumer level
converters or preamps? In my experience the vast differences people
describe in sighted comparisons disappear when they can't see the
labels.

Why have you reacted with such vitriol to a simple disagreement? It
makes you appear defensive and insecure. Which makes your credibility
much less.

Fran

[Fran Guidry]

On Mar 15, 3:45*pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Fran Guidry" wrote in message



I'm embarrassed to post this again, because my comparison
tests invariably include technical goofs. In this one I
had the high pass filter engaged on the DMP-3. But here's
a comparison of a $150 preamp (M-Audio DMP-3), a $500
preamp (FMR RNP), and a $1500 preamp (John Hardy M-1).

http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2007/...amps-compared/

In the first test, preamp 3 seems to have a serious technical problem - a
very signficant bass rolloff, its -3 dB at 70 Hz and maybe -18 dB/ocatve
below that. *If memory serves, preamp 3 is the DMP-3.

The other two are as alike as peas in a pod.

I looked at the reverb tail for some evidence of significant differences in
noise performance. It only decayed to -55 dB FS, so the results with
inconclusive.

The second trio of tests seem to be confusing in comparison. Again, one of
the preamps differed below 70 Hz. The difference was not so great. This time
preamp 3 (said to be a different preamp than preamp 3 in the first test)
tested with *higher* response below 70 Hz.

Using a dynamic mic as a source should have dropped the signal level, and
indeed significant spectral differences show up in the analysis of the last
quarter second of the samples. *Preamp 4 was significantly quieter above 1
Khz, followed by preamp 5. Preamp 6 was the noisiest.

Sample 6 was the RNP.

Yeah, I had the high pass button pushed on the DMP-3. Whotta dummmy.

Fran

[hank alrich]

wrote:

On Mar 20, 11:47 am, Ethan Winer wrote:
On Mar 19, 12:14 pm, wrote:

However, it's subjective, and you can't prove something subjective.

Not so! This is what DBT is for. If you live anywhere near me I invite
you to visit and we'll do some blind listening tests.

You will not be the first "believer" to go down in flames. :-)

--Ethan

Ethan, don't be a hypocrite. Tell me, what do you use to record and
play back your own music? Do you use a Tascam or entry level M-
audio? Be honest now, give it a try.

Ethan has invited you to test your ASSumptions. You haven't the guts to
do it.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[hank alrich]

wrote:

You have to go back and comprehend it for yourself Mike, I can't do it
for you.

Yeah, right. One of y'all writes in an easily comprehensilbe style,
almost like a pro, and the other is blowing smoke out his butt and
calling it mountain air.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 2:23*pm, Fran Guidry wrote:
On Mar 20, 9:14*am, wrote:



On Mar 20, 12:56*am, Fran Guidry wrote:

On Mar 19, 3:07*pm, wrote:

On Mar 18, 10:20*pm, wrote:

On Mar 18, 8:48*pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:

wrote in message



On Mar 18, 7:02 pm, (hank alrich) wrote:
wrote:
You need to work on your comprehension skills Arny. The
Tascam houses his converter and preamp in one unit and
that was my point.

Your problem with that is...?

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

Nothing wrong with that if it sounds good and works well.

Prove that the US 122 doesn't sound good and work well.

Prove that it does. *Are you denying that there are differences in
quality of converters?

Do you realistically think a Tascam is going to sound as good as a
Lynx or MOTU? *If so, why don't we all buy a Tascam and save ourselves
hundreds of dollars? *Why even bother spending more than $150 on any
gear? *Do you have any experience with converters or are you just
talking out of your ass again? *No doubt there are some good deals and
some rip offs, but you get what you pay for more often than not.

I don't have access to all the different possible combinations of
gear, nor the inclination to test every combination, do you? *I'm not
saying the Tascam 122 is bad, I'm not saying it's good, I'm just being
realistic as far as the expected quality from a $150 card. *I think
you're just looking for a fight and falling flat on your face every
time. *Give it up already, you're just making a fool of yourself.

We have to make approximations to suggest a remedy. *The guy asked for
suggestions for improvement, that's my suggestion, take it or leave
it. *No one needs your approval Arny, this is a public forum. You're
just another vitriolic nutcase scumbag looking for attention, that's
all. *I suppose I have some sympathy for you. *Case closed.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

... and i thought frustrated musicians had issues, minga! You guys are
hilarious, really. Thanks for the advice, from some of you. I don't
remember this group being so caustic when i used to post a few years
ago. Must be the economy.

I'm not sure how much time you've spent around r.a.p., but some of the
folks who are commenting are very experienced professional engineers.
Others have documented extensive testing of digital recording
equipment. It takes a few weeks of reading, or a few dozen searches,
to see that a number of the regulars here go out of their way to help
people.

But they don't take ****. No reason to. They have cred, they earned
it, they deliver the goods. They may seem caustic, but basically
they're just having fun with somebody who hasn't a clue where he is.

I've been reading internet discussions about recording for six years
or so. As I've learned from my own experience, I've realized that a
huge percentage of the advice I was given was based on a complete lack
of actual hands on knowledge - people just parroting things they'd
read. But there is a small group who know stuff and are willing to
share it. You've met a lot of them in this thread.

Fran

Well Fran join the herd mentality if that makes you feel comfortable
you ****ing sheep. *Sounds like you're condoning their caustic
intolerant attitudes just so you can be part of the herd.

I was giving valid advice, but just because I'm not part of your
****ing herd, you jump down my throat. *If it was coming from one of
the regulars here, they wouldn't be so intolerant. *They're just
stupid sheep, that's all, they can't help it. *Don't be surprised when
it comes back your way. *Better hide behind your fellow sheep again.

These guys that you're insulting have helped me a lot to make better
recordings.

Do you any samples of your recordings available for us to hear? Do you
have a curriculum vitae for us to evaluate?

Have you attempted any double blind comparisons of prosumer level
converters or preamps? In my experience the vast differences people
describe in sighted comparisons disappear when they can't see the
labels.

Why have you reacted with such vitriol to a simple disagreement? It
makes you appear defensive and insecure. Which makes your credibility
much less.

Fran

Go back and read the thread and you'll find out Fran. Just like the
rest of this herd, you jump in and criticize before you even have a
clue what's going on. If you disrespect someone don't expect them to
respect you back.

As for sharing my own stuff here with these ****s, get real. I'm not
sharing it with these scum bags who live to make baseless assumptions
and criticize based on them. I don't throw pearls before swine.

I don't feel the need to prove myself to any of you. I know what
sounds good to me. Prove that I'm wrong first and refute my points
before you waste any more of my time. You're not able to, that's
clear by now.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 3:47*pm, (hank alrich) wrote:
wrote:
Ethan, can do his own tests, and answer my questions before he wastes
any more of my time.

No way can Ethan waste your time as well as you do. He's not talking
about doing his own tests. He's offering you the chance to let your ears
be the judge. Maybe you don't have ears. Then everything here makes good
sense.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

Refer to my previous response(s). You're wasting my time dim wit.

[hank alrich]

wrote:

Ethan, can do his own tests, and answer my questions before he wastes
any more of my time.

No way can Ethan waste your time as well as you do. He's not talking
about doing his own tests. He's offering you the chance to let your ears
be the judge. Maybe you don't have ears. Then everything here makes good
sense.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[Ethan Winer[_3_]]

On Mar 20, 2:53 pm, wrote:
As for sharing my own stuff here with these ****s, get real. I'm not
sharing it with these scum bags who live to make baseless assumptions
and criticize based on them.

Aha, the truth finally comes out. :-)

Good call Fran. It's obvious this dude either 1) has no recordings and
is a troll who doesn't even belong here (my guess), or 2) he's a total
hack and he knows his stuff sounds like ass.

As for wasting your precious time Alan, you choose to read and post.
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Just about every one of your
posts relies on name-calling instead of logical points about the
science of audio. IMO, people who resort to insults know they're full
of it but insults is all they have. You sound just like Michael Savage
on one of his psychotic rants.

Dood, this is your big chance to impress us with your skill. Not that
good mixing chops means someone understands the science. But at least
it's something.

--Ethan

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 4:38*pm, Ethan Winer wrote:
On Mar 20, 2:53 pm, wrote:

As for sharing my own stuff here with these ****s, get real. *I'm not
sharing it with these scum bags who live to make baseless assumptions
and criticize based on them.

Aha, the truth finally comes out. :-)

Good call Fran. It's obvious this dude either 1) has no recordings and
is a troll who doesn't even belong here (my guess), or 2) he's a total
hack and he knows his stuff sounds like ass.

As for wasting your precious time Alan, you choose to read and post.
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Just about every one of your
posts relies on name-calling instead of logical points about the
science of audio. IMO, people who resort to insults know they're full
of it but insults is all they have. You sound just like Michael Savage
on one of his psychotic rants.

Dood, this is your big chance to impress us with your skill. Not that
good mixing chops means someone understands the science. But at least
it's something.

--Ethan

Name calling just adds to the fun of it. lol

Now answer the question and stop skirting around it like a
politician. What do you use to record and play back and why? If it
all sounds the same why not use the cheapest one you can find?

Yeah you're wasting my time, but someone has to teach you guys a
lesson. Time to get back what you dish out. You don't seem to like a
taste of your own medicine. hahaha

[Mike Rivers]

wrote:

I suggested something specific; a MOTU traveler. It's got 4
preamps, plus a lot of other inputs, is a mixer, and sound card all in
one. It's a little over his budget though, which is why I suggested
he go for room treatment and save for it.

Yeah, I saw it, but I disregarded it as "good advice" for several reasons:

1. It wasn't what the original poster (OP) asked for. He asked for a preamp.

2. It has more features and functions than the OP has now. We don't know if
that's any benefit to him. Its mixer is digital, not analog, and it's
only "zero latency"
for large values of zero. This may or may not matter, but it's something
worth
pointing out.

3. It's computer interface is Firewire. The OP may not have that
available on
his computer.

4. It's over his budget - you yourself recognized this

5. I'm not convinced that it would make that much difference over what
he has
now. You seem to think so, but I don't have any reason to believe that
your idea
of better is different from mine, or more important, the OP's.

You're just clutching at straws and looking for an excuse to nitpick.

No, I'm trying to educate you in what's a useful response and what's just
another opinion. If you had explained the reasons why you recommended
what you did, we could see where you were coming from.

But I think I understand. It's what you know. It's so Internet to tell
someone
that what you have is what they should have.

Read thoroughly and comprehend before you start to criticize.

I read and comprehend, but I don't always remember details that I have
tossed out as being irrelevant (as your recommendation of a MOTU
Traveler).


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Steve King]

wrote in message
...
On Mar 20, 4:38 pm, Ethan Winer wrote:
On Mar 20, 2:53 pm, wrote:

As for sharing my own stuff here with these ****s, get real. I'm not
sharing it with these scum bags who live to make baseless assumptions
and criticize based on them.

Aha, the truth finally comes out. :-)

Good call Fran. It's obvious this dude either 1) has no recordings and
is a troll who doesn't even belong here (my guess), or 2) he's a total
hack and he knows his stuff sounds like ass.

As for wasting your precious time Alan, you choose to read and post.
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Just about every one of your
posts relies on name-calling instead of logical points about the
science of audio. IMO, people who resort to insults know they're full
of it but insults is all they have. You sound just like Michael Savage
on one of his psychotic rants.

Dood, this is your big chance to impress us with your skill. Not that
good mixing chops means someone understands the science. But at least
it's something.

--Ethan

Name calling just adds to the fun of it. lol

But it diminishes you. You come off as a hateful little worm worthy of no
respect. If you get fun from name calling, you are a child or you are sick.

Now answer the question and stop skirting around it like a
politician. What do you use to record and play back and why? If it
all sounds the same why not use the cheapest one you can find?

Yeah you're wasting my time, but someone has to teach you guys a
lesson. Time to get back what you dish out. You don't seem to like a
taste of your own medicine. hahaha

What kind of a person concludes insulting discourse with a laugh! I do not
believe that you believe that you are able to teach anyone a lesson. I
believe that you know just what you are. You are a child. And your
anonymous postings suggest that you are also a coward. I think you know
that, too. This forum is populated mostly by professional audio people who
have for a long time been making a living, supporting families, and putting
kids through college using their professional skills. Some are musicians of
substance and fame. Some are Grammy winners. Most sign their posts. They
are totally unlike you. Shame on you! Grow up. This is no place for you
to behave the way you do. You are trying to play 'mine's bigger than yours'
with people you don't know. That's just stupid.

As far as the substance of the thread.... What you seem incapable of
understanding is that what members of this group use in professional
recording settings, is different than what we might recommend for the
personal use of someone recording for pleasure, particularly when one can
infer that budget is an issue. We often differ in where we believe emphasis
should be placed in a recording chain, but few of us are so arrogant that we
believe that there is one right way record. All you have to offer is
arrogance and invective. Go away. Come back, when you are capable of
having a conversation without resorting to insults. However, I suspect that
you will further prove just what kind of person you are in your reply.

Steve King

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 6:02*pm, Mike Rivers wrote:
wrote:
I suggested something specific; a MOTU traveler. *It's got 4
preamps, plus a lot of other inputs, is a mixer, and sound card all in
one. *It's a little over his budget though, which is why I suggested
he go for room treatment and save for it.

Yeah, I saw it, but I disregarded it as "good advice" for several reasons:

1. It wasn't what the original poster (OP) asked for. He asked for a preamp.

2. It has more features and functions than the OP has now. We don't know if
that's any benefit to him. Its mixer is digital, not analog, and it's
only "zero latency"
for large values of zero. This may or may not matter, but it's something
worth
pointing out.

3. It's computer interface is Firewire. The OP may not have that
available on
his computer.

4. It's over his budget - you yourself recognized this

5. I'm not convinced that it would make that much difference over what
he has
now. You seem to think so, but I don't have any reason to believe that
your idea
of better is different from mine, or more important, the OP's.

You're just clutching at straws and looking for an excuse to nitpick.

No, I'm trying to educate you in what's a useful response and what's just
another opinion. If you had explained the reasons why you recommended
what you did, we could see where you were coming from.

But I think I understand. It's what you know. It's so Internet to tell
someone
that what you have is what they should have.

Read thoroughly and comprehend before you start to criticize. *

I read and comprehend, but I don't always remember details that I have
tossed out as being irrelevant (as your recommendation of a MOTU
Traveler).

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

"Yeah, I saw it, but I disregarded it as "good advice" for several
reasons:"

Lying scum bag. Anyone with half a brain can see you're lying and
covering up for your flawed, assumption based, straw man arguments.
Now you continue to create straw man arguments disregarding the truth.

The unit I recommended has four preamps as I already mentioned. And
if he's replacing his preamp which is also his converter, he's going
to need another converter. $200 to $300 is not way over his budget,
and he can save up for it if he needs to. Also, if he's going to
replace it, he may as well make it worth it and not take baby steps.

Damn you're ****ing stupid, and you're supposed to be an engineer? No
wonder you spend all your time here. I wouldn't trust you to engineer
anything either with your dim witted brain.

You make a long post about how I didn't recommend anything specific
then you turn everything around when I point out I did. You should be
a politician Mike, you're in the wrong career.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 6:22*pm, "Steve King"
wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Mar 20, 4:38 pm, Ethan Winer wrote:



On Mar 20, 2:53 pm, wrote:

As for sharing my own stuff here with these ****s, get real. I'm not
sharing it with these scum bags who live to make baseless assumptions
and criticize based on them.

Aha, the truth finally comes out. :-)

Good call Fran. It's obvious this dude either 1) has no recordings and
is a troll who doesn't even belong here (my guess), or 2) he's a total
hack and he knows his stuff sounds like ass.

As for wasting your precious time Alan, you choose to read and post.
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Just about every one of your
posts relies on name-calling instead of logical points about the
science of audio. IMO, people who resort to insults know they're full
of it but insults is all they have. You sound just like Michael Savage
on one of his psychotic rants.

Dood, this is your big chance to impress us with your skill. Not that
good mixing chops means someone understands the science. But at least
it's something.

--Ethan

Name calling just adds to the fun of it. lol

But it diminishes you. *You come off as a hateful little worm worthy of no
respect. *If you get fun from name calling, you are a child or you are sick.

Now answer the question and stop skirting around it like a
politician. *What do you use to record and play back and why? *If it
all sounds the same why not use the cheapest one you can find?

Yeah you're wasting my time, but someone has to teach you guys a
lesson. *Time to get back what you dish out. *You don't seem to like a
taste of your own medicine. *hahaha

What kind of a person concludes insulting discourse with a laugh! *I do not
believe that you believe that you are able to teach anyone a lesson. *I
believe that you know just what you are. *You are a child. *And your
anonymous postings suggest that you are also a coward. *I think you know
that, too. *This forum is populated mostly by professional audio people who
have for a long time been making a living, supporting families, and putting
kids through college using their professional skills. *Some are musicians of
substance and fame. *Some are Grammy winners. *Most sign their posts. *They
are totally unlike you. *Shame on you! *Grow up. *This is no place for you
to behave the way you do. *You are trying to play 'mine's bigger than yours'
with people you don't know. *That's just stupid.

As far as the substance of the thread.... What you seem incapable of
understanding is that what members of this group use in professional
recording settings, is different than what we might recommend for the
personal use of someone recording for pleasure, particularly when one can
infer that budget is an issue. *We often differ in where we believe emphasis
should be placed in a recording chain, but few of us are so arrogant that we
believe that there is one right way record. *All you have to offer is
arrogance and invective. *Go away. *Come back, when you are capable of
having a conversation without resorting to insults. *However, I suspect that
you will further prove just what kind of person you are in your reply.

Steve King

Shut the **** up with your self righteous crap Steve, what a bore. I
don't give a **** what you think. You demonize me but your fellow
sheep are blameless I see. You're just another sheep, who agrees with
the rest of the herd so he can avoid conflict.

They're just getting what they deserve. These pricks had it coming
to them. You're another sheep in denial.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 6:31*pm, wrote:
On Mar 20, 6:02*pm, Mike Rivers wrote:





wrote:
I suggested something specific; a MOTU traveler. *It's got 4
preamps, plus a lot of other inputs, is a mixer, and sound card all in
one. *It's a little over his budget though, which is why I suggested
he go for room treatment and save for it.

Yeah, I saw it, but I disregarded it as "good advice" for several reasons:

1. It wasn't what the original poster (OP) asked for. He asked for a preamp.

2. It has more features and functions than the OP has now. We don't know if
that's any benefit to him. Its mixer is digital, not analog, and it's
only "zero latency"
for large values of zero. This may or may not matter, but it's something
worth
pointing out.

3. It's computer interface is Firewire. The OP may not have that
available on
his computer.

4. It's over his budget - you yourself recognized this

5. I'm not convinced that it would make that much difference over what
he has
now. You seem to think so, but I don't have any reason to believe that
your idea
of better is different from mine, or more important, the OP's.

You're just clutching at straws and looking for an excuse to nitpick.

No, I'm trying to educate you in what's a useful response and what's just
another opinion. If you had explained the reasons why you recommended
what you did, we could see where you were coming from.

But I think I understand. It's what you know. It's so Internet to tell
someone
that what you have is what they should have.

Read thoroughly and comprehend before you start to criticize. *

I read and comprehend, but I don't always remember details that I have
tossed out as being irrelevant (as your recommendation of a MOTU
Traveler).

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

"Yeah, I saw it, but I disregarded it as "good advice" for several
reasons:"

Lying scum bag. *Anyone with half a brain can see you're lying and
covering up for your flawed, assumption based, straw man arguments.
Now you continue to create straw man arguments disregarding the truth.

The unit I recommended has four preamps as I already mentioned. *And
if he's replacing his preamp which is also his converter, he's going
to need another converter. *$200 to $300 is not way over his budget,
and he can save up for it if he needs to. *Also, if he's going to
replace it, he may as well make it worth it and not take baby steps.

Damn you're ****ing stupid, and you're supposed to be an engineer? *No
wonder you spend all your time here. *I wouldn't trust you to engineer
anything either with your dim witted brain.

You make a long post about how I didn't recommend anything specific
then you turn everything around when I point out I did. *You should be
a politician Mike, you're in the wrong career.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

i agree with ethan. Now i admit, i'm just checking this thread for
laughs now, in the same way that i sometimes listen to mike Savage,
which is really sad.
In the words of my Dad (RIP), 'he's outta line', get his ass of this
newsgroup.
Where's the moderator? yeah, yeah, i know it's a free country, and he
can say anything he wants. So i am officially excercizing my right not
to listen (at least on this thread). Have fun dude, there are other
groups you can rant on and people will love it.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 6:43*pm, wrote:
On Mar 20, 6:31*pm, wrote:



On Mar 20, 6:02*pm, Mike Rivers wrote:

wrote:
I suggested something specific; a MOTU traveler. *It's got 4
preamps, plus a lot of other inputs, is a mixer, and sound card all in
one. *It's a little over his budget though, which is why I suggested
he go for room treatment and save for it.

Yeah, I saw it, but I disregarded it as "good advice" for several reasons:

1. It wasn't what the original poster (OP) asked for. He asked for a preamp.

2. It has more features and functions than the OP has now. We don't know if
that's any benefit to him. Its mixer is digital, not analog, and it's
only "zero latency"
for large values of zero. This may or may not matter, but it's something
worth
pointing out.

3. It's computer interface is Firewire. The OP may not have that
available on
his computer.

4. It's over his budget - you yourself recognized this

5. I'm not convinced that it would make that much difference over what
he has
now. You seem to think so, but I don't have any reason to believe that
your idea
of better is different from mine, or more important, the OP's.

You're just clutching at straws and looking for an excuse to nitpick.

No, I'm trying to educate you in what's a useful response and what's just
another opinion. If you had explained the reasons why you recommended
what you did, we could see where you were coming from.

But I think I understand. It's what you know. It's so Internet to tell
someone
that what you have is what they should have.

Read thoroughly and comprehend before you start to criticize. *

I read and comprehend, but I don't always remember details that I have
tossed out as being irrelevant (as your recommendation of a MOTU
Traveler).

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

"Yeah, I saw it, but I disregarded it as "good advice" for several
reasons:"

Lying scum bag. *Anyone with half a brain can see you're lying and
covering up for your flawed, assumption based, straw man arguments.
Now you continue to create straw man arguments disregarding the truth.

The unit I recommended has four preamps as I already mentioned. *And
if he's replacing his preamp which is also his converter, he's going
to need another converter. *$200 to $300 is not way over his budget,
and he can save up for it if he needs to. *Also, if he's going to
replace it, he may as well make it worth it and not take baby steps.

Damn you're ****ing stupid, and you're supposed to be an engineer? *No
wonder you spend all your time here. *I wouldn't trust you to engineer
anything either with your dim witted brain.

You make a long post about how I didn't recommend anything specific
then you turn everything around when I point out I did. *You should be
a politician Mike, you're in the wrong career.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

i agree with ethan. Now i admit, i'm just checking this thread for
laughs now, in the same way that i sometimes listen to mike Savage,
which is really sad.
In the words of my Dad (RIP), 'he's outta line', get his ass of this
newsgroup.
Where's the moderator? yeah, yeah, i know it's a free country, and he
can say anything he wants. So i am officially excercizing my right not
to listen (at least on this thread). Have fun dude, there are other
groups you can rant on and people will love it.

Yeah that's because you're another ****ing sheep who can't think for
himself. Who gives a ****? I'm just having a laugh. These **** wits
deserve to be kicked in the balls repeatedly. lol

[Mike Rivers]

wrote:

Ethan, can do his own tests, and answer my questions before he wastes
any more of my time.

Why should Ethan waste his time to avoid you wasting your time?

If their sound blaster or whatever crap they claim they use is
good enough for them, then why do they have a Lynx? Why didn't they
return the Lynx if the sound blaster, Tascam, M-audio, or whatever was
just as good?

Sound isn't everything. Maybe it is to you, but not to me. It's
important, sure.
No reason to buy something that sounds worse than what you have unless
overall it's better for you.

I never had a SoundBlaster. For a long time, I thought that tape
recorders were
for recording and computers were for doing my writing and book keeping. Oh,
and working with MIDI sequencers talking to real hardware synthesizers. My
first MIDI interface was a Music Quest MQX-32M. It had two ports and
supported
SMPTE time code, which was important since that's what my tape recorders
recorded. I could sync audio to MIDI.

When I decided that it was time to learn about using a computer for
audio applications,
I bought a Turtle Beach Tahiti sound card. At the time, it was the best
quality short of
the much more expensive Digital Audio Labs card. I knew engineering
folks from the
company, had confidence that they knew what they were doing, and took it
on faith
that it was worth the $100 or so more than what a SoundBlaster would
cost me.

But once I graduated from my TASCAM Model 5 console to a Soundcraft 600
(which
I still had) I had a problem with the Turtle Beach card. First off, the
Soundcraft was
enough quieter than the TASCAM console so that I could hear the Turtle
Beach hum.
Also, the Turtle Beach's nominal -10 dBV operating level wasn't a good
match for the
Soundcraft's +4 dBu operating level. It was time to upgrade the sound card.

I had reviewed a couple of Echo products and they worked nicely with the
console and
the computer. I was thinking of buying a Mia since I only was interested
only in a 2-channel
card, not a multichannel one. I was (and I'm still not) not comfortable
in using my computer
as a multitrack workstation. But while I was contemplating what to buy,
Lynx appeared
on the market. I met their engineers, they had some good ideas and
understood how to
properly test their products. Being a man-about-town whose opinions SOME
people
respect (whether they agree or not) and also being someone who can write
a coherent
sentence and explain how something works, Lynx offered me a LynxONE at a
price not
enough more than the Echo Mia to worry about, so I bought it.

The first and second things that I noticed about it when I switched out
the Turtle Beach
card was (1) no hum, and (2) better signal-to-noise ratio because of the
better match of
operating levels. Now you can argue "that's better sound" and I wouldn't
disagree, but
I don't think that's the sort of issue the original poster was concerned
with. Anyway, when
playing some music through it, it sounded nice and clean. I didn't turn
cartwheels having
discovered what I had been missing for the six or seven years I was
using the Tahiti. I
expect that it sounded quite a bit better, but it took a while to grow
into it.

Note that the LynxTWO was out before I got my ONE, but it was
significantly more expensive
and while it had slightly better specs, and was more expandable, I
decided that I didn't need it.
But when the L22 came along, Lynx was eager to get the word out about
"the Lynx you can
afford" and offered to trade me an L22 for my ONE. I took them up on it,
and again, I didn't
flip over better sound, but it was an advantage to have the digital as
well as analog I/O (though
I had to buy a USB MIDI interface because the ONE had MIDI and the L22
doesn't. So again,
to me, the advantage of the L22 was first a matter of interfacing, and
the potential for better
sound when I was ready for it.

So that's why I have an L22. If Lynx hadn't come along, I'd probably
have bought the Echo Mia
and I'd probably still be using it. For me, "good enough" is good enough.

I have some other audio interfaces now. I have a Mackie 1200F,
Satellite, and Onxy mixer
Firewire card. They all sound good and I use each one (as well as the
Lynx) for what it's best
at. I don't have to worry about which one sounds best - they're all good
enough for the purpose.
I also have a Behringer UCA-202, a $30 USB audio interface that I use
with an old laptop
computer on my test bench. It works with the RightMark Audio Analyzer
program and I use it
to make measurements on analog gear that I review. It works just fine
for that even though it
only costs thirty bucks.

So all of these things have their purpose, and one size doesn't
necessarily fit all
applications and all users. If someone asks me for a recommendation for
a 2-channel
PCI sound card for a PC and they were willing to spend $700, I'd
recommend the L22.
If they had only $200 to spend, I might recommend an M-Audio or Echo. If
they had a
laptop, I'd certainly not recommend a PCI card. If someone wanted an
8-channel I/O
box with the best converters at any cost, I'd probably recommend the
Prism Orpheus
or a Lynx Aurora 8 with the Firewire option. But if they insisted on at
least some mic
preamps integrated, the Lynx has none (the Prism has four). If money was
an object,
Focusrite makes some good units.

So that's sort of how I go about recommending things. I try to study out
the problem
and recommend a solution. Your suggestion of working on improving the
OP's room was
valid and you could have left it there. But you continued to argue with
people who
didn't understand why you recommended the hardware that you did.

And here we are. I don't expect you to care very much, but maybe you can
go away
understanding that there's more than sound to consider when it comes to
selecting
or recommending equipment.


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 7:09*pm, Mike Rivers wrote:
wrote:
Ethan, can do his own tests, and answer my questions before he wastes
any more of my time. *

Why should Ethan waste his time to avoid you wasting your time?

If their sound blaster or whatever crap they claim they use is
good enough for them, then why do they have a Lynx? *Why didn't they
return the Lynx if the sound blaster, Tascam, M-audio, or whatever was
just as good? *

Sound isn't everything. Maybe it is to you, but not to me. It's
important, sure.
No reason to buy something that sounds worse than what you have unless
overall it's better for you.

I never had a SoundBlaster. For a long time, I thought that tape
recorders were
for recording and computers were for doing my writing and book keeping. Oh,
and working with MIDI sequencers talking to real hardware synthesizers. My
first MIDI interface was a Music Quest MQX-32M. It had two ports and
supported
SMPTE time code, which was important since that's what my tape recorders
recorded. I could sync audio to MIDI.

When I decided that it was time to learn about using a computer for
audio applications,
I bought a Turtle Beach Tahiti sound card. At the time, it was the best
quality short of
the much more expensive Digital Audio Labs card. I knew engineering
folks from the
company, had confidence that they knew what they were doing, and took it
on faith
that it was worth the $100 or so more than what a SoundBlaster would
cost me.

But once I graduated from my TASCAM Model 5 console to a Soundcraft 600
(which
I still had) I had a problem with the Turtle Beach card. First off, the
Soundcraft was
enough quieter than the TASCAM console so that I could hear the Turtle
Beach hum.
Also, the Turtle Beach's nominal -10 dBV operating level wasn't a good
match for the
Soundcraft's +4 dBu operating level. It was time to upgrade the sound card.

I had reviewed a couple of Echo products and they worked nicely with the
console and
the computer. I was thinking of buying a Mia since I only was interested
only in a 2-channel
card, not a multichannel one. I was (and I'm still not) not comfortable
in using my computer
as a multitrack workstation. But while I was contemplating what to buy,
Lynx appeared
on the market. I met their engineers, they had some good ideas and
understood how to
properly test their products. Being a man-about-town whose opinions SOME
people
respect (whether they agree or not) and also being someone who can write
a coherent
sentence and explain how something works, Lynx offered me a LynxONE at a
price not
enough more than the Echo Mia to worry about, so I bought it.

The first and second things that I noticed about it when I switched out
the Turtle Beach
card was (1) no hum, and (2) better signal-to-noise ratio because of the
better match of
operating levels. Now you can argue "that's better sound" and I wouldn't
disagree, but
I don't think that's the sort of issue the original poster was concerned
with. Anyway, when
playing some music through it, it sounded nice and clean. I didn't turn
cartwheels having
discovered what I had been missing for the six or seven years I was
using the Tahiti. I
expect that it sounded quite a bit better, but it took a while to grow
into it.

Note that the LynxTWO was out before I got my ONE, but it was
significantly more expensive
and while it had slightly better specs, and was more expandable, I
decided that I didn't need it.
But when the L22 came along, Lynx was eager to get the word out about
"the Lynx you can
afford" and offered to trade me an L22 for my ONE. I took them up on it,
and again, I didn't
flip over better sound, but it was an advantage to have the digital as
well as analog I/O (though
I had to buy a USB MIDI interface because the ONE had MIDI and the L22
doesn't. So again,
to me, the advantage of the L22 was first a matter of interfacing, and
the potential for better
sound when I was ready for it.

So that's why I have an L22. If Lynx hadn't come along, I'd probably
have bought the Echo Mia
and I'd probably still be using it. For me, "good enough" is good enough.

I have some other audio interfaces now. I have a Mackie 1200F,
Satellite, and Onxy mixer
Firewire card. They all sound good and I use each one (as well as the
Lynx) for what it's best
at. I don't have to worry about which one sounds best - they're all good
enough for the purpose.
I also have a Behringer UCA-202, a $30 USB audio interface that I use
with an old laptop
computer on my test bench. It works with the RightMark Audio Analyzer
program and I use it
to make measurements on analog gear that I review. It works just fine
for that even though it
only costs thirty bucks.

So all of these things have their purpose, and one size doesn't
necessarily fit all
applications and all users. If someone asks me for a recommendation for
a 2-channel
PCI sound card for a PC and they were willing to spend $700, I'd
recommend the L22.
If they had only $200 to spend, I might recommend an M-Audio or Echo. If
they had a
laptop, I'd certainly not recommend a PCI card. If someone wanted an
8-channel I/O
box with the best converters at any cost, I'd probably recommend the
Prism Orpheus
or a Lynx Aurora 8 with the Firewire option. But if they insisted on at
least some mic
preamps integrated, the Lynx has none (the Prism has four). If money was
an object,
Focusrite makes some good units.

So that's sort of how I go about recommending things. I try to study out
the problem
and recommend a solution. Your suggestion of working on improving the
OP's room was
valid and you could have left it there. But you continued to argue with
people who
didn't understand why you recommended the hardware that you did.

And here we are. I don't expect you to care very much, but maybe you can
go away
understanding that there's more than sound to consider when it comes to
selecting
or recommending equipment.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

Yawn, is it over? I don't need your long winded recommendation on how
to recommend something. Especially since you've proved that you're a
lying scumbag. My recommendation fits the application perfectly, and
if you weren't such a dim wit you might realize that too.

[Rick Ruskin]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:31:19 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip
You should be
a politician Mike, you're in the wrong career.


You, sir, should dress in drag and get a job as Ann Coulter's stunt
double.


Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://liondogmusic.com
http://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 7:57*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:31:19 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip
* You should bea politician Mike, you're in the wrong career.

You, sir, should dress in drag and get a job as Ann Coulter's stunt
double. *

Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

You should write something worth listening to before you embarrass
yourself on myspace with that boring unoriginal crap you call music.

[Rick Ruskin]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:05:04 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Mar 20, 7:57Â*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:31:19 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip
Â* You should bea politician Mike, you're in the wrong career.

You, sir, should dress in drag and get a job as Ann Coulter's stunt
double. Â*

Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

You should write something worth listening to before you embarrass
yourself on myspace with that boring unoriginal crap you call music.

At least I'm willing to put my stuff out on display. Where's your
music portfolio or part thereof, hotshot? Anybody licensed/purchased
any of it lately or ever?


Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://liondogmusic.com
http://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 8:10*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:05:04 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Mar 20, 7:57*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:31:19 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip
* You should bea politician Mike, you're in the wrong career.

You, sir, should dress in drag and get a job as Ann Coulter's stunt
double. *

Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

You should write something worth listening to before you embarrass
yourself on myspace with that boring unoriginal crap you call music.

At least I'm willing to put my stuff out on display. *Where's your
music portfolio or part thereof, hotshot? *Anybody licensed/purchased
any of it lately or ever?

Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.

[Rick Ruskin]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:13:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip

Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.

Pop quiz: The above retort signifies which of the following:

A. The writer is a coward.
B. The writer has no talent.
C. The writer is living proof that turds can't be polished.
D. The writer has run out of lipstick for his pig.
E. The writer is off his medication.
F. All of the above.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://liondogmusic.com
http://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 8:24*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:13:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip



Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.

Pop quiz: *The above retort signifies which of the following:

A. *The writer is a coward.
B. *The writer has no talent.
C. *The writer is living proof that turds can't be polished.
D. *The writer has run out of lipstick for his pig.
E. *The writer is off his medication.
F. *All of the above.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Wow, those all fit you perfectly. lol

That's funny coming from a spineless coward who has to run with the
herd, be like the herd, even write music like the herd.

[Mike Rivers]

wrote:

"Yeah, I saw it, but I disregarded it as "good advice" for several
reasons:"

Lying scum bag. Anyone with half a brain can see you're lying and
covering up for your flawed, assumption based, straw man arguments.

What am I lying about? DId I previously say "Hey, an MOTU Traveler.
What a great suggestion!"? And what's a straw man?

The unit I recommended has four preamps as I already mentioned.

Why do you think that four preamps is better than two? Maybe he only
has one microphone. Do you think preamps grow on trees? Might he
get better converters if he only had to buy two preamps?

if he's replacing his preamp which is also his converter, he's going
to need another converter.

But that's not what he asked. He can use an outboard preamp with
his present interface. It was someone else, maybe you, who suggested
that the converter in the US-122 might be the weak link, not the preamp.
My take on that was that they were pretty well matched and that there
was not a compelling reason to replace one without the other unless
the preamp issue was a case of a mic that the preamp in the US-122
wasn't a good match for. I don't recall if he said what mic he was using.

$200 to $300 is not way over his budget,
and he can save up for it if he needs to.

But would that get him the results he expects? You seem to think so
but you're not him. And that money might be better spent elsewhere
than on preamps that he doesn't need. And then he'd have the
potential problem of getting the Firewire interface to work with his
computer.

Also, if he's going to
replace it, he may as well make it worth it and not take baby steps.

I agree, but his budget doesn't allow for very big steps. There were
several recommendations for an RNMP and that makes a certain
degree of sense. He'd get a different sound for sure, perhaps some
improvement, and it would be useful when he makes the next step up.

Damn you're ****ing stupid, and you're supposed to be an engineer? No
wonder you spend all your time here. I wouldn't trust you to engineer
anything either with your dim witted brain.

Doesn't bother me. I'm happy making money writing about what I know. I don't
have to put up with people who can't play and need all the DAW tools to make
something resembling robotic music.

You make a long post about how I didn't recommend anything specific
then you turn everything around when I point out I did. You should be
a politician Mike, you're in the wrong career.

Turn around? How so? You recommended the MOTU Traveler and I said
that was not a good recommendation. What didn't you comprehend? Must
I invite you over for coffee so we can talk this over? Take a bath
first, though.
And maybe an enema.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Mike Rivers]

wrote:

I don't need your long winded recommendation on how
to recommend something.

You do if you want anyone to take your recommendations seriously.

My recommendation fits the application perfectly

How can you say that? You don't even know what the application is.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 9:02*pm, Mike Rivers wrote:
wrote:
I don't need your long winded recommendation on how
to recommend something. *

You do if you want anyone to take your recommendations seriously.

My recommendation fits the application perfectly

How can you say that? You don't even know what the application is.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

He wants to keep his laptop setup , records using Octava mics (that's
plural by the way, so that's more than 1 mic, requires at least 2
preamps), records guitar and piano, wants to replace his preamp/
converter with another preamp/converter. That's his application, and
what I suggested fits his application perfectly.

God damn, read his first post, ****ing try to comprehend at least.

[Rick Ruskin]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:32:24 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Mar 20, 8:24Â*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:13:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip



Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.

Pop quiz: Â*The above retort signifies which of the following:

A. Â*The writer is a coward.
B. Â*The writer has no talent.
C. Â*The writer is living proof that turds can't be polished.
D. Â*The writer has run out of lipstick for his pig.
E. Â*The writer is off his medication.
F. Â*All of the above.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Wow, those all fit you perfectly. lol

That's funny coming from a spineless coward who has to run with the
herd, be like the herd, even write music like the herd.

You're the only one hiding. If you're so brave, let's hear some of
your work.


Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://liondogmusic.com
http://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 8:59*pm, Mike Rivers wrote:
wrote:
"Yeah, I saw it, but I disregarded it as "good advice" for several
reasons:"
Lying scum bag. *Anyone with half a brain can see you're lying and
covering up for your flawed, assumption based, straw man arguments.

What am I lying about? DId I previously say "Hey, an MOTU Traveler.
What a great suggestion!"? And what's a straw man?

The unit I recommended has four preamps as I already mentioned. *

Why do you think that four preamps is better than two? Maybe he only
has one microphone. Do you think preamps grow on trees? Might he
get better converters if he only had to buy two preamps?

if he's replacing his preamp which is also his converter, he's going
to need another converter. *

But that's not what he asked. He can use an outboard preamp with
his present interface. It was someone else, maybe you, who suggested
that the converter in the US-122 might be the weak link, not the preamp.
My take on that was that they were pretty well matched and that there
was not a compelling reason to replace one without the other unless
the preamp issue was a case of a mic that the preamp in the US-122
wasn't a good match for. I don't recall if he said what mic he was using.

* $200 to $300 is not way over his budget,

and he can save up for it if he needs to. *

But would that get him the results he expects? You seem to think so
but you're not him. And that money might be better spent elsewhere
than on preamps that he doesn't need. And then he'd have the
potential problem of getting the Firewire interface to work with his
computer.

* Also, if he's going to

replace it, he may as well make it worth it and not take baby steps.

I agree, but his budget doesn't allow for very big steps. There were
several recommendations for an RNMP and that makes a certain
degree of sense. He'd get a different sound for sure, perhaps some
improvement, and it would be useful when he makes the next step up.

Damn you're ****ing stupid, and you're supposed to be an engineer? *No
wonder you spend all your time here. *I wouldn't trust you to engineer
anything either with your dim witted brain.

Doesn't bother me. I'm happy making money writing about what I know. I don't
have to put up with people who can't play and need all the DAW tools to make
something resembling robotic music.

You make a long post about how I didn't recommend anything specific
then you turn everything around when I point out I did. *You should be
a politician Mike, you're in the wrong career.

Turn around? How so? You recommended the MOTU Traveler and I said
that was not a good recommendation. What didn't you comprehend? Must
I invite you over for coffee so we can talk this over? *Take a bath
first, though.
And maybe an enema.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

Are you really that slow or do you feign it? Everyone has a right to
be stupid, but you're abusing that right. How many times do I have to
repeat myself before you get it through your thick skull? I'm not
going to explain everything in detail so you can get it. I've already
done enough of that.

As for lying:

After your long winded post about how I didn't cite anything specific,
and when I pointed out that I did cite something specific you turn
around your whole argument and say this:
"Yeah, I saw it, but I disregarded it as "good advice" for several
reasons: "

That's bull**** and you know it. You're just covering your dumb ass.

I'm getting bored of explaining the same **** over and over to someone
that is trying his best to be a dumb **** and then lying to cover his
mistakes. Go back and read my posts and try to comprehend what I'm
saying first. Maybe collectively you guys can figure it out
eventually. lol Is it really that difficult?

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 9:19*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:32:24 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:



On Mar 20, 8:24*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:13:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip

Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.

Pop quiz: *The above retort signifies which of the following:

A. *The writer is a coward.
B. *The writer has no talent.
C. *The writer is living proof that turds can't be polished.
D. *The writer has run out of lipstick for his pig.
E. *The writer is off his medication.
F. *All of the above.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Wow, those all fit you perfectly. *lol

That's funny coming from a spineless coward who has to run with the
herd, be like the herd, even write music like the herd.

You're the only one hiding. *If you're so brave, let's hear some of
your work. * *

Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Yeah that's why I'm responding to all your stupid retorts. Do you
understand the meaning of "I don't throw pearls before swine".?

[Rick Ruskin]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 18:47:46 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Mar 20, 9:19Â*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:32:24 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:



On Mar 20, 8:24Â*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:13:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip

Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.

Pop quiz: Â*The above retort signifies which of the following:

A. Â*The writer is a coward.
B. Â*The writer has no talent.
C. Â*The writer is living proof that turds can't be polished.
D. Â*The writer has run out of lipstick for his pig.
E. Â*The writer is off his medication.
F. Â*All of the above.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Wow, those all fit you perfectly. Â*lol

That's funny coming from a spineless coward who has to run with the
herd, be like the herd, even write music like the herd.

You're the only one hiding. Â*If you're so brave, let's hear some of
your work. Â* Â*

Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Yeah that's why I'm responding to all your stupid retorts. Do you
understand the meaning of "I don't throw pearls before swine".?


Yeah. It's your code for "I don't have anything decent to show anyone
because I suck."


Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://liondogmusic.com
http://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 9:51*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 18:47:46 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:



On Mar 20, 9:19*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:32:24 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Mar 20, 8:24*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:13:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip

Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.

Pop quiz: *The above retort signifies which of the following:

A. *The writer is a coward.
B. *The writer has no talent.
C. *The writer is living proof that turds can't be polished.
D. *The writer has run out of lipstick for his pig.
E. *The writer is off his medication.
F. *All of the above.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Wow, those all fit you perfectly. *lol

That's funny coming from a spineless coward who has to run with the
herd, be like the herd, even write music like the herd.

You're the only one hiding. *If you're so brave, let's hear some of
your work. * *

Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Yeah that's why I'm responding to all your stupid retorts. *Do you
understand the meaning of "I don't throw pearls before swine".?

Yeah. *It's your code for "I don't have anything decent to show anyone
because I suck." *

Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Speak for yourself Ricky. lol

I see you base all your arguments on assumptions, and have very bad
comprehension as well. You fit right in with this herd. haha

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 8:24*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:13:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip



Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.

Pop quiz: *The above retort signifies which of the following:

A. *The writer is a coward.
B. *The writer has no talent.
C. *The writer is living proof that turds can't be polished.
D. *The writer has run out of lipstick for his pig.
E. *The writer is off his medication.
F. *All of the above.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

None of the above. The writer is a troll!

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 10:15*pm, wrote:
On Mar 20, 8:24*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:



On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:13:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip

Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.

Pop quiz: *The above retort signifies which of the following:

A. *The writer is a coward.
B. *The writer has no talent.
C. *The writer is living proof that turds can't be polished.
D. *The writer has run out of lipstick for his pig.
E. *The writer is off his medication.
F. *All of the above.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

None of the above. The writer is a troll!

Says the troll that just crawled out of the gutter to eat the sheep
****.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 20, 10:26*pm, wrote:
On Mar 20, 10:15*pm, wrote:



On Mar 20, 8:24*pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:13:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip

Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.

Pop quiz: *The above retort signifies which of the following:

A. *The writer is a coward.
B. *The writer has no talent.
C. *The writer is living proof that turds can't be polished.
D. *The writer has run out of lipstick for his pig.
E. *The writer is off his medication.
F. *All of the above.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

None of the above. The writer is a troll!

Says the troll that just crawled out of the gutter to eat the sheep
****.

Well guys if no one else wants to be spanked then I'll call it a
night. Getting bored here with you lamers, yawn.

[Les Cargill]

wrote:
On Mar 20, 8:24 pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:13:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip



Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.
Pop quiz: The above retort signifies which of the following:

A. The writer is a coward.
B. The writer has no talent.
C. The writer is living proof that turds can't be polished.
D. The writer has run out of lipstick for his pig.
E. The writer is off his medication.
F. All of the above.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Wow, those all fit you perfectly. lol

That's funny coming from a spineless coward who has to run with the
herd, be like the herd, even write music like the herd.


This is who you are arguing with.

http://www.answers.com/topic/rick-ruskin

We've herd of him. You?

--
Les Cargill

[hank alrich]

wrote:

On Mar 20, 8:24 pm, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:13:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

snip



Like I said, I don't throw pearls before swine.

Pop quiz: The above retort signifies which of the following:

A. The writer is a coward.
B. The writer has no talent.
C. The writer is living proof that turds can't be polished.
D. The writer has run out of lipstick for his pig.
E. The writer is off his medication.
F. All of the above.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music -
Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.comhttp://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

None of the above. The writer is a troll!

But valuable as a method of verifying the efficacy of my killfile.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[Mike Rivers]

wrote:

He wants to keep his laptop setup , records using Octava mics (that's
plural by the way, so that's more than 1 mic, requires at least 2
preamps), records guitar and piano, wants to replace his preamp/
converter with another preamp/converter. That's his application, and
what I suggested fits his application perfectly.

God damn, read his first post, ****ing try to comprehend at least.

I looked at his first post. I didn't re-read the entire thread. First post,
February 16, quoted in its entirety:

It's been a while. I currently record in my home with octava mics into
a tascam US122 to laptop and use Cakewalk.
Results are pretty good but i'm looking to improve. I mainly record
classical and acoustic guitar and ocasionally piano. Someone suggested
the next logical upgrade would be a better pre-amp because the one in
the us122 is probably not that good. I want to keep using the laptop
setup and don't want to spend more than $500. Any suggestions?

Doesn't say anything about replacing "preamp/converter," he's only acting
on someone's recommendation for a better preamp. Since he's using
Cakewalk, his laptop is a PC, and that means that it's fairly unlikely that
it has a Firewire port, so he probably also wants to continue using a USB
connection. Otherwise he'll have to budget for a Firewire adapter card and
get that working. Did you even ask if he had Firewire available? Do you
see anything that suggests that he might want to use more tha two mics?

I found a second post from him on March 16:

OK, so give me some suggestions. To remind you, i have
octava mics-- tascam US-122-- laptop.
When recording, i select the tascam soundcard because it's better than
my crappy laptop card.
I am also going to 'treat' the room, following advise on Ethan Winers
website (but i'm making the absorbers myself), and I'll measure
response before and after, as well as judge with my ears. One more
thing, I was using the cardioid capsules on the octava (because that's
all i had) but i recently purchased some omni capsules, so i'll do
some experimenting with that as well. In my recording i usually have
to cut some bass in post-EQ, probably from the proximity effect,
because to get the best sound my mics need to be only a few inches
from the guitar. Also, i do not have firewire, just USB.

So here, nearly three weeks later, he offers some more information. Here
he states that he does not have Firewire, a correct assumption that I had
made earlier.

On March 28, he explained his mic setup so that's one more piece of
information, (Oktava MK-012s) but it doesn't really change his hardware
requirements. However, it does throw a monkey wrench into the works.
Those mics have a checkered history, at least here in the US, where I
assume he is. When they were first imported from Russia, they were a
bit hit - practically a KM-84 for 1/10 the price. They were a big hit with
the home recording crowd. You could buy selected good ones from The
Sound Room. You could get random ones from Guitar Center. Later
on, you could get counterfeit and poorly made copies from Guitar Center.
And now there is a sort of legitimate distributor. So it's quite possible
that the real problem, if there indeed is one, is with his mics. Maybe
he should rent a pair of KM-84s from a reliable rental house next time
he has a session and see what that does for him.

At one point he said:
I tested my recording setup by recording a CD directly from the
speakers (PSB Image B-25's), one mic per speaker right in front of
grill) and playing back. I was surprised how good it sounded. It was
hard to distinguish from the CD direct. So i think the mics are pretty
good.

Um . . Well the PSB B-25 is a pretty well thought of mid-priced audiophile
bookshelf speaker. That's a pretty good test so maybe his mics are OK,
or maybe his judgment isn't too good. Don't know yet, but at least he's
doing some experimenting and that's a good thing. With more resources
he could try a different preamp with his US-122, he could try the US-122
preamps with a different converter, and he could make some informed
decisions about HIS system. But he's probably in the same position as
most of the people who come to this newsgroup - he has no friends with
alternative gear and he has no local dealer he can go to for loaners. Geez,
I never had it so tough when I was getting set up 40 years ago.

You seem to have an agenda here, to discredit everyone contributing to
the discussion, so you probably either have a great memory and nothing else
to distract you or you have a set of notes that you keep handy to back up
your lame attempts to justify your recommendations. This isn't the way
I do business. The original poster is hopefully working on his room and
experimenting with mic placement so that he can get a better idea of
how good his existing hardware can really sound.

He seems to have caught on that you're a joker with nothing useful to say
and seems to have gone on his way. You should probably do the same.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)