[Jus Nobody]

Any opinions on how this mic stacks up as a tube/ribbon mic?

[Scott Dorsey]

In article . net,
Jus Nobody wrote:
Any opinions on how this mic stacks up as a tube/ribbon mic?

I'm still trying to figure out the marketing gimmick that leads a
manufacturer to stick a tube inside a (passive) ribbon mike.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[JP Gerard]

Well, it's now a tube mic, man... dig?

JP

"Scott Dorsey" a écrit dans le message de
...
In article . net,
Jus Nobody wrote:
Any opinions on how this mic stacks up as a tube/ribbon mic?

I'm still trying to figure out the marketing gimmick that leads a
manufacturer to stick a tube inside a (passive) ribbon mike.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

I'm still trying to figure out the marketing gimmick that leads a
manufacturer to stick a tube inside a (passive) ribbon mike.

Nice, high impedance load on the ribbon, for one. Some ribbons like
that. Others don't. They may or may not know whether their ribbon likes
a load or not, but at least the load (though perhaps not the ribbons)
will be consistent so the users won't report different performance
depending on what preamp they use.

Besides, every marketing department likes "warm" mic, and this one is
doubly warm, first from the ribbon, and second from the tube. That's
gotta be twice as good as a plain ribbon mic or a tube condenser mic.
g

[GKB]

Yeah , i'd say you have warm AND smooth
[ which is which ? ]

aaaaaaannnnd put an oil can capacitor and you have slick !
just careful about what kind of oil and from where !



"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
Jus Nobody wrote:
Any opinions on how this mic stacks up as a tube/ribbon mic?

I'm still trying to figure out the marketing gimmick that leads a
manufacturer to stick a tube inside a (passive) ribbon mike.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[GKB]

"JP Gerard" wrote in message
...
Well, it's now a tube mic, man... dig?


DUG !



"Scott Dorsey" a écrit dans le message de
...
In article . net,
Jus Nobody wrote:
Any opinions on how this mic stacks up as a tube/ribbon mic?

I'm still trying to figure out the marketing gimmick that leads a
manufacturer to stick a tube inside a (passive) ribbon mike.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ty Ford]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 08:57:25 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote
(in article ):

In article . net,
Jus Nobody wrote:
Any opinions on how this mic stacks up as a tube/ribbon mic?

I'm still trying to figure out the marketing gimmick that leads a
manufacturer to stick a tube inside a (passive) ribbon mike.
--scott


Keeps the ribbon free of condensation in high humidity environments!

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

[Agent 86]

On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 06:14:57 -0800, Mike Rivers wrote:


Scott Dorsey wrote:

I'm still trying to figure out the marketing gimmick that leads a
manufacturer to stick a tube inside a (passive) ribbon mike.

Nice, high impedance load on the ribbon, for one. Some ribbons like
that. Others don't. They may or may not know whether their ribbon likes
a load or not,

May or may not? This is Nady we're talking about!

[Jus Nobody]

Well, after waiting for a related response to the original post, I still
see NO ONE knows??? Now, if only we could post or stay on topic, that
would be of help...ya think? Maybe there are a few of you out there
that has tried one or knows someone that has, is all I ask. Personally,
I am considering getting a decent ribbon mic and a tube mic for around
($150.00-$300.00 US) but, not the the most expensive ones out there. I'm
on a budget. The Nady seems to have a mic that has the best of both
worlds...maybe, maybe not? So far, I've only found one negative review
that blasted the shockmount, but no mention of how the mic sounded or
performed. Any qualified responses? TIA!

Jus Nobody wrote:
Any opinions on how this mic stacks up as a tube/ribbon mic?

[Scott Dorsey]

Jus Nobody wrote:
Well, after waiting for a related response to the original post, I still
see NO ONE knows??? Now, if only we could post or stay on topic, that
would be of help...ya think? Maybe there are a few of you out there
that has tried one or knows someone that has, is all I ask. Personally,
I am considering getting a decent ribbon mic and a tube mic for around
($150.00-$300.00 US) but, not the the most expensive ones out there. I'm
on a budget. The Nady seems to have a mic that has the best of both
worlds...maybe, maybe not? So far, I've only found one negative review
that blasted the shockmount, but no mention of how the mic sounded or
performed. Any qualified responses? TIA!

You don't give a valid e-mail to reply to. I don't have anything to say
about this that I could say in a public forum.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[coreybenson]

On Feb 2, 12:16 pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Jus Nobody wrote:
Any qualified responses? TIA!

You don't give a valid e-mail to reply to. I don't have anything to say
about this that I could say in a public forum.
--scott

And that's a good enough response for me. NEXT!

Corey

[Jus Nobody]

So Scott, what exactly is this public forum for then? And no, providing
a "valid e-mail address," isn't something I want or need! You would
think most on here know about getting unwanted junk mail, trojans,
worms, viruses and the like, by using one??? Another example of a
response that's OT...BTW, I guess if you don't have anything to
contribute worth while, than silence should be golden. Ya think?

Scott Dorsey wrote:
Jus Nobody wrote:

Well, after waiting for a related response to the original post, I still
see NO ONE knows??? Now, if only we could post or stay on topic, that
would be of help...ya think? Maybe there are a few of you out there
that has tried one or knows someone that has, is all I ask. Personally,
I am considering getting a decent ribbon mic and a tube mic for around
($150.00-$300.00 US) but, not the the most expensive ones out there. I'm
on a budget. The Nady seems to have a mic that has the best of both
worlds...maybe, maybe not? So far, I've only found one negative review
that blasted the shockmount, but no mention of how the mic sounded or
performed. Any qualified responses? TIA!


You don't give a valid e-mail to reply to. I don't have anything to say
about this that I could say in a public forum.
--scott

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:53:30 GMT, Jus Nobody
wrote:

So Scott, what exactly is this public forum for then? And no, providing
a "valid e-mail address," isn't something I want or need! You would
think most on here know about getting unwanted junk mail, trojans,
worms, viruses and the like, by using one??? Another example of a
response that's OT...BTW, I guess if you don't have anything to
contribute worth while, than silence should be golden. Ya think?

What everybody's trying hard, because too polite, to not say
is that a vacuum tube is a wacky thing to put into a ribbon
microphone. It's noise matching is at least 20dB different
from a ribbon-plus-transformer. It can only degrade an already
difficult situation.

And, by the way, grow up.

Chris Hornbeck

[Scott Dorsey]

Chris Hornbeck wrote:
On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:53:30 GMT, Jus Nobody
wrote:

So Scott, what exactly is this public forum for then? And no, providing
a "valid e-mail address," isn't something I want or need! You would
think most on here know about getting unwanted junk mail, trojans,
worms, viruses and the like, by using one??? Another example of a
response that's OT...BTW, I guess if you don't have anything to
contribute worth while, than silence should be golden. Ya think?

I've been posting here since 1987 (well, to net.audio and to its successor
groups) with a valid e-mail address. Munging your return address to prevent
spam is an unpleasant thing to do, but not providing any at all is rude as
hell.

You may want to go to news.announce.newusers and read the Emily Postnews
article.

What everybody's trying hard, because too polite, to not say
is that a vacuum tube is a wacky thing to put into a ribbon
microphone. It's noise matching is at least 20dB different
from a ribbon-plus-transformer. It can only degrade an already
difficult situation.

In the case of this particular microphone there are other issues.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Agent 86]

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:53:30 +0000, Jus Nobody wrote:


So Scott, what exactly is this public forum for then? And no, providing a
"valid e-mail address," isn't something I want or need! You would think
most on here know about getting unwanted junk mail, trojans, worms,
viruses and the like, by using one???

You would think most on here know about what they're likely to get if they
buy a microphone with "Nady" written on it. ESPECIALLY if it has a ribbon
or a toob in it.

[Agent 86]

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 16:32:02 +0000, Jus Nobody wrote:

Well, after waiting for a related response to the original post, I still
see NO ONE knows??? Now, if only we could post or stay on topic, that
would be of help...ya think? Maybe there are a few of you out there that
has tried one or knows someone that has, is all I ask.

You'll get more help if you lose the attitude, bucko. Nobody here owes you
****.


Personally, I am
considering getting a decent ribbon mic and a tube mic for around
($150.00-$300.00 US) but, not the the most expensive ones out there.

You won't get a decent ribbon for that, not new anyway. You might find a
tube mic in that range, but it won't be decent. That's just the way the
world works.


I'm on a budget.

You and everyone else.

The Nady seems to have a mic that has the best of both
worlds...maybe, maybe not?

Which worlds would that be? Uranus?


So far, I've only found one negative review
that blasted the shockmount,

Where did you *find* that review? In a magazine with a full page Nady ad?


but no mention of how the mic sounded or performed.

I think you just found your answer. Sometimes you have to
read between the lines.

[hank alrich]

Jus Nobody wrote:

So Scott, what exactly is this public forum for then?

Once upon a time it was a place for working professionals to discuss
their trade and the tools and techniques thereof.

Now it's apparently a place for those seeking the cheapest ****ing piece
of **** ribbon microphone to harass those who post here and who do know
soemthing about mics, possibly including the piece of cheap crap
somebody is interested in.

And no, providing
a "valid e-mail address," isn't something I want or need! You would
think most on here know about getting unwanted junk mail, trojans,
worms, viruses and the like, by using one???

I've been here for years. The address from which I post works. I get
replies and queries off-forum that are worth the trouble it takes me
(and that's damn little trouble) to throw out of my inbox all the crap
that doesn't apply to my life.

Another example of a
response that's OT...BTW, I guess if you don't have anything to
contribute worth while, than silence should be golden. Ya think?

He has something to contribute. You are not sufficiently interested in
that to make it sensibly possible for him to reply courteously and in
private. Nobody here owes you anything at all.

Scott Dorsey wrote:
Jus Nobody wrote:

Well, after waiting for a related response to the original post, I still
see NO ONE knows??? Now, if only we could post or stay on topic, that
would be of help...ya think?

I guess it escapes your mind that possibly may of us here could not care
less about the very bottom of the ribbon mic barrel.

Maybe there are a few of you out there
that has tried one or knows someone that has, is all I ask.

If you could manage Google's Advanced Group Search function, you might
be on to something. It might just be that some discussion about low end
pieces of ribbon mic has taken place here.

Personally,
I am considering getting a decent ribbon mic and a tube mic for around
($150.00-$300.00 US) but, not the the most expensive ones out there. I'm
on a budget.

Everybody is on a budget. Most people spend too little, so they spend it
again, and again, and again. In the end they could've bought something
good for the money they threw out on garbage, but they can't restrain
themselves from buying stuff long enough to save up enough to get
something that will last them a goodly while, maybe even for the rest of
their life.

The Nady seems to have a mic that has the best of both
worlds...maybe, maybe not?


And/or maybe it's a piece of **** masquerading behind a truckload of
marketable buzz words like "tube" and "ribbon", aimed at people who have
never used a Beyer, RCA, AEA, or Royer, and who think whatever is
advertised works as advertised, especially if there are enough buzzwords
in the ads.

So far, I've only found one negative review
that blasted the shockmount, but no mention of how the mic sounded or
performed. Any qualified responses? TIA!

It doesn't mean enough to you for you to figure out how to to put up an
email addy to which those who know would prefer to respond. Are bullet
holes in your feet a sign of marksmanship?

If you can't manage Google and can't read between the lines, maybe you
deserve the mic. Better get a matched pair for stereo. Hell, they don't
cost much.

You don't give a valid e-mail to reply to. I don't have anything to say
about this that I could say in a public forum.
--scott

--
ha
"Iraq" is Arabic for "Vietnam"

[Jus Nobody]

To Chris and Hank,
Since when did posting a simple question warrant attacks? Here again,
with the influx of stupid, offensive and uninformative responses, these
are reasons why some of us would rather not get more involved in using a
forum such as this one. I've been on here quite a while myself, under
different ID's for obvious reasons, none of which justifies attacks
concerning what "Users" think of a product line they have 1st hand
knowledge with. I guess a part of maturity is knowing when to pick your
battles and when to just shut up!

Years ago they also said it was impossible to put a video on a CD when
Laser discs were popular, since then, we have DVD's. Also said it was
virtually impossible to convert a wav file to midi, well by using a
spectrum analyzer and other technology, (BIAB uses a process called a
Chord Wizard now to do this), however, it's still not perfected, but it
is possible to some degree. So why not a tube/ribbon mic? Maybe it's not
all that or there yet, but at least someone has tried to do it. And yes,
sometimes you get what you pay for and sometimes not! Everyone's ears,
pockets and usage's differs. That's why we have so many choices.

My reference in saying all this is, it may well be possible Nady (whom I
know very little about, mic or product wise) has come up with something
no one else has? I don't really know? Speculation about what a mic can
or can not do that's not based on actual hands on experience, to me,
falls on deaf ears.

To Scott,
I appreciate your candor, but if you know something about a product, I
thought this was a place where an educated exchange could take place?
There's an old saying, "It's not what you say, it's how you say it."

In terms of providing a spam free email address, I for one would rather
not participate in filtering or receiving any more unwanted
crap in my inbox...thus the reason for using a public forum or
a users group.

Again, all I asked is what those users (those that have seen, heard or
tried) the mic think about it. Inquiring minds want to know. I've seen
posts here slamin' low cost chinese mics (Cascade's Ribbon mics come to
mind) in particular. I also know someone that brought one and they love
it? Go figure? There are a few people on here that do have useful info
to pass on and that's the reason why I posted here...props to Mike
Rivers and a few others that do in depth product reviews. Long winded
enough?

Peace, life is too short to be stressed out about it.
Bright moments!

snip

You don't give a valid e-mail to reply to. I don't have anything to say
about this that I could say in a public forum.
--scott

[Jus Nobody]

Here again, another fine example of non information.

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 16:32:02 +0000, Jus Nobody wrote:


Well, after waiting for a related response to the original post, I still
see NO ONE knows??? Now, if only we could post or stay on topic, that
would be of help...ya think? Maybe there are a few of you out there that
has tried one or knows someone that has, is all I ask.

Agent 86 wrote:

You'll get more help if you lose the attitude, bucko. Nobody here owes you
****.

Loosing the attitude "Bucko" reference here, regarding whom owes what
for asking a simple question, speaks volumes about this and similar
responses, in terms of what I said about useful information??? And the
real purpose of this ng is?

Personally, I am
considering getting a decent ribbon mic and a tube mic for around
($150.00-$300.00 US) but, not the the most expensive ones out there.


You won't get a decent ribbon for that, not new anyway. You might find a
tube mic in that range, but it won't be decent. That's just the way the
world works.

The term "decent" is only relative to the user and application in
question, is it not?

I'm on a budget.


You and everyone else.

And your point is?

The Nady seems to have a mic that has the best of both
worlds...maybe, maybe not?


Which worlds would that be? Uranus?

Here again, useful information...not!

So far, I've only found one negative review
that blasted the shockmount,


Where did you *find* that review? In a magazine with a full page Nady ad?

I did an extensive google search. Since this mic came out in April of
2006. This is my reason for finding out more about it and especially
from those that actually have tried it or that have one. Mfg. reviews
are virtually useless. Recently, someone on ebay purchased one and I am
eagerly awaiting to hear what they think about it. Hardly any reviews at
all can be found. True, there might be reasons for this and that is why
I posted. Usually, even if a mic sucks, you'll find at least someone
that speaks from experience from having used it. Again, speculation
without real knowledge is just that, speculation!

but no mention of how the mic sounded or performed.


I think you just found your answer. Sometimes you have to
read between the lines.

Reading between the lines is not my forte. You can sometimes
misinterpret the obvious by not seeing things for what they are, and
especially if you're blind, that comes to mind?!? Maybe the lack of a
"USER" feedback on this technology is just due to those that don't have
the time or expertise/ability to write a "decent" review? Ya think or
don't cha?

[Mike Rivers]

Jus Nobody wrote:

Loosing the attitude "Bucko" reference here, regarding whom owes what
for asking a simple question, speaks volumes about this and similar
responses, in terms of what I said about useful information???

Taken as a simple questionm, the simple answer, that you've probably
inferred already, is "practically nobody here has ever heard it."
However, if everyone kept quiet, you'd ask the same question over and
over, and eventually get ****ed that nobody answered you. So you got
some answers.

I suspect that the reason why Scott didn't want to post a detailed
reply in public is because he may be reviewing that mic for a magazine
and doesn't want to spill the beans before it's published, or before
the manufacturer decides that they'd better make some changes in it.
He suggested that if he had an e-mail address he might tell you more
privately, but if you choose not to accept that route, don't get mad
because you don't have a knowledgable answer to your question.

And the real purpose of this ng is?

For people who know a little about what they're talking about to hang
out, exchange information and experiences, and have a little fun. It's
not to teach beginners everything they need to know, or to amass a
collective knowledge of every product on the market, particularly
brand new products. Most professionals aren't early adopters of new
products, but make careful evaluations.

The term "decent" is only relative to the user and application in
question, is it not?

Yes. And I think that you'll find that most of the experienced users
here would tend to dismiss a low cost ribbon mic, particularly one
with a marketing gimmick that, unless very well designed, has little
functional value.

Usually, even if a mic sucks, you'll find at least someone
that speaks from experience from having used it.

Did you not get this drift from Scott's response? If he thought it
sucked and posted that on a newsgroup (he's pretty well respected
around here, and has reviewed many mics for a few in-print
publications) without giving Nady an opportunity to respond fairly,
that would be unethical. It's not quite that bad if Joe Blow says he
bought one and it sucks (or that it's great) but then you need to know
something about Joe Blow and whether his experience would match with
yours.

Again, speculation
without real knowledge is just that, speculation!

This is true, however, there are some general things that we've comne
to learn about ribbon mics designed and made in that part of the world
and sold at low cost by vendors who specialize in low cost product
lines. Do you think there's no reason for AEA or Royer to sell ribbon
mics in the $1-2K range when Nady can do it for a couple of hundred
bucks? Of course you don't. But depending on your experience and
requirements, there may not be enough difference to warrant the
difference in price.

Some of us here experiment with cheap mics in hopes that there might
be a gem, or a one trick pony (a friend of mine has one fiddle for
which his AKG C1000, normally a pretty dreadful sounding mic, sounds
better than anything else he has, and he has some really fine mics).
But that's something that you can only find out for yourself.

Why don't you just buy one, try it out, and return it if you don't
like it? There isn't enough collective knowledge yet to be able to say
that there's a pretty good chance you'll like it, but there's enough
collective experience with similar products to suggest that unless it
does just what you want, you could be wasting your money.

Sorry, but that's all the advice there is at this point.

Maybe the lack of a
"USER" feedback on this technology is just due to those that don't have
the time or expertise/ability to write a "decent" review? Ya think or
don't cha?

Nope, I think it's just that there haven't been enough people reading
this newsgroup who have actually used one. Just because it's been
"out" since April doesn't mean people have been buying them. If the
only evidence you can find that someone has actually bought one is
through an eBay sale, I don't think that's a representative opinion.

Now if you wanted to know about the CAD Trion ribbon mic, I'd direct
you to my review in the January 2007 issue of Pro Audio Review (mine)
or the February 2007 issue of Recording (Matt Seilor's). But when it
comes to the Nady mic, you'll have to take what you can find on line.
Have you tried the Gearslutz or TapeOp forums? They tend to have more
people on a tight budget who aren't hesitant to experiment.

[Scott Dorsey]

Jus Nobody wrote:
My reference in saying all this is, it may well be possible Nady (whom I
know very little about, mic or product wise) has come up with something
no one else has? I don't really know? Speculation about what a mic can
or can not do that's not based on actual hands on experience, to me,
falls on deaf ears.

The thing is, it's easy to come up with a product that nobody else has.
Uniqueness is easy. The problem is that it's hard to come up with
product that is both unique and good.

I appreciate your candor, but if you know something about a product, I
thought this was a place where an educated exchange could take place?
There's an old saying, "It's not what you say, it's how you say it."

There are a lot of things I can't say in public about a lot of products,
because there are people I don't want to offend, or because there is
something about a product I don't want to give away, or because Mike or
I have a forthcoming review out on a product and we don't want the
information public before the review comes out. Or maybe we are reviewing
the item that the product is a copy of, which has happened more than once.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ty Ford]

On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 18:56:25 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote
(in article ):

Chris Hornbeck wrote:
On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:53:30 GMT, Jus Nobody
wrote:

So Scott, what exactly is this public forum for then? And no, providing
a "valid e-mail address," isn't something I want or need! You would
think most on here know about getting unwanted junk mail, trojans,
worms, viruses and the like, by using one??? Another example of a
response that's OT...BTW, I guess if you don't have anything to
contribute worth while, than silence should be golden. Ya think?

I've been posting here since 1987 (well, to net.audio and to its successor
groups) with a valid e-mail address. Munging your return address to prevent
spam is an unpleasant thing to do, but not providing any at all is rude as
hell.

You may want to go to news.announce.newusers and read the Emily Postnews
article.

What everybody's trying hard, because too polite, to not say
is that a vacuum tube is a wacky thing to put into a ribbon
microphone. It's noise matching is at least 20dB different
from a ribbon-plus-transformer. It can only degrade an already
difficult situation.

In the case of this particular microphone there are other issues.
--scott



I don't know what you guys are doing, but I haven't ever hid my email address
and I haven't been over run with spam. Comcast, my ISP, may be doing a better
job than your ISP, but I doubt it.

Maybe the technology has changed since problems occurred with using a real
email address or maybe there are just a lot of people who like BSing and
don't want to be identified.


Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Ty Ford]

On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 07:09:05 -0500, Jus Nobody wrote
(in article . net):

It's really interesting. In the last week I have seen several Nady new
product posting on other forums. It's like they just figured out that the
Internet might be a good way to market their stuff.

From this I gather:

1. Nady has a marketing push on

2. While their gear has never been highly regarded, we may want to at least
look at or listen to it to see if they are doing something better than they
used to.

Regards,

Ty Ford

PS: If Nady wants to send me something to review, they know where I am.

Part 2:

You said: "I've been on here quite a while myself, under different ID's for
obvious reasons"

What? You're a child molester? You're doing yourself more harm by do it that
way. Get off the porch and get out in the yard with the rest of the kids.

You said: My reference in saying all this is, it may well be possible Nady
(whom I
know very little about, mic or product wise) has come up with something
no one else has? I don't really know? Speculation about what a mic can
or can not do that's not based on actual hands on experience, to me,
falls on deaf ears.

Audio technica has a mic with both condenser and dynamic capsules inside.
Nobody I know has that. They don't get bashed for it. So there must be some
other reason than the degree of inventiveness that results in people kicking
Nady to the curb. Ya' think?

You said: In terms of providing a spam free email address, I for one would
rather
not participate in filtering or receiving any more unwanted
crap in my inbox...thus the reason for using a public forum or
a users group.

Asked and answered earlier. It's been proven that putting an address in your
newsgroup postings doesn't result in spam. Again, get off the porch.

You said: I've seen
posts here slamin' low cost chinese mics (Cascade's Ribbon mics come to
mind) in particular. I also know someone that brought one and they love
it?

Most who have "loved it" have never heard a top shelf mic, or the application
doesn't require a top shelf mic.

You ability to cast shade or sunshine is the mark of a careful marketeer. I
thinks that's the source of the problem. That and your big deal issue with
anonymity. Don't expect anyone to take you seriously until you divest
yourself. We're not really all that dumb here.

Regards,

Ty Ford



To Chris and Hank,
Since when did posting a simple question warrant attacks? Here again,
with the influx of stupid, offensive and uninformative responses, these
are reasons why some of us would rather not get more involved in using a
forum such as this one. I've been on here quite a while myself, under
different ID's for obvious reasons, none of which justifies attacks
concerning what "Users" think of a product line they have 1st hand
knowledge with. I guess a part of maturity is knowing when to pick your
battles and when to just shut up!

Years ago they also said it was impossible to put a video on a CD when
Laser discs were popular, since then, we have DVD's. Also said it was
virtually impossible to convert a wav file to midi, well by using a
spectrum analyzer and other technology, (BIAB uses a process called a
Chord Wizard now to do this), however, it's still not perfected, but it
is possible to some degree. So why not a tube/ribbon mic? Maybe it's not
all that or there yet, but at least someone has tried to do it. And yes,
sometimes you get what you pay for and sometimes not! Everyone's ears,
pockets and usage's differs. That's why we have so many choices.

My reference in saying all this is, it may well be possible Nady (whom I
know very little about, mic or product wise) has come up with something
no one else has? I don't really know? Speculation about what a mic can
or can not do that's not based on actual hands on experience, to me,
falls on deaf ears.

To Scott,
I appreciate your candor, but if you know something about a product, I
thought this was a place where an educated exchange could take place?
There's an old saying, "It's not what you say, it's how you say it."

In terms of providing a spam free email address, I for one would rather
not participate in filtering or receiving any more unwanted
crap in my inbox...thus the reason for using a public forum or
a users group.

Again, all I asked is what those users (those that have seen, heard or
tried) the mic think about it. Inquiring minds want to know. I've seen
posts here slamin' low cost chinese mics (Cascade's Ribbon mics come to
mind) in particular. I also know someone that brought one and they love
it? Go figure? There are a few people on here that do have useful info
to pass on and that's the reason why I posted here...props to Mike
Rivers and a few others that do in depth product reviews. Long winded
enough?

Peace, life is too short to be stressed out about it.
Bright moments!

snip

You don't give a valid e-mail to reply to. I don't have anything to say
about this that I could say in a public forum.
--scott




--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Jus Nobody]

Thanks Mike. I do appreciate your take on the dialog, but here again,
all I asked was, were there any "user reviews," since I couldn't find
that many by now and since the mic came out?

Mike Rivers wrote:
Taken as a simple questionm, the simple answer, that you've probably
inferred already, is "practically nobody here has ever heard it."
However, if everyone kept quiet, you'd ask the same question over and
over, and eventually get ****ed that nobody answered you. So you got
some answers.

The responses so far have been about the feasibility of that
technology or the lack there of, and attacks assuming that if you
haven't gotten any responses, either people here don't know or just
don't care to share, for whatever reasons. Using aliases is a work
around, believe me, I know. And no, I have more of a life to ask the
same thing over, and over again, because life's too short for a lot of
BS. For instance: What's the best mic, pre-amp, how to record vocals,
guitar cabs, etc....covered how many times?


I suspect that the reason why Scott didn't want to post a detailed
reply in public is because he may be reviewing that mic for a magazine
and doesn't want to spill the beans before it's published, or before
the manufacturer decides that they'd better make some changes in it.
He suggested that if he had an e-mail address he might tell you more
privately, but if you choose not to accept that route, don't get mad
because you don't have a knowledgable answer to your question.

Point well taken about Scott, but his response left me high and dry due
to the wanting of his opinion being kept quite. I have no affiliation
with NADY nor the makers of the C1000s, but in the past, the mere
mention of a product, not liked here, is subjective and not a true
representation of anything really useful other than someone's opinion
anyway.

And the real purpose of this ng is?


For people who know a little about what they're talking about to hang
out, exchange information and experiences, and have a little fun. It's
not to teach beginners everything they need to know, or to amass a
collective knowledge of every product on the market, particularly
brand new products. Most professionals aren't early adopters of new
products, but make careful evaluations.

Here you're assuming a beginners ill advised contribution or question to
a public forum? If one doesn't ask, you'll never know or learn. True,
most professionals have resources the commoner doesn't have and that's
some of the reasons why there are so many different types of mics on the
market. After all, there wouldn't be pros without amateurs or novices.
You got to start from somewhere?

The term "decent" is only relative to the user and application in
question, is it not?


Yes. And I think that you'll find that most of the experienced users
here would tend to dismiss a low cost ribbon mic, particularly one
with a marketing gimmick that, unless very well designed, has little
functional value.

So are we talking about closed mindedness and speculation? "They said it
couldn't be done." How many times have we heard that before? I've seen,
heard and know people who have the money to buy the top of line
everything, and some know what they're doing, some don't. Because a mic
cost a lot doesn't make for a good recording. Trash in, trash out.
Setting up or placement makes a big difference as well as what you're
recording and where. Sometimes the cheapest can be the dearest. I
guess what I'm really saying is, "It's not what you've got, it's how you
use it."

Usually, even if a mic sucks, you'll find at least someone
that speaks from experience from having used it.


Did you not get this drift from Scott's response? If he thought it
sucked and posted that on a newsgroup (he's pretty well respected
around here, and has reviewed many mics for a few in-print
publications) without giving Nady an opportunity to respond fairly,
that would be unethical. It's not quite that bad if Joe Blow says he
bought one and it sucks (or that it's great) but then you need to know
something about Joe Blow and whether his experience would match with
yours.

Can you say alias? Again, being general goes a long way or saying "stay
tuned," lends itself to one's coming or something? I tend to weigh
responses based on their merit. Since very few on here know all the
"Players" or whom to really trust/respect. I personally take issue with
the personal attacks, than the educated and informed responses for
newbees or people that just sign in from time to time, to see what's up.


Again, speculation
without real knowledge is just that, speculation!


This is true, however, there are some general things that we've comne
to learn about ribbon mics designed and made in that part of the world
and sold at low cost by vendors who specialize in low cost product
lines. Do you think there's no reason for AEA or Royer to sell ribbon
mics in the $1-2K range when Nady can do it for a couple of hundred
bucks? Of course you don't. But depending on your experience and
requirements, there may not be enough difference to warrant the
difference in price.


I mentioned Cascade as one of those "cheap" mfg. chinese mics indicated
on here, but again, I know someone that loves what they got. For my
money, dumping $350.00 US on a mfg.'s description or concept and no
actual user review leaves me wanting to wait until all the dust settles.
Common sense here! And because someone inquires about a product, why on
here does that make them a novice or for them to be slapped on wrist?
Remember there are really no stupid questions, just dumb answers.

Some of us here experiment with cheap mics in hopes that there might
be a gem, or a one trick pony (a friend of mine has one fiddle for
which his AKG C1000, normally a pretty dreadful sounding mic, sounds
better than anything else he has, and he has some really fine mics).
But that's something that you can only find out for yourself.

I agree, but ones man's junk could be another's man's treasure. Mics,
wine and food etc., fall into the same category.

Why don't you just buy one, try it out, and return it if you don't
like it? There isn't enough collective knowledge yet to be able to say
that there's a pretty good chance you'll like it, but there's enough
collective experience with similar products to suggest that unless it
does just what you want, you could be wasting your money.

Hmmm? Try before you buy, what a concept? Unfortunately, these mics seem
to be only available on line and returning some products, I've heard,
can be a drag. Returning, sanitation, reshelving and restocking fees,
these issues aside keeps me from doing that, so I'm in a wait and see mode.

Sorry, but that's all the advice there is at this point.

Granted.

Maybe the lack of a
"USER" feedback on this technology is just due to those that don't have
the time or expertise/ability to write a "decent" review? Ya think or
don't cha?


Nope, I think it's just that there haven't been enough people reading
this newsgroup who have actually used one. Just because it's been
"out" since April doesn't mean people have been buying them. If the
only evidence you can find that someone has actually bought one is
through an eBay sale, I don't think that's a representative opinion.

No, just "one" users opinion. You take everything you read here and on
line with a grain of salt and as a reference to questions you may not
know already. Is this not all for entertainment, anyway?


Now if you wanted to know about the CAD Trion ribbon mic, I'd direct
you to my review in the January 2007 issue of Pro Audio Review (mine)
or the February 2007 issue of Recording (Matt Seilor's). But when it
comes to the Nady mic, you'll have to take what you can find on line.
Have you tried the Gearslutz or TapeOp forums? They tend to have more
people on a tight budget who aren't hesitant to experiment.

I'm also considering a CAD and I'll definitely read what you have to say
about it. I believe I've googled Gearslutz and TapeOp to no avail, but
things change on line day to day. I've seen Nady around for years and
have some knowledge of their wireless line, but I'm not that familiar
with all their products, quality or support. I'm picking up the vibe
from here that they fall into the same bag as the AKG C1000s, but then
again....Makes you wonder why a mfg. keeps producing such a bad product
doesn't it? Hmmm? Can you say cost incentive, supply and demand?

Thanks!

[Richard Crowley]

"Ty Ford" wrote ...
It's been proven that putting an address in your
newsgroup postings doesn't result in spam. Again,
get off the porch.

I think you've just been lucky, Ty. I have first-hand
examples of a single revelation of an email address
resulting in a large step-function increase in spam.
Many of us have had to change email addresses when
the SNR became intollerable.

[Jus Nobody]

Thanks Scott. Mike also echoes your position and I do appreciate what
you guys have to say. I guess I'll keep lurking and wait until it's
revealed what the real skinny is on the concept and product. At this
point, I'm just curious. I've seen, heard, own and know good mics that
cost $$$$$$$, but I also like to know what's new. Haven't been able of
late to make the NAMM shows, that's why I inquired.

Scott Dorsey wrote:

Jus Nobody wrote:

My reference in saying all this is, it may well be possible Nady (whom I
know very little about, mic or product wise) has come up with something
no one else has? I don't really know? Speculation about what a mic can
or can not do that's not based on actual hands on experience, to me,
falls on deaf ears.


The thing is, it's easy to come up with a product that nobody else has.
Uniqueness is easy. The problem is that it's hard to come up with
product that is both unique and good.


I appreciate your candor, but if you know something about a product, I
thought this was a place where an educated exchange could take place?
There's an old saying, "It's not what you say, it's how you say it."


There are a lot of things I can't say in public about a lot of products,
because there are people I don't want to offend, or because there is
something about a product I don't want to give away, or because Mike or
I have a forthcoming review out on a product and we don't want the
information public before the review comes out. Or maybe we are reviewing
the item that the product is a copy of, which has happened more than once.
--scott

[Jus Nobody]

It's been my experience in the past to get a lot of BS email. It could
be my ISP, could be a number of things. For the life of me with anti
virus, adware, and host of other anti spam software, stuff still gets
through, so I avoid providing too much info, especially since I am also
in the industry and use my computer to do a host of other things than
just posting to news groups. I also use specific user groups for certain
things. I figured the question was general enough not to cause WW4. A
public generic response is all I ask. Scott & Mike addressed this, I
heard and read it.

Ty Ford wrote:

On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 18:56:25 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote
(in article ):


Chris Hornbeck wrote:

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:53:30 GMT, Jus Nobody
wrote:


So Scott, what exactly is this public forum for then? And no, providing
a "valid e-mail address," isn't something I want or need! You would
think most on here know about getting unwanted junk mail, trojans,
worms, viruses and the like, by using one??? Another example of a
response that's OT...BTW, I guess if you don't have anything to
contribute worth while, than silence should be golden. Ya think?

I've been posting here since 1987 (well, to net.audio and to its successor
groups) with a valid e-mail address. Munging your return address to prevent
spam is an unpleasant thing to do, but not providing any at all is rude as
hell.

You may want to go to news.announce.newusers and read the Emily Postnews
article.


What everybody's trying hard, because too polite, to not say
is that a vacuum tube is a wacky thing to put into a ribbon
microphone. It's noise matching is at least 20dB different
from a ribbon-plus-transformer. It can only degrade an already
difficult situation.

In the case of this particular microphone there are other issues.
--scott




I don't know what you guys are doing, but I haven't ever hid my email address
and I haven't been over run with spam. Comcast, my ISP, may be doing a better
job than your ISP, but I doubt it.

Maybe the technology has changed since problems occurred with using a real
email address or maybe there are just a lot of people who like BSing and
don't want to be identified.


Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Carey Carlan]

"Richard Crowley" wrote in news:12s9bj42k4vdv67
@corp.supernews.com:

"Ty Ford" wrote ...
It's been proven that putting an address in your
newsgroup postings doesn't result in spam. Again,
get off the porch.

I think you've just been lucky, Ty. I have first-hand
examples of a single revelation of an email address
resulting in a large step-function increase in spam.
Many of us have had to change email addresses when
the SNR became intollerable.

But was that revelation to RAP? I doubt it.

The above email address is public. I give it to every commercial site that
requires an email address and have for at least 4 years. I also have an
ISP email address that is only handed out to individuals who merit it.
Neither has an issue with spam. I get a "spike" of a dozen or so spams at
the beginning of each month and very few the rest of the time.

If you're worried about spam, get a Yahoo or Hotmail account like I did.
They block spam pretty well and can be easily discarded if attacked.

The real user name and email account are worthless to those who post crap,
and also worthless to those who make substantial contributions. For the
rest of us in the middle, name and email add credibility.

[Richard Crowley]

"Jus Nobody" wrote ...
but in the past, the mere mention of a product, not liked here, is
subjective and not a true representation of anything really useful
other than someone's opinion anyway.

Some people actually love Spam, but some prefer foie gras.
And some who prefer foie gras likely can't afford it most of
the time. But I am a vegetarian, so I'll not enter that debate.

Because a mic
cost a lot doesn't make for a good recording. Trash in, trash out.
Setting up or placement makes a big difference as well as what you're
recording and where. Sometimes the cheapest can be the dearest. I
guess what I'm really saying is, "It's not what you've got, it's how
you use it."

The long-term expreience of many many recording engineers
(both those here, and those that never heard of this newsgroup)
is that not many inexpensive microphones turn out to be
undiscovered gems. But this is very similar to many areas of
human endeavor, so it should come as no great surprise.

It is true that some brand names have developed the reputation
for selling low-cost junk. And certainly there is a market for it,
or they wouldn't remain in business. I have knowingly (or not)
acquired some of that low-cost junk equipment myself and
some of it is adequate for the task, while other stuff was a
complete waste of $$.

Every once in a while one of those notorious brand names
produces some product that is uncharacteristically "good".
If you have hung around this neighborhood for any length
of time, you have seen these exceptional products discussed
here.

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 12:09:05 GMT, Jus Nobody
wrote:

I've been on here quite a while myself, under
different ID's for obvious reasons,

It's Chevdo. Good grief.

Chris Hornbeck

[Carey Carlan]

Jus Nobody wrote in
hlink.net:

Yes. And I think that you'll find that most of the experienced users
here would tend to dismiss a low cost ribbon mic, particularly one
with a marketing gimmick that, unless very well designed, has little
functional value.

So are we talking about closed mindedness and speculation? "They said
it couldn't be done." How many times have we heard that before? I've
seen, heard and know people who have the money to buy the top of line
everything, and some know what they're doing, some don't. Because a
mic cost a lot doesn't make for a good recording. Trash in, trash out.
Setting up or placement makes a big difference as well as what you're
recording and where. Sometimes the cheapest can be the dearest. I
guess what I'm really saying is, "It's not what you've got, it's how
you use it."

If you've been reading here for any length of time, you've read the
threads that describe how the Chinese recently began copying ribbon
microphones for the first time. The consenus has been that they
successfully copied about 90% of the design, understood none of the
theory, and created bad sounding microphones. These Chinese clones are
sold by various companies including Nady.

If no one has reviewed the Nady model here, several have reviewed other
companys' products and come to the conclusion that they were poor
performers. Bearing in mind that a professional's quality rating and
yours vary, you might like them. But that "poor quality" rating is
sufficient to dampen the desire of most qualified pros to even try yet
another Chinese ribbon.

I agree, but ones man's junk could be another's man's treasure. Mics,
wine and food etc., fall into the same category.

But just like wine and food, there are some absolutes in microphone
quality. Does the case ring like a bell? Does the output transformer
mangle the signal? Does the grill skew the frequency response? Better
quality microphones eliminate or minimize these problems.

Now if you wanted to know about the CAD Trion ribbon mic, I'd direct
you to my review in the January 2007 issue of Pro Audio Review (mine)
or the February 2007 issue of Recording (Matt Seilor's). But when it
comes to the Nady mic, you'll have to take what you can find on line.
Have you tried the Gearslutz or TapeOp forums? They tend to have
more people on a tight budget who aren't hesitant to experiment.

I'm also considering a CAD and I'll definitely read what you have to
say about it. I believe I've googled Gearslutz and TapeOp to no avail,
but things change on line day to day.

While your googling, do an advanced group search of rec.audio.pro for
"chinese ribbon".

combine the following into one line:
http://groups.google.com/groups?
as_q=chinese+ribbon&as_ugroup=rec.audio.pro

[Jus Nobody]

Can't a person just ask a simple question without getting the third
degree about who, what and where they are? I guess the next requirement
will be for a contact phone #...get real! This a public forum and there
are a lot of jive time responders out here, none of which I wish to
receive unsolicted email/viruses from. I've been compromised
unsuspectedly in the past and protect myself when I deem it necessary.
So shoot me or better yet hit the delete or read message button and move
on.

If you don't feel the need to scramble, hide, use an alias, good for
you. And no, I have no hidden agendas, like being a representative, or
anything involved in the promotion of said products. I'm just another
possible consumer that wants to know what other people think and use.

Geesh!

Ty Ford wrote:

On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 07:09:05 -0500, Jus Nobody wrote
(in article . net):

It's really interesting. In the last week I have seen several Nady new
product posting on other forums. It's like they just figured out that the
Internet might be a good way to market their stuff.

From this I gather:

1. Nady has a marketing push on

2. While their gear has never been highly regarded, we may want to at least
look at or listen to it to see if they are doing something better than they
used to.

Regards,

Ty Ford

PS: If Nady wants to send me something to review, they know where I am.

Part 2:

You said: "I've been on here quite a while myself, under different ID's for
obvious reasons"

What? You're a child molester? You're doing yourself more harm by do it that
way. Get off the porch and get out in the yard with the rest of the kids.

You said: My reference in saying all this is, it may well be possible Nady
(whom I

know very little about, mic or product wise) has come up with something
no one else has? I don't really know? Speculation about what a mic can
or can not do that's not based on actual hands on experience, to me,
falls on deaf ears.


Audio technica has a mic with both condenser and dynamic capsules inside.
Nobody I know has that. They don't get bashed for it. So there must be some
other reason than the degree of inventiveness that results in people kicking
Nady to the curb. Ya' think?

You said: In terms of providing a spam free email address, I for one would
rather

not participate in filtering or receiving any more unwanted
crap in my inbox...thus the reason for using a public forum or
a users group.


Asked and answered earlier. It's been proven that putting an address in your
newsgroup postings doesn't result in spam. Again, get off the porch.

You said: I've seen

posts here slamin' low cost chinese mics (Cascade's Ribbon mics come to
mind) in particular. I also know someone that brought one and they love
it?


Most who have "loved it" have never heard a top shelf mic, or the application
doesn't require a top shelf mic.

I beg to differ here. You'd be surprised what a lot of "techs" use,
especially when you have a difficult session or an artist to deal with.
Like I said in an earlier post, "Tain't what you do, it's how you do
it." I'm dating myself sans Ella Fitzgerald, you do know who that was?


You ability to cast shade or sunshine is the mark of a careful marketeer. I
thinks that's the source of the problem. That and your big deal issue with
anonymity. Don't expect anyone to take you seriously until you divest
yourself. We're not really all that dumb here.

It was just a simple question not a soliloquy. I don't need or require
creds from here, and if one does...then you probably need to get a life!
I got mine!

C ya, don't want to be ya!

Regards,

Ty Ford




To Chris and Hank,
Since when did posting a simple question warrant attacks? Here again,
with the influx of stupid, offensive and uninformative responses, these
are reasons why some of us would rather not get more involved in using a
forum such as this one. I've been on here quite a while myself, under
different ID's for obvious reasons, none of which justifies attacks
concerning what "Users" think of a product line they have 1st hand
knowledge with. I guess a part of maturity is knowing when to pick your
battles and when to just shut up!

Years ago they also said it was impossible to put a video on a CD when
Laser discs were popular, since then, we have DVD's. Also said it was
virtually impossible to convert a wav file to midi, well by using a
spectrum analyzer and other technology, (BIAB uses a process called a
Chord Wizard now to do this), however, it's still not perfected, but it
is possible to some degree. So why not a tube/ribbon mic? Maybe it's not
all that or there yet, but at least someone has tried to do it. And yes,
sometimes you get what you pay for and sometimes not! Everyone's ears,
pockets and usage's differs. That's why we have so many choices.

My reference in saying all this is, it may well be possible Nady (whom I
know very little about, mic or product wise) has come up with something
no one else has? I don't really know? Speculation about what a mic can
or can not do that's not based on actual hands on experience, to me,
falls on deaf ears.

To Scott,
I appreciate your candor, but if you know something about a product, I
thought this was a place where an educated exchange could take place?
There's an old saying, "It's not what you say, it's how you say it."

In terms of providing a spam free email address, I for one would rather
not participate in filtering or receiving any more unwanted
crap in my inbox...thus the reason for using a public forum or
a users group.

Again, all I asked is what those users (those that have seen, heard or
tried) the mic think about it. Inquiring minds want to know. I've seen
posts here slamin' low cost chinese mics (Cascade's Ribbon mics come to
mind) in particular. I also know someone that brought one and they love
it? Go figure? There are a few people on here that do have useful info
to pass on and that's the reason why I posted here...props to Mike
Rivers and a few others that do in depth product reviews. Long winded
enough?

Peace, life is too short to be stressed out about it.
Bright moments!

snip

You don't give a valid e-mail to reply to. I don't have anything to say
about this that I could say in a public forum.
--scott




--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Jus Nobody]

This is one reason I posted here. Sometimes someone will point you in
the right direction and then others will spend huge amounts of time
flamin' and degrading, without really saying anything. I've seen these
"cheap" mics, but haven't invested in any. It's interesting to hear
what bench tests were performed and by whom to determine the quality
of a product. So far, only the mfg. has anything to say about this
technology. As you know, anyone in business that is trying sell a
product/concept will tell you anything to make them look good. That's
the point of seeking "user info" and not seller's. As far as whether
this product is any good will be determined in time. I guess I'll just
have to wait this one out. Thanks for the insight!

Carey Carlan wrote:

Jus Nobody wrote in
hlink.net:


Yes. And I think that you'll find that most of the experienced users
here would tend to dismiss a low cost ribbon mic, particularly one
with a marketing gimmick that, unless very well designed, has little
functional value.

So are we talking about closed mindedness and speculation? "They said
it couldn't be done." How many times have we heard that before? I've
seen, heard and know people who have the money to buy the top of line
everything, and some know what they're doing, some don't. Because a
mic cost a lot doesn't make for a good recording. Trash in, trash out.
Setting up or placement makes a big difference as well as what you're
recording and where. Sometimes the cheapest can be the dearest. I
guess what I'm really saying is, "It's not what you've got, it's how
you use it."


If you've been reading here for any length of time, you've read the
threads that describe how the Chinese recently began copying ribbon
microphones for the first time. The consenus has been that they
successfully copied about 90% of the design, understood none of the
theory, and created bad sounding microphones. These Chinese clones are
sold by various companies including Nady.

If no one has reviewed the Nady model here, several have reviewed other
companys' products and come to the conclusion that they were poor
performers. Bearing in mind that a professional's quality rating and
yours vary, you might like them. But that "poor quality" rating is
sufficient to dampen the desire of most qualified pros to even try yet
another Chinese ribbon.


I agree, but ones man's junk could be another's man's treasure. Mics,
wine and food etc., fall into the same category.


But just like wine and food, there are some absolutes in microphone
quality. Does the case ring like a bell? Does the output transformer
mangle the signal? Does the grill skew the frequency response? Better
quality microphones eliminate or minimize these problems.


Now if you wanted to know about the CAD Trion ribbon mic, I'd direct
you to my review in the January 2007 issue of Pro Audio Review (mine)
or the February 2007 issue of Recording (Matt Seilor's). But when it
comes to the Nady mic, you'll have to take what you can find on line.
Have you tried the Gearslutz or TapeOp forums? They tend to have
more people on a tight budget who aren't hesitant to experiment.

I'm also considering a CAD and I'll definitely read what you have to
say about it. I believe I've googled Gearslutz and TapeOp to no avail,
but things change on line day to day.


While your googling, do an advanced group search of rec.audio.pro for
"chinese ribbon".

combine the following into one line:
http://groups.google.com/groups?
as_q=chinese+ribbon&as_ugroup=rec.audio.pro

[Mike Rivers]

On Feb 3, 10:44 am, Jus Nobody wrote:

The responses so far have been about the feasibility of that
technology or the lack there of

That's not an unreasonable flow of discussion for a newsgroup. The
concept isn't new, but it also hasn't really been proven to be the
best thing since sliced ribbons. It's natural for people with some
technical knowledge to question its validity, and suggest that it
might be a marketing ploy to sell a mediocre mic rather than a real
technological improvement to a pretty good mic. But again, apparently
nobody has experience with this particular mic. But that's never
stopped a newsgroup discussion cold - it's not the way newsgroups,
particularly unmoderated newsgroups, work.

Here you're assuming a beginners ill advised contribution or question to
a public forum? If one doesn't ask, you'll never know or learn.

Not directly, but you've already looked for comments on that mic,
presumably your search included this newsgroup, and you didn't see
any. It's OK to ask for input, but if there's no input, don't expect
just no input. We tend to answer questions with questions ("why in the
world would you want to do that?" is pretty common) because often the
initial post doesn't really have any meaning by itself or is
insufficiently detailed.

If I were inquiring about this mic, I might have shown that I knew
something about ribbon mics, about Nady mics in general, and focused
the question on the value of bolting an amplifier, particularly a tube
amplifier, on to a ribbon element. Most of us feel that there's
nothing special about a tube amplifier but that it's a good marketing
tactic, and better marketing doesn't necessarily mean better audio. So
we tend to discourage people from buying into gimmicks if there's no
good reason to do so.

most professionals have resources the commoner doesn't have and that's
some of the reasons why there are so many different types of mics on the
market.

Actually, the reason why there are so many mics on the market is
because there are so many amateurs. Professional studios existed and
made good sounding records for 50 years with less than a choice of
about two dozen microphones.

After all, there wouldn't be pros without amateurs or novices.
You got to start from somewhere?

There used to be apprentices, second engineers, tape operators, and
the like who were exposed both to the gear and the experienced
engineers together. They could never afford to own the gear, so they
had to hang out where it was. Today there are musicians (or wannabes)
who buy gear with no experience behind them. They don't get the
advantage of sitting next to an engineer and watching him set levels
or compare mics or adjust EQ or mix and hearing what happens. They try
to get that knowledge from asking questions on a forum or reading a
book. It's not the same thing. But they have a lot of money to spend,
and they're eager to try new toys. And there are manufacturers who are
happy to help them.

So are we talking about closed mindedness and speculation? "They said it
couldn't be done." How many times have we heard that before?

Not at all. But there's good reason to suspect that Manufacturer A,
based on previous similar products, won't get good results building
Product B. Times change, and so do manufacturers. Peavey used to make
good sounding instrument amplifiers that blew up a lot. Today they
make good sounding amplifiers that don't blow up (as well as some
mediocre sounding amplifiers, too) so the advice is no longer "Don't
buy a Peavey if you need for it to work on your next gig", it's
"Listen to Peavey, and if you like what you hear, you can feel
reasonably safe buying it." When Nady makes a couple of really good
sounding ribbon mics, then perhaps it will be worth while to check out
the tube version. But that hasn't happened yet.

Because a mic
cost a lot doesn't make for a good recording.

This is true. But a bad sounding mic can limit how good a recording
you can make. It's the same with guitars or pianos or cars.

guess what I'm really saying is, "It's not what you've got, it's how you
use it."

That's certainly a significant part to it, but if you're trying to
capture an instrument that has overtones up around 10 kHz and the mic
rolls off significantly at 5 kHz, you're just not going to get there.
That's not to say you couldn't change the arrangement and use a
rubboard instead of a triangle, but the triangle just isn't going to
sound like a triangle without a mic that has an extended top end. It
may be OK to use a mic with the top end "hyped" because that's what
you're looking for. But if it's not coming out of the mic, you can't
use it on the recording.

Can you say alias? Again, being general goes a long way or saying "stay
tuned," lends itself to one's coming or something?

Are you suggesting that Scott post under an alias if he has something
uncomplimentary to say about a product? People would ask "Who are you
and why is your opinion valid?" But most people who have hung around
here for a while know Scott, or you can certainly search for his posts
and make a judgment for yourself. But if you see a poster who has a
record of ONE post, complaining about a product, will you put much
stock in it? Many would suggest that this is a competitor discrediting
a product similar to one he makes.

Since very few on here know all the
"Players" or whom to really trust/respect. . . . .

Well, you see, this is part of what a newsgroup is. It's a group of
people who have hung out together long enough to know who's who. An
unknown who comes in asking a question that doesn't really have a good
answer, and then follows up with a "what's the matter with this group?
I thought you were pros" answer tends to get the shaft.

I mentioned Cascade as one of those "cheap" mfg. chinese mics indicated
on here, but again, I know someone that loves what they got. For my
money, dumping $350.00 US on a mfg.'s description or concept and no
actual user review leaves me wanting to wait until all the dust settles.

It would for me, too. I don't buy things that sound hot, I wait until
I hear more about it (it eventually happens) or if I'm really curious,
I ask my dealer to lend me one, or I try to get one for a magazine
review. There's no reason why you can't go to a music store and ask to
try out a Nady tube ribbon mic since you're the one who's curious
about it. Me, I don't need one so I'm not likely to ever investigate
it. I never thought about the CAD ribbon until it came in a group with
two condenser mics for review, and I turned out liking it for a couple
of things, but only when mated with specific preamps (one of which I
had in for review at the time, and was far too expensive for me to
ever buy). But I didn't think it was useful enough for me to buy it.
Your experience might be different. But I can't tell you that you'll
like it or won't.

Remember there are really no stupid questions, just dumb answers.

Actually, there are no stupid questions if they're good questions.
There's a difference between a stupid question and an incomplete
question that leaves us guessing what the poster is REALLY asking
about.


Hmmm? Try before you buy, what a concept? Unfortunately, these mics seem
to be only available on line

Nady sells through dealers. You're sufficiently anonymous that you
might be in some country where they don't. Musician's Friend (on line)
sells Nady (not sure if they have that model yet) and take returns
without a hassle. But they might not ship to you in Bunglevaria.
Guitar Center also carries Nady. They **** and moan and point to a
sign on the cash register if you want to return a mic, but if they
have it, you can at least try it in the store, make a test recording,
and listen to the recording at home when you have less pressure.

I've seen Nady around for years and
have some knowledge of their wireless line, but I'm not that familiar
with all their products, quality or support.

They started out making inexpensive wireless systems back when you
could get away with it because there wasn't so much interference. It's
only been in the last five years of so that they've jumped on to the
'they want it cheap so let's get them cheap" bandwagon, selling me-too
products (mixers, PA gear, microphones) made in China as lower cost
copies of moderately well designed and built equipment. So they're in
the pool with dozens of other companies just like them, and we're in a
different pool.

I'm picking up the vibe
from here that they fall into the same bag as the AKG C1000s, but then
again....Makes you wonder why a mfg. keeps producing such a bad product
doesn't it?

Not really. The C1000 was an inexpensive condenser mic back when there
weren't any inexpensive condenser mics. A dozen years ago it opened up
the field. Now there are lots better mics, but the AKG name is well
established and people who want the confidence of buying a name brand
will buy a C1000 rather than an, for example, an Apex. The fact that
AKG makes some fine mics and provides support makes them a cut above
the little-knowns even though the actual product isn't all that great.
Back in the day it was not that great compared to other condenser mics
(that cost more) and today it isn't that great "for the price."
Different grades of "not that great."

[Scott Dorsey]

Carey Carlan wrote:

If you've been reading here for any length of time, you've read the
threads that describe how the Chinese recently began copying ribbon
microphones for the first time. The consenus has been that they
successfully copied about 90% of the design, understood none of the
theory, and created bad sounding microphones. These Chinese clones are
sold by various companies including Nady.

As far as I know, these microphones are currently all made at one
factory. For a while, there was basically one ribbon motor (a copy
of Wes Dooley's design), but they then did something misguided in an
attempt to increase the output so there are now two ribbon motor
designs out there.

If no one has reviewed the Nady model here, several have reviewed other
companys' products and come to the conclusion that they were poor
performers. Bearing in mind that a professional's quality rating and
yours vary, you might like them. But that "poor quality" rating is
sufficient to dampen the desire of most qualified pros to even try yet
another Chinese ribbon.

In the case of the Nady which I reviewed publically in Recording, the
motor assembly itself was okay, and with a few modifications it could
probably have been made into a usable microphone. It was indeed clear
that they copied Wes' design without understanding it very well.

Now if you wanted to know about the CAD Trion ribbon mic, I'd direct
you to my review in the January 2007 issue of Pro Audio Review (mine)
or the February 2007 issue of Recording (Matt Seilor's). But when it
comes to the Nady mic, you'll have to take what you can find on line.
Have you tried the Gearslutz or TapeOp forums? They tend to have
more people on a tight budget who aren't hesitant to experiment.

I'm also considering a CAD and I'll definitely read what you have to
say about it. I believe I've googled Gearslutz and TapeOp to no avail,
but things change on line day to day.

While your googling, do an advanced group search of rec.audio.pro for
"chinese ribbon".

Note that the ribbon motor used in the CAD Trion is the same as used in
the original Nady microphone that I reviewed, however not everything else
behind the grille is the same at all.

combine the following into one line:
http://groups.google.com/groups?
as_q=chinese+ribbon&as_ugroup=rec.audio.pro

For the most part, it will just make you depressed, though.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Paul Stamler]

"Ty Ford" wrote in message
. ..
I've been posting here since 1987 (well, to net.audio and to its
successor
groups) with a valid e-mail address. Munging your return address to
prevent
spam is an unpleasant thing to do, but not providing any at all is rude
as
hell.

You may want to go to news.announce.newusers and read the Emily Postnews
article.
Maybe the technology has changed since problems occurred with using a real
email address or maybe there are just a lot of people who like BSing and
don't want to be identified.

Meanwhile if you want to avoid spam but not be totally anonymous you can do
something like I do:



If you want to reach my real address, just get the hell out. Other people
have similar gimmicks, like .

Peace,
Paul

[Ty Ford]

On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 11:41:10 -0500, Jus Nobody wrote
(in article .net):

Can't a person just ask a simple question without getting the third
degree about who, what and where they are? I guess the next requirement
will be for a contact phone #...get real! This a public forum and there
are a lot of jive time responders out here, none of which I wish to
receive unsolicted email/viruses from. I've been compromised
unsuspectedly in the past and protect myself when I deem it necessary.
So shoot me or better yet hit the delete or read message button and move
on.

OK Fine. Bang, You're dead. Put your nuts on the table, GET REAL, as you say,
of STFU or get out. If you don't have the stones to be here get back on the
****ing porch and stay there. We're into reality here.Ghost comments from
someone who feels they need to hide their identity DON"T WORK HERE, if you
want to be credible. It's that simple.

If you don't feel the need to scramble, hide, use an alias, good for
you.

And yet that's what you do.

Do you really think we are THAT ****ing dumb?

Dude! Please give us all a break.

Ty Ford






Ty Ford wrote:

On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 07:09:05 -0500, Jus Nobody wrote
(in article . net):

It's really interesting. In the last week I have seen several Nady new
product posting on other forums. It's like they just figured out that the
Internet might be a good way to market their stuff.

From this I gather:

1. Nady has a marketing push on

2. While their gear has never been highly regarded, we may want to at least
look at or listen to it to see if they are doing something better than they
used to.

Regards,

Ty Ford

PS: If Nady wants to send me something to review, they know where I am.

Part 2:

You said: "I've been on here quite a while myself, under different ID's for
obvious reasons"

What? You're a child molester? You're doing yourself more harm by do it
that
way. Get off the porch and get out in the yard with the rest of the kids.

You said: My reference in saying all this is, it may well be possible
Nady
(whom I

know very little about, mic or product wise) has come up with something
no one else has? I don't really know? Speculation about what a mic can
or can not do that's not based on actual hands on experience, to me,
falls on deaf ears.


Audio technica has a mic with both condenser and dynamic capsules inside.
Nobody I know has that. They don't get bashed for it. So there must be some
other reason than the degree of inventiveness that results in people
kicking
Nady to the curb. Ya' think?

You said: In terms of providing a spam free email address, I for one
would
rather

not participate in filtering or receiving any more unwanted
crap in my inbox...thus the reason for using a public forum or
a users group.


Asked and answered earlier. It's been proven that putting an address in
your
newsgroup postings doesn't result in spam. Again, get off the porch.

You said: I've seen

posts here slamin' low cost chinese mics (Cascade's Ribbon mics come to
mind) in particular. I also know someone that brought one and they love
it?


Most who have "loved it" have never heard a top shelf mic, or the
application
doesn't require a top shelf mic.

I beg to differ here. You'd be surprised what a lot of "techs" use,
especially when you have a difficult session or an artist to deal with.
Like I said in an earlier post, "Tain't what you do, it's how you do
it." I'm dating myself sans Ella Fitzgerald, you do know who that was?


You ability to cast shade or sunshine is the mark of a careful marketeer. I
thinks that's the source of the problem. That and your big deal issue with
anonymity. Don't expect anyone to take you seriously until you divest
yourself. We're not really all that dumb here.

It was just a simple question not a soliloquy. I don't need or require
creds from here, and if one does...then you probably need to get a life!
I got mine!

C ya, don't want to be ya!

Regards,

Ty Ford




To Chris and Hank,
Since when did posting a simple question warrant attacks? Here again,
with the influx of stupid, offensive and uninformative responses, these
are reasons why some of us would rather not get more involved in using a
forum such as this one. I've been on here quite a while myself, under
different ID's for obvious reasons, none of which justifies attacks
concerning what "Users" think of a product line they have 1st hand
knowledge with. I guess a part of maturity is knowing when to pick your
battles and when to just shut up!

Years ago they also said it was impossible to put a video on a CD when
Laser discs were popular, since then, we have DVD's. Also said it was
virtually impossible to convert a wav file to midi, well by using a
spectrum analyzer and other technology, (BIAB uses a process called a
Chord Wizard now to do this), however, it's still not perfected, but it
is possible to some degree. So why not a tube/ribbon mic? Maybe it's not
all that or there yet, but at least someone has tried to do it. And yes,
sometimes you get what you pay for and sometimes not! Everyone's ears,
pockets and usage's differs. That's why we have so many choices.

My reference in saying all this is, it may well be possible Nady (whom I
know very little about, mic or product wise) has come up with something
no one else has? I don't really know? Speculation about what a mic can
or can not do that's not based on actual hands on experience, to me,
falls on deaf ears.

To Scott,
I appreciate your candor, but if you know something about a product, I
thought this was a place where an educated exchange could take place?
There's an old saying, "It's not what you say, it's how you say it."

In terms of providing a spam free email address, I for one would rather
not participate in filtering or receiving any more unwanted
crap in my inbox...thus the reason for using a public forum or
a users group.

Again, all I asked is what those users (those that have seen, heard or
tried) the mic think about it. Inquiring minds want to know. I've seen
posts here slamin' low cost chinese mics (Cascade's Ribbon mics come to
mind) in particular. I also know someone that brought one and they love
it? Go figure? There are a few people on here that do have useful info
to pass on and that's the reason why I posted here...props to Mike
Rivers and a few others that do in depth product reviews. Long winded
enough?

Peace, life is too short to be stressed out about it.
Bright moments!

snip

You don't give a valid e-mail to reply to. I don't have anything to say
about this that I could say in a public forum.
--scott




--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU





--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Jus Nobody]

Ty Ford wrote:
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 11:41:10 -0500, Jus Nobody wrote
(in article .net):

snip


OK Fine. Bang, You're dead. Put your nuts on the table, GET REAL, as you say,
of STFU or get out. If you don't have the stones to be here get back on the
****ing porch and stay there. We're into reality here.Ghost comments from
someone who feels they need to hide their identity DON"T WORK HERE, if you
want to be credible. It's that simple.


If you don't feel the need to scramble, hide, use an alias, good for
you.

And you exemplify my point. Everyone's got an ego, opinon/epinon and a
an asshole, and it's only a 6th degree seperation from the next.


And yet that's what you do.

Do you really think we are THAT ****ing dumb?

It's not a "we" thing, maybe it's just a "you" thing, perhaps?

Dude! Please give us all a break.
Ty Ford
So when does the original response to the question kick in?







Ty Ford wrote:


On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 07:09:05 -0500, Jus Nobody wrote
(in article . net):

It's really interesting. In the last week I have seen several Nady new
product posting on other forums. It's like they just figured out that the
Internet might be a good way to market their stuff.

From this I gather:

1. Nady has a marketing push on

2. While their gear has never been highly regarded, we may want to at least
look at or listen to it to see if they are doing something better than they
used to.

Regards,

Ty Ford

PS: If Nady wants to send me something to review, they know where I am.

Part 2:

You said: "I've been on here quite a while myself, under different ID's for
obvious reasons"

What? You're a child molester? You're doing yourself more harm by do it
that
way. Get off the porch and get out in the yard with the rest of the kids.

You said: My reference in saying all this is, it may well be possible
Nady
(whom I


know very little about, mic or product wise) has come up with something
no one else has? I don't really know? Speculation about what a mic can
or can not do that's not based on actual hands on experience, to me,
falls on deaf ears.


Audio technica has a mic with both condenser and dynamic capsules inside.
Nobody I know has that. They don't get bashed for it. So there must be some
other reason than the degree of inventiveness that results in people
kicking
Nady to the curb. Ya' think?

You said: In terms of providing a spam free email address, I for one
would
rather


not participate in filtering or receiving any more unwanted
crap in my inbox...thus the reason for using a public forum or
a users group.


Asked and answered earlier. It's been proven that putting an address in
your
newsgroup postings doesn't result in spam. Again, get off the porch.

You said: I've seen


posts here slamin' low cost chinese mics (Cascade's Ribbon mics come to
mind) in particular. I also know someone that brought one and they love
it?


Most who have "loved it" have never heard a top shelf mic, or the
application
doesn't require a top shelf mic.

I beg to differ here. You'd be surprised what a lot of "techs" use,
especially when you have a difficult session or an artist to deal with.
Like I said in an earlier post, "Tain't what you do, it's how you do
it." I'm dating myself sans Ella Fitzgerald, you do know who that was?


You ability to cast shade or sunshine is the mark of a careful marketeer. I
thinks that's the source of the problem. That and your big deal issue with
anonymity. Don't expect anyone to take you seriously until you divest
yourself. We're not really all that dumb here.

It was just a simple question not a soliloquy. I don't need or require
creds from here, and if one does...then you probably need to get a life!
I got mine!

C ya, don't want to be ya!


Regards,

Ty Ford





To Chris and Hank,
Since when did posting a simple question warrant attacks? Here again,
with the influx of stupid, offensive and uninformative responses, these
are reasons why some of us would rather not get more involved in using a
forum such as this one. I've been on here quite a while myself, under
different ID's for obvious reasons, none of which justifies attacks
concerning what "Users" think of a product line they have 1st hand
knowledge with. I guess a part of maturity is knowing when to pick your
battles and when to just shut up!

Years ago they also said it was impossible to put a video on a CD when
Laser discs were popular, since then, we have DVD's. Also said it was
virtually impossible to convert a wav file to midi, well by using a
spectrum analyzer and other technology, (BIAB uses a process called a
Chord Wizard now to do this), however, it's still not perfected, but it
is possible to some degree. So why not a tube/ribbon mic? Maybe it's not
all that or there yet, but at least someone has tried to do it. And yes,
sometimes you get what you pay for and sometimes not! Everyone's ears,
pockets and usage's differs. That's why we have so many choices.

My reference in saying all this is, it may well be possible Nady (whom I
know very little about, mic or product wise) has come up with something
no one else has? I don't really know? Speculation about what a mic can
or can not do that's not based on actual hands on experience, to me,
falls on deaf ears.

To Scott,
I appreciate your candor, but if you know something about a product, I
thought this was a place where an educated exchange could take place?
There's an old saying, "It's not what you say, it's how you say it."

In terms of providing a spam free email address, I for one would rather
not participate in filtering or receiving any more unwanted
crap in my inbox...thus the reason for using a public forum or
a users group.

Again, all I asked is what those users (those that have seen, heard or
tried) the mic think about it. Inquiring minds want to know. I've seen
posts here slamin' low cost chinese mics (Cascade's Ribbon mics come to
mind) in particular. I also know someone that brought one and they love
it? Go figure? There are a few people on here that do have useful info
to pass on and that's the reason why I posted here...props to Mike
Rivers and a few others that do in depth product reviews. Long winded
enough?

Peace, life is too short to be stressed out about it.
Bright moments!

snip

You don't give a valid e-mail to reply to. I don't have anything to say
about this that I could say in a public forum.
--scott



--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU





--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 22:09:35 GMT, Jus Nobody
wrote:

Look out, Ty. It's a Combatative High Entropy Verbal
Disruption Obfuscator, and it's got its teeth in yer
ankle.

God bless us, every one.

Chris Hornbeck

[Jus Nobody]

Mike Rivers wrote:

On Feb 3, 10:44 am, Jus Nobody wrote:


The responses so far have been about the feasibility of that
technology or the lack there of


That's not an unreasonable flow of discussion for a newsgroup. The
concept isn't new, but it also hasn't really been proven to be the
best thing since sliced ribbons. It's natural for people with some
technical knowledge to question its validity, and suggest that it
might be a marketing ploy to sell a mediocre mic rather than a real
technological improvement to a pretty good mic. But again, apparently
nobody has experience with this particular mic. But that's never
stopped a newsgroup discussion cold - it's not the way newsgroups,
particularly unmoderated newsgroups, work.


Here you're assuming a beginners ill advised contribution or question to
a public forum? If one doesn't ask, you'll never know or learn.


Not directly, but you've already looked for comments on that mic,
presumably your search included this newsgroup, and you didn't see
any. It's OK to ask for input, but if there's no input, don't expect
just no input. We tend to answer questions with questions ("why in the
world would you want to do that?" is pretty common) because often the
initial post doesn't really have any meaning by itself or is
insufficiently detailed.

If I were inquiring about this mic, I might have shown that I knew
something about ribbon mics, about Nady mics in general, and focused
the question on the value of bolting an amplifier, particularly a tube
amplifier, on to a ribbon element. Most of us feel that there's
nothing special about a tube amplifier but that it's a good marketing
tactic, and better marketing doesn't necessarily mean better audio. So
we tend to discourage people from buying into gimmicks if there's no
good reason to do so.


And this is based on theory and not actual experience, right?
This was just a simple "KISS" moment when I couldn't find anything else
about
the product or the company. I often wince at the thought of believing
everything I see on the internet, especially from some that get paid for
their views...however, I've also been on here long enough to know
who's who and who to discount, too. I'm no spring chicken and have
worked and been around long enough to know, "Believe half of what you
see and hear, research as much as you can, then weigh the facts before
forming an opinion about something."

most professionals have resources the commoner doesn't have and that's
some of the reasons why there are so many different types of mics on the
market.


Actually, the reason why there are so many mics on the market is
because there are so many amateurs. Professional studios existed and
made good sounding records for 50 years with less than a choice of
about two dozen microphones.



Been there, done that!


After all, there wouldn't be pros without amateurs or novices.
You got to start from somewhere?


There used to be apprentices, second engineers, tape operators, and
the like who were exposed both to the gear and the experienced
engineers together. They could never afford to own the gear, so they
had to hang out where it was. Today there are musicians (or wannabes)
who buy gear with no experience behind them. They don't get the
advantage of sitting next to an engineer and watching him set levels
or compare mics or adjust EQ or mix and hearing what happens. They try
to get that knowledge from asking questions on a forum or reading a
book. It's not the same thing. But they have a lot of money to spend,
and they're eager to try new toys. And there are manufacturers who are
happy to help them.

Granted, that's why it's better now than it was back in the day to some
degree. More info and better technology at lower costs. Remember when
analog was theee thing?


So are we talking about closed mindedness and speculation? "They said it
couldn't be done." How many times have we heard that before?


Not at all. But there's good reason to suspect that Manufacturer A,
based on previous similar products, won't get good results building
Product B. Times change, and so do manufacturers. Peavey used to make
good sounding instrument amplifiers that blew up a lot. Today they
make good sounding amplifiers that don't blow up (as well as some
mediocre sounding amplifiers, too) so the advice is no longer "Don't
buy a Peavey if you need for it to work on your next gig", it's
"Listen to Peavey, and if you like what you hear, you can feel
reasonably safe buying it." When Nady makes a couple of really good
sounding ribbon mics, then perhaps it will be worth while to check out
the tube version. But that hasn't happened yet.

This is what I'm talking about. I haven't seen that much critique about
Nady or Cascade other than a lot of "they aren't as good as...because
they're cheaply made overseas or by the chinese etc.." I think the last
time I checked the "Chinese" are putting their foot in the auto
industry, in terms of quality and affordability, while we fell asleep at
the wheel...go figure?


Because a mic
cost a lot doesn't make for a good recording.


This is true. But a bad sounding mic can limit how good a recording
you can make. It's the same with guitars or pianos or cars.


guess what I'm really saying is, "It's not what you've got, it's how you
use it."


That's certainly a significant part to it, but if you're trying to
capture an instrument that has overtones up around 10 kHz and the mic
rolls off significantly at 5 kHz, you're just not going to get there.
That's not to say you couldn't change the arrangement and use a
rubboard instead of a triangle, but the triangle just isn't going to
sound like a triangle without a mic that has an extended top end. It
may be OK to use a mic with the top end "hyped" because that's what
you're looking for. But if it's not coming out of the mic, you can't
use it on the recording.


As you know, if you've been around long enough, what sometimes gets used
on a session and a great recording has little to do with what makes
sense, sometimes. Be it a high frq. end, mids or low, if it ain't
working for that time, you end up using what will, be it a cheap or a
better piece of gear. It's all relative to what's going on and who's
using it.


Can you say alias? Again, being general goes a long way or saying "stay
tuned," lends itself to one's coming or something?


Are you suggesting that Scott post under an alias if he has something
uncomplimentary to say about a product? People would ask "Who are you
and why is your opinion valid?" But most people who have hung around
here for a while know Scott, or you can certainly search for his posts
and make a judgment for yourself. But if you see a poster who has a
record of ONE post, complaining about a product, will you put much
stock in it? Many would suggest that this is a competitor discrediting
a product similar to one he makes.


Since very few on here know all the
"Players" or whom to really trust/respect. . . . .


Well, you see, this is part of what a newsgroup is. It's a group of
people who have hung out together long enough to know who's who. An
unknown who comes in asking a question that doesn't really have a good
answer, and then follows up with a "what's the matter with this group?
I thought you were pros" answer tends to get the shaft.


I'm not sure who's reading more into this post, you or I? It's now a
requirement here to have credibility just to post a question? Give me a
F#!$#%$ break?


I mentioned Cascade as one of those "cheap" mfg. chinese mics indicated
on here, but again, I know someone that loves what they got. For my
money, dumping $350.00 US on a mfg.'s description or concept and no
actual user review leaves me wanting to wait until all the dust settles.


It would for me, too. I don't buy things that sound hot, I wait until
I hear more about it (it eventually happens) or if I'm really curious,
I ask my dealer to lend me one, or I try to get one for a magazine
review. There's no reason why you can't go to a music store and ask to
try out a Nady tube ribbon mic since you're the one who's curious
about it. Me, I don't need one so I'm not likely to ever investigate
it. I never thought about the CAD ribbon until it came in a group with
two condenser mics for review, and I turned out liking it for a couple
of things, but only when mated with specific preamps (one of which I
had in for review at the time, and was far too expensive for me to
ever buy). But I didn't think it was useful enough for me to buy it.
Your experience might be different. But I can't tell you that you'll
like it or won't.


My reason for posting this, again, if I could check it out myself before
throwing down cash, so be it, but unfortunately that's not possible...so
here I am?

Remember there are really no stupid questions, just dumb answers.


Actually, there are no stupid questions if they're good questions.
There's a difference between a stupid question and an incomplete
question that leaves us guessing what the poster is REALLY asking
about.


ANY "USERS" ON HERE HAVE "TRIED" THE NADY TRM-6 AND HAVE AN OPINION
ABOUT IT?

Was that loud, clear and simple enough?


Hmmm? Try before you buy, what a concept? Unfortunately, these mics seem
to be only available on line


Nady sells through dealers. You're sufficiently anonymous that you
might be in some country where they don't. Musician's Friend (on line)
sells Nady (not sure if they have that model yet) and take returns
without a hassle. But they might not ship to you in Bunglevaria.
Guitar Center also carries Nady. They **** and moan and point to a
sign on the cash register if you want to return a mic, but if they
have it, you can at least try it in the store, make a test recording,
and listen to the recording at home when you have less pressure.


I've seen Nady around for years and
have some knowledge of their wireless line, but I'm not that familiar
with all their products, quality or support.


They started out making inexpensive wireless systems back when you
could get away with it because there wasn't so much interference. It's
only been in the last five years of so that they've jumped on to the
'they want it cheap so let's get them cheap" bandwagon, selling me-too
products (mixers, PA gear, microphones) made in China as lower cost
copies of moderately well designed and built equipment. So they're in
the pool with dozens of other companies just like them, and we're in a
different pool.


I'm picking up the vibe
from here that they fall into the same bag as the AKG C1000s, but then
again....Makes you wonder why a mfg. keeps producing such a bad product
doesn't it?


Not really. The C1000 was an inexpensive condenser mic back when there
weren't any inexpensive condenser mics. A dozen years ago it opened up
the field. Now there are lots better mics, but the AKG name is well
established and people who want the confidence of buying a name brand
will buy a C1000 rather than an, for example, an Apex. The fact that
AKG makes some fine mics and provides support makes them a cut above
the little-knowns even though the actual product isn't all that great.
Back in the day it was not that great compared to other condenser mics
(that cost more) and today it isn't that great "for the price

And Mike, thanks again for elaborating on the speculation. Stay tuned,
I'm sure there's more to follow!