Re: Guitar Center/Octava MK012

[LeBaron & Alrich]

EggHd > wrote:

> 2 Octava MK012 for $99.00. Includes 10db pads.

> Seems pretty cheap.

Indeed. But what is QC worth to you? If you get good ones, nifty; if
not, would your time have been beyyer spent getting good ones from
Taylor Johnson?

Not my call. I'm still in save-up mode.

--
ha

[ESL555]

I saw an article in Recording Magazine explaining how to upgrade the GC
Oktavas. The Soundroom Oktavas come upgraded and QC'd so why not just save up
unless QC , upgrades, and matched pairs aren't an issue to the buyer ? My2c.

[EggHd]

<< Indeed. But what is QC worth to you? If you get good ones, nifty; if
not, would your time have been beyyer spent getting good ones from
Taylor Johnson? >>

I was just talking out loud. 99 bucks for a couple of mics no matter what is
cheap.


---------------------------------------
"I know enough to know I don't know enough"

[LeBaron & Alrich]

EggHd > wrote:

> I was just talking out loud.

Whooodathunkit? <g>

> 99 bucks for a couple of mics no matter what is cheap.

Sucker.

--

ha

[Brian Takei]

ESL555 ) wrote:
> I saw an article in Recording Magazine explaining how to upgrade the GC
> Oktavas. The Soundroom Oktavas come upgraded and QC'd so why not just save up
> unless QC , upgrades, and matched pairs aren't an issue to the buyer ?

I thought the Soundroom's were QC'd, but not upgraded/altered(?).

- Brian

[Ty Ford]

In Article >,
(EggHd) wrote:
>2 Octava MK012 for $99.00. Includes 10db pads.
>
>Seems pretty cheap.

Seems about right for what they sound like.

Regards,

Ty Ford

For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

[Ty Ford]

In Article >, Rob Adelman
> wrote:
>
>
>EggHd wrote:
>
>> I was just talking out loud. 99 bucks for a couple of mics no matter what is
>> cheap.
>>
>
>But is the market determining their value? I had a couple (sound room)
>and I didn't really like them much.
>
>-Rob
>

Bingo! Pass that man a giant stuffed bear!

Regards,

Ty Ford

For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

[Justin Ulysses Morse]

EggHd > wrote:

> I was just talking out loud. 99 bucks for a couple of mics no matter what is
> cheap.

$99 for a hundred mics is a rip-off if you never use them because they
don't sound as good as your other mics.

ulysses

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >,
ESL555 > wrote:
>So the Soundroom capsules aren't any better than the GC capsules or are the
>capsules also QC'd by the Soundroom?

The capsules are very much QC'ed by the Soundroom, and they also manage to
get better quality production from the factory in the first place than
McKay gets for GC.

It's definitely worth the extra for the Soundroom capsules, even if you
are cleaning the electronics up.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ty Ford]

In Article >, (Scott Dorsey)
wrote:
>In article >,
>ESL555 > wrote:
>>So the Soundroom capsules aren't any better than the GC capsules or are the
>>capsules also QC'd by the Soundroom?
>
>The capsules are very much QC'ed by the Soundroom, and they also manage to
>get better quality production from the factory in the first place than
>McKay gets for GC.
>
>It's definitely worth the extra for the Soundroom capsules, even if you
>are cleaning the electronics up.
>--scott
>--
>"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Had a apri here from teh SR recently; they were still skritchy and boomy.
I'd hate to imagine what the "regular" issue sounded like.

Regards,

Ty Ford

For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

[Geoff Wood]

"EggHd" > wrote in message
...
> << Indeed. But what is QC worth to you? If you get good ones, nifty; if
> not, would your time have been beyyer spent getting good ones from
> Taylor Johnson? >>
>
> I was just talking out loud. 99 bucks for a couple of mics no matter what
is
> cheap.

I saw a pair of mics for $9.95 each the other day. Good deal ?


geoff

[Geoff Wood]

"Ty Ford" > wrote in message
...
> In Article >,
> (EggHd) wrote:
> >2 Octava MK012 for $99.00. Includes 10db pads.
> >
> >Seems pretty cheap.
>
> Seems about right for what they sound like.


So Ty now obviously has a snitcher on 012a's, for whatever reason. Makes
you wonder why Scott D ever bothered to pay any attention to them at all
.....

;-)

geoff

[EggHd]

<< I saw a pair of mics for $9.95 each the other day. Good deal ? >>

It ain't like the octavas hadn't been discussed here before.



---------------------------------------
"I know enough to know I don't know enough"

[Ty Ford]

In Article >, "Geoff Wood"
-nospam> wrote:
>
>"Ty Ford" > wrote in message
...
>> In Article >,
>> (EggHd) wrote:
>> >2 Octava MK012 for $99.00. Includes 10db pads.
>> >
>> >Seems pretty cheap.
>>
>> Seems about right for what they sound like.
>
>
>So Ty now obviously has a snitcher on 012a's, for whatever reason. Makes
>you wonder why Scott D ever bothered to pay any attention to them at all
>....
>
>;-)
>
>geoff


Let there be no mistake, mic to mic consistency, the skritchy top, the
blooming bottom and selfnoise are my reasons.

I reviewed these mics years ago and heard a SR one a few weeks back. It
suffered from the same problems as I had heard earlier.

At this point in my life I really don't care what you use, but I do have a
problem with people who point to them as being as good as KM 84 or CMC64,
CMC641 mics.

They (and a LOT of the SinoMics) will continue to find service for entry
level folks, especially in situations where using better mics is a bad idea
because they might be derstroyed.

Bless Scott, he likes stray dogs and has the determination and knowledge to
convert kludges into ......something less kludgey.

I think recording is a better use of my time than to unscrewingup what
someone else mangled, but that's just me.

In the end will undoubtedly be able to improve the stray dogs. Whether they
will ever be as good as the real mics is, however, doubtable.


Regards,

Ty Ford

For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

[Chris Del Faro]

Ty, IIRC, your website has a positive review of this model of Oktava.

IYO, then was it a particulary good specimen from the Sound Room?

Chris

[Ty Ford]

In Article >,
(Chris Del Faro) wrote:
>Ty, IIRC, your website has a positive review of this model of Oktava.
>
>IYO, then was it a particulary good specimen from the Sound Room?
>
>Chris

1. It wasn't from the Sound Room.
2. Check the date on the review.
3. I hadn't heard a Schoeps through a GML at that point.

Regards,

Ty Ford

For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Ty Ford wrote:

> (Chris Del Faro) wrote:

> >Ty, IIRC, your website has a positive review of this model of Oktava.

> >IYO, then was it a particulary good specimen from the Sound Room?

> 1. It wasn't from the Sound Room.

Check.

> 2. Check the date on the review.

1997?

> 3. I hadn't heard a Schoeps through a GML at that point.

The Josephson's weren't out, all those new A-T and Audix mics weren't
around, and so forth. Time flies when I can't remember anything.

--
ha

[Rob Adelman]

Ty Ford wrote:

> 3. I hadn't heard a Schoeps through a GML at that point.


Ty, didn't you recognize right away that there were serious problems
with mid-range clarity?

It seems like everybody is always so concerned with the highs and lows,
they overlook the most important part of the audio spectrum.

-Rob

[Chris Del Faro]

(Ty Ford) wrote in message >...
> 1. It wasn't from the Sound Room.
> 2. Check the date on the review.
> 3. I hadn't heard a Schoeps through a GML at that point.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ty Ford
>
> For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
> click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

Ty, thanks for the clarification.
Will look forward to trying a Schoeps someday also.

Chris

[Geoff Wood]

"Ty Ford" > wrote in message
...
> In Article >,
> (Chris Del Faro) wrote:
> >Ty, IIRC, your website has a positive review of this model of Oktava.
> >
> >IYO, then was it a particulary good specimen from the Sound Room?
> >
> >Chris
>
> 1. It wasn't from the Sound Room.

Are the Sound Room ones worse, better, or same ?

> 2. Check the date on the review.

Have they got worse since then ?

> 3. I hadn't heard a Schoeps through a GML at that point.

Did hearing the above actually change the sound of the reviewed mic, or are
your negative comments *comparitive* to other mics/preamps . How did the
Oktava sound through a GML ? If not not heard, that's hardly a valid
comparision . (Not trying to infer that a $100 Oktava is in the same league
as a Schoeps here !)

geoff

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Geoff Wood wrote:

> "Ty Ford" wrote:

> > (Chris Del Faro) wrote:
> > >Ty, IIRC, your website has a positive review of this model of Oktava.

> > >IYO, then was it a particulary good specimen from the Sound Room?

> > >Chris

> > 1. It wasn't from the Sound Room.

> Are the Sound Room ones worse, better, or same ?

Better/

> > 2. Check the date on the review.

> Have they got worse since then ?

No, but they aren't from SR, and lots of othr mics at competing prices
have arrived since that review.

<snip>

--
ha

[Chris Del Faro]

Perhaps this was analogus, on a humbler level, as to my experience
with the first "pro" LD condenser bought, the original Rode NT1, in
these stages...

1) Wow! This microphone sounds great, so MUCH detail, more than my
SM57.

2) Gee, this sure makes my vocals brighter than when I first tried it.

3) How much money can I get for this POS? (long gone now)

Well maybe not THAT analogus! <g>

Chris

P.S. I have great respect for Ty opinions/reviews, his website has
excellent
information on it, and have learned a good deal from it.
Not to mention his posts here at RAP, of course.

[Hal Laurent]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> (Ty Ford) wrote in message
>...
> >> 1. It wasn't from the Sound Room.
> >> 2. Check the date on the review.
> >> 3. I hadn't heard a Schoeps through a GML at that point.
> >
> >Ty, thanks for the clarification.
> >Will look forward to trying a Schoeps someday also.
>
> The Schoeps... well, it's a lot better sounding than the Oktava. But for
> what it costs, it had better be. I still think the Oktava is a real
winner
> considering how inexpensive it is. It's no Schoeps, B&K, or Josephson,
but
> for that money it doesn't have to be.

The Oktava MC012 (from the Sound Room) that Ty recently tested
was mine, and I was there for the test. I heard what Ty is describing,
but it didn't bother me as much as it bothered him. What was "skritchy
highs and boomy lows" to Ty seemed more like "somewhat exaggerated
high and low frequency response" to me. That probably indicates
that he has better ears than I do, and I learned a lot just sitting in on
the test. The Schoeps (both the CMC64 and CMC641) sounded
a lot better.

That said, if you're on a budget, you might be quite satisfied with the
Oktava MC012, at least until you taste something better (and more
expensive). My MC012's will be getting less use now that I have
a pair of Schoeps CMC641's, but I wouldn't be ashamed to put them
into play when the better mics were already in use.

On the other hand, I have an Oktava MC-319 that I absolutely hate.
I have to remember to get around to unloading it on eBay one of
these days.

Hal Laurent
Baltimore

[Josh Snider]

>
> On the other hand, I have an Oktava MC-319 that I absolutely hate.
> I have to remember to get around to unloading it on eBay one of
> these days.
>
> Hal Laurent
> Baltimore


How much for the 319? No Really...


J

--
josh.snider
cave.productions
416.524.6927

[Ricky W. Hunt]

"Chris Del Faro" > wrote in message
om...
> Perhaps this was analogus, on a humbler level, as to my experience
> with the first "pro" LD condenser bought, the original Rode NT1, in
> these stages...
>
> 1) Wow! This microphone sounds great, so MUCH detail, more than my
> SM57.
>
> 2) Gee, this sure makes my vocals brighter than when I first tried it.
>
> 3) How much money can I get for this POS? (long gone now)
>
> Well maybe not THAT analogus! <g>

That's priceless. A good dynamic is better than a bad condenser. Too many
people get told that condensers are "pro" mics (like that much ballyhooed
marketing phrase "world class" that seems to pop in every equipment ad). In
fact given a particular job it might be the worst mic for the situation. To
a newbie though when trying one since it's usually louder/brighter than what
they are used to they think it's better. Louder/brighter usually wins out in
comparisons. But in real world use that might be a disaster particularly if
you use it on everything and all that crap starts piling up.

[Chris Del Faro]

(Ty Ford) wrote in message >...
> Thanks Chris,
>
> I think there are actually 5-6 steps of disillusionment, but you sum it up
> very nicely.
>
> I'm not saying the MC012 is a POS. I'm saying when you hear it through a
> good preamp against a Schoeps or Neumann (and others), the difference is
> there. Can't afford a Schoeps? Too bad. I can't afford a Maserati or a
> Hummer. We all have to make choices.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ty Ford
>
> For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
> click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

True Ty.

My present choice for an omni is the EV 635a, and it's great for what I record,
on the amateur level. Scott Dorsey's and Bob Ohlsson's past RAP posts alerted
me to the value of this underestimated microphone.

BTW, thanks to everyone else too, who've contributed to this interesting thread.

Chris

P.S. And for not busting me on my prior spelling of "analogous". <g>

[chetatkinsdiet]

Discussing these mics again is like discussing whether or not Pete
Rose should go into the Hall of Fame, but I couldn't resist
responding.
So, as he's mentioned before, Ty doesn't like these mics top or bottom
end....now. But he thought it was passable in '97, before he had
heard the other better, much more expensive mics that he's comparing
them too.
So, for a lot of us that can't afford a matched pair of Neumanns,
Schoeps, or other high end mics, these are a really nice pair of sd
condensers. The fact that a pair can be had for about the price of an
SM57 makes them one of the best deals out there.
I don't know why this gets so many of you guys worked up? It might be
a little annoying when you read that they're "just as good as a 184"
or similar, but it's probably written by someone that's only used a
57, or worse yet, just getting something besides their C1000. Of
course they're going to be floored by the way this sounds.
I have a pair of these from GC that I've used for the past few years
and am happy with their performance. Is it perfect? No. But then
again, neither is the rest of my signal chain. If I had a few
channels of Great River to go into, I'm sure the things like the self
noise and top and bottom end might be noticable, but basically their
primary use...in my studio...is drum overheads for rock drums.
Later,
m

[Todd Belden]

I had an Oktava MK-219 LD condenser that I have since sold. Altough
it was quiet and yielded detailed recordings, it had a slightly "dark"
coloration to the sound that bothered me. I'm wondering if this was
an intended coloration or if it is a variation from mic to mic, some
sounding more "dark" than others. I've heard recorded samples of the
MK012, some sounding "dark", others more "transparent".
Todd



(chetatkinsdiet) wrote in message >...
> Discussing these mics again is like discussing whether or not Pete
> Rose should go into the Hall of Fame, but I couldn't resist
> responding.
> So, as he's mentioned before, Ty doesn't like these mics top or bottom
> end....now. But he thought it was passable in '97, before he had
> heard the other better, much more expensive mics that he's comparing
> them too.
> So, for a lot of us that can't afford a matched pair of Neumanns,
> Schoeps, or other high end mics, these are a really nice pair of sd
> condensers. The fact that a pair can be had for about the price of an
> SM57 makes them one of the best deals out there.
> I don't know why this gets so many of you guys worked up? It might be
> a little annoying when you read that they're "just as good as a 184"
> or similar, but it's probably written by someone that's only used a
> 57, or worse yet, just getting something besides their C1000. Of
> course they're going to be floored by the way this sounds.
> I have a pair of these from GC that I've used for the past few years
> and am happy with their performance. Is it perfect? No. But then
> again, neither is the rest of my signal chain. If I had a few
> channels of Great River to go into, I'm sure the things like the self
> noise and top and bottom end might be noticable, but basically their
> primary use...in my studio...is drum overheads for rock drums.
> Later,
> m

[Scott Dorsey]

Todd Belden > wrote:
>I had an Oktava MK-219 LD condenser that I have since sold. Altough
>it was quiet and yielded detailed recordings, it had a slightly "dark"
>coloration to the sound that bothered me. I'm wondering if this was
>an intended coloration or if it is a variation from mic to mic, some
>sounding more "dark" than others.

The 219 has all kinds of weird narrow resonances... I don't think any of
them are what I would call dark, but some of them might be. Most of those
problems can be fixed with a little silicone goop and some felt, but not all
of them.

> I've heard recorded samples of the
>MK012, some sounding "dark", others more "transparent".
>Todd

The 012 is a totally different mike than the 219. The quality control is
all over the map, but then again recordists using them are all over the map
too so it's hard to just anything from recorded samples.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."