Has anybody had the chance to compare Peluso small diaphragm condensers with
Schoeps? The question appeared on another forum and intrigued me -- but
nobody had an answer. I'd never heard of Peluso until a couple of days ago
but now have learned he uses a few select Chinese components to hand
assemble (in the USA) what some claim to be very good mics. The big
question, of course, is HOW good? (Unless they are virtually the equal of
Schoeps, I probably would be uninterested in buying one but still interested
in the answer.)

"Uncle Russ" Reinberg

WESTLAKE PUBLISHING COMPANY
www.finescalerr.com
WESTLAKE RECORDS
www.westlakerecords.com

Uncle Russ wrote:

Unless they are virtually the equal of Schoeps

*Highly* unlikely.

"Uncle Russ" wrote in message
...
Has anybody had the chance to compare Peluso small diaphragm condensers
with Schoeps? The question appeared on another forum and intrigued me --
but nobody had an answer. I'd never heard of Peluso until a couple of days
ago but now have learned he uses a few select Chinese components to hand
assemble (in the USA) what some claim to be very good mics. The big
question, of course, is HOW good? (Unless they are virtually the equal of
Schoeps, I probably would be uninterested in buying one but still
interested in the answer.)

If this link holds together...

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...cb609129ed1d9f

.... there's a recent thread on the topic you can check out.

Neil Henderson

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 01:10:44 -0500, Neil Henderson wrote
(in article ) :


"Uncle Russ" wrote in message
...
Has anybody had the chance to compare Peluso small diaphragm condensers
with Schoeps? The question appeared on another forum and intrigued me --
but nobody had an answer. I'd never heard of Peluso until a couple of days
ago but now have learned he uses a few select Chinese components to hand
assemble (in the USA) what some claim to be very good mics. The big
question, of course, is HOW good? (Unless they are virtually the equal of
Schoeps, I probably would be uninterested in buying one but still
interested in the answer.)

If this link holds together...


http://groups-
beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/browse_frm/thread/e0b844566d
3f66b3/2ccb609129ed1d9f?q=peluso+#2ccb609129ed1d9f

... there's a recent thread on the topic you can check out.

Neil Henderson



I think I asked about getting a pair to compare with my schoeps, but nothing
ever happened.

Ty Ford



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

Missed that thread the first time, but there still isn't info up there about
the small-diaphragm mics he makes. Has anybody tried them?

--Ben

--
Benjamin Maas
Fifth Circle Audio
Los Angeles, CA
http://www.fifthcircle.com

Please remove "Nospam" from address for replies

"Neil Henderson" wrote in message ...


If this link holds together...

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...cb609129ed1d9f

... there's a recent thread on the topic you can check out.

Neil Henderson

Hi, Uncle Russ. There is no relationship between Schoeps (whose main
microphone amplifier model is the "CMC 6") and Peluso. And Peluso's Web
site doesn't claim that his "CEMC 6" microphones are based on Schoeps.
However, a dealer on eBay has been making this claim, without evidence
or explanation of any kind.

As far as I can see, the only possible basis for the statement is that
there are several capsule types available for the same microphone
amplifier (body). In other words, it is a modular system, like many
others--not only Schoeps, by far. In fact the switch arrangement for
attenuation and low-frequency cut seems to be copied more from the AKG
C 535EB and C 451B.

To see how easily microphones like this can get onto the U.S. market,
go to www.feilo-usa.com and have a look at the customization services
that they offer. Then go to the mother ship at www.feilo-china.com --
choose "Condenser mic" from the menu on the left, then select the first
microphone in the menu (CR1-14). If you've seen the Peluso microphone,
this one may seem ... oddly familiar.

--best regards

"David Satz" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hi, Uncle Russ. There is no relationship between Schoeps (whose main
microphone amplifier model is the "CMC 6") and Peluso. And Peluso's Web
site doesn't claim that his "CEMC 6" microphones are based on Schoeps.
However, a dealer on eBay has been making this claim, without evidence
or explanation of any kind.

Hey David, what about those MBHO mics that are supposed to be Schoeps-like?
Ever hear any of those? I tried e-mailing a US dealer for them to try & get
some info, but havent heard anything back yet.

Neil Henderson

Neil Henderson wrote:
"David Satz" wrote in message
Hi, Uncle Russ. There is no relationship between Schoeps (whose main
microphone amplifier model is the "CMC 6") and Peluso. And Peluso's Web
site doesn't claim that his "CEMC 6" microphones are based on Schoeps.
However, a dealer on eBay has been making this claim, without evidence
or explanation of any kind.

Hey David, what about those MBHO mics that are supposed to be Schoeps-like?
Ever hear any of those? I tried e-mailing a US dealer for them to try & get
some info, but havent heard anything back yet.

I had some on eval, and they aren't in the same league with the Schoeps/DPA/
Sennheiser MKH/Josephson 606 stuff. But, they also aren't anywhere near as
expensive, which is a big deal with the dollar continuing to drop.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

In article OSPAM writes:

Hey David, what about those MBHO mics that are supposed to be Schoeps-like?

Schoeps-like, Neumann-like, AKG/Telefunken-like . . none of them are
the real thing, most are pretty good. I wouldn't buy a mic because
it's supposed to (or even does) sound like or be built like a mic
that's supposed to be really good. I'd buy a mic because it does
something I need. This is why I have U87s (at one time this was
something that separated me from other home studios), and why I have
SM57s.

MBHO has some decent mics, but the reason to buy them is that they're
MBHO, not that that they're Schoeps-like.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1110713763k@trad...

In article
OSPAM writes:

Hey David, what about those MBHO mics that are supposed to be
Schoeps-like?

Schoeps-like, Neumann-like, AKG/Telefunken-like . . none of them are
the real thing, most are pretty good. I wouldn't buy a mic because
it's supposed to (or even does) sound like or be built like a mic
that's supposed to be really good. I'd buy a mic because it does
something I need. This is why I have U87s (at one time this was
something that separated me from other home studios), and why I have
SM57s.

MBHO has some decent mics, but the reason to buy them is that they're
MBHO, not that that they're Schoeps-like.

Point taken, but how's the build quality, sound quality, & self-noise of the
MBHO's, in your opinion?

Neil Henderson

Scott, since you have actually evaluated them first-hand, what mic
would you compare the CEMC6 to, and how would you best describe them?
Others please chime in too if you have used these. My use would be for
location recording as a stereo pair.

I appreciate any & all thoughts/opinions...

best,
Keith

/lurk mode back on/

Scott, since you have actually evaluated them first-hand, what mic
would you compare the CEMC6 to, and how would you best describe them?
Others please chime in too if you have used these. My use would be for
location recording as a stereo pair.

I appreciate any & all thoughts/opinions...

best,
Keith

/lurk mode back on/

I have a modified AT4051 cardioid that sounds fairly close to my
Schoeps, but like you say, "close" doesn't mean it's the same. Still,
for the price the AT is a nice mic.

Al

On 13 Mar 2005 11:32:02 -0500, (Mike Rivers)
wrote:


In article OSPAM writes:

Hey David, what about those MBHO mics that are supposed to be Schoeps-like?

Schoeps-like, Neumann-like, AKG/Telefunken-like . . none of them are
the real thing, most are pretty good. I wouldn't buy a mic because
it's supposed to (or even does) sound like or be built like a mic
that's supposed to be really good. I'd buy a mic because it does
something I need. This is why I have U87s (at one time this was
something that separated me from other home studios), and why I have
SM57s.

MBHO has some decent mics, but the reason to buy them is that they're
MBHO, not that that they're Schoeps-like.

In article m OSPAM writes:

Point taken, but how's the build quality, sound quality, & self-noise of the
MBHO's, in your opinion?

All decent as far as I can tell, but I've never used one long enough
to decide that it's not useful. And I've never used one longe enough
to decide that it IS useful. I've seen the insides and they look as
good as any decent microphone.

Why dont' you get one and try it on what you'd like to use it on? Any
dealer who won't let you return it for a refund if you don't decide to
keep it isn't worth dealing with. And don't worry about an A/B
comparision. As yourself "Can I use this mic?"


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Neil, again some dealers seem to enjoy trading on the fact that the
chief engineer of MBHO was once an employee of Schoeps (in the 1950s
and/or 1960s, I think--certainly not at all recently). Having visited
the company's Web site, I do see some outward physical similarities,
for example in the way that the capsule heads are shaped and the slits
are made in the sides of the capsule heads.

I've never tried the microphones themselves and I don't know anyone who
uses them, but now and then a favorable comment about MBHO as a budget
alternative is posted on one of the German-language boards which I
follow. I certainly wouldn't rule out trying a pair of their mikes,
though if I had the budget for that sort of taste-testing, personally
there are a few other companies whose products I'd try first (e.g.
Josephson).

One thing to consider is that not very many years ago, several of the
dealers active on eBay were big-time gray marketers, and their source
of supply was cut off. So they have resentments against Neumann and
Schoeps, and they enjoy posting auctions and statements which they know
will irritate the people at those companies. It is an immature little
game that the public is not let in on.

--best regards

"David Satz" wrote in message
oups.com...

I've never tried the microphones themselves and I don't know anyone who
uses them, but now and then a favorable comment about MBHO as a budget
alternative is posted on one of the German-language boards which I
follow. I certainly wouldn't rule out trying a pair of their mikes,
though if I had the budget for that sort of taste-testing, personally
there are a few other companies whose products I'd try first (e.g.
Josephson).

One thing to consider is that not very many years ago, several of the
dealers active on eBay were big-time gray marketers, and their source
of supply was cut off. So they have resentments against Neumann and
Schoeps, and they enjoy posting auctions and statements which they know
will irritate the people at those companies. It is an immature little
game that the public is not let in on.


Yeah, but that stuff doesn't bother me... I have nothing against Neumann
mics - I own a couple, have used tons of 'em apart from that, and was in
fact pondering a pair of -184's, since I am looking for a pair of cardioid
SDC's; and I've used the 184's and like 'em just fine. However, with the
dollar getting it's ass kicked against several currencies, the new German
stuff seems to be climbing in price, so I am also considering lower-priced
alternatives... with the Josephson's you mentioned being one of those
alternatives. My only concern there is self-noise... there've been a number
of posts on this NG mentioning that aspect of the C-42's, and I almost
grabbed a pair not too long ago, thinking: "I'm mainly going to use these
for drum overheads in a rock context, so a couple of db's worth of noise
isn't going to be an issue", but now it looks like I'll be doing some more
classically-oriented stuff as well, so self-noise is now a bigger concern. I
was curious as to how the MBHO's stack up in that department (as well as
overall sound quality, of course). I suppose I may have to just try 'em &
see.

Neil Henderson

Plus, by EQ or Mix this month, they are American made, which means they
aren't Shanghai mics. Peluso mics are definitely Chinese, but from what
I've heard, they are quite superior to those of the run of the mill Chinese
mics. I'm tempted to call John and ask for a pair for evaluation. Do Mike
or Scott want to help on the evaluation?

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
Neil Henderson wrote:
"David Satz" wrote in message
Hi, Uncle Russ. There is no relationship between Schoeps (whose main
microphone amplifier model is the "CMC 6") and Peluso. And Peluso's Web
site doesn't claim that his "CEMC 6" microphones are based on Schoeps.
However, a dealer on eBay has been making this claim, without evidence
or explanation of any kind.

Hey David, what about those MBHO mics that are supposed to be
Schoeps-like?
Ever hear any of those? I tried e-mailing a US dealer for them to try &
get
some info, but havent heard anything back yet.

I had some on eval, and they aren't in the same league with the
Schoeps/DPA/
Sennheiser MKH/Josephson 606 stuff. But, they also aren't anywhere near
as
expensive, which is a big deal with the dollar continuing to drop.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

And that dropping dollar means something. Milk costs $3 plus dollars for a
gallon. That's more than gas, and it only takes someone with the knowledge
to pull teets.

And while I'm at it, keep those tuna dollars in your pocket. You're buying
mercury. Get salmon or catfish. But by all means, spend the money on
purified or distilled water. Your children will thank you for it because
THEY CAN. This administration wants you to have more mercury in your system
so your brains can't develop any further. Then you can elect more
republicans so they can keep the mercury in the water. The studies don't
lie. Predator fish have high levels of mercury because they eat lots of
fish with lower levels and it's stored in fatty tissue. Eat fish often but
not predatory fish. Trout, salmon and other non-predatory fish have as
little as 1/10th of the total mercury in tuna. Heavy metals kill brain
cells. Fish is good for the brain. Doesn't make sense, does it?

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
Neil Henderson wrote:
"David Satz" wrote in message
Hi, Uncle Russ. There is no relationship between Schoeps (whose main
microphone amplifier model is the "CMC 6") and Peluso. And Peluso's Web
site doesn't claim that his "CEMC 6" microphones are based on Schoeps.
However, a dealer on eBay has been making this claim, without evidence
or explanation of any kind.

Hey David, what about those MBHO mics that are supposed to be
Schoeps-like?
Ever hear any of those? I tried e-mailing a US dealer for them to try &
get
some info, but havent heard anything back yet.

I had some on eval, and they aren't in the same league with the
Schoeps/DPA/
Sennheiser MKH/Josephson 606 stuff. But, they also aren't anywhere near
as
expensive, which is a big deal with the dollar continuing to drop.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

But what cost is "modified"? Once you lay in that sunk cost you have to
then compare the total to the cost of a Josephson or Schoeps or even the
MBHO. Plus the time to get the AT modified. And why buy a mic and modify
it unless it's far less expensive to get the sound of a more expensive mic.

I agree with Mike. Buy what you buy because it does something you want it
to and leave it at that. No use in making comparisons. If you need the
sound of a Neumann, then buy one.

BTW, Mike and Scott's mic cabinets are pretty impressive. But I see some
reasoning going on in their minds to go for some of the less expensive mics
simply because a single purpose mic that's $100 is far more cost effective
than a $3k mic that does 3 things well.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"play on" wrote in message
...
I have a modified AT4051 cardioid that sounds fairly close to my
Schoeps, but like you say, "close" doesn't mean it's the same. Still,
for the price the AT is a nice mic.

Al

On 13 Mar 2005 11:32:02 -0500, (Mike Rivers)
wrote:


In article
OSPAM writes:

Hey David, what about those MBHO mics that are supposed to be
Schoeps-like?

Schoeps-like, Neumann-like, AKG/Telefunken-like . . none of them are
the real thing, most are pretty good. I wouldn't buy a mic because
it's supposed to (or even does) sound like or be built like a mic
that's supposed to be really good. I'd buy a mic because it does
something I need. This is why I have U87s (at one time this was
something that separated me from other home studios), and why I have
SM57s.

MBHO has some decent mics, but the reason to buy them is that they're
MBHO, not that that they're Schoeps-like.

Roger W. Norman wrote:
And that dropping dollar means something. Milk costs $3 plus dollars for a
gallon. That's more than gas, and it only takes someone with the knowledge
to pull teets.

And while I'm at it, keep those tuna dollars in your pocket. You're buying
mercury. Get salmon or catfish. But by all means, spend the money on
purified or distilled water. Your children will thank you for it because
THEY CAN. This administration wants you to have more mercury in your system
so your brains can't develop any further. Then you can elect more
republicans so they can keep the mercury in the water. The studies don't
lie. Predator fish have high levels of mercury because they eat lots of
fish with lower levels and it's stored in fatty tissue. Eat fish often but
not predatory fish. Trout, salmon and other non-predatory fish have as
little as 1/10th of the total mercury in tuna. Heavy metals kill brain
cells. Fish is good for the brain. Doesn't make sense, does it?


Why BEER is good for your brain,

"Well ya see, Norm, it's like this. A herd of buffalo can only move
as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the
slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This
natural
selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed
and
health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the
weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate
as
fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we
know,
kill brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest
brain
cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the
weaker
brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine!

One thing to consider is that not very many years ago, several of the
dealers active on eBay were big-time gray marketers, and their source
of supply was cut off. So they have resentments against Neumann and
Schoeps, and they enjoy posting auctions and statements which they know
will irritate the people at those companies.


Knowledge is wonderful. However, it's not a situation that was some years
ago. It's still going on at an extended level today. Grey market items are
beginning to get recognition for service even as white market items are. It
doesn't behoove any manufacturer to ignore their market, regardless of how
that consumer bought the product. It's one of the few good things about
fair trade that has come about. Less grey market items and more
availability of service. Win/win for the consumer. Loss/loss for any
country that has exports that fall behind. Besides, what great American
microphone is available today?
--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"David Satz" wrote in message
oups.com...
Neil, again some dealers seem to enjoy trading on the fact that the
chief engineer of MBHO was once an employee of Schoeps (in the 1950s
and/or 1960s, I think--certainly not at all recently). Having visited
the company's Web site, I do see some outward physical similarities,
for example in the way that the capsule heads are shaped and the slits
are made in the sides of the capsule heads.

I've never tried the microphones themselves and I don't know anyone who
uses them, but now and then a favorable comment about MBHO as a budget
alternative is posted on one of the German-language boards which I
follow. I certainly wouldn't rule out trying a pair of their mikes,
though if I had the budget for that sort of taste-testing, personally
there are a few other companies whose products I'd try first (e.g.
Josephson).

It is an immature little
game that the public is not let in on.

--best regards

I don't think you need concern yourself about noise factors in the C-42
Josephsons. I see highly touted mics in the range of -20 dB self noise and
wonder who the **** they expect to run buy the mics, but the fact is that
it's a reasonable number. Getting towards -12 or even at the Rode NT-2,
which Ty likes a lot at -7, is costly in comparison. Not expensive, just
costly. Remember, with tape one had to consider the accumulated noise of
the mics/pres in order to get something on tape without a tremendous amount
of noise because the medium itself was noisy. In today's digital
environment, we're not talking the same amount of consideration nor purchase
decision requirements.

However, if one wants the absolute quietest mic for each input channel, then
one will only have one level of mic to work with. It might sound quiet, but
it won't sound real.

Or it might! g

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"Neil Henderson" wrote in message
om...

"David Satz" wrote in message
oups.com...

I've never tried the microphones themselves and I don't know anyone who
uses them, but now and then a favorable comment about MBHO as a budget
alternative is posted on one of the German-language boards which I
follow. I certainly wouldn't rule out trying a pair of their mikes,
though if I had the budget for that sort of taste-testing, personally
there are a few other companies whose products I'd try first (e.g.
Josephson).

One thing to consider is that not very many years ago, several of the
dealers active on eBay were big-time gray marketers, and their source
of supply was cut off. So they have resentments against Neumann and
Schoeps, and they enjoy posting auctions and statements which they know
will irritate the people at those companies. It is an immature little
game that the public is not let in on.


Yeah, but that stuff doesn't bother me... I have nothing against Neumann
mics - I own a couple, have used tons of 'em apart from that, and was in
fact pondering a pair of -184's, since I am looking for a pair of cardioid
SDC's; and I've used the 184's and like 'em just fine. However, with the
dollar getting it's ass kicked against several currencies, the new German
stuff seems to be climbing in price, so I am also considering lower-priced
alternatives... with the Josephson's you mentioned being one of those
alternatives. My only concern there is self-noise... there've been a
number
of posts on this NG mentioning that aspect of the C-42's, and I almost
grabbed a pair not too long ago, thinking: "I'm mainly going to use these
for drum overheads in a rock context, so a couple of db's worth of noise
isn't going to be an issue", but now it looks like I'll be doing some more
classically-oriented stuff as well, so self-noise is now a bigger concern.
I
was curious as to how the MBHO's stack up in that department (as well as
overall sound quality, of course). I suppose I may have to just try 'em &
see.

Neil Henderson

Well I'm not sure how to address that, George, except to say if you see a
stampeding group of brain cells running from some alcohol molecules then you
probably should see a doctor! g

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"George Gleason" wrote in message
...
Roger W. Norman wrote:
And that dropping dollar means something. Milk costs $3 plus dollars
for a
gallon. That's more than gas, and it only takes someone with the
knowledge
to pull teets.

And while I'm at it, keep those tuna dollars in your pocket. You're
buying
mercury. Get salmon or catfish. But by all means, spend the money on
purified or distilled water. Your children will thank you for it
because
THEY CAN. This administration wants you to have more mercury in your
system
so your brains can't develop any further. Then you can elect more
republicans so they can keep the mercury in the water. The studies
don't
lie. Predator fish have high levels of mercury because they eat lots of
fish with lower levels and it's stored in fatty tissue. Eat fish often
but
not predatory fish. Trout, salmon and other non-predatory fish have as
little as 1/10th of the total mercury in tuna. Heavy metals kill brain
cells. Fish is good for the brain. Doesn't make sense, does it?


Why BEER is good for your brain,

"Well ya see, Norm, it's like this. A herd of buffalo can only move
as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the
slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This
natural
selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed
and
health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the
weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate
as
fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we
know,
kill brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest
brain
cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the
weaker
brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine!

Roger W. Norman wrote:
Well I'm not sure how to address that, George, except to say if you see a
stampeding group of brain cells running from some alcohol molecules then you
probably should see a doctor! g


mine are drawn to single malt like a moth to a flame
only my wallet acts as a barrier
g

And that's the reason there's Rolling Rock beer! g

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"George Gleason" wrote in message
news
Roger W. Norman wrote:
Well I'm not sure how to address that, George, except to say if you see
a
stampeding group of brain cells running from some alcohol molecules then
you
probably should see a doctor! g


mine are drawn to single malt like a moth to a flame
only my wallet acts as a barrier
g

Roger W. Norman wrote:

Besides, what great American microphone is available today?

Josephson, AEA, and Royer come to mind immediately. My microphone
purchasing dollars are headed thusly for awhile.

And you know something George? That's probably the most coherent statement
you've made on RAP, even though a lot of your posts have been excellent.
The mental picture needs no further explanation.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"George Gleason" wrote in message
news
Roger W. Norman wrote:
Well I'm not sure how to address that, George, except to say if you see
a
stampeding group of brain cells running from some alcohol molecules then
you
probably should see a doctor! g


mine are drawn to single malt like a moth to a flame
only my wallet acts as a barrier
g

Which was really the point. All multiples of $1k. Out of the reach of most
project/home studios unless someone has more money then sense. Although
didn't I see a Josephson mic at a sub $1k price in EQ from NAMM?

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message
...
Roger W. Norman wrote:

Besides, what great American microphone is available today?

Josephson, AEA, and Royer come to mind immediately. My microphone
purchasing dollars are headed thusly for awhile.

Roger W. Norman wrote:
And that's the reason there's Rolling Rock beer! g


Rog,
I want to get drunk
not spend all night ****ing out the fire!
George

On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:49:34 -0500, "Roger W. Norman"
wrote:

The mental picture needs no further explanation.

"Time to pee on the dog and put out the fire."
"I miss Old Yeller." -Riders in the Sky

Isn't it almost time for a beer OT thread?

"You can't buy beer; you can only rent it" - Archie Bunker



Chris Hornbeck

Roger W. Norman wrote:

But what cost is "modified"? Once you lay in that sunk cost you have to
then compare the total to the cost of a Josephson or Schoeps or even the
MBHO. Plus the time to get the AT modified. And why buy a mic and modify
it unless it's far less expensive to get the sound of a more expensive mic.

Kurt A's Audio Upgraded C460's are a good example of great value for
money, great enough to say "screw the time it took". The do compare
nicely with my CMC6's + MK4's, and for around $400 all-in (except for
postage g).

--
ha

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 05:00:56 GMT, Chris Hornbeck
wrote:

"Time to pee on the dog and put out the fire."
"I miss Old Yeller." -Riders in the Sky

I've just remembered the correct quote, and don't want to
print it. Yeah, it's funnier *in context*.

Chris Hornbeck

George already referenced it! g

Geez, some of you guys stay up late.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"Chris Hornbeck" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 05:00:56 GMT, Chris Hornbeck
wrote:

"Time to pee on the dog and put out the fire."
"I miss Old Yeller." -Riders in the Sky

I've just remembered the correct quote, and don't want to
print it. Yeah, it's funnier *in context*.

Chris Hornbeck

I can see buying some nice beyer ribbons and having Mr. Sank work on them,
too. It still fits within what I said. Unless you buy a mic with the idea
of modifying it, you didn't by the right mic. That said, there's nothing
wrong with changing your determination of what's right and wrong.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"hank alrich" wrote in message
. ..
Roger W. Norman wrote:

But what cost is "modified"? Once you lay in that sunk cost you have to
then compare the total to the cost of a Josephson or Schoeps or even the
MBHO. Plus the time to get the AT modified. And why buy a mic and
modify
it unless it's far less expensive to get the sound of a more expensive
mic.

Kurt A's Audio Upgraded C460's are a good example of great value for
money, great enough to say "screw the time it took". The do compare
nicely with my CMC6's + MK4's, and for around $400 all-in (except for
postage g).

--
ha

Roger W. Norman wrote:

Geez, some of you guys stay up late.


Quite a few of us are three hours behind you. It's only 10:00 PM here.

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 00:47:08 -0500, "Roger W. Norman"
wrote:

Geez, some of you guys stay up late.

Well, I'm in CST, and back to a real day job (yeah! I
love working) and up at 6 AM, but I really miss the late-
night repartee. Late nights are our only true vestige
of childhood. (Whaaaa???? TF?? )

Chris Hornbeck
"That's where may forebears came from. Three of them
anyway. Who's been sleeping in my porridge?"

My point wasn't what time it was, but rather that there's significant
posting here during the latter part of the evening. Being on the right
coast Will and I were basically arguing in somewhat real time. In order to
talk to the others here I have to be up at 1:25 AM. Now the way it works, I
usually am getting up about 1 to 2 AM and going to bed about 8 to 9 PM.
Today is different. I woke up at 2 AM and am still awake 24 hours later.
So I'm seeing direct responses from people that usually take two days to do.

Kurt sends me emails during my middle of the night. I answer him in his
way too early morning.

Different, that's all.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
http://blogs.salon.com/0004478/

"Chris Hornbeck" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 00:47:08 -0500, "Roger W. Norman"
wrote:

Geez, some of you guys stay up late.

Well, I'm in CST, and back to a real day job (yeah! I
love working) and up at 6 AM, but I really miss the late-
night repartee. Late nights are our only true vestige
of childhood. (Whaaaa???? TF?? )

Chris Hornbeck
"That's where may forebears came from. Three of them
anyway. Who's been sleeping in my porridge?"

In article OSPAM writes:

stuff seems to be climbing in price, so I am also considering lower-priced
alternatives... with the Josephson's you mentioned being one of those
alternatives. My only concern there is self-noise...

People have been recording with microphones for 75 years without being
concerned with self noise. Why all the fuss all of suddden? I hear
this a lot lately. Have microphones become noisier, or are people just
getting carried away with what they hear when the mic's on and no
music is playing? Ever hear of pulling down a fader?


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Mike Rivers wrote:
In article OSPAM writes:


stuff seems to be climbing in price, so I am also considering lower-priced
alternatives... with the Josephson's you mentioned being one of those
alternatives. My only concern there is self-noise...


People have been recording with microphones for 75 years without being
concerned with self noise. Why all the fuss all of suddden? I hear
this a lot lately. Have microphones become noisier, or are people just
getting carried away with what they hear when the mic's on and no
music is playing? Ever hear of pulling down a fader?

there is quite a bit of difference between what you could hear on a wax
cylinder compared to what you can hear in a 192K recording
the playback has gotten better which demanded the input become better
george

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1110851759k@trad...

In article
OSPAM writes:

stuff seems to be climbing in price, so I am also considering
lower-priced
alternatives... with the Josephson's you mentioned being one of those
alternatives. My only concern there is self-noise...

People have been recording with microphones for 75 years without being
concerned with self noise. Why all the fuss all of suddden? I hear
this a lot lately. Have microphones become noisier, or are people just
getting carried away with what they hear when the mic's on and no
music is playing? Ever hear of pulling down a fader?

Hey, just trying to get the best quality possible for the money - you got a
problem wit' 'dat?

Neil Henderson