Home Studio Mic Recommendations

[ACOUSTICDEWD]

Tony Rice once mentioned that he preferred the Sony C-48 but that Unit of Measure of album (sounds phenomenal) cover pic shows two massive LDC mics. Of course, his custom "banjo killer" guitar was possibly the loudest acoustic ever. i once played the santa cruz remake and was stunned.

As for the mic quest OCD, this single video should help. The entire 12 string guitar part of the ONE great song recorded in the 90's was done using a cheap headset mic through a tascam... on the toilet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJHXDdmPn0Y

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by ACOUSTICDEWD

As for the mic quest OCD, this single video should help. The entire 12 string guitar part of the ONE great song recorded in the 90's was done using a cheap headset mic through a tascam... on the toilet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJHXDdmPn0Y

Except if you listen to the recording in question , while the song is a great song and apparently had lots of success



In point of fact the 12 string in that recording sounds exactly like it was recorded on a very cheep mic that lacks dynamics, depth, and presence, and is pretty tiny , hi-mid focused, and out of the context (of that very specific song and recording ) would be a pretty lack luster un impressive sound for say just a 12 string & vocal only song

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by ACOUSTICDEWD

As for the mic quest OCD, this single video should help. The entire 12 string guitar part of the ONE great song recorded in the 90's was done using a cheap headset mic through a tascam... on the toilet

You left out the part where it was mixed in a pro studio with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of gear and then mastered using thousands of dollars worth of gear ...not to mention the talent of the mixing and mastering engineers. You can't omit those parts of the equation as if they're unimportant and didn't have a much bigger impact on the outcome for that particular song than the guitar mic did.

Now if anyone here has access to that kind of gear and talent for the mixing and mastering stages of their songs, sure... go ahead and record on a $10 AliExpress microphone. They'll fix it in post.

[kurth]

Originally Posted by DupleMeter

Sure, talent will transcend the gear, but there's a reason studios don't buy $300 mics to record great talent. It's not to show off. Believe me, I'd go cheaper if there wasn't such a huge difference in quality, and so would every other studio owner. It would certainly make turning a profit as a studio easier.

I know we all want to believe that the $300 mic is good enough...but it's not. Not for that level of recording. And anyone who says they can't hear a difference simply can't hear the difference. The difference is definitely there. The fact that one can't hear it only points out the need to better train the ears.

Go listen to the guitar on Tony Rice's Unit Of Measure album...I don't mean his playing...just the capture of the tone of his guitar. How big & bold it is without being at all unbalanced or out of place. Listen to the space around the guitar...how dimensional it feels. That can't be captured with cheap gear.

Duple....if there's a Tony rice level level of acoustic guitar player, without a 1000dollar mic, please stand up. And if ever the difference ( I thought 10%) would show it would be a pure acoustic guitar instrumental album. Acoustic guitar is a bxxch to record, even in my own limited personal experience. But....when the guitar is just the road were walking on while the main dish is served....lyrics....then I think vocals is a different story. And recording guitar becomes a different priority. Although what musician wouldn't want the gear, it's a simple question of real world economic. And the world is a big place. Most of you have chosen to live where they serve the biggest helping of gravy, and you can splurge to your hearts content. But most of the world would've been living like me, where even putting together a 1000 dollar studio was a sacrifice. I know that's a fact cause I spent over 4 years of my life traveling on 4 continents. A much better life investment imho than 'stuff' btw. A 1000 dollar mic....my wife would divorce me....for good reason. So for me....after alot of trials of recording my acoustic guitar with microphones, I've pretty well abandoned mics for pickups and vst's. Pickups allow me to laydown a basic two track song , and keep the guitar as a backing track or even as a prime track that I can add to...with the same setup...without having to try to match them. And I don't have to worry about background pollution whatsoever. No it doesn't sound like Tony. And my mic doesn't make me sound like Sinatra. But it gets the idea across. And in myverse the idea is 90% of the game. We do all know that most people ( besides us) will listen on cheap compu speakers , or maybe some average headphones, or good earbuds at the most, right. And obviously you're working a professional studio...so that would be a whole new ballgame entirely.

So honestly...it's a bit ingenuous for people with their plates full of gravy to always assume the $1000 mic solution vs no other, and as well the idea of not recording anything until you acoustically model the recording space into a verifiable studio, when the op is obviously looking for a cheaper mic ....for a reason...and doesn't have the capacity to have a recording studio inside his guest bedroom. He might not even have a guest bedroom. Do you guys know how frustrating you make it ? Love your help...but sometimes you need to learn to put your materialism on a lease and address the problem rather than always resigning your opinions to solutions not everyone can attain....so the rest of the world can benefit from your knowledge. Who knows....the op might record the most important music of the decade in his closet....if he doesn't just quit cause he can't afford a Neumann.

[DupleMeter]

Originally Posted by ACOUSTICDEWD

Tony Rice once mentioned that he preferred the Sony C-48 but that Unit of Measure of album (sounds phenomenal) cover pic shows two massive LDC mics. Of course, his custom "banjo killer" guitar was possibly the loudest acoustic ever. i once played the santa cruz remake and was stunned.

As for the mic quest OCD, this single video should help. The entire 12 string guitar part of the ONE great song recorded in the 90's was done using a cheap headset mic through a tascam... on the toilet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJHXDdmPn0Y

Yeah, those are U47s on the cover...about $60k in today's market for the pair.

On to Bettencourt/Extreme - that recording is not great...I mean, you can tell it was a cheap recording that they resuscitated. Can you hear the "whoosh" of the noise from the room at the very start? Or how thin that guitar sounds. They rolled off a ton of low end to get rid of noise, at the expense of the guitar tone. It sounds like a 1930s recording of a an old Stella.

Now whether that mattered to it's success...obviously not. But they did that for the emotion of the demo. Not because they though it sounded better than what they captured in the studio. It's really not uncommon for an artist to get demo-itis. I feel for whoever the producer was...that had to be a difficult conversation with the label/A&R rep. Oofa!

[DupleMeter]

Originally Posted by kurth

Duple....if there's a Tony rice level level of acoustic guitar player, without a 1000dollar mic, please stand up. And if ever the difference ( I thought 10%) would show it would be a pure acoustic guitar instrumental album. Acoustic guitar is a bxxch to record, even in my own limited personal experience. But....when the guitar is just the road were walking on while the main dish is served....lyrics....then I think vocals is a different story. And recording guitar becomes a different priority. Although what musician wouldn't want the gear, it's a simple question of real world economic. And the world is a big place. Most of you have chosen to live where they serve the biggest helping of gravy, and you can splurge to your hearts content. But most of the world would've been living like me, where even putting together a 1000 dollar studio was a sacrifice. I know that's a fact cause I spent over 4 years of my life traveling on 4 continents. A much better life investment imho than 'stuff' btw. A 1000 dollar mic....my wife would divorce me....for good reason. So for me....after alot of trials of recording my acoustic guitar with microphones, I've pretty well abandoned mics for pickups and vst's. Pickups allow me to laydown a basic two track song , and keep the guitar as a backing track or even as a prime track that I can add to...with the same setup...without having to try to match them. And I don't have to worry about background pollution whatsoever. No it doesn't sound like Tony. And my mic doesn't make me sound like Sinatra. But it gets the idea across. And in myverse the idea is 90% of the game. We do all know that most people ( besides us) will listen on cheap compu speakers , or maybe some average headphones, or good earbuds at the most, right. And obviously you're working a professional studio...so that would be a whole new ballgame entirely.

So honestly...it's a bit ingenuous for people with their plates full of gravy to always assume the $1000 mic solution vs no other, and as well the idea of not recording anything until you acoustically model the recording space into a verifiable studio, when the op is obviously looking for a cheaper mic ....for a reason...and doesn't have the capacity to have a recording studio inside his guest bedroom. He might not even have a guest bedroom. Do you guys know how frustrating you make it ? Love your help...but sometimes you need to learn to put your materialism on a lease and address the problem rather than always resigning your opinions to solutions not everyone can attain....so the rest of the world can benefit from your knowledge. Who knows....the op might record the most important music of the decade in his closet....if he doesn't just quit cause he can't afford a Neumann.

I think you're missing the point (or intentionally keep changing your argument...I'm really not sure, but giving you the benefit of the doubt).

The discussion is: does the quality of the gear matter. The answer is: yes!

The reason you can hear how good Tony's guitar sounds on that recording & how textured his playing is is because the equipment is good enough to capture those details (and a great sounding live room, lest we forget that part of the equation).

Cheaper equipment would have resulted in a very 2 dimensional recording. it could still be quite listenable, but not that "there in the room with him/bigger than life" experience that that record delivers.

Putting it into terms everyone here will get: will a $99 production line acoustic ever sound as good as a $6k handbuilt acoustic? The gear matters, to an extent. Better gear has fewer limitations. There is always a point of diminishing returns, but the road to that point is a road of huge leaps in quality.

Now, whether that $6k acoustic (or microphone) is a reality in your world is a very different issue. But we can't wish away the quality factor because it's financially unattainable to some. So, yes, record with what you have. I endorse that 100%. It's better to record now rather than wait. When my assistant asks me what mic was best for any particular source I always say "the one you have right now".

It's important to make art while you can, life is short. But it is also careless to boldly state there ate no levels of better when it comes to the tools to create that art. Any artist will tell you that cheap tools are limiting. Whether they are guitars, pianos, paint brushes, or microphones.

By all means, match the level of gear to your expectations (or means). But don't try to sell the lie that you can get that same quality that is on that Tony Rice Unit record with cheap gear. That's disingenuous.

[kurth]

Originally Posted by DupleMeter

I think you're missing the point (or intentionally keep changing your argument...I'm really not sure, but giving you the benefit of the doubt).

The discussion is: does the quality of the gear matter. The answer is: yes!

The reason you can hear how good Tony's guitar sounds on that recording & how textured his playing is is because the equipment is good enough to capture those details (and a great sounding live room, lest we forget that part of the equation).

Cheaper equipment would have resulted in a very 2 dimensional recording. it could still be quite listenable, but not that "there in the room with him/bigger than life" experience that that record delivers.

Putting it into terms everyone here will get: will a $99 production line acoustic ever sound as good as a $6k handbuilt acoustic? The gear matters, to an extent. Better gear has fewer limitations. There is always a point of diminishing returns, but the road to that point is a road of huge leaps in quality.

Now, whether that $6k acoustic (or microphone) is a reality in your world is a very different issue. But we can't wish away the quality factor because it's financially unattainable to some. So, yes, record with what you have. I endorse that 100%. It's better to record now rather than wait. When my assistant asks me what mic was best for any particular source I always say "the one you have right now".

It's important to make art while you can, life is short. But it is also careless to boldly state there ate no levels of better when it comes to the tools to create that art. Any artist will tell you that cheap tools are limiting. Whether they are guitars, pianos, paint brushes, or microphones.

By all means, match the level of gear to your expectations (or means). But don't try to sell the lie that you can get that same quality that is on that Tony Rice Unit record with cheap gear. That's disingenuous.

maybe you should read the op's threadstarter again...and then again. And two little facts that water down your argument. The Beatles recorded in an untreated space. And billy elish recordered her first hit using an at2020. And no one said you can get the SAME....reread what I wrote. And u see....you always revert to your argument that expensive is the only way, which says fundamentally nothing you do will be worth it. It looks like an ad. You guys are living in an echo chamber....and there's a level of fixation to your thinking. And ethnocentrisms galore.

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by kurth

No it doesn't sound like Tony. And my mic doesn't make me sound like Sinatra. But it gets the idea across. And in myverse the idea is 90% of the game.

With respect.

I think virtually everyone here would rally around the idea that if, in fact, in your myverse, 90% of your goal is to just "get the idea across," and indeed, you're getting there with whatever tools you may or may not have, all here would be ultra-supportive. I know I would. That, however, is clearly not everyone's goal here on the forum. There appears to be (although I could be misinterpreting) some degree of finger-wagging here for those of us who are more "materialistic" with our approach. That, for me, is a ginormous leap of character assumptions. It's really tough to know what struggles some have gone through to get where they are. I'm beyond certain there have been a ton of sacrifices by many.

Originally Posted by kurth

We do all know that most people ( besides us) will listen on cheap compu speakers , or maybe some average headphones, or good earbuds at the most, right. And obviously you're working a professional studio...so that would be a whole new ballgame entirely.

I've always had a great deal of titanic struggles with this mindset. It appears to promote the concept that everyone's gonna listen with cheap, crappy equipment; therefore, the logical leap is to create cheap, crappy content. I very, very much care, to the core, about my productions. It goes directly to my heart and soul, and I'll invest all of that and all available talent to make that happen. My absolute best foot forward simply matters a great deal to me. Where and or what people listen to my stuff on has absolutely zero impact on my production decisions. That, to me, seems to be a defeated, before-started musical mindset.

Originally Posted by kurth

So honestly...it's a bit ingenuous for people with their plates full of gravy to always assume the $1000 mic solution vs no other, and as well the idea of not recording anything until you acoustically model the recording space into a verifiable studio

This, again, is a leap across the Grand Canyon assumption. I'm more than sure there are folks here who went bone-destitute while getting into this business, learning the craft along the way, and at some point reached a more comfortable material slot in life. I'm one of them. If in calling folks out, you really mean "ingenuous," I don't think any of the folks submitting ideas here, regardless of the gravy on their plate, are anywhere near naive. Well-founded, well-thought-out sonic advice is always valuable regardless of one's financial situation..

Originally Posted by kurth

Love your help...but sometimes you need to learn to put your materialism on a lease and address the problem rather than always resigning your opinions to solutions not everyone can attain

Since the late 60's, mentors of mine have suggested equipment that was far, far out of my financial reach. I meticulously filed the information away, perhaps in hopes I could put that suggestion in play, at least at some point, and moved ahead with the appreciation someone actually took the time to personally lend a hand and help. I can't recall ever surveying the situation and coming away thinking that my mentor was too materialistic.

Originally Posted by kurth

Who knows....the op might record the most important music of the decade in his closet....if he doesn't just quit cause he can't afford a Neumann.

This is just a strawman setup and is impossible to qualify.

In the end, there's a great deal of expertise proffered here on this forum. It's almost always given in the spirit of genuine help. If it's difficult for you to take that advice under advisement because of your personal stand on materialism and or how much gravy one has on their plate, I'd suggest concentrating more on publishing your recordings in the "Show and Tell" section here as it's far less equipment oriented and much more geared to finished productions.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by kurth

And billy elish recordered her first hit using an at2020.

People who bring this up as proof of anything always leave out the rest of the story. Eilish didn't simply record that album in her brother's bedroom and release it. She already had a record deal. Her AT2020 recording was sent to Rob Kinelski, a world class mixing engineer, who has a studio with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of gear at his disposal. It then went to John Greenham, a world class mastering engineer, whose gear is also top notch. You can get away with less expensive gear on the front end if you have that kind of knowledge, expertise, and racks of amazing gear that are going to come in afterwards and polish and massage the tracks until they shine like the sun. That you bring this up as proof that any of us can produce similar quality in our home studios with cheap gear is actually proof that you really don't understand the whole process of making a song sound polished and radio ready.

[kurth]

Originally Posted by jim1960

People who bring this up as proof of anything always leave out the rest of the story. Eilish didn't simply record that album in her brother's bedroom and release it. She already had a record deal. Her AT2020 recording was sent to Rob Kinelski, a world class mixing engineer, who has a studio with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of gear at his disposal. It then went to John Greenham, a world class mastering engineer, whose gear is also top notch. You can get away with less expensive gear on the front end if you have that kind of knowledge, expertise, and racks of amazing gear that are going to come in afterwards and polish and massage the tracks until they shine like the sun. That you bring this up as proof that any of us can produce similar quality in our home studios with cheap gear is actually proof that you really don't understand the whole process of making a song sound polished and radio ready.

Jim...if you think about it, you just completed my argument. Because if the material is good enough for tens of 1000's of dollars of gear, but that was unavailable, then the world is made so, most of the time, the material will find it's way there. But think about if she didn't even have access to the at2020, then what ? My premise is this is also a socioeconomic discussion on an international forum. I think. Hey I'm sorry to step on toes. I've learned my share on agf to be thankful. But one point ...having to set up a 10,000dollar studio minimum has gotten far away from what the op asked. And in many threads of this nature, asking for modest suggestions, they always end with this argument. As for the fact we all live in the real world....look at a map of the American continents. From the border of the US south, no one spends $3000 dollars on a mic unless they are already making boocoos of bucks from their music. Shakira. And no personal home studios have them whatsoever. I obviously have no idea where the op lives...but I don't automatically assume he lives in the US. That and the ops modest request should've kept the thread from dissolving into ....what you say I'm certain is absolute truth, but worthless to most of us....maximum gear solutions. It almost makes me want to get a zoom with onboard mics and cut to the chase.

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by kurth

The Beatles recorded in an untreated space.

Nothing, and I mean nothing, could be further from the truth. The Beatles moved to EMI on or about the 1st of June 1962. EMI was already in existence since before the end of World War II. The two rooms that existed in 1962 had roughly 25 years of sonic construction and improvements under their belt that, in fact, made it, at the time, one of the most sophisticated sonic recording environments on the planet.

Originally Posted by kurth

You guys are living in an echo chamber....and there's a level of fixation to your thinking. And ethnocentrisms galore.

I started my recording career in and or about 1969. I worked my way through Nashville and now, for 23-plus years, have been mixing audio for television and motion pictures here in Hollywood. The sacrifices and personal and family hardships have been endless as that, unfortunately, is what it takes to gain the knowledge and skill set to succeed. The job is massively stressful and takes not only a lifetime of learned skills but endless patience and a willingness to be completely shot down by Creative Directors and Executive Producers, even if the face of a really great mix.

The totality of advice I proffer here has come from a lifetime of struggles, battles, and learning curves and has utterly and absolutely nothing to do with being in an echo chamber and, even less, practicing ethnocentrism. That's simply inaccurate and misguided. Again your propensity to wag-fingers based on who has more gravy is biblically off base. By all means, reject whatever advice you so choose; that's your choice, and I suspect most here would respect that. When, however, it gets distilled to character darts, I get a tad ruffled.

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by ACOUSTICDEWD

ONE great song recorded in the 90's was done using a cheap headset mic through a tascam... on the toilet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJHXDdmPn0Y

Loved this video. Was not familiar with his music before. He seems to have so much energy. Really liked what he had to say about producers.

Originally Posted by jim1960

You left out the part where it was mixed in a pro studio with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of gear and then mastered using thousands of dollars worth of gear ...not to mention the talent of the mixing and mastering engineers. You can't omit those parts of the equation as if they're unimportant and didn't have a much bigger impact on the outcome for that particular song than the guitar mic did.

Originally Posted by DupleMeter

The discussion is: does the quality of the gear matter. The answer is: yes!

Putting it into terms everyone here will get: will a $99 production line acoustic ever sound as good as a $6k handbuilt acoustic? The gear matters, to an extent. Better gear has fewer limitations. There is always a point of diminishing returns, but the road to that point is a road of huge leaps in quality.

Originally Posted by kurth

. The Beatles recorded in an untreated space. And billy elish recordered her first hit using an at2020.

I think the problem lies is in that each side has different goals & needs.

Kurth, I do hear your plea. Yes, you can record good music, have lots of fun and full fill your music desires with lower cost microphones in an untreated rooms. I am pretty sure that All of us, made music with lower cost equipment to begin with.

However, for some of us music blossomed into an extreme passion. We bought higher quality guitars for their extra harmonics, dynamics & tone
We wanted to capture every nuance our guitars offer.
For some songs, a guitar's tone, nuance, dynamics literally will make the song come alive. (That doesn't mean that you can not write great sons on lesser guitars either. For some songs it makes little difference on the quality of guitar.)

Music in general is about making sacrifices for what we love. Usually musicians sacrifice hours and hours of practice in order to become better musicians. Some of us Sacrificed other things in our lives to buy better guitars and equipment.
So what is happening here, is most everyone on the AGF Recording is super passionate about making high quality recordings. I am one of those people. And I have personally sacrificed lots to get my better gear.

Anyway, Kurth I certainly understand where you are coming from. And if your are kind enough to do so, Please understand where the other side is coming from as well. Guitar quality, Gear quality has to make a difference. But that difference may not be necessary for you. That is something only you can decide.

[kurth]

Originally Posted by Joseph Hanna

Nothing, and I mean nothing, could be further from the truth. The Beatles moved to EMI on or about the 1st of June 1962. EMI was already in existence since before the end of World War II. The two rooms that existed in 1962 had roughly 25 years of sonic construction and improvements under their belt that, in fact, made it, at the time, one of the most sophisticated sonic recording environments on the planet.




I started my recording career in and or about 1969. I worked my way through Nashville and now, for 23-plus years, have been mixing audio for television and motion pictures here in Hollywood. The sacrifices and personal and family hardships have been endless as that, unfortunately, is what it takes to gain the knowledge and skill set to succeed. The job is massively stressful and takes not only a lifetime of learned skills but endless patience and a willingness to be completely shot down by Creative Directors and Executive Producers, even if the face of a really great mix.

The totality of advice I proffer here has come from a lifetime of struggles, battles, and learning curves and has utterly and absolutely nothing to do with being in an echo chamber and, even less, practicing ethnocentrism. That's simply inaccurate and misguided. Again your propensity to wag-fingers based on who has more gravy is biblically off base. By all means, reject whatever advice you so choose; that's your choice, and I suspect most here would respect that. When, however, it gets distilled to character darts, I get a tad ruffled.

The beatles also recorded in an untreated space. Everyone's seen the docs. Do you think everyones on a professional recording career path, joseph. Because I'd bet the op isn't. A recording studio probably has an acoustic engineer to design the space as well but that doesn't mean it's a necessity for me...or the op. Everyone gets the deal...but suggestions should be tailored to the needs being requested. I early, made two good mic suggestions to the op, and others as well....but just waited for the inevitable evolution. I'm not going back thru 5 pages...but did you address the op's request ?

[kurth]

Originally Posted by AcousticDreams

Loved this video. Was not familiar with his music before. He seems to have so much energy. Really liked what he had to say about producers.







I think the problem lies is in that each side has different goals & needs.

Kurth, I do hear your plea. Yes, you can record good music, have lots of fun and full fill your music desires with lower cost microphones in an untreated rooms. I am pretty sure that All of us, made music with lower cost equipment to begin with.

However, for some of us music blossomed into an extreme passion. We bought higher quality guitars for their extra harmonics, dynamics & tone
We wanted to capture every nuance our guitars offer.
For some songs, a guitar's tone, nuance, dynamics literally will make the song come alive. (That doesn't mean that you can not write great sons on lesser guitars either. For some songs it makes little difference on the quality of guitar.)

Music in general is about making sacrifices for what we love. Usually musicians sacrifice hours and hours of practice in order to become better musicians. Some of us Sacrificed other things in our lives to buy better guitars and equipment.
So what is happening here, is most everyone on the AGF Recording is super passionate about making high quality recordings. I am one of those people. And I have personally sacrificed lots to get my better gear.

Anyway, Kurth I certainly understand where you are coming from. And if your are kind enough to do so, Please understand where the other side is coming from as well. Guitar quality, Gear quality has to make a difference. But that difference may not be necessary for you. That is something only you can decide.

thanks ...I am and hope to make more as long as the body breathes. One thing I always do when on internet forums is respect the thread. And this happens not rarely. A guy asks a modest question wanting a modest response. It can be about guitars...but less so, because there's so many more cheap guitars in this world. But when talking about recording...which if you read the description, it covers other valid points than just professional recording studios. For example , in which forum is composing using recording as a tool. Because I completely compose differently using a daw than before. And using the actual complete daw experience changes how I go about composing. Or adds another step. Before I would ever arrive at a completed composition , I would usually generate the idea on guitar. Pass that idea thru a piano grinder ( metaphor) for recomposing the song on piano, and walla. Now I create another step, by recording multiple versions, refining each one based on the results of the first. How would someone like me 50 years ago walk into a recording studio? Way to much financial investment required thinking I would somehow rationalize even a breakeven point. So...sure in the end it's about different goals. But I'm always going back and reading the op's request.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by kurth

Jim...if you think about it, you just completed my argument. Because if the material is good enough for tens of 1000's of dollars of gear, but that was unavailable, then the world is made so, most of the time, the material will find it's way there.

There are thousands of people out there making music that are just as talented as Eilish. A very small percentage of them will be "discovered" and given the opportunity to get into a professional studio.

Originally Posted by kurth

But think about if she didn't even have access to the at2020, then what?

No one is arguing that one should not buy a 2020 if a 2020 is all they can afford. You seem to be arguing that people should buy cheap mics regardless of whether they can afford better. You seem insistent that we assume everyone posting here is broke and when they ask for recommendations we should only recommend low cost gear. Many of us don't approach it that way and, frankly, I think to do so is a bit insulting to whoever made the request.

Originally Posted by kurth

My premise is this is also a socioeconomic discussion on an international forum. I think.

On some small level, perhaps, but socioeconomics is not the reason this forum exists. This forum is about recording music and that includes discussion of the tools used for recording music, all the tools, not just the least expensive ones. Not everyone who posts here is forced to buy cheap because of their personal economic circumstances. Some people may simply not understand the economics of recording.

This reminds me of a story my dad once told me...
My dad's day job was as a project manager for a company that built ships. Somewhere along the way, he developed a passion for play-writing and his plays have met with some success... multiple awards, shows being produced around the country, some public television, etc. Once, when one of his plays was being produced locally, he brought a video camera to the playhouse to record the performance. Knowing the video camera didn't have a great microphone on it, he bought a better mic to attach to the camera.

When he watched the video afterwards, the sound quality was terrible. He went back to the store where he bought the mic (might have been Radio Shack, if I'm remembering correctly) to speak to someone and see if they could help him figure out why the sound was so bad. The person speaking with him asked what mic he used. My dad's reply was, "The mic can't be the problem because he spent $100 on it." That was the day my dad learned about the economics of recording.

I think he told me that story when I told him about my new, at the time, Flea 47 and how much I paid for it. While many, yourself included, might look at that price tag and wonder how any microphone could be worth that much money, my dad understood because of his experience.

Originally Posted by kurth

Hey I'm sorry to step on toes. I've learned my share on agf to be thankful.

I'm glad you have but you do give off a "get off my lawn" vibe sometimes or maybe that's just me and how I'm reading your words.

Originally Posted by kurth

But one point ...having to set up a 10,000dollar studio minimum has gotten far away from what the op asked. And in many threads of this nature, asking for modest suggestions, they always end with this argument.

Opinions are always going to be varied. Someone asks for advice, we give the best advice we can. Even among those in the group with the most experience, opinions will vary, but I wouldn't characterize the vast majority of the conflicting opinions as arguments, a word that, for me in this context, connotes some level of anger. Disagreements, even strenuously defended disagreements, don't necessarily have to be arguments where either party is angry.

Originally Posted by kurth

As for the fact we all live in the real world....look at a map of the American continents. From the border of the US south, no one spends $3000 dollars on a mic unless they are already making boocoos of bucks from their music. Shakira.

I'm sure that's true for the majority of home studio owners no matter where they're located.

Originally Posted by kurth

And no personal home studios have them whatsoever. I obviously have no idea where the op lives...but I don't automatically assume he lives in the US. That and the ops modest request should've kept the thread from dissolving into ....what you say I'm certain is absolute truth, but worthless to most of us....maximum gear solutions. It almost makes me want to get a zoom with onboard mics and cut to the chase.

I have no idea what the OP's personal finances look like and neither do you. His request was non-specific outside of here's the mic I have, here's the mic I'm considering, could I have some recommendations. He gave us no hint of his limitations so why should any of us impose limitations that we don't know are there?

The OP is seeking information that can guide him towards a good purchasing decision. Had he mentioned a budget in his original post, I'm sure most, if not all, of the responses would have offered suggestions in the neighborhood of that budget. But he didn't, so that leaves the door open for a much wider variety of recommendations.

As for the conversation evolving into discussions about other things (like $10k studios)... well, that's just the nature of discussions, isn't it? Conversations evolve, they're fluid, and just because a topic starts out as one thing, we're not constrained by that topic so these things do morph quite often.

Originally Posted by kurth

The beatles also recorded in an untreated space. Everyone's seen the docs.

Just because you can't see the treatment doesn't mean there was no treatment.

Originally Posted by kurth

...suggestions should be tailored to the needs being requested.

You're welcome to make rules for yourself but you don't get to impose them on the rest of us. People here do there best to educate those who come here looking for information. If they stop doing that, this subforum will have little purpose.