Take a look at the ever-expanding prosumer audio gear landscape these days, and you'll notice several things: 1) There is a lot of new gear coming out all the time; 2) the quality you get for the money seems to be getting better; and 3) there's a lot of hype surrounding just about everything. Not that it's without good reason. Think about it. Not more than six years ago, so-called pro audio departments of most music stores were either nonexistent, or consisted mostly of keyboards and various midi-based applications. Since Tascam released the first Portastudio in 1984, we've certainly seen our share of significant paradigm shifts in the project studio markets in a short time.
Smaller, yet no less significant breakthroughs seem to keep popping up by the droves. More notably, the release of the RNC1773 compressor by FMR Audio in 1997 brought an unusually high-caliber of compression available to even the most modest of budgets. Right around the same time, overseas microphone manufacturers like Rode and Oktava began mass-producing affordable large diaphragm condensers by the boat loads. Soon, China would come in to the picture and play a major role.
Choruses of "I can get recording's like the pros!" sounded off, in unison, from basements around the world. These choruses would resonate at a pretty steady pace, keeping developers and manufacturers very busy. Only this time, it would evolve in to chants of "What's next?" or "When can I get an affordable ___?" or "How about an affordable ___?"
Naturally, the hype surrounding new product releases can reach fever pitches amongst the hobbyists, and on most internet user groups. Unfortunately, meeting such lofty demands is often impractical to impossible for the manufacturer. That doesn't stop them from trying, and it certainly doesn't stop the home rec'er from searching high and low for the "diamond in the rough" product that could blow in to the next budget breakthrough application.
These days, with so many new entrants in to the marketplace, the search becomes more confusing, the products more similar, the hype even greater and the hit-and-miss factor unavoidable. With this in mind, I decided to look at some of the unfortunate byproducts of the BAH (Budget Audio Hysteria) of the past few years. I will cast a critical eye on what I feel are the "misses," saving the hits for another article or another reviewer. Right now, we are looking at the overhyped, overrated gear that I fell for. Did you?
What smells?
It must be that vocal track you just recorded with our first audio disaster, the Rode NT1. Don't worry. A lot of us fell for this one. After all, some of the first NT1s produced were actually pretty good, prompting rave review after rave review, hailing the NT1 the next affordable audio wonder. Unfortunately, Australian manufacturer Rode left us wondering why they opted to replace their original capsules with a cheaper one as a cost-saving measure -- without informing the buying public first. Analogy: Going to bed with a 10 and waking up with a 2.
Conclusion: Luckily, if you should ever find yourself in need of a mic that provides a certain grating, metalic, nails-on-chalkboard sort of thing, it's not difficult to find an NT1 owner willing to part with what will be your new prize.
Grade: D-. Not an F because if you were lucky enough to snag an earlier model, you might have a gem.
And you, too, will soon jam...
That was the promise afforded us by the Fender Squire Stratocaster. It was also the promise of our next overhyped disappointment, the Line 6 POD and all other amp modelers. Gone are the days of needing real amplifiers and real mics in lush rooms, the hype promises. Just plug your guitar in to the magic box, select from something like one billion different amp models, hit record, and you, too will sound like Satriani! Albeit a concocted, digital, unauthentic version of Satriani.
Conclusion: Wait a minute here... The Line 6 has been used by some of the great guitar players by high-profile engineers on high-budget projects, right? This just in: Some of these greats could tie a noodle to a shoebox, plug it in to a Dixie cup, strum, and it would sound brilliant. Most of their records either sucked, or at least would have been much better had they used a real amp. And most of these engineers should be fired. Wait a minute here... Maybe they're not the real thing, but they can still sound good, right? And blowup dolls can be fun, too, but...
Grade: D. Not even close to the real thing. A fun toy, nonetheless.
A flat-out... Something???
Few things titillate the gearlust hormones like a shiny, new large-diaphragm condenser. So impressive, so big and so cool. And rarely will you see such an obedient group of cultlike followers flocking to what will most assuredly be the next great budget messiah. All it takes is the right words from the right reviewer (or microphone guru) at the right time, and alas the genesis of a market is born. Such was the case when a few people had a few good words to say about the MXL line of microphones. OK, I know you might disagree with me but hear me out.
We've heard the saying, and we all know what opinions are like so here's yet one more asshole's opinion to ad to the mix on the MXL V67.
For some reason, people like to compare this mic to the Studio Projects C1. I've heard many of my piers claim that it is magic on the right voice. Actually, I too thought it was quite magical myself when I noticed the disappearing act it pulls when placed in a busy mix. Now you hear your track... Presto! Now, it's sort of disappeared. If you like the murky sound of cheap transformers. If you crave the "out-of-focus" quality it imparts to low-mids. And if too much proximity effect is your thing, then I implore you to run and get this mic. Just follow the flock.
Conclusion: Last time I checked, this mic was about half the price of a C1. And fittingly, it's probably about half as good.
Grade: C. A cheap mic that actually sounds like a cheap mic. I got to give it up to MXL for this novel concept.
A venerable classic...
The most widely-used staple of most every studio and live gig. The "workhorse." The darling of the affordable microphone world. Ah, yes, the SM57. What? How dare I mention the SM57 on this page.
"Ring, Ring!" Reality on line one and it's for you. He said to tell you that, contrary to what people say, no engineer worth his salt would take this mic with him to a desert island. Sorry. "Click."
Now before you gather the dogs and hunt me down, I'm not at all saying it's a bad mic. As far as guitar amp micing goes, it's not shabby, although I usually opt for the brasher quality of a large condenser. That is when I don't prefer the natural, less-assuming nature of a decent ribbon. On snare and toms, I use the SM57 all the time but more because they can withstand the errant beating of the often sloppily navigated drumstick, not because I adore it's wondrously sluggish, low-fi sound.
We’ve all heard countless stories about how so-and-so recorded a hit record using an SM57, and doubtless the stories are true. In my humble estimation this has a lot more to do with the fact that it is perhaps the most widely used mic for scratch vocal tracks. And what often winds up happening is no-pressure performance of a scratch track that winds up being a keeper, strictly on the merits of the performance. Also, I believe it’s a right of passage for a producer or engineer to be able to say he did a particular track with "nothing but 57s" in order to make himself look brilliant. I've heard of engineers who have even used them as drum overheads. These are the kinds of people you shouldn’t be hiring for your next project.
Conclusion: I use it when I want a particular sound, which sadly isn't often.
Grade: B-. It's not bad but it's not outstanding.
Really, I'm not lying...
Now that I've committed audio blasphemy, I am going to make it up to you by saving you some money. You know that revolutionary new technology that Mackie and Universal Audio recently unleashed and turned the DAW world upside-down with? I'll take a quote straight from their website:
"Thanks to a high-headroom, custom-built processor specifically designed for DSP, it enables near-virtual digital replicas of Universal Audio's vintage analog classics such as the Teletronix!™ LA-2A!™ and the infamous 1176LN!™. And because it works seamlessly within a number of VST and MAS compatible host applications, you don't need to learn an entire new program to benefit from its power and flexibility."
Well, isn't that nice of them? Well, I'm going to do something very nice and pretend I'm writing for their web site, now. Here goes my version:
"Thanks to an entire PCI-slot's worth of custom-built dongle-switch, you too can achieve somewhat useful yet ultimately pale comparisons of vintage analog classics, and because the plugins sound no better than what you already have, you don't even have to bother buying it."
For some reason, I have the faint suspicion I might have difficulty finding a job as a copy writer of ad literature. But on the bright side, this freelance gig for Mojo Pie just might be the thing for me. If I can live up to all the hype, that is.
Conclusion: Get the real 1176LN if you want that sound.
Grade: C. They are pale comparisons.
Keith Ricker is an opinionated engineer who owns Moon Unit Sound.
