In article , Keith G
scribeth thus

"Jim Lesurf" wrote


The problem with cheap speakers (of any size) is that two of them used as
a
'pair' may actually be very different. The more they differ, the less
satisfactory the image would tend to become. All depends on the details.


Sure, but the *good enough at the price* must kick in for most if not all
buyers - also people's requirements differ, but if I have ever advocated
anything with speakers, it is always to get something you *can't afford*
with a 'respected' name! Then as time goes by and the price fades into
history*, they will iron themselves in as the *norm* for life - almost no
matter what they sound like!

As I said here recently, even bumping into strangers in an 'audio
environment' it seems every one of them was trying to find a pair of the
same speakers they had in the 70s!!


* Sign in a big piano shop in Cambridge: "The quality remains long after the
price has been forgotten." - Seriously!! :-)


"The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the delight of low
price fades"
--
Tony Sayer

On Sun, 03 May 2009 09:48:53 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote:

In article 4a006be5.14377828@localhost, Don Pearce
wrote:

Well, you generally get pretty much what you pay for

I tend to reverse that. :-) You may pay for what you get. But you don't
always get what you pay for.

And it has to be said that good imaging is easier to achieve with
smaller boxes, unfortunately at the expense of all the other good stuff,
like bass.

...and more attention required to room acoustics, etc. Unless lucky.

Slainte,

Jim

I wasn't even thinking of the room as I wrote this. Do the test in the
garden, would be my advice.

And of course stick a finger in one ear. It definitely doesn't work
with two ears on the job.

d

On Sun, 3 May 2009 22:58:20 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Funny you should say that - I was quite staggered a while back to realise I
don't actually care much for 'stereo' at all! So much so that I sold two
complete pairs of mics and reduced the remaining pair to a single mic.

What were you recording? Did you have a good-sounding space to record
in? I agree, in a bad room close-miked mono can sound better that an
attempt at stereo miking.

In article ,
Laurence Payne wrote:
Funny you should say that - I was quite staggered a while back to
realise I don't actually care much for 'stereo' at all! So much so
that I sold two complete pairs of mics and reduced the remaining pair
to a single mic.

What were you recording? Did you have a good-sounding space to record
in? I agree, in a bad room close-miked mono can sound better that an
attempt at stereo miking.

Indeed - nothing new there. Anyone remember Eldorado? A soap opera made on
location in Spain where some suit decided that stereo dialogue gathering
was the thing to have. In rooms made entirely out of concrete. At best
'muddy' and at worst unintelligible.

Two minutes experimenting with similar DP mics in mono and stereo in an
average acoustic would show this. But then our Kitty isn't exactly renown
for using any form of logical testing. Prefers to rely on 'magic'.

--
*All those who believe in psychokinesis, raise my hand *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
news:4a091595.123345031@localhost...
On Sun, 3 May 2009 14:16:23 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote


snip the **** boys - it's killing the planet


Well, that would be an "effect", that might or might not make things
sound better, depending. If I had an amplifier that did that to
everything, it would be on ebay faster than I could say "rubbish".


The old 'It may be ****e, but at least it's accurate!' argument, eh? :-)

No, the old "it may be ****e - that's because it is inaccurate"
argument.


No-one should listen to ****e if they can afford not to!

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
scribeth thus

"Jim Lesurf" wrote


The problem with cheap speakers (of any size) is that two of them used
as
a
'pair' may actually be very different. The more they differ, the less
satisfactory the image would tend to become. All depends on the details.


Sure, but the *good enough at the price* must kick in for most if not all
buyers - also people's requirements differ, but if I have ever advocated
anything with speakers, it is always to get something you *can't afford*
with a 'respected' name! Then as time goes by and the price fades into
history*, they will iron themselves in as the *norm* for life - almost no
matter what they sound like!

As I said here recently, even bumping into strangers in an 'audio
environment' it seems every one of them was trying to find a pair of the
same speakers they had in the 70s!!


* Sign in a big piano shop in Cambridge: "The quality remains long after
the
price has been forgotten." - Seriously!! :-)


"The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the delight of low
price fades"


No-one should buy crap even if it's cheap!

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 3 May 2009 22:58:20 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Funny you should say that - I was quite staggered a while back to realise
I
don't actually care much for 'stereo' at all! So much so that I sold two
complete pairs of mics and reduced the remaining pair to a single mic.

What were you recording? Did you have a good-sounding space to record
in? I agree, in a bad room close-miked mono can sound better that an
attempt at stereo miking.


Clarinet and piano, but not at the same time....

On Mon, 4 May 2009 00:15:48 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

What were you recording? Did you have a good-sounding space to record
in? I agree, in a bad room close-miked mono can sound better that an
attempt at stereo miking.


Clarinet and piano, but not at the same time....

Why not at the same time? Much better musically. Or was the same
person playing both?

Oh, wait a bit. We heard some of your stuff a few years ago, haven't
we? Wasn't there some Edward McDowell? I expect both the playing and
recording have progressed since then. May we hear the latest efforts?

I'd be very interested in hearing stuff you've recorded outside your
front room. You must know a hall with a good piano, you must know
some other musicians? I'd love to hear your wife playing live with a
pianist in a good acoustic. She'd enjoy the musical interaction too.

Somehow, living-room recordings always SOUND like living-room
recordings. And multi-tracking is so musically restrictive for music
that doesn't fit to a click.

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Jim Lesurf" wrote


The problem with cheap speakers (of any size) is that two of them used as
a
'pair' may actually be very different. The more they differ, the less
satisfactory the image would tend to become. All depends on the details.


Sure, but the *good enough at the price* must kick in for most if not all
buyers - also people's requirements differ, but if I have ever advocated
anything with speakers, it is always to get something you *can't afford*
with a 'respected' name! Then as time goes by and the price fades into
history*, they will iron themselves in as the *norm* for life - almost no
matter what they sound like!

As I said here recently, even bumping into strangers in an 'audio
environment' it seems every one of them was trying to find a pair of the
same speakers they had in the 70s!!


* Sign in a big piano shop in Cambridge: "The quality remains long after
the price has been forgotten." - Seriously!! :-)


Back in the 1970s, my brother bought a band new
Premier (British made) vibraphone complete with cases.
It cost £100. It's value now is £3 500.

Iain

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,

Thank gawd I don't claim to have passed a 'Tonmeister exam'


So you that a formal education and a professional
qualification are unimportant then?

Perhaps they are not so important for freelances
but for a senior staff position with any good
studio they are a pre-requisite, in addition to
an excellent show-reel and a good reputation.

Iain