Why can't people just say stuff sucks?

[AstroDan]

Basing your own decision on other's reviews takes a lot of finesse. You have to sift, look for clues...There's probably never been a person born who has consistantly spot-on opinions which are universally accepted. Opinions are just that, opinions, and not fact and therefore are open for debate which possibly can lead to violence and therefore opinions will always be treasured by humanity.

Harmony-Central is the Grand Daddy of unsolicited opinions, and few here would argue that site is next to worthless. You have to wade through dozens and dozens of reviews comprised of both a) in-experienced 17 olds or b) in-experienced 17 year olds who claim to have been "at it" for 25 years. And through all the rambling adjectives and the "I can really get a good Angus Young sound" claims, you really just have to pan for facts. Like 3 people saying "the bridge does seem to rattle on mine, too".

My method is just to read as much as possible about whatever field I'm interested in and look for oft-mentioned items that are almost conversation static, like "uh" or "like". SM57 is almost generic conversation static in recording discussions. It's mentioned peripherally in this thread, and it's a very safe bet it's mentioned within two threads from this one. It's not always mentioned in a positive light, but even the fact that the haters mention it, gives me an indication that it's at least used extensively. I actually have never used an 1176 or Oktava MK-012's, but I would reckon I would find them useful, and I'm sure great, if I bought both solely on the fact that they, too, are almost like conversation filler in pro audio discussions.

[lobstman]

One look at a recent TapeOp magazine shows it is filled with exactly that kind of (to my mind/experience) utterly useless verbage, repeating the same bullshit over and over like a mantra, plus.. <whisper whisper>some magazines will not print mean bad reviews because it upsets the advertisers paying for the magazine...

Please understand that the following is not a slam on the TO Magazine staff, because I understand that we live in a capitalist society and I don't blame anyone for doing what it takes to put food on the table (Hell, I just took a gig for Franklin Graham). Although it's still a great, useful magazine and puts all the other recording mags to shame, when I see all the glossy ads and Sweetwater sponsoring Tapeop Con at a resort, I'm reminded of a quote from George Orwell's "Keep The Aspidistra Flying"-

Everyone rebels against the money-code, and everyone sooner or later surrenders. He had kept up his rebellion a little longer than most, that was all.

[joeysimms]

As an aside, I have never met a mic I couldn't use. It may suck on vocals, guitar, and fiddle; but is perfect under a snare and on a harmonica.

Too true.. - I use whatever's there and never ever say 'oh man, if I only had a jimmigajammboschnottzser I could record this guitar part right..'

And, I agree a "this blows" review isn't worth much but, neither is another "warm lows, extended highs, and a beefy midrange.." review.

[dirk_v]

"warm lows, extended highs, and a beefy midrange.."

Warm lows, extended highs, and beefy midrange? Sounds Sweet! If it Must be "based on reknowned European designs" {wink}. Where can I order one?

Seriously though, you can't get something that sounds like a C12 for $79. For $79, it probably kinda does suck.

-dv

[Garthplinko]

I don't know guys, maybe I'm missing the point. I know that when I was starting out bang-for-the-buck was a serious issue for me - and still is. I know that with a few clever purchases I can make very decent sounding records without a 5-figure front end chain.

Let's take the cheap chinese condensor mic for example. Without naming names, many of them are notorious for having high-end harshness. You can say in a review, "for 100 bucks this is a heck of a mic BUT you may find it to be too bright." That to me would be useful - it tells me that I could use this to get started maybe on my four-track or for demos to put on myspace but probably wouldn't want to use it for my album project...

I mean, come on, this is TapeOp for pete's sake - I don't think it's an exclusive club where only pros with big budgets can come to get information. There are a lot of us still on the shoestring where reasonably priced gear is very important and they shouldn't be excluded from a review just because it doesn't sound as good as a neumann. In my opinion a good engineer should be able to make a decent sounding recording with an old Mackie and some 57s.

[joeysimms]

Seriously though, you can't get something that sounds like a C12 for $79. For $79, it probably kinda does suck.

Conversely, blowing $7k on a U47 will not make you sound like Frank Sinatra or John Lennon.. but a good singer /performance will sound great with even a $79 mic.

[dirk_v]

Amen to that. Prime example: I'm a big fan of Daniel Lanois' work, and I always find it inspiring to learn how he gets his work done. Most of you probably already know that he used SM57s as overheads when he did Wrecking Ball with Emmylou Harris.

The point which I find bothersome I guess is the subtle psychology behind the whole 'vintage-inspired' marketing schtick - that underlying suggestion that putting a 12AX7 in between your $79 euro-knockoff mic and your computer will somehow summon the spirit of Abbey Road and make you sound like Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band.

The truth is, I'm making this argument for my own sake, since I find bargains on gear soooooo tempting. It's hard to be patient and save up for something good, but I can attest from a quick glance around the room here that it's worth it. I have a ton of stuff that has served me well enough, and has sounded OK (but not high-end), which I couldn't sell for anywhere near what I paid for it. Then there's a few pieces of kit that have maintained or increased in value, have sounded great, and which I expect to have around for a long time to come.

I have gotten what I've paid for, and I suppose I'm just outgrowing some of the stuff that is aimed at the entry-level end of the market, which is where I was when I bought it. Naturally, in this progression, I have learned to listen, evaluate, and appreciate the difference between different types of gear for myself, so, for my next trick, you can check the buy/sell/trade MB and watch me try and flip half a dozen channels of mediocre compressors for one solid channel I can happily use for years and years to come.

Sorry to wander so far off-topic.

-dv

[mrclean]

Yes - most reviews are sometimes too "nice" and a lttle more directness might be in order but the fact is most listeners could care less if you used the U47 or the SM57 on your recording (or that $4,000 mic pre, or that vintage tube amp...or...)

If the performance is fantastic and you've managed to get it onto a recording that sounds good - then use what is available and sounds good to you. I suppose "good" gear can make things easier to get it done sometimes, but just because a mic is cheap doesn't mean its not usable or can't sound good.

[Ethan Holdtrue]

Go with what you know. And when in doubt, ask: "What would Rick Rubin do?".

[Spark]

Harmony-Central is the Grand Daddy of unsolicited opinions, and few here would argue that site is next to worthless. You have to wade through dozens and dozens of reviews comprised of both a) in-experienced 17 olds or b) in-experienced 17 year olds who claim to have been "at it" for 25 years. And through all the rambling adjectives and the "I can really get a good Angus Young sound" claims, you really just have to pan for facts. Like 3 people saying "the bridge does seem to rattle on mine, too".

Man... I found Harmony Central's review section to be mostly a place where kids go to gush about their new purchase instead of the messageboards... I automaticaly pass over reviews start with "I just got home with my new _________ and it kicks ass!".

Like you said, If Im researching a purchase I just scan through and find common problems. Its also decent for finding the average price for things. Its too bad, if they had a rule that you had to wait 3 months before posting the review section would be a lot more useful.

[joeysimms]

.. And when in doubt, ask: "What would Rick Rubin do?".

And then: do the opposite.

[joelpatterson]

One look at a recent TapeOp magazine shows it is filled with exactly that kind of (to my mind/experience) utterly useless verbage, repeating the same bullshit over and over like a mantra....

And they didn't send you a Sattelite? You're kidding.

[joel hamilton]

I dont know about how everyone does it, but this is how I personally do a review...

I get the piece of gear in the mail, and I open it up. I look at the thingy... does it look cool? does it seem well made? is it heavy? does it feel like I could drop it and not owe them a new one?

I try the thingy out and constantly think about someone who may not be as fortunate as I have been... meaning, I could probably gamble on something in a given price range and it wouldnt be the end of the world if the thing wasnt the most kick ass thing I had ever tried.... But what if I saved for two years straight to buy this piece of gear? I havent always been lucky... I DID save my ass off to get things rolling... I lived in a fucking motor home for two years... no rent meant I could put more money towards recording stuff!!! So anyway, would this thingy be something I would have been glad to own then? how about now? why?

I simply dont believe in the "warm, punchy, on-hat-it-is-cool" type of review...
Read any of the reviews I have ever written. I always feel a sense of responsibility to the recording community at large... I have only really slammed ONE product that I had to review, and it was something i was expecting to LIKE!

I have found things that I really love, and felt compelled to share those discoveries with the world... like the copperphone, the bova ball, sagee mic pre's, oktava 012's on toms.. glensound BBC boxes... symetrix 501's... There have beeen a few that I have gushed about...

Keep in mind that just like recording and producing... with no personal agenda other than the sheer enthusiasm for the art of recording.. you can really make observations that might actually help someone make an informed decision with their money.

Perpetuating what advertising does every single day (read "propaganda") seems kind of heartless at best, spineless at worst...
I certainly dont need to read the boring-ass stats about a piece of gear that are available on thee manufacturers website anyway... I certainly dont need to hear the SAME old fucking review for the 4 billionth time.. just plug in the mic name and type: "this ribbon really did what ribbon mics do, and I was surprised to find that on other things I dont usually like ribbons on, this was shitty." really? OMG...
now I totally KNOW I should buy that mic or not because it is a ribbon! Maybe if you had printed the freq response chart I could have figured out the angle I would aim it at the hi hat BEFORE even buying it or knowing who was playing the drums!

BUT....

The reason you dont just hear "it sucks" is certainly not some x files meets corporate nightmare... it is because people writing the reviews usually WANT to try something that gets sent to them. What review havee you read that you can honestly say you could refute the good aspects of the piece in question?

Tapeop does not pay reviewers, and even if the magazine I am writing for DOES pay [like EQ and MIX] I dont give a FUCK what the advertisers think, nor should they give a fuck what I think! They have ad's to sell their stuff, I am going to tell the recording community what I really, honestly think of something. Dont send it to me if you are afraid to hear the truth of one persons experience...

that being said, a lot of the stuff that comes through the door is cool.. nothing more, nothing less.

[Justin Foley]

It's up to you to find sources of information that you can trust. If a magazine prints a review that you find faulty, don't trust that magazine. If you read Joel's review (Joel, I don't know you from Adam but what you've said seems reasonable) and find what he says is worthwhile, the pay attention to his reviews. You have to consider the source.

There are plenty of people who are full time professional music recording people who have a wide range of experience and gear to draw from. Some of these people write reviews of gear and give reasoned and detailed opinions about the piece in question. I read the review and think - "huh, that sounds interesting". Then I go and listen to the last record they recorded and I hate the way it sounds. I'll then ignore that review.

On the other hand, I've got a few mics on my "to buy" list only because I've seen them on the Electrical Audio website. I love the way lots of the Albini records sound and so trust their gear reviews.

Much of recording is subjective. Well, something breaking when you open the box is not subjective, but sound quality generally is. There are so many choices of how to do things that it's worth being selective about who you learn from.

= Justin

[I'm Painting Again]

it's more satisfying sometimes to make art out of garbage..