On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 11:59:26PM +0200, Robin Gareus wrote: > Paul Winkler wrote: > > I'm not a fan of the C1000. Here's an interesting post about why it > > sometimes works fine and sometimes is awful: > > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/browse_thread/thread/eab8c6400a4f4fa0/369fcee1b26201ba?lnk=st&q=&rnum=1&hl=en#369fcee1b26201ba > > I also like Harvey's other comment on the C1000 on this page. > and I've never heard about the "Oktava MK012" before - > http://www.mojopie.com/mk012.html I've been reading the thread referred to above, and if you ask me it's just load of nonsense presented as informed opinion. This is quite common in audio reviews these days. The same reasoning can be used for any microphone. Sometimes it will have exactly the frequency response you require and sometimes not. That's about all there is to it. Indeed the C1000 has some boost at the top end. So what ? In many cases that is what you need, and if you don't you can just use some gentle EQ to remove it. Or are we still living in the 1950's ?? To describe a mic's sound as 'harsh' - implying low-quality - when all there is about it is some HF boost just shows that whoever is doing this doesn't have a clue about what he's talking about. -- FA Follie! Follie! Delirio vano è questo ! _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-user
