Chinese Mics vs the Cult of German Mics

[bitflipper]

[NOTE: I don't usually double-post things I've written in another forum, but I posted this in the SONAR forum thinking I'd start some flames. But nothing from that crowd. Maybe somebody here will argue with me]


Chinese microphones have been taking the market by storm, because they're cheap. The first wave were also pretty awful, because the Chinese engineers were given a single mandate: make 'em cheap. Don't worry about subtlety, off-axis frequency response, or even build quality. Just make them so ridiculously cheap that we can slap an American or German brand name on them and enjoy huge profit margins.

But Chinese engineers aren't stupid. They know perfectly well that they could design high-quality microphones if given the chance. I figured it was just a matter of time before that happened. Well, it's happened.

While we were all poo-pooing Chinese mics and saying they're OK for bedroom recordists but serious engineers insist on expensive microphones from Germany, those Shanghai factories were quietly turning out some really good stuff. Curiously, few seemed to notice.

At least, nobody noticed until Telefunken got caught rebranding a $200 Chinese microphone and selling the exact same mic for $1400.

I have a good microphone. It's quiet, it handles high SPLs, it's got multiple polar patterns, it's got two HPF settings, it's very well-built and it sounds great. And I paid $800 for it. But if I were starting over today, I'd budget about $200 for an LDC and have enough money left over for a pair of SDCs and a lobster dinner.

Check out this commentary by Slau, a recordist's recordist and admitted microphone junkie. It's always nice to hear a real expert echo your own opinions

[garageband]

the Chinese engineers were given a single mandate

This is not state of affairs in all situations. Western companies are often having their designs manufactured in China. Another situation that is becoming more prevalent is non-Chinese mic companies are have componentry manufactured in China that will QC'd and assembled elsewhere. I have some mics that use the latter paradigm and they do not suck.

They know perfectly well that they could design high-quality microphones if given the chance.

"Design" has nothing to do with anything. Anybody with internet access can come up with a high quality microphone design. It's about making it. What you'll make it out of. Are you going to pay people pennies a day to make them? Are you going to use the best materials or what ever's cheapest? Are you going to reject componentry that that doesn't cut it of just slap them together and stuff them into boxes? Are you going to have them manufactured in a country that artificially devalues their currency to gain an unfair trade advantage or one that plays by established monetary rules of international trade?

those Shanghai factories were quietly turning out some really good stuff.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. QC is all over the ballpark. Remember the last dud Neumann/Shure condenser you used?

Telefunken got caught rebranding

Ahhh, the "Telefunken" situation. Yeah, well, lots of folks have bought the rights to venerable old names and to use the marques as a way to misrepresent inferior goods. This sort of bad acting is hardly limited to microphone sales.

It's always nice to hear a real expert echo your own opinions

Probably the worst thing about the internet: the ease of finding like-minded individuals and not properly sharpening your arguments and examining your position.

[bitflipper]

Thank you, garageband. That's the kind of thought I was hoping to stimulate.

"Design" has nothing to do with anything.

There are different aspects to "engineering" or "designing" a product. While it's true that a basic design can be obtained by anyone, determining how to substantiate that design requires specialized engineering expertise.

Example: say there is a mesh screen in front of the diaphragm - how does one actually manufacture that screen in a cost-effective way? Will it be woven or punched? What will it be made of? How will it be attached? If the openings are made larger, that might reduce cost but also alter the linearity of the frequency response. Substituting a different material might reduce cost but be prone to warping.

The point is that there are a great many small decisions that contribute to the final "productization" (a real word, btw, I did not make it up), decisions that affect both cost and quality. Even if David Royer hands a detailed design to his manufacturing plant in Shanghai, a great deal of engineering and design still remains to be done before he'll hold a physical product in his hand.

Probably the worst thing about the internet: the ease of finding like-minded individuals and not properly sharpening your arguments and examining your position.

Ouch. OK, I've got a thick-enough skin to accept the "not properly sharpening arguments" barb. But trust me, I am not in the habit of appropriating the arguments of others from the internet and parroting them without due diligence.

In fact, it's very easy to find contrary opinions on this subject and relatively difficult to find authoritive people who agree with me! Have you listened to the piece I linked to yet?

[garageband]

Even if David Royer hands a detailed design to his manufacturing plant in Shanghai, a great deal of engineering and design still remains to be done before he'll hold a physical product in his hand.

Love the David Royer example. I would say not. I would say all the component engineering is done by him and his team. What parts to make, their dimensions, materials to use. No doubt, all goods to be manufactured in this fashion are thoroughly prototyped before one piece is mass produced. The Royer people ultimately decide the suitability of the parts (not final assemblies, in this case). This is not different from any of the products you see sold from late night commercials by skilled pitchmen.

I would contend that the factory in China does not do any productization of their product.

Have you listened to the piece I linked to yet?

No. I thought it was going to be text. Then I realized, it didn't make any difference what he said, as you are the one espousing this point of view and it's difficult to have a discussion with an mp3.

[whomper]

Originally Posted by garageband

This is not state of affairs in all situations. Western companies are often having their designs manufactured in China. Another situation that is becoming more prevalent is non-Chinese mic companies are have componentry manufactured in China that will QC'd and assembled elsewhere. I have some mics that use the latter paradigm and they do not suck.
"Design" has nothing to do with anything. Anybody with internet access can come up with a high quality microphone design. It's about making it. What you'll make it out of. Are you going to pay people pennies a day to make them? Are you going to use the best materials or what ever's cheapest? Are you going to reject componentry that that doesn't cut it of just slap them together and stuff them into boxes? Are you going to have them manufactured in a country that artificially devalues their currency to gain an unfair trade advantage or one that plays by established monetary rules of international trade?

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. QC is all over the ballpark. Remember the last dud Neumann/Shure condenser you used?

Ahhh, the "Telefunken" situation. Yeah, well, lots of folks have bought the rights to venerable old names and to use the marques as a way to misrepresent inferior goods. This sort of bad acting is hardly limited to microphone sales.

Probably the worst thing about the internet: the ease of finding like-minded individuals and not properly sharpening your arguments and examining your position.

there are many factors in play

good fast(delivery date) cheap risk function
you have to trade them all off

you could make the worlds greatest mike for pennies
if the reliablity fell to near zero

most companies try to hit a middle ground
that the market will accept
good enough (noise, distortion, bw, filtering, )
cheap enough $$
reliable enough - keeps on tickin
delivered soon enough - need it now not ten years hence
with enough functionality - low cut, polar patterns, noise
filter, yada yada,

you get what you bought
just cause it is cheap does not mean that it is not good
and clearly they are good enough cause people keep buying and using them

[whomper]

Originally Posted by garageband

Love the David Royer example. I would say not. I would say all the component engineering is done by him and his team. What parts to make, their dimensions, materials to use. No doubt, all goods to be manufactured in this fashion are thoroughly prototyped before one piece is mass produced. The Royer people ultimately decide the suitability of the parts (not final assemblies, in this case). This is not different from any of the products you see sold from late night commercials by skilled pitchmen.

I would contend that the factory in China does not do any productization of their product.
No. I thought it was going to be text. Then I realized, it didn't make any difference what he said, as you are the one espousing this point of view and it's difficult to have a discussion with an mp3.

the design should be complete and detailed enough
so that manufacturing can just build it exactly
with minimum added cost

factorys should not be designing
and designers should not engineer
engineers should not be architecting
and architects have to satisfy marketing/customer

[whomper]

Originally Posted by garageband

Anybody with internet access can come up with a high quality microphone design.


Are you going to have them manufactured in a country that artificially devalues their currency to gain an unfair trade advantage or one that plays by established monetary rules of international trade?

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. QC is all over the ballpark.

Ahhh, the "Telefunken" situation. Yeah, well, lots of folks have bought the rights to venerable old names and to use the marques as a way to misrepresent inferior goods. This sort of bad acting is hardly limited to microphone sales.

nobody is going to learn how to design a good mike from the internet. you wont even find that in the textbooks.
and makign a good mike cheaper also takes experience.

and yes, biz will buy the cheapest they can no matter what the externalities. until worldwide rules block it, we will have a race to the bottom to make things cheaper no matter what happens to the workers or ecology or economy of some country.

ditto running brands into the ground. has happened since they were invented. american biz will make money no matter what if they can get away with it. and if not the next gold sack will get the govt to help them do it anyway.

[garageband]

I guess the problem I have with the thesis argument of this thread is... all of it. The "Cult of German Mics" is offensive and, I believe, describes a condition that doesn't exist. People buy Gefells, Sennheisers, Beyers, AKGs (Austrian, I know), Sennheisers, MBHOs and Neumanns (off the top of my head, I'm sure I've missed some) not because they are German but because they adhere to high standard of manufacturing quality, have a long track record of consistent excellence, sound good, their application is useful and, ultimately, are good value for money. If they weren't, how many would shell out for an M149 or UM 92.1 S just to be one of the "cool kids"? Enough to keep them in production? Chinese mics are what they are. You get what you pay for and a few extramusical consequences as well.

Chinese microphones have been taking the market by storm, because they're cheap.

And people shop at Wal Mart based on the same perception. Shopping at Wal Mart is bad for America and anybody patriotic shouldn't set foot in there. People should avoid Chinese mics for the same reason: It's bad for our economy and encourages a "race to bottom" in the marketing of these goods.

[brandondrury]

Are you going to have them manufactured in a country that artificially devalues their currency to gain an unfair trade advantage or one that plays by established monetary rules of international trade?

Not to get political on this thread (if necessary we can break it off) , but every perspective I've read states that this is exactly what President Nixon had in mind in 1971 when he took us off the gold standard. So assuming we share similar political/historical views on the subject, it would seem you are implying that American made products don't fit this criteria either.

the ease of finding like-minded individuals and not properly sharpening your arguments and examining your position.

This unnecessarily and brutally harsh position seems contradictory to what you said here... Drum Overheads: $100 vs $2,000 (Ruling out the inherent flaws of the concept of a shootout/illustration in general)

He wasn't making any argument other than there are some kick ass cheap products out there or at least decent microphones have gotten less expensive. I don't think anyone is going to dispute that.

The "Cult of German Mics" is offensive

To whom? Have you not checked Gearslutz in a while? (Me neither!) The "cult" word insinuates a decision based on faith. $$$ aside (and without listening to both mics), I think we'd all reach for a German mic before a Chinese mic. However, like it has been done countless times in history, faith is exploited ("exploitable" is my personal definition of the word faith) and can lead to apathetic tendencies.

People buy Gefells, Sennheisers, Beyers, AKGs (Austrian, I know), Sennheisers, MBHOs and Neumanns (off the top of my head, I'm sure I've missed some) not because they are German but because they adhere to high standard of manufacturing quality, have a long track record of consistent excellence, sound good, their application is useful and, ultimately, are good value for money.

No argument....except I'm curious how this $200 Telefunken mic fits into the equation. (See exploited faith above)

And people shop at Wal Mart based on the same perception. Shopping at Wal Mart is bad for America and anybody patriotic shouldn't set foot in there. People should avoid Chinese mics for the same reason: It's bad for our economy and encourages a "race to bottom" in the marketing of these goods.

How long does it take for you guys to come to the conclusion that it's immoral to be poor when taking this stance? (Seems contradictory to that Jesus fellow, but not-so-much with his followers). The other alternative is doing without other things so we can afford expensive microphones presumably made in the USA.

I seem to have trouble finding a significant difference between patriotism and nationalism. Vietnam should have killed the first one and WW2 should have called the second. Maybe there is something I'm missing on that one.

Brandon

[whomper]

Originally Posted by brandondrury

Not to get political on this thread (if necessary we can break it off) , but every perspective I've read states that this is exactly what President Nixon had in mind in 1971 when he took us off the gold standard. So assuming we share similar political/historical views on the subject, it would seem you are implying that American made products don't fit this criteria either.

This unnecessarily and brutally harsh position seems contradictory to what you said here... Drum Overheads: $100 vs $2,000 (Ruling out the inherent flaws of the concept of a shootout/illustration in general)

He wasn't making any argument other than there are some kick ass cheap products out there or at least decent microphones have gotten less expensive. I don't think anyone is going to dispute that.


To whom? Have you not checked Gearslutz in a while? (Me neither!) The "cult" word insinuates a decision based on faith. $$$ aside (and without listening to both mics), I think we'd all reach for a German mic before a Chinese mic. However, like it has been done countless times in history, faith is exploited ("exploitable" is my personal definition of the word faith) and can lead to apathetic tendencies.



No argument....except I'm curious how this $200 Telefunken mic fits into the equation. (See exploited faith above)


How long does it take for you guys to come to the conclusion that it's immoral to be poor when taking this stance? (Seems contradictory to that Jesus fellow, but not-so-much with his followers). The other alternative is doing without other things so we can afford expensive microphones presumably made in the USA.

I seem to have trouble finding a significant difference between patriotism and nationalism. Vietnam should have killed the first one and WW2 should have called the second. Maybe there is something I'm missing on that one.

Brandon

I don't think you really understand the "Jesus guy" as you put it.

He was not a capitalist.
He was not a communist.
His point was loving people and helping them, not screwing them over.

People should work and make money honestly.
Being rich is not a crime. It's how you got there that matters.
Make it the old fashioned way -- earn it. Don't get rich by inventing ways to cheat people or take risks and expect us to bail you out when you lose like gold sacks and wall street did.

The way most rich people get their money should be a crime -- just look at the SOBs on wall street that destroyed teh economy and spread misery among people wanting to buy houses they could not afford by lying to them and then screwing them over.

And then expecting the govt to pay them when their risk taking failed and have the cojones to give themselves bonuses based on their "profit" this year which was our tax money that was given to them.

The ugly truth is that world population is growing faster than jobs.
There are not jobs for everyone anymore.
Jobs are also disappearing due to automation.
There will never be enough jobs for everyone ever again.
And not enough land for us to all grow our own veggies.

As I understand it -- certainly no expert on this, we should all work and those who are successful owe it to help those who can't find work, are handicapped and cannot work, the sick, those too old to work, etc.

Think of it as health care and social security for everyone without the govt bureaucrats taking 87¢ out of every dollar for themselves and playing dictator to say who gets what benefits.
Churches used to be the charity provider, until the govt stole that biz from them so the 'crats could enrich themselves. And the churches pass on close to 90% of donations to those who truly need them. Hard to be a welfare queen when your neighbors see how you live and they are the ones who would be giving you help. Easy to scam the system when some overworked weenie has to process 1000 people a day for their unemployment claims.


And nowadays the crats are also giving 30% of our taxes to gonifs who belong in jail. Social security and health care will eat up 80% or more of our revenue. Toss in 50% soon that will be needed just to pay the interest on the debt and it is clear that the usa is bankrupt and cannot survive in the long run.

in the short run we will have hyperinflation and then pooof! breaks up like the FSU did. Will anybody help rebuild the defunct usa like we did europe with the marshall plan?