| George Massenburg wrote on Sun, 05 December 2004 21:02 |
Is it any wonder I churn inside when someone asks why this kind of approach is so expensive (more than a 100x multiple) when Mackie's and Behringer's are so cheap?
|
No , of course not., George. The daily usage of my GML gear convinced me, that you simply try to build these masterpieces a good as possible in every aspect. The more I used it , the more I wanted to bypass all other stages in my recording chain. They are worth every cent. The problem is, that the majority of engineers, musicians or producers have never really listened to your equipment without a stage following in the signal path that is degrading the sonic quality before it reaches their ears. Consequently they have never really heard the difference.They connect it to cheap converters or to cheap consoles with third class cables and try to rate that quality through the eye of a needle. In my workshops I have experienced that many people's horizon expands dramatically when they hear a pure path with GML equipment for the first time. They can't believe how much detail is getting lost, when I insert a piece of "well respected "budget gear or converter in that chain.
This is even true for very successful engineers or producers who have been around for many years.Consequently the sonic quality of your mixer simply is beyond their imagination. I don't know any console that could transport that quality. Engineers would have to bypass the monitoring section of their consoles to find out.
Recently I took my GML pre amp to a session for acoustic guitar recordings. The engineer insisted on running it through his console's channel strip, because he was afraid, that it might have sounded so much better than his MCI 500.
Some months ago I tried to find a GML 9100 mixer in Germany as a reference for an analogue summing test. The only one I had seen here before serves as a reverb return submixer for a SSL in Ibiza.. So it's really sad but it's no wonder that hardly anybody knows that quality over here.
| Quote: |
Does it come as a surprise that you hear sales and marketing pitches (a.k.a. "lies") that try to convince you it doesn't matter? ...that you can do just as well with a Liquid Channel?
|
No, because they don't know what they are talking about.
Recently a guy from a well know German budget audio company took part in one of my workshops and he dared to bring in his newest amp simulator for a shootout. Everybody was rolling on the floor laughing, when we compared it to the real stuff.
The poor man was honestly shocked because he simply didn't know the difference himself before.
One producer said: " Now I know, why I 've always had difficulties to mix guitars".
But the good news is: I can see that these little experiments
really change their visual angle. We simply have to know something before we can appreciate it.
I would love to find a GML 9100 in Germany and demonstrate it on my workshop.
I asked Bernard Frings about it, but he didn't know one either.
Another important point is that recording budgets nowadays are only a quarter of what they have used to be over here. There's a German producer, who won the German grammy (Echo) three years ago and simply stopped his buisiness because it could not even cover the monthly costs anymore. His income through licence had dropped by 90%.
I get the same wages , no matter whether I play somewhere in mothers kitchen with one guitar or if I offer my fully equipped analogue and digital studio. Nobody is willing to pay for a studio for guitar sessions anymore, because it would be possible to produce in basement with a labtop .No matter how it sounds.
The rest is pure private luxury. But I see my customers appreciate it more and more.
| Quote: |
Kinda makes me want to design for the Defense Department.
George
|
You don't want to see your mixer flying to Iraq, do you?
My technician said :" I have the impression that in comparison to GML the circuit design of most of the other audio gear looks like : stoned assistants having a party while designing."
Best Peter
