|
|
Posted by Richard Crowley on 10/10/06 17:27
> Richard Crowley wrote:
>> But the significant premium price for the very tiny mics
>> seems beyond reasonableness unless you are dealing with
>> close-up TV shots or period dramas, etc. Certainly not
>> worth it for your average TV application, and not at all
>> worth it for audio-only recording, radio, etc.
"Bill" wrote ...
> By "very tiny" do you mean the B6, as opposed to the more inexpensive B3?
> Or both the B6 and B3 (and similar models) compared to, say, a Shure SM
> 11?
Both. It is a continuous spectrum. The smaller you get, the more
expensive the microphone. For the kinds of things I do, and the
projects/ people I work with, it would take a very significant
reason to splurge that much money on a microphone just because
it is small vs. something more conventional (and cost-effective).
Furthermore, the smaller the microphone, the higher the cost of
ownership. They are frequently so small that people forget they
are wearing them. And the folk over on r.a.m.p.s frequently
complain about "talent" trying to remove those fragile mics
themselves and damaging them. Their REPAIR budget for
those things is bigger than my PURCHASE budget. It comes
down to irresponsible stewardship as I see it.
There are really excellent reasons to use those things, but
absent one or more of those reasons, those things are just
a liability and a pain in the neck.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|