Shure SM57-LC and the computer (and guitar amp)

[burke]

I'm a novice at sound recording. I do have Cooledit 2000 on my
comptuer and recently purchased a Shure SM57-LC dynamic microphone. I
tried hooking the microphone into the mic input on my computer's sound
card (HP Pavilion 9680c, Rockwell Riptide PCI sound card) but the
signal coming into the system was too low. That is, a signal was
recorded by Cooledit but was faint, even when the recording levels
were higher. Incidentally, I also tried running the microphone through
a stereo cassette player and connecting the output of that to my sound
card, and still got a weak signal.

Is there something wrong with this microphone or do I just not know
what the heck I'm doing (that's probably the case.) Incidentally, is
the microphone not designed to be used through guitar amps? I tried
using it with my acoustic guitar and plugging the mic into my amp, but
only got a faint signal.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Burke

[Raymond]

burke wrote>I
>tried hooking the microphone into the mic input on my computer's sound
>card (HP Pavilion 9680c, Rockwell Riptide PCI sound card) but the
>signal coming into the system was too low.

You need a micpre (and or mixer) and a better audio grade sound card. Some
education on recording would help to, there's only so much you can learn from
message's on the net. There are lot's of good books and mag's on recording, try
one/all of those and read about a thousand post's from this group and you'll
understand more.

[Blues_Jam]

Sounds like you have an impedence mismatch. The SM57 is a low impedence mic
while all of the inputs you are connecting it to (computer audio card,
cassette deck, and guitar amp) are high impedence inputs.

You must have bought some kind of adapters to make these connections (1/8"
phone for the computer and 1/4" phone for the other two) but you need a
low-Z to high-Z impedence matching transformer at minimum. You can get one
from Radio Shack for about $15.

If you want to spend more money or need better sound quality than this
provides then you can look into getting a microphone pre-amp.

Blues

Keep on jammin' :)

"burke" <bcpttn@ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:a85ce4b4.0308071716.3b7788cf@posting.google.c om...
> I'm a novice at sound recording. I do have Cooledit 2000 on my
> comptuer and recently purchased a Shure SM57-LC dynamic microphone. I
> tried hooking the microphone into the mic input on my computer's sound
> card (HP Pavilion 9680c, Rockwell Riptide PCI sound card) but the
> signal coming into the system was too low. That is, a signal was
> recorded by Cooledit but was faint, even when the recording levels
> were higher. Incidentally, I also tried running the microphone through
> a stereo cassette player and connecting the output of that to my sound
> card, and still got a weak signal.
>
> Is there something wrong with this microphone or do I just not know
> what the heck I'm doing (that's probably the case.) Incidentally, is
> the microphone not designed to be used through guitar amps? I tried
> using it with my acoustic guitar and plugging the mic into my amp, but
> only got a faint signal.
>
> Any help would be greatly appreciated!
> Thanks,
> Burke

[Arny Krueger]

"burke" <bcpttn@ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:a85ce4b4.0308071716.3b7788cf@posting.google.c om
> I'm a novice at sound recording. I do have Cooledit 2000 on my
> comptuer and recently purchased a Shure SM57-LC dynamic microphone. I
> tried hooking the microphone into the mic input on my computer's sound
> card (HP Pavilion 9680c, Rockwell Riptide PCI sound card) but the
> signal coming into the system was too low. That is, a signal was
> recorded by Cooledit but was faint, even when the recording levels
> were higher. Incidentally, I also tried running the microphone through
> a stereo cassette player and connecting the output of that to my sound
> card, and still got a weak signal.
>
> Is there something wrong with this microphone or do I just not know
> what the heck I'm doing (that's probably the case.)

Probably the latter.

> Incidentally, is the microphone not designed to be used through guitar
amps?

Yes. The SM-57 mic is a low-impedance mic, which is the current standard for
quality microphones.

> I tried using it with my acoustic guitar and plugging the mic into my
amp, but
> only got a faint signal.

The hot tip is to get a little low cost mixer such as this one:

http://www.zzounds.com/item--BEHUB502

Plug the mic into the mic input, set the pan pot to center, center the level
and eq controls, and plug the output of the mixer into the line input of the
sound card. You will need an adaptor cable to hook the main output of the
mixer into the little input jack on the sound card. Radio Shack and similar
stores have mini-jack to dual RCA cables, and they also have RCA to phone
jack adaptors. Unbelievably, they will cost you almost a quarter as much as
the mixer!

Adjust for desired sound levels. Ditto for the guitar amp, except it
probably has no line input, so use that mic input that seemed to be so
insensitive.

Next, you might find that sound card in your computer is not really good for
recording. Or maybe it will be OK. But at least you can listen to recordings
made at a decent level and contemplate your next move based on what your
ears tell you.

[Garthrr]

In article <a85ce4b4.0308071716.3b7788cf@posting.google.com>,
bcpttn@ameritech.net (burke) writes:

>Is there something wrong with this microphone or do I just not know
>what the heck I'm doing (that's probably the case.) Incidentally, is
>the microphone not designed to be used through guitar amps? I tried
>using it with my acoustic guitar and plugging the mic into my amp, but
>only got a faint signal.
>

You need a mic preamplifier. Thats what boosts the signal level up to whats
called "line level" (approx 1 volt) where it can be used by recording devices.
As far as putting the mic through a guitar amp in tht case you need a line
transformer which converts the mics low impedance to a high impedance and
usually these devices also convert the connector from the XLR used on the mic
to a 1/4" used by the guitar amp.
Mind you, an acoustic guitar going through an electric guitar amp is going to
sound less than hi-fi. A guitar amp's frequency response drops off somewhere
around 5 or 6 kHz. An acoustic guitar will put out useful information all the
way up to maybe 10 or 15 kHz I believe. In any event it will benefit you to
amplify your acoustic with a full range system (assuming you want as much
realism as possible).
The 57 is a great electric guitar mic and will do on acoustic in a pinch but is
not a first call ac gtr mic in any studio I have ever known. Most people prefer
a small diaphram condenser or even a large diaphram condenser. Condenser mics
have extended high end when compared to the 57 and the sound is perhaps silkier
and less grainy than most dynamics with the exception of ribbon mics.
Anyway, get a mic pre.

Garth~



"I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle."
Ed Cherney

[Jack Kontney]

garthrr@aol.com (Garthrr) wrote in message news:<20030808061025.01315.00001374@mb-m18.aol.com>...
> In article <a85ce4b4.0308071716.3b7788cf@posting.google.com>,
> bcpttn@ameritech.net (burke) writes:
>
> >Is there something wrong with this microphone or do I just not know
> >what the heck I'm doing (that's probably the case.) Incidentally, is
> >the microphone not designed to be used through guitar amps? I tried
> >using it with my acoustic guitar and plugging the mic into my amp, but
> >only got a faint signal.
> >
>
> You need a mic preamplifier. Thats what boosts the signal level up to whats
> called "line level" (approx 1 volt) where it can be used by recording devices.
> As far as putting the mic through a guitar amp in tht case you need a line
> transformer which converts the mics low impedance to a high impedance and
> usually these devices also convert the connector from the XLR used on the mic
> to a 1/4" used by the guitar amp.
> Mind you, an acoustic guitar going through an electric guitar amp is going to
> sound less than hi-fi. A guitar amp's frequency response drops off somewhere
> around 5 or 6 kHz. An acoustic guitar will put out useful information all the
> way up to maybe 10 or 15 kHz I believe. In any event it will benefit you to
> amplify your acoustic with a full range system (assuming you want as much
> realism as possible).
> The 57 is a great electric guitar mic and will do on acoustic in a pinch but is
> not a first call ac gtr mic in any studio I have ever known. Most people prefer
> a small diaphram condenser or even a large diaphram condenser. Condenser mics
> have extended high end when compared to the 57 and the sound is perhaps silkier
> and less grainy than most dynamics with the exception of ribbon mics.
> Anyway, get a mic pre.
>
> Garth~
>
>
>
> "I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle."
> Ed Cherney

Garth is apparently a "ask me the time and I'll tell you how to build
a watch" kind of guy. Nothing personal, dude -- Good info there, but
maybe too much for a beginning recordist to swallow. I won't even
comment on the depiction of the '57 -- and for me, that's hard!

Back to the original issue -- For reference, go to
http://www.shure.com/support/technotes/app-soundcard.html
This is one of the most often-downloaded documents on the Shure Web
site and deals directly and specifically with your question.

In general, www.shure.com/support is a great resource, containing a
searchable knowledge base of all questions answered by the Shure
Applications Engineering Dept. over the past several years. There are
also tons of educational articles and booklets (plus User Guides etc)
available for PDF download.

Great to see the PC snag another DIY recordist!

-Jack Kontney
Shure Incorporated

[Garthrr]

In article <99c820cc.0308081027.1bbea5ed@posting.google.com>,
kontney_jack@shure.com (Jack Kontney) writes:

>Garth is apparently a "ask me the time and I'll tell you how to build
>a watch" kind of guy. Nothing personal, dude -- Good info there, but
>maybe too much for a beginning recordist to swallow.

Perhaps so. Because of the nature of the orginal question it seemed to me like
the info was pertinent.

> I won't even comment on the depiction of the '57 -- and for me, that's
hard!>>

No please. I'm curious what I said to ruffle your feathers. I love 57s and use
them everyday. Certainly not my first choice for acoustic gtr though. What part
of my depiction was erroneous?

Garth~





"I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle."
Ed Cherney

[Steve Carroll]

In article <99c820cc.0308081027.1bbea5ed@posting.google.com>,
kontney_jack@shure.com (Jack Kontney) wrote:

> garthrr@aol.com (Garthrr) wrote in message
> news:<20030808061025.01315.00001374@mb-m18.aol.com>...
> > In article <a85ce4b4.0308071716.3b7788cf@posting.google.com>,
> > bcpttn@ameritech.net (burke) writes:
> >
> > >Is there something wrong with this microphone or do I just not know
> > >what the heck I'm doing (that's probably the case.) Incidentally, is
> > >the microphone not designed to be used through guitar amps? I tried
> > >using it with my acoustic guitar and plugging the mic into my amp, but
> > >only got a faint signal.
> > >
> >
> > You need a mic preamplifier. Thats what boosts the signal level up to whats
> > called "line level" (approx 1 volt) where it can be used by recording
> > devices.
> > As far as putting the mic through a guitar amp in tht case you need a line
> > transformer which converts the mics low impedance to a high impedance and
> > usually these devices also convert the connector from the XLR used on the
> > mic
> > to a 1/4" used by the guitar amp.
> > Mind you, an acoustic guitar going through an electric guitar amp is going
> > to
> > sound less than hi-fi. A guitar amp's frequency response drops off
> > somewhere
> > around 5 or 6 kHz. An acoustic guitar will put out useful information all
> > the
> > way up to maybe 10 or 15 kHz I believe. In any event it will benefit you to
> > amplify your acoustic with a full range system (assuming you want as much
> > realism as possible).
> > The 57 is a great electric guitar mic and will do on acoustic in a pinch
> > but is
> > not a first call ac gtr mic in any studio I have ever known. Most people
> > prefer
> > a small diaphram condenser or even a large diaphram condenser. Condenser
> > mics
> > have extended high end when compared to the 57 and the sound is perhaps
> > silkier
> > and less grainy than most dynamics with the exception of ribbon mics.
> > Anyway, get a mic pre.
> >
> > Garth~
> >
> >
> >
> > "I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle."
> > Ed Cherney
>
> Garth is apparently a "ask me the time and I'll tell you how to build
> a watch" kind of guy. Nothing personal, dude -- Good info there, but
> maybe too much for a beginning recordist to swallow. I won't even
> comment on the depiction of the '57 -- and for me, that's hard!


Hey 'Jack'-ass, that's pretty funny and if you weren't so clueless you
might enjoy the laugh, too... pearls before swine. See, Garth's too nice
a guy to say it, but I'm not, so I hope you took my comments in the
manner in which they were intended. Garth graciously offered you some
info you obviously have need for and look at your reply to him. If you
think his answer was too in depth and would overload both brain cells,
methinks this recording thing isn't for you.

Steve

[dt king]

"Steve Carroll" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:noone-0F8E84.18430208082003@netnews.attbi.com...
> In article <99c820cc.0308081027.1bbea5ed@posting.google.com>,
> kontney_jack@shure.com (Jack Kontney) wrote:
>
> >
> > Garth is apparently a "ask me the time and I'll tell you how to build
> > a watch" kind of guy. Nothing personal, dude -- Good info there, but
> > maybe too much for a beginning recordist to swallow. I won't even
> > comment on the depiction of the '57 -- and for me, that's hard!
>
>
> Hey 'Jack'-ass, that's pretty funny and if you weren't so clueless you
> might enjoy the laugh, too... pearls before swine. See, Garth's too nice
> a guy to say it, but I'm not, so I hope you took my comments in the
> manner in which they were intended. Garth graciously offered you some
> info you obviously have need for and look at your reply to him. If you
> think his answer was too in depth and would overload both brain cells,
> methinks this recording thing isn't for you.

This one gets printed and posted on the office bulletin board with Jack's
address highlighted.

dtk

[burke]

"dt king" <usenet@leztoys.com> wrote in message news:<U_XYa.3473$M6.233635@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink. net>...
> "Steve Carroll" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:noone-0F8E84.18430208082003@netnews.attbi.com...
> > In article <99c820cc.0308081027.1bbea5ed@posting.google.com>,
> > kontney_jack@shure.com (Jack Kontney) wrote:
> >
> > >

> >
> > Hey 'Jack'-ass, that's pretty funny and if you weren't so clueless you
> > might enjoy the laugh, too... pearls before swine. See, Garth's too nice
> > a guy to say it, but I'm not, so I hope you took my comments in the
> > manner in which they were intended. Garth graciously offered you some
> > info you obviously have need for and look at your reply to him. If you
> > think his answer was too in depth and would overload both brain cells,
> > methinks this recording thing isn't for you.
>
> This one gets printed and posted on the office bulletin board with Jack's
> address highlighted.
>
> dtk

Thanks for all the information guys. I really appreciate it.
Although I must say in regards to the following --

> > Garth graciously offered you some
> > info you obviously have need for and look at your reply to him

I'm not the one who posted the message about Garth. It seems you've
confused me with Jack, Steve. I would never write back a message like
this when I've asked for help.
> > > Garth is apparently a "ask me the time and I'll tell you how to build
> > > a watch" kind of guy. Nothing personal, dude -- Good info there, but
> > > maybe too much for a beginning recordist to swallow. I won't even
> > > comment on the depiction of the '57 -- and for me, that's hard!

Burke

[Steve Carroll]

User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.2 (PPC Mac OS X)
Message-ID: <noone-D97611.10575712082003@netnews.attbi.com>
Lines: 53
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.253.115.206
X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net
X-Trace: rwcrnsc53 1060707477 12.253.115.206 (Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:57:57 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:57:57 GMT
Organization: Comcast Online
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:57:57 GMT
Xref: news.newshosting.com rec.audio.pro:334117

In article <99c820cc.0308120520.33e26956@posting.google.com>,
kontney_jack@shure.com (Jack Kontney) wrote:

> Steve Carroll <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:<noone-0F8E84.18430208082003@netnews.attbi.com>...
> >
> > Hey 'Jack'-ass, that's pretty funny and if you weren't so clueless you
> > might enjoy the laugh, too... pearls before swine. See, Garth's too nice
> > a guy to say it, but I'm not, so I hope you took my comments in the
> > manner in which they were intended. Garth graciously offered you some
> > info you obviously have need for and look at your reply to him. If you
> > think his answer was too in depth and would overload both brain cells,
> > methinks this recording thing isn't for you.
> >
> > Steve
>
> Hey, Steve. I'm know it's more fun to flame someone (esp. an evil
> mfr.) than to actually contribute to the point of the thread. But
> chill.
>
> Like Garth, I was trying to be helpful. While my "build a watch"
> comment was perhaps unnecessary, I qualified it directly to Garth and
> he was cool with it. In fact, he more-or-less copped to it. And I
> doubt he needs you to defend him.
>
> While I don't live on rec.audio, I do some lurking and post (only)
> when I have something on-topic to say. Your apparent resentment of my
> existence here is duly noted.
>
> -Jack Kontney
> Shure Incorporated

You've got it all wrong, Jack. I don't resent your existence, I resent
the way you treated,(flamed) someone who responded to YOUR plea for
help. Like I said earlier, Garth is too nice a guy to have done anything
but 'copped' to it. Instead of simply saying, 'you need a mic preamp',
he explained WHY. He also explained why it wasn't a good idea, from a
frequency response viewpoint, not to use a guitar amp for an acoustic
guitar if you wanted realism. He then explained why most people prefer
condensor mics in such a situation. In other words, he attempted to save
you some time pouring over google by answering a couple of other
questions he figured you might get around to asking when you finally got
your **** together... and all he got for his trouble was a smart ass
reply, hence my 'pearls before swine' comment. By and large, I think
you'll find that the people who frequent this NG don't want those who
have information to impart to feel like they need to walk on eggshells
for people that get their feathers ruffled by complex answers. They'd
much prefer these people learn to recognize when they are being helped
and respond accordingly. See, I'm not so much defending Garth as I am
trying to keep a valuable resource from leaving this NG. We've lost too
many to this very thing already. It's your NG too, Jack...

Steve

[Jack Kontney]

Steve Carroll <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:<noone-0F8E84.18430208082003@netnews.attbi.com>...
>
> Hey 'Jack'-ass, that's pretty funny and if you weren't so clueless you
> might enjoy the laugh, too... pearls before swine. See, Garth's too nice
> a guy to say it, but I'm not, so I hope you took my comments in the
> manner in which they were intended. Garth graciously offered you some
> info you obviously have need for and look at your reply to him. If you
> think his answer was too in depth and would overload both brain cells,
> methinks this recording thing isn't for you.
>
> Steve

Hey, Steve. I'm know it's more fun to flame someone (esp. an evil
mfr.) than to actually contribute to the point of the thread. But
chill.

Like Garth, I was trying to be helpful. While my "build a watch"
comment was perhaps unnecessary, I qualified it directly to Garth and
he was cool with it. In fact, he more-or-less copped to it. And I
doubt he needs you to defend him.

While I don't live on rec.audio, I do some lurking and post (only)
when I have something on-topic to say. Your apparent resentment of my
existence here is duly noted.

-Jack Kontney
Shure Incorporated

[Steve Carroll]

In article <noone-D97611.10575712082003@netnews.attbi.com>,
Steve Carroll <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:

> In article <99c820cc.0308120520.33e26956@posting.google.com>,
> kontney_jack@shure.com (Jack Kontney) wrote:
>
> > Steve Carroll <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:<noone-0F8E84.18430208082003@netnews.attbi.com>...
> > >
> > > Hey 'Jack'-ass, that's pretty funny and if you weren't so clueless you
> > > might enjoy the laugh, too... pearls before swine. See, Garth's too nice
> > > a guy to say it, but I'm not, so I hope you took my comments in the
> > > manner in which they were intended. Garth graciously offered you some
> > > info you obviously have need for and look at your reply to him. If you
> > > think his answer was too in depth and would overload both brain cells,
> > > methinks this recording thing isn't for you.
> > >
> > > Steve
> >
> > Hey, Steve. I'm know it's more fun to flame someone (esp. an evil
> > mfr.) than to actually contribute to the point of the thread. But
> > chill.
> >
> > Like Garth, I was trying to be helpful. While my "build a watch"
> > comment was perhaps unnecessary, I qualified it directly to Garth and
> > he was cool with it. In fact, he more-or-less copped to it. And I
> > doubt he needs you to defend him.
> >
> > While I don't live on rec.audio, I do some lurking and post (only)
> > when I have something on-topic to say. Your apparent resentment of my
> > existence here is duly noted.
> >
> > -Jack Kontney
> > Shure Incorporated
>
> You've got it all wrong, Jack. I don't resent your existence, I resent
> the way you treated,(flamed) someone who responded to YOUR plea for
> help. Like I said earlier, Garth is too nice a guy to have done anything
> but 'copped' to it. Instead of simply saying, 'you need a mic preamp',
> he explained WHY. He also explained why it wasn't a good idea, from a
> frequency response viewpoint, not to use a guitar amp for an acoustic
> guitar if you wanted realism. He then explained why most people prefer
> condensor mics in such a situation. In other words, he attempted to save
> you some time pouring over google by answering a couple of other
> questions he figured you might get around to asking when you finally got
> your **** together... and all he got for his trouble was a smart ass
> reply, hence my 'pearls before swine' comment. By and large, I think
> you'll find that the people who frequent this NG don't want those who
> have information to impart to feel like they need to walk on eggshells
> for people that get their feathers ruffled by complex answers. They'd
> much prefer these people learn to recognize when they are being helped
> and respond accordingly. See, I'm not so much defending Garth as I am
> trying to keep a valuable resource from leaving this NG. We've lost too
> many to this very thing already. It's your NG too, Jack...
>
> Steve

Jack, I must apologize for mixing you up with another poster. I just
went to google and found my newsreader mangled the headers with someone
else,(Burke). So please accept my apology for the above post. Still, I
do think your comment was, as you said, unnecessary and the info Garth
gave was very pertinent. BTW, I have nothing against mfr.'s.

Steve

[Hal Laurent]

"Steve Carroll" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:noone-D97611.10575712082003@netnews.attbi.com...
>
> You've got it all wrong, Jack. I don't resent your existence, I resent
> the way you treated,(flamed) someone who responded to YOUR plea for
> help.

Steve, you haven't been paying sufficient attention. Jack was not the one
that asked for help, Burke was.

Hal Laurent
Baltimore

[Steve Carroll]

In article <aq9_a.4$uU3.21836@news.abs.net>,
"Hal Laurent" <laurent@charm.net> wrote:

> "Steve Carroll" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:noone-D97611.10575712082003@netnews.attbi.com...
> >
> > You've got it all wrong, Jack. I don't resent your existence, I resent
> > the way you treated,(flamed) someone who responded to YOUR plea for
> > help.
>
> Steve, you haven't been paying sufficient attention. Jack was not the one
> that asked for help, Burke was.
>
> Hal Laurent
> Baltimore
>
>

As I've shown in another post, my newsreader mangled the headers. Going
to google straightened me out and I already apologized to Jack.

Steve

[Garthrr]

In article <99c820cc.0308120520.33e26956@posting.google.com>,
kontney_jack@shure.com (Jack Kontney) writes:

>Like Garth, I was trying to be helpful. While my "build a watch"
>comment was perhaps unnecessary, I qualified it directly to Garth and
>he was cool with it. In fact, he more-or-less copped to it. And I
>doubt he needs you to defend him.

Jack, you never (as far as I know) answered my question to you: What was it I
said about the SM57 that you took exception to?

As far as my amswer to the orginal post I thought it was all pertinent info I
was giving. I will cop to being, perhaps, longwinded.

Garth~


"I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle."
Ed Cherney

[Steve Carroll]

In article <20030812185403.01315.00001427@mb-m18.aol.com>,
garthrr@aol.com (Garthrr) wrote:

> In article <99c820cc.0308120520.33e26956@posting.google.com>,
> kontney_jack@shure.com (Jack Kontney) writes:
>
> >Like Garth, I was trying to be helpful. While my "build a watch"
> >comment was perhaps unnecessary, I qualified it directly to Garth and
> >he was cool with it. In fact, he more-or-less copped to it. And I
> >doubt he needs you to defend him.
>
> Jack, you never (as far as I know) answered my question to you: What was it I
> said about the SM57 that you took exception to?
>
> As far as my amswer to the orginal post I thought it was all pertinent info I
> was giving. I will cop to being, perhaps, longwinded.
>
> Garth~
>
>
> "I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle."
> Ed Cherney

Garth, Jack essentially said you had copped to giving too much
information. I guess I never saw that post, but personally, I don't
believe you did. Anyway, sorry for any confusion my mix up may have
caused.

OT here for a sec... I saw an old bandmate (Mark Klagstad) of yours
several times recently and he asked me how you were doing. He's a killer
jazz player with a very melodic sense about him. Your name came up when
Tommy Bolin became the topic of guitarists out of Colorado. He mentioned
Tommy and I told him I knew of a player in Ca. who had taken lessons
from him, only to find out you guys played together.

Steve

[Mike Rivers]

In article <noone-D97611.10575712082003@netnews.attbi.com> noone@nowhere.com writes:

> You've got it all wrong, Jack. I don't resent your existence, I resent
> the way you treated,(flamed) someone who responded to YOUR plea for
> help. Like I said earlier, Garth is too nice a guy to have done anything
> but 'copped' to it. Instead of simply saying, 'you need a mic preamp',
> he explained WHY.

I can't imagine why Jack Kontney would ask a question the (short)
answer to which is "you need a mic preamp." If anyone knows when a
preamp is needed it's the marketing guy from a major microphone
manufacturer who has a little engineering experience under his belt,
not just (or even) an MBA.

Whazzis all about anyway?



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)

[Hal Laurent]

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1060724265k@trad...
>
> In article <noone-D97611.10575712082003@netnews.attbi.com>
noone@nowhere.com writes:
>
> > You've got it all wrong, Jack. I don't resent your existence, I resent
> > the way you treated,(flamed) someone who responded to YOUR plea for
> > help. Like I said earlier, Garth is too nice a guy to have done anything
> > but 'copped' to it. Instead of simply saying, 'you need a mic preamp',
> > he explained WHY.
>
> I can't imagine why Jack Kontney would ask a question the (short)
> answer to which is "you need a mic preamp." If anyone knows when a
> preamp is needed it's the marketing guy from a major microphone
> manufacturer who has a little engineering experience under his belt,
> not just (or even) an MBA.
>
> Whazzis all about anyway?

"Whazzis all about" apparently is that Steve got thoroughly confused about
who
said what and why, thought a friend of his was being abused, and lashed out
inappropriately.

Hal Laurent
Baltimore

[Steve Carroll]

In article <7_f_a.11$uU3.54360@news.abs.net>,
"Hal Laurent" <laurent@charm.net> wrote:

> "Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
> news:znr1060724265k@trad...
> >
> > In article <noone-D97611.10575712082003@netnews.attbi.com>
> noone@nowhere.com writes:
> >
> > > You've got it all wrong, Jack. I don't resent your existence, I resent
> > > the way you treated,(flamed) someone who responded to YOUR plea for
> > > help. Like I said earlier, Garth is too nice a guy to have done anything
> > > but 'copped' to it. Instead of simply saying, 'you need a mic preamp',
> > > he explained WHY.
> >
> > I can't imagine why Jack Kontney would ask a question the (short)
> > answer to which is "you need a mic preamp." If anyone knows when a
> > preamp is needed it's the marketing guy from a major microphone
> > manufacturer who has a little engineering experience under his belt,
> > not just (or even) an MBA.
> >
> > Whazzis all about anyway?
>
> "Whazzis all about" apparently is that Steve got thoroughly confused about
> who
> said what and why, thought a friend of his was being abused, and lashed out
> inappropriately.
>
> Hal Laurent
> Baltimore
>
>

Hal, I've already explained this to you in another post, (maybe you
haven't seen it yet) AND I've already apologized to Jack. I said some
things to Jack he didn't deserve because the headers in my newsreader
got mangled, but I still think it was wrong of him to make the statement
he did to Garth. Being he is in the business, one would think he'd know
better.

Steve

[Garthrr]

In article <noone-752842.17340012082003@netnews.attbi.com>, Steve Carroll
<noone@nowhere.com> writes:

>Garth, Jack essentially said you had copped to giving too much
>information. I guess I never saw that post, but personally, I don't
>believe you did. Anyway, sorry for any confusion my mix up may have
>caused.

My response to Jack's comment was "Perhaps so." which was really just my way of
saying "whatever". I think what I wrote was pertinent if long. What I want to
know is what I said about SM 57s that he took exception to. So far he has not
answered that question although this is the 3rd time I've asked. Again,
whatever... <g>.

>OT here for a sec... I saw an old bandmate (Mark Klagstad) of yours
>several times recently and he asked me how you were doing. He's a killer
>jazz player with a very melodic sense about him.

He was always good. When I was 19 and he was about 15 we were in a band
together. I played a Strat and as I recall he played an SG. He was the youngest
looking human I've ever seen. He's probably still getting carded in bars.

Garth~


"I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle."
Ed Cherney

[Mike Rivers]

In article <noone-623BFB.22261912082003@netnews.attbi.com> noone@nowhere.com writes:

> I still think it was wrong of him to make the statement
> he did to Garth. Being he is in the business, one would think he'd know
> better.

This should be his boss' business, not yours. I didn't find anything
that he said to be offensive, but then I know that I'm not exactly the
thinnest skinned person here.

I don't have any better reason to stand up for Jack than you do to
stand up for Garth EXCEPT that I don't particularly care whether Garth
gets pissed and never comes back here again (somehow they all do,
eventually - it's a sickness), but I do care if Jack doesn't come
back. I think it's important to have the participation (rather than just
lurking, and they all do that) of the gear manufacturers here.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)

[Steve Carroll]

In article <znr1060773002k@trad>, mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers)
wrote:

> In article <noone-623BFB.22261912082003@netnews.attbi.com> noone@nowhere.com
> writes:
>
> > I still think it was wrong of him to make the statement
> > he did to Garth. Being he is in the business, one would think he'd know
> > better.
>
> This should be his boss' business, not yours. I didn't find anything
> that he said to be offensive, but then I know that I'm not exactly the
> thinnest skinned person here.


It all depends on one's point of view, doesn't it?

> I don't have any better reason to stand up for Jack than you do to
> stand up for Garth EXCEPT that I don't particularly care whether Garth
> gets pissed and never comes back here again (somehow they all do,
> eventually - it's a sickness), but I do care if Jack doesn't come
> back. I think it's important to have the participation (rather than just
> lurking, and they all do that) of the gear manufacturers here.
>
>
>
> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)

Well, I guess that's where we differ. I don't care whether manufacturers
come to this particular NG. I do care if the people that actually use
the gear a manufacturer makes come back and I highly value such input,
Garth's included.

Steve

[Mike Rivers]

In article <znr1060773002k@trad> mrivers@d-and-d.com (that's me!) writes:

> I don't have any better reason to stand up for Jack than you do to
> stand up for Garth EXCEPT that I don't particularly care whether Garth
> gets pissed and never comes back here again

Gee, that didn't come out sounding very nice, did it? Sorry, Garth, I
didn't mean it that way. Actually, I like having "Ask him the time and
he'll tell you how to build a watch." guys around on this forum.
(regardless of who was talking about whom - I've lost track)

A lot of people who ask a simple question don't really know that they
should be asking a more complicated question.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)

[Garthrr]

In article <znr1060785301k@trad>, mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) writes:

>Gee, that didn't come out sounding very nice, did it? Sorry, Garth, I
>didn't mean it that way.

I didnt take it that way either. I knew what you meant. For what its worth I
think its important that we are all here. I'm as interested in the
manufacturers (sic?) perspective as I am in the users.

Garth~


"I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle."
Ed Cherney

[Jack Kontney]

garthrr@aol.com (Garthrr) wrote in message news:<20030813082805.15462.00002211@mb-m06.aol.com>...
> In article <noone-752842.17340012082003@netnews.attbi.com>, Steve Carroll
> <noone@nowhere.com> writes:
>
> My response to Jack's comment was "Perhaps so." which was really just my way of
> saying "whatever". I think what I wrote was pertinent if long. What I want to
> know is what I said about SM 57s that he took exception to. So far he has not
> answered that question although this is the 3rd time I've asked. Again,
> whatever... <g>.
>
> Garth~
>

Just back from a business trip (sans laptop) and thought I'd check in.
My reaction: Wow.

1. (to the group) Thanks for the various bits of support,
admonishments, and (to Steve Carroll) the apology. This thread ended
up pretty far off topic, and that was certainly not my intent when I
posted. For that, I apologize to the group.

With rare exception, I've always been welcomed by the group here.
This is very much appreciated. And while lurking is useful, I think
we all feel strongly enough about audio that we want to contribute.

2. (to Garth) There was nothing inaccurate in your depiction of the
SM57 (nor did I say there was). IIRC, you called it a great mic for
electric guitar, then described some better options for miking
acoustic guitar. Very fair.

When I said I was holding back further comments, it was only insofar
as the mic description could have been more complete re applications
and such. As a Shure guy, I tend to look for those opportunities.
(Ironically, I didn't go there because that would have been OT...)
Sorry if I stated that poorly. Apparently, I was not have having a
good day in the Lucid Communications area.

-Jack Kontney
Shure Incorporated