Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston  The Shinybox, and any other Chinese ribbon I've heard so far, is in nowhere near the same class as the C&Ts. IMO.
Skip the Chinese ribbons, which are good introductions but not fabulous tools, and go straight for a tool that you can own and enjoy the rest of your life. |
Since the issue of quality has come up, and Lynn, you seem to have alot more experience on this than the average joe. I'd like to get into some fact on these matters...
The Shinybox with either the Lundahl transformer and the extra gunk removed + other mods is generally regarded to be a bit better sounding than the original Nady.
I'm wondering where this Mic now stands in regards to the C&T Naked Eye? In your opinion of course... Comparing parts used? The ribbon itself? Tension, magnets, body, placement? Construction?
On construction you would probably think that a C&T would be put together better which is very important to the sound of a microphone. However, is the Nady/Shinybox created with such fatal flaws that it can never be a quality professional tool? Or is there something inherent in its design that makes it a temporary toy?
I certainly understand the arguement of business practise. Where you have a factory of politically supressed workers methodically and coldly churning out one mic (Nady/Shinybox). While a company of intelligent and relatively free people concieve and produce another microphone (C&T) - pricing the microphone so that its employees can comfortably support their families in modern America.
I'm wondering where the Shinybox falls short and where the Naked Eye shines outside of the business practise / good audio karma argument.??
Thanks!