Stand?

[Whyisthereair]

What's a cool mic stand for the main mic in the studio? I have two or three great mics I like to use on vocals (or whatever), but my stand sucks. I want to get one of those big stands that I see in the big studios.

Opinions?

[Geo]

Check it out...

[Nika]

Geo,

Those stands are certainly the industry standard.

I, personally, prefer the Quiklok A50's. I own one now and think it's MUCH more stable than the Atlas. It's got wide tripod legs and wheels rather than a small iron base. It goes up to 7 feet in the air with up to a 7 foot boom arm with counterweights.

I also find that the assemblies don't come loose as often - there are less joints in it.

If you feel like having the nicest that money can buy, I hear that the Starbird stands from Manley are pretty classy at about $1000 (compared to $129 for the Quicklock?)

If you get into hoisting up decca tree's for orchestral purposes it's a whole new ball of wax. Those crank-up stands run $1500-$2500 or higher depending on the size and height.

I hope this helps!

Nika.

[Geo]

Nika,

I think the Atlas SB-36W is going to be harder to tip over than the Quicklok A50. The Atlas weighs 40lb, has a massive base, giving it weight and a low center of gravity. And "small"??? That thing is 21" accross! The ISI stability factor is 1860. It also has a six pound counterweight to make it easy to cancel the torque from a mic way out on the boom. The Atlas is tough and will last a long time. It won't be coming loose if properly tightened. In my opinion it looks more professional than the A50.

1) How much does the A50 weigh?
2) How much does the counterweight on the A50 weigh?
3) What is the ISI stability factor for the A50?

Let me know. I think if you delve into the details, you'll see why the Atlas is the industry standard. It's not esoteric, just damn good and practical!

The A50's have been $214 a pair forever at Sweetwater. That's about how much one SB-36W can be had for. I think this is the kind of stand he is looking for.

[Rishathra]

Atlas has always had a good name with their stands... they are a lot of money, but so are neumann mics, right? I have a couple of quik lok stands, but they are just the regular cheapy boom stands.. i can't see them making a really top end stand.

[Whyisthereair]

Wow! Thanks for all the input you guys. I know Nika works at Sweetwater. Geo, do you also?

The Atlas stand is what I had in my mind's eye when I asked, but I have to give Nika some credit for proposing a solution that could potentially be better for me...at least for the money. Yes, I too am on a budget.

I only used the example of the "big studios" to illustrate what I wanted. I by no means need (or want) to spend top dollar on a stand if I don't have to. On the other hand I certainly don't need to bother with one that will fall apart. I already have plenty of those.

I can't say I'm too concerned with the specs Geo mentions (sorry, I'm just not a specs guy). I just want to know if they'll safely hold a mic. I can't imagine they wouldn't. It's not as if I hold gymnastic meets in my studio. I just need to get the job done with something relatively decent looking. The A50 looks like it's modeled a bit after the Manley $1000 model. Is it, or is that just a coincidence?

The wheels on all of them look like they could potentially become a liability over time. Again, I assume they work okay since people are using them. Any further comments appreciated.

Thanks a lot you guys!

[Nika]

Originally posted by Geo
Nika,

I think the Atlas SB-36W is going to be harder to tip over than the Quicklok A50. The Atlas weighs 40lb, has a massive base, giving it weight and a low center of gravity. And "small"??? That thing is 21" accross! The ISI stability factor is 1860. It also has a six pound counterweight to make it easy to cancel the torque from a mic way out on the boom. The Atlas is tough and will last a long time. It won't be coming loose if properly tightened. In my opinion it looks more professional than the A50.

1) How much does the A50 weigh?
2) How much does the counterweight on the A50 weigh?
3) What is the ISI stability factor for the A50?

Let me know. I think if you delve into the details, you'll see why the Atlas is the industry standard. It's not esoteric, just damn good and practical!

The A50's have been $214 a pair forever at Sweetwater. That's about how much one SB-36W can be had for. I think this is the kind of stand he is looking for.

Geo,

Thank you for your reply.

The problem I've had over the years with the Atlas SB series stands is that they tend to "come loose" over time. The bolts that keep the wheels attached, the screw joints that attach the boom arm, the various clamps and screws seem to wiggle loose over time and make it very frustrating to wiggle around.

I have never had any of these problems with the Quicklok just because it's constructed differently. The telescoping mechanism isn't the same, nor are there as many, so I've never heard of them loosening over time.

On the onset I think they'll both be as stable as each other, but the Quiklok will be more reliable in a year from my experience. Recently I did an orchestral recording with a pair of large diaphragm tube mics mounted on a stereo bar with the boom at full extension and at a 90 degree angle and the mic stand at full extension so the mics were over 7 feet out in front and the stand was nearly 8 feet up. There was no fear at all of instability.

As for the specs you asked for, the base of the A50 is 36" wide and it weighs 27 lbs (the Atlas weighs 36 lbs). I'm not sure what the counterweight weighs, but it's never been an issue. I think it weighs about 5 lbs. The piping is so much heavier than the Atlas that the torque factor seems less relevant.

I'm sorry, I don't know the stability factor. I don't see a rating on that.

Certainly the Atlas is the industry standard and I'll grant that it does indeed LOOK pretty chic. Quiklok's is relatively new, but to date it has done me a better service.


Those are just my thoughts. If you get a chance to give it a try it might surprise you. It's certainly not like their $50 boom stands. It's really quite a hunk of metal!


Thanx for sharing your opinions, though!
Nika.

[Geo]

Hi Nika and Air,

I'm not here to argue, but to glean and pass on information. I'm a bit of a stickler for details, so to speak, and I'm displeased by misinformation, though. Therefore, I have come to reply just to clear up a couple of things. Most of the information I share is fact, although I certainly do offer some opinion as well.

As far as coming loose over time, consider that the Atlas has actually HAD time to come loose, whereas you yourself have asserted that the QuikLok is relatively new. For the same reason, it's a little challenging to make claims about the longevity of the QuickLok.

At the local High School, we have a pair of SB-36Ws that have been around since Moby Dick was a sardene. These things are not just USED by high school students, they are sorely ABused! And after they're kicked, they continue to tick. While the QuikLok certainly should last with careful use, turning them loose in this environment would certainly bring out the differences in durability.

As for specs: specifications are what describe an entity. They inform you of how well suited a product is likely to be for an application, and provide an excellent base for comparison, properly used. The world would be a considerably more difficult place to operate in, were it not for specs, and if one chooses to not learn how to use them, they only slight themselves.

As for the weight of the SB-36W, contradicting me should have run up a red flag for you that maybe you weren't reading something right. The 40lb weight comes straight from the product data sheet. Looking a little closer, you should be able to identify the weight for this particular model. I just take reading data sheets for granted I guess, I just don't remember very well what it was like learning the skill.

The idea of countering the torque of the boom is to reduce the likelihood of tipping, which could crash a precious microphone. The mass of the tubing is not what's at stake.

Speaking of which, I haven't seen any specs on the guage of steel used for either stand, but I certainly find it highly unlikely that "The piping is so much heavier than the Atlas... ", referring to the QuikLok. If you can provide specifications or measurements to substantiate this claim, I will be happy to believe it.

I'm not trying to put down the A50, in case you thought I was. They may well be worth half as much as the SB-36W. Certainly they have a more modern artistic look to them, FWIW. Personally, I prefer the utilitarian but unmistakeably professional look of the SB-36W. A qualm regarding the A50 is that when I was considering them, I contacted my Sweetwater Sales Specialist asking where I could get the specification sheet on them, and was ignored. I'm not the type to buy something without researching it first. If I were buying a large studio boom stand, I'd get the SB-36W. However, if I were taking the economy route, I'd be comparing the A50 to the one from "On Stage Stands" before proceeding.

Just a few more facts and opinions, to help or confuse.....
Cheers, all

[Nika]

Geo,

Just to clarify a couple of last points, the Atlas stand has a shipping weight of 40 lbs, but weighs 36 according to information from Atlas that may contradict information that you have from Atlas. Both of our information is coming from spec sheets.

I have both the SB36W and the Quiklok. I prefer the Quiklok and it has indeed caused me fewer problems - even in the short amount of time that I have had both. The gauge of steel is indeed thicker with the Quiklok. I'm not a mechanical engineer, but I think you'd be surprised by the difference.

I looked for a while yesterday for ANY specifications on the Quiklok and found myself running against a brick wall. Perhaps Quiklok hasn't made any more information available than what is on their website - which is skimpy at best. Atlas does a much better job of rating various features of their stands, no doubt. I get the feeling that Quiklok just put together a good, competetive stand and didn't go through the details that Atlas does.

If you are buying based on specifications then you will most certainly go with the Atlas. I am in a bit of an advantageous position because I actually had the opportunity to use both here before buying. Simply using them for a gig gives a lot more information than Quiklok makes available to the consumer.

And I do understand the issues of torque and identifying the appropriate place for the fulcrum on a balance. Because of the size of the bass and the weight dispersing of the Quiklok, the counterweight is less necessary. It is more necessary on a stand with a smaller bass.

I'm not coming here to toot anyone's horn. We sell both at Sweetwater, and in our studios we have ONLY the SB36's that were purchased many years ago. I, personally, prefer the Quiklok from my own experiences, and I merely wanted to contribute why that was. Hopefully "air" will be able to make an informed decision between the gluttony of responses that you and I have both made.

Thanx!
Nika.

P.S. The Atlas still does look pretty sexy. Chrome doesn't hurt. It looks like it could be used for medical equipment also.

[Geo]

Thanks for your reply and opinion, Nika.

40lb stand weight comes from the current data sheet, the part of which I included in my last post for your reference. Note that the SB-36 (no W) has a weight of 36lbs. Almost the same stand

Is it necessary to be a mechanical engineer to pull out a set of calipers and measure tubing thickness? Since you have both at your disposal, why not pull out some calipers (perhaps borrow some from the repair room) and tabulate a report on the diameters and thicknesses of the various tubes that make up the stand?

It is my contention that a company that does not provide detailed specifications of its product is either lazy or hiding something. Many sell on pizazz, rather than substance. Regardless, they aren't getting my business if they can't document their product. It's a matter of principle. I guess I just can't help it, being one of those engineers

I appreciate your opinions on the various products. Have you seen, used, or sold the one from "On Stage Stands"?

[Nika]

Geo,

Leaving the weight issue aside, I guess it would be possible to measure the external and internal diameters, as well as the density of the metal pretty easily. I'm not sure, though, how much I'll have to disassemble the stand to do that.

Just for a quick note, the legs on the bass tripod portion of the Quiklok stand are solid and about an inch in diameter, solid steel, no internal diameter. This is a large part of its weight.

If I get a chance I'll try to make some measurements.

I can also understand your skeptical view of Quiklok and their lack of available information. I have a different view of it, just knowing many of the manufacturers. I don't think they're hiding anything. I just think that they don't believe that the measurements are necessary for their clientele, so they don't objuscate their website with this information. They don't make a spec sheet for any of their equipment that I can find. Because they're Italian, if they don't have the information readily available, trying to obtain it could be a nightmare.

I have never used the "on stage stands" that you mentioned.

Thanx!
Nika.

[Geo]

MS9612B+ Studio Boom Stand w/Casters

High-quality studio boom ideal for mic applications where higher mic-placement is desired, such as room or over-head miking. The MS9612B+ includes newly-designed removable locking casters and cable holder. The locking four-leg design of this telescoping Studio Boom makes this a remarkably stable stand, even when using very large mics.

Adjustable height: 45"-76"
Telescoping boom length: 43"-79"
Foldable for travel
Black finish

found at
http://www.oktava.com/

Last price I saw recently was $79.99

Hope it's helpful...

[Nika]

Interesting!


Not quite as tall.

Not quite as long.

Not quite as expensive.


Thanx!
Nika.