Quantcast
m149 vs rode k2 !!!! ( nice test ) - Page 4 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
m149 vs rode k2 !!!! ( nice test )
Old 22nd April 2010 | Show parent
  #91
Lives for gear
 
pasarski's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I started a thread about FET mics.

https://gearspace.com/board/geekslut...ml#post5335630
Old 23rd April 2010 | Show parent
  #92
Lives for gear
 
Ari-M.'s Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightsun ➑️
especially, sitting in front of the kick drum.
+1

the bottom line about this test, IMO, seems to be not which mic is "better"...I am sure in some cases the k2 would work well....the thing that really caught me about this thread, was how some folks were mentioning how "you can hardly hear the difference".....if you really can't hear the difference....then I am sure the k2 would be fine for you....in fact you could save even more and get yourself a top end MXL ldc (which aren't terrible)...

but let's cut it down a bit....the test isn't at all fair....it's 2 separate takes, the speaker is OBVIOUSLY more enthusiastic when he speaks into the K2, the mic's are in different positions in the room, the gain staging is not equal...etc etc etc...

really it's not a fair comparison....

someone mentioned that the m149 is NOT a neutral mic...I have owned one for almost 10 years....and I would be really hard pressed to call it "neutral"....maybe the term I would use is "laid back"....where as the c12vr is very forward....

here is something i have noticed about the m149 though....it never blows you away...c12, and c12 variants always seem to knock you out of your shoes when you first hear them....then about 4 hours into the mix, they get a bit annoying...they are just too bright IMO

the m149 always seems to be just right....never on top....never buried...always big and rich and serving the music....

I am not saying the m149 is perfect, or the best mic ever, or anything so silly....but I have never found it to be "bad" in ANY situation....from piano, to guitar, to drums, to room mic duties, to vocals to you name it....it is always usable and predictable

I have worked with the k2 a number of times (never did buy one) and it was certainly a decent mic, and certainly usable....but it always seemed a bit brittle and WAAAAYYYY to forward for my taste....I found myself eq'ing it every time I used it...also when pushed, it had a really nasty breakup on top...I tried it a few times as a room mic, and a few times on acoustic guitar...on those sources it was OK...but on piano and drums, it was down right overbearing, not in the midband either...more like a nasty transistor breakup on the top end...I wonder if it has a transistor based amp before the tube gain stage...

I think there are mics out there that can compete with the m149, for less money....to me the k2 isn't one of them...

and to be fair, you can pick-up a used m149 for around $2700 or so....is it "twice as good" as the k2? I don't even get that...how can something totally be different be twice as good? or "eight times as good"...I think there have been some really absurd statements made in this thread

apple and oranges....you can't call one better or worse...and measuring results based on price won't help in this either...

Old 23rd April 2010 | Show parent
  #93
Lives for gear
 
didier.brest's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari-M. ➑️
...but on piano and drums, it was down right overbearing, not in the midband either...more like a nasty transistor breakup on the top end...I wonder if it has a transistor based amp before the tube gain stage...
My experience with the K2 on piano was not so bad, although I sold my pair. I'm now waiting for a pair of M149 and am being made still more impatient by your post.
Old 23rd April 2010 | Show parent
  #94
Here for the gear
 
🎧 10 years
I am getting the K2. I dont know how you can compare a Β£450 mic up against a 3k mic. The k2 looks like heaven to me!
Old 23rd April 2010 | Show parent
  #95
Lives for gear
 
midnightsun's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari-M. ➑️
+1

you can't call one better or worse...and measuring results based on price won't help in this either...

Yes.... fair or not the cost and how well the tool performs for the job at hand don't necessarily correlate. My biggest complaint with any piece of equipment is if is doesn't perform consistently or yields erratic results or flakes out during a session or mix. SM57 are very useful tools-- used them for many decades and (knock on wood) have never had one fail me.
Old 23rd April 2010 | Show parent
  #96
Lives for gear
 
midnightsun's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
hmmmm..... I was just thinking about what the M149 does that really stands out for me and my choice to use or not, vs another LDC mic. If I desire for some of the very low frequencies to beautifully, and distinctly lay in the mix rather than pop out in my face I will pick the M149 and not use any filtering. The low acoustic tones can be blended into the mix and are there to be heard if the listener cares to hear them. The lows seem to translate well to crappy sound systems. If I want to capture the beautiful lows of a well tuned kick drum to lay back nicely in a mix and not dominate, I'll strongly consider the M149. If I then decide I really want the kick to pop out there, it is easy to EQ to taste. Totally my subjective impressions.
Old 23rd April 2010 | Show parent
  #97
Lives for gear
 
vernier's Avatar
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari-M. ➑️
+1
here is something i have noticed about the m149 though....it never blows you away...c12, and c12 variants always seem to knock you out of your shoes when you first hear them....then about 4 hours into the mix, they get a bit annoying...they are just too bright IMO

the m149 always seems to be just right....never on top....never buried...always big and rich and serving the music....

I am not saying the m149 is perfect, or the best mic ever, or anything so silly....but I have never found it to be "bad" in ANY situation....from piano, to guitar, to drums, to room mic duties, to vocals to you name it....it is always usable and predictable

Yep, M149 seems to work in any situation ..kind of a swiss army knife appliance type thing.
Old 24th April 2010 | Show parent
  #98
Lives for gear
 
Ari-M.'s Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by didier.brest ➑️
My experience with the K2 on piano was not so bad, although I sold my pair. I'm now waiting for a pair of M149 and am being made still more impatient by your post.
I noticed in your test that the k2 was positioned quite far from the sound board...more in the classical context

my experiences with the k2 on piano were more in the respect of pop piano production....directly under the lid, pretty much right on the sound board....

I do think the context which you are using the k2 in is the best possible scenario for the mic....

I did notice that the k2 is much more adequate at a distance....it doesn't seem to suffer fromt he same "fizzy" breakup...

I found it overbearing when close micing....not at all a bad room mic though

I think you will be very happy with the m149....it's really a tool I love having in my collection....

if you have the opportunity, try the m149 through the martech mss-10....it's a combo that has never failed me....so articulate, yet so heavy

the neve/neumann combo was not something I ever liked (too slow for my taste), I have found the m149 is great through a transparent and fast pre....focusrite red range or ISA range, martech, milennia, buzz audio etc....

I wish you the best with your new mics, I would love to hear your impressions about the m149 once you get it
Old 27th June 2010 | Show parent
  #99
Lives for gear
 
Tommy-boy's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I recently had an opportunity to listen to a female jazz vocalist (alto with a good smooth voice, but could get edgy when needed) sing through several Neumann mics into Neve pres. Not my studio or mics (or zillion dollar Neve console), so I don't have clips. But I did have the following observations:

The M149 was fantastic - smooth and rich, and with good detail. What a wonderful mic.
U87 was good, but not as good.
TLM 67 was a little harsh in comparison
Solution D - Was so incredibly detailed it was unreal. But in this case, I think it was too detailed.


I'd love to hear the m149 on a tenor.

-Tom
Old 27th June 2010 | Show parent
  #100
Lives for gear
 
midnightsun's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
M149 on Congas!!!

Did a session today with a gifted Cuban conga drum player. Used m149-- figure of 8, 20Hz roll off. Positioned 26 inches away from the congas below the head aimed at the wood. I used AKG451 stereo pair 26 inched OH from the head. The result was out of this world. The M149 picked up the beauty of the great room as well as the lows from the conga. The 451s allowed the skins to spank. I was able to blend the mics to achieve a perfect balance. One of those rare sessions where it seemed that things just don't get any better. Of course, it always helps when the musician is stellar.
Old 27th June 2010 | Show parent
  #101
Lives for gear
 
didier.brest's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari-M. ➑️
I wish you the best with your new mics, I would love to hear your impressions about the m149 once you get it
Comparison of the M149 and the Brauner Valvet on classical piano
Old 27th June 2010 | Show parent
  #102
Lives for gear
 
SteelyDani's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari-M. ➑️
I have found the m149 is great through a transparent and fast pre....focusrite red range or ISA range, martech, milennia, buzz audio etc....
Female vocalist: M149 + Focusrite Red 7.

No Eq., very gentle compression, PCM91 (Vocal Magic) rev.
Attached Files

Intro M149.wav (4.62 MB, 324 views)

Old 27th June 2010 | Show parent
  #103
Gear Nut
 
🎧 10 years
Neumann has a way better definition, but has anyone ever doubted about it ?
Old 4th July 2010 | Show parent
  #104
Lives for gear
 
tampa's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
The only difference I'm hearing is in the lower end, so tweak the low end with some EQ and now how do they compare. 5K vs 500 I'm glad there is a difference.
Old 21st November 2010 | Show parent
  #105
Gear Nut
 
billyindonesia's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
neumann is classic and musical (authority)

K2 just flat, lean and barren (wanna be mic)
Old 21st November 2010 | Show parent
  #106
Lives for gear
 
s12512's Avatar
 
4 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
that m149 sounded quite better. way more presence. more meaty!
Old 21st November 2010 | Show parent
  #107
Lives for gear
 
Arthur Stone's Avatar
 
92 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Heresy, I know, but I preferred the K2 heh - IMO it sounded smoother on the Peter Piper section and in general the low-mid bass was tighter...I'm listening on AKG702's. I own a K2 and don't work for Rode.
Old 21st November 2010 | Show parent
  #108
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
K2 mics are the best. There warm and fat. I call it, the Brown Sound Mic. I use mine on vocals, it's my no 1 choice over all my other mics. It's very U47.
By the time you HiPass, Add EQ, DeEss, Compress, Verb, Delay or add certain FX to a pop vocal in the mix, it realy doesn't matter what expensive mic you used. K2 stands up....
The K2 will sound great and much better than any bright thin grainy mic in that price range.
Main thing is- All hi end mics have slight different eq curves, but they have that rich expensive Sound. The K2 has that rich Epensive Sound, yes it sure does. It's got great great Tone.
The K2 sounds so close to a Telefunken U47 and you could use either and not tell the difference buy the time the mix is complete :-)

At the end of the day, the K2 is a hi class mic thats bull**** cheap.
Old 21st November 2010 | Show parent
  #109
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 10 years
M149!

Hands down, the M149 was full of presence, especially in the lower frequencies. Between the various mice at our facility (M149, MA-200, Blue Bottle, C-800G), I find myself reaching for this one the most...
Old 21st November 2010 | Show parent
  #110
Lives for gear
 
DarkSky Media's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibson ➑️
K2 mics are the best ... It's very U47.


Sorry. Not even close.
Old 21st November 2010 | Show parent
  #111
Lives for gear
 
88fingerz's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
With all things being equal, I'd make a killer record with either mic. I also am certain that if a project had started with the Neumann but then had to finish up using the Rode, there's be no discernable difference to the outcome of the recording.
Old 22nd November 2010 | Show parent
  #112
Gear Nut
 
billyindonesia's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkSky Media ➑️


Sorry. Not even close.
ok mr.DarkSky it would be good for us to let him go heh
Old 22nd November 2010 | Show parent
  #113
Lives for gear
 
chrisdee's Avatar
 
9 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by hipass ➑️
This is such a bogus test why not compare it to a Shure 58?
a Fukin Voice Over is how you compare 2 mics?
Put a real singer in a song EQ and compress the mic put into a mix and I guarantee that you think the Rode is a piece of crap compared to just about anything decent. fuuck
I agree. In addition there should be an explenation on how the "test" is done.

I think the most "scientific" way of testing microphones would be to first match levels through a multichannel preamp/soundcard. The microphones would have to be as close as possible to each other. The source (singer etc) should be placed with equal distance to each of the microphones. Then record the same preformance in one take.

Testing microphones against each other by recording in separate takes is inaccurate, unless your source is pre recorded.

But thanks for sharing anyway.
Old 22nd November 2010 | Show parent
  #114
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Good test - thanks for that. It just shows that you do have to spend the big bucks to get that final 5%. Neumann is just richer and has more authority. I'm guessing that the German would take heavy processing better too. I'd have more confidence if I had the M149 in my locker.
Old 22nd November 2010 | Show parent
  #115
Gear Nut
 
Toppermost's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisdee ➑️
I agree. In addition there should be an explenation on how the "test" is done.

I think the most "scientific" way of testing microphones would be to first match levels through a multichannel preamp/soundcard. The microphones would have to be as close as possible to each other. The source (singer etc) should be placed with equal distance to each of the microphones. Then record the same preformance in one take.

Testing microphones by recording in separate takes is just a waste of time, unless your source is pre recorded.

But thanks for sharing anyway.
Yes, it's a bogus test for all sorts of reasons. That is only one of the problems.

A mic like the K2 that has resonances, phase distortion and blurring going on at various freqs can actually suit some voices well enough, hiding some harder edges and shifting emphasis onto (or even "enhancing") others. Just about *any* mic can sound okay (or even good) on somebody or other's speaking voice, which proves precisely zero and surely doesn't mean there aren't fundamental issues or failings.

By contrast, the M149 will sound clear, full and detailed on many different sources. It may not always be the best mic on a given source, but it will always be polished, creditable and usable.

The test and this thread proves nothing at all about the mics, but it does make a fine study of the state of knowledge vs folly in this industry of ours.
Old 22nd November 2010 | Show parent
  #116
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
the m149 - fuller and warmer. It sounds like a better mic for an intimate sound...close vocals. Lovely sounding imo.

the rode - more evenly balanced, and by that I mean you dont have this low end roundness standing out like the m149. It sounds nice too. They don't sound the same to me at all though. This feels lighter.

Saying all this, it did sound like you were talking with a deeper voice and closer to the mic with the m149 which would explain the "warmth and intimate" type sound.

Is it worth the difference in price? Not IMO. Could I acheive the m149 sound with a bit of eq and a k2... definately!
Old 4th February 2011 | Show parent
  #117
Here for the gear
 
🎧 10 years
Neumann M149 sounds even great and expensive, no doubt - but everybody knows: it's sounds and it's really much expensive.

But a suggestion: if you change the tube, you get very better results.
A Mullard tube can make this Rode sounds so much close to the M149.

Some times this excess of bass of Neumann bothers my ears... =)
Old 4th February 2011 | Show parent
  #118
Lives for gear
 
rocksure's Avatar
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Firstly I want to say I have actually never used an M149 myself so I can't specifically comment on it.
However, K2's are mics I do know from use (as are U87's) and I have found you can get great results with them. As far as breaking up when pushed too hard...I think any condensor mic will do that. I have certainly heard that happen in U87's.
The M149 may infact be a better sounding mic than the K2, but you can certainly get very classy results from the Rode.
People who have spent thousands on very expensive high end mics will think those mics are better than a Rode anyway.......how else can they justify the cost in their minds?
If I had the $$$$ I am sure an M149 would be a great addition to my mic collection, but I think I'd rather have a U67 first.
Old 4th February 2011 | Show parent
  #119
Gear Maniac
 
borism's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junior Pakes ➑️
Neumann M149 sounds even great and expensive, no doubt - but everybody knows: it's sounds and it's really much expensive.

But a suggestion: if you change the tube, you get very better results.
A Mullard tube can make this Rode sounds so much close to the M149.

Some times this excess of bass of Neumann bothers my ears... =)

Id like to chime in with my personal experience
I had a K2, and i changed its tube for a much more esoteric and expensive one (cant remember what exactly) and in reality I did not think it changed much.
The K2 is a capable mic and will get a very nice job done for most people in many situations.
However in my humble experience the 149 is much nice, detailed, fuller mic, some reason the vocals stand nicer and have much more presence in a mix.
That is my humble experience
The question is if the 149 is so many thousand dollars better than the Rode
That is a response that depends solely on your wallet and your clients
IMO the 149 is much better
BTW I sold my K2
Old 4th February 2011 | Show parent
  #120
Lives for gear
 
didier.brest's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by borism ➑️
BTW I sold my K2
So I did. However it is a very nice mic. It was my first tube mic and it makes me wishful to listen to its more expensive colleagues...
πŸ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 87 views: 44660
Avatar for ray_subsonic
ray_subsonic 24th November 2011
replies: 73 views: 24874
Avatar for monkeyxx
monkeyxx 24th May 2013
replies: 5910 views: 772824
Avatar for Neptune45
Neptune45 4 weeks ago
replies: 148 views: 17121
Avatar for andersmv
andersmv 1st April 2018
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump