I’d like informed advice on a couple of mics and decent pres for home studio use, i.e. within reasonable budget. (I'm intentionally not quoting a specific figure here as I have some flexibility: I scan spend more if I save for longer.)

Buying from 'the German webshop' with that great 1 month return policy has become impractical since Brexit. There's no facility to try out mics before purchase locally, so I need to rely on advice. Please try and refrain from providing a mic ref without explaining why you think it may be fit for my purpose. A bit of background on yourself and your experience with recommended mic can be helpful too. Generic remarks about my thinking and approach are also very welcome.

To give some context about what I'm after: I make electronic music. Working with synths doesn’t provide what some call "organic" sound, “air” magic, room character — call it what you like. I want to introduce an electro-acoustic element to my process. For starters, I want to get some re-amping going, and record ornamental percussion played live (cymbals, shaker, tambourine, woodblock, etc., both alone or as groups). Always with the aim of capturing the room. I don’t want to focus on close miking at this stage.

I did a Sound Engineering degree in the early 2000s, with a college that had a Neumann mic in the locker (U67 reissue if memory serves well). It was supposedly the ultimate mic, and of course it's a classic for good reasons, but somehow it never quite gelled with me. I always found it much to “hard” sounding, with kind of harsh tops. This was formative in that I realised I generally prefer softer-sounding recordings, maybe against the general trend in production practices. I also can get plenty tops from my synths. So I’m thinking ribbons; I hear they do a great job as room mics and tend to take EQ pretty well when more tops are desired. I keep an open mind about it though.

At the moment, I have an API 500 lunchbox with lots of empty slots, and an SM58. (Side question: I understand that if I take the anti pop capsule off, it’s pretty much an SM57 — is that right?) If I had the cash, I’d get a couple of vintage Neve pres and rock a matched pair of Coles 4038 in Blumlein all day long; sadly I don’t. I’ve also looked at the Beyer M160/M130 combo. Even that is a significant investment for me but maybe I can stagger it over a few months, e.g. start with my SM58 and an M130 in MS and get the M160 later. More realistically though, I've also got the Cascade Fatheads on my radar — I read only good things about those, and the Royer R-10s — I believe the brand is more focused on near-field designs but they are a leader in modern ribbon tech. Less sexy but there's also the Chinese brands; the Nady RSM-5 seems to stand out but again, as a near-field mic. (I read somewhere on this forum that those frighteningly often come brand new with saggy ribbons, courtesy of Chinese quality control standards. It's off-putting but darn aren't they just cheap...) I’m generally cautious of the “latest, newest, shiny toy in town” trends though; obviously I prefer tried and tested.

In term of preamp I’m clueless right now. I know I need to pay attention to impedance matching with passive ribbon mics. I can start with the babyface mic pres (2 kOhm, 5.2 kOhm with PAD), so I’ve not really though about it yet, but I'm all ears.

With all the above in mind, what would you advise?

You can certainly go down a rabbit hole trying to get various flavors. I'm in sort of the same situation as I rebuild my mic locker after selling off 10 years ago.

My advice, it is cheaper to add flavor with cheap mics than it is with preamps. A lot of really good inexpensive mics out there right now. Doubt you'll get as much sonic variety in the lower end preamps.

40 years ago when I started, you really had much more limited choices except the standards. 20 years ago it go interesting. Someone suggested the MXL 603 and Studio Projects C1. It has only gotten better and with greater variety.

An amazing low cost ribbon for very natural open room sounds is the NoHype Audio LRM-2 https://www.nohypeaudio.com/nhaproducts.htm

I have one with the Lundahl transformer but even the stock one sounds great, and way beyond what you pay for. That coupled with your RME pres will already sound great on anything. I use mine one vocals, acoustic and electric guitar, percussion, room sounds for any kind of instrument etc. I think you're right about ribbons making great room mics. Condensers (especially affordable LDC's) seem to emphasise room modes and resonances in my experience, where the LRM-2 just sounds like what you hear in the room without having to finetune the exact positioning of the mic.

Are you primarily referring to condenser mics that go for $400-$600 new or used, or do you also mean dynamic microphones or cheap ribbon microphones?

I can't open NoHype's website in my PC's webrowser? (worked on my phone yesterday, must be a certificate thing.) Instead I went and listened to this guy's LRM-2 demo
https://www.tschernuth.com/gear-revi...on-microphone/

Demos are so context-dependent that I'm cautious, but his LRM-2s, with stock transformers, did impress me. The stereo image in Blumlein is rather good (see e.g. BlumleinStereo-LRM2-WalkingL-R-WA12pre.wav). The double bass example, through a WA12 pre really leans towards the flavour I am after.

FWIW, I reckon the LRM-2 is also better matched to his voice, in his room, than the pricier AT4050 that seems to peak a little in the mids. I don't feel like the LRM-2 does, it's quite natural by comparison. Maybe it's that reduced sensitivity to room nodes you allude to.

The preamp shoot out result is less clear cut to me, but the RME pre does not fair specifically badly. Maybe MajorNoteSutio is right that in today's market, the cost/result ratio is better for mics than pres.

Color is not totally dependent on type, though I suppose ribbons might. In fact, mic doesn't really care what it is recording. It is up to you to figure out how best to use a mic that gets you a recording that fits your need.

Say I have a really good acoustic guitar, I might pick a pick a small diaphragm as it is more accurate and I want to capture every nuance of that instrument. If the guitar is not so great, maybe go LD and figure out where I can place the mic to best flatter its sound.

Sometimes it's as simple as expectation running higher than what the instrument can deliver. Also if you are recording yourself, sometimes it is hard to reconcile what you hear playing to what the mic is hearing.

So in answer to your question, even cheaper if you can figure out how to make it work for you.

Some great points made already. In your case, given you'll be using one mic for many sources potentially, I'd look at something that's relatively neutral, or at least isn't excessively peaky in one region. As MajorNoteStudio says, you can go very cheap and still get a mic that sounds great on some sources with some finetuning of the micing position, but especially with condensers you'll most likely have a mic that just doesn't like some instruments or room positions. Fine if you have a mic locker with a few options to pick from, less handy if you want an allrounder mic.

Also, a natural figure of 8 mic like a ribbon is extremely handy in most environments without perfect acoustics. The nulls on the sides are so deep that you can really tune out unwanted noises from traffic or fans or unflattering reflections from windows, while the spill that you do pick up off centre is still natural sounding. Again, a lot of (affordable) condensers can sound boxy or harsh on sounds being picked up from off centre, depending on the instrument and the room of course.

I listened to lots of demos on the NoHype website last night. Unsurprisingly, it's fantastic on accoustic guitars, but I'm not going to record one of those anytime soon. I also really liked what I heard on a strings ensemble but that may have been a mastered recording rather than a raw take. What I take from this though, is that whether artificially boosted or straight up, the tops were very smooth and I'd expect either it takes well to tops boosting or won't need it.

I'm a little less charmed by drum overhead/room mic demos. Most examples seemed to have very spiky transiants. Could it be positional, and mitigated with different mic placement? Anyway it may be good to have sharp transients and shave them off to taste in context at mixing.

Though it is obvious, I hadn't thought about it. I expect to have to record in either of my flat's 3 rooms depending on time of day, baby sleeping, noisy neighbours etc. Two of these rooms are modest in size (roughly 4m by 3m) and offer relatively large windows to contend with...

None of my instruments are good quality, it's more pound shop stuff and toys. I'm not trying to hide that, I want to capture things honestly, warts and all, but I'd like to also make it sound flattering if I can.

That's another obvious point I haven't considered, and might have struggled with so thanks for pointing it out. I guess learning to capture sounds I like is half the fun of it, right?

In the same vein as the NoHype, perhaps yet cheaper, there's this guy in Russia assembling ribbon mics that some users here swear by; I need to take a good look at those too. (I'm not entirely clear what is the going price for those at the moment.)

The russian mic reminds me of the Bumblebee DIY ribbon mic kits. There's lots of cheap ribbons out there, and probably many are decent to very good as well. A ribbon is pretty simple compared to a condenser, at least with regards to number of parts.

Regarding the transients of the Nohype LRM-2, I can't say I've had a recording where they irritated me but ribbons do have a different transient response to most condensers so there might be something to it. With positioning and compression this can of course be moulded into something else entirely.

Over the last couple of weeks, I've listened to a number of LRM-2(b) and BIV-1 examples. I like them both. Unfortunately I couldn't find a direct shootout between the two.

I don't have an issue with the LRM-2 transient response anymore. Actually it's good to start with dynamic signals: as Sizeofanocean says they can be "moulded" to taste. To me it sounds "creamy" (for lack of a better word), which I like. I feel the BIV-1 is good as well, "creamy" too with perhaps a little more colour and a little less tops. I'd probably be happy with either. Without a proper shootout my choice might come down strictly to price, I'm not sure yet. (I also listened to Bumblebee examples and I feel the BIV-1 is only similar to those in look. Sound-wise it's in another league.)

I've also discovered Line Audio SDCs. Different kind of fish, less flattering, but CM4 and OM1 are fantastic mics too (especially for that money!). I've heard great-sounding demos in churches as well as dead-dampened studios. Do you reckon they could react badly to challenging acoustics?

I feel like I will eventually own both a pair of CM4s and a pair of ribbons; not sure which first though. However I'm definitely keen on heeding the frequent advice to just get one mic at a time and learn to use it in depth. I must decide what I want to explore first: SDC (can be less forgiving or react badly to room nodes) vs. ribbon (less peaky & perhaps more flattering), as well as "large" cardioid vs. figure of 8. I have concerns about the polar pattern of the CM4 specifically for my purpose. Here are my thoughts:

Basically I want to experiment with electro-acoustic processes very artistically, in stereo. I will probably edit and post-process the recordings heavily, both for artistic reasons (neutral is good!) and to mitigate the unflattering room sounds of the spaces I have access to, e.g. my bathroom, living room and such, cubic rooms, large window panes, etc. (flattering is good!). The dips on the side of the pattern of 8 or at the back of a true cardioid seem valuable in that context.

I also want to play with stereo imaging, e.g. create a hole in the centre or offset the image to one side intentionally. I believe the consistency of the polar pattern of the CM4 throughout the frequency spectrum is good for this. However I also want to be able to capture a subjectively very large stereo image, perhaps even distort it to widen it. (To be clear, I'm not taling about post processing here.) I may be wrong, but I feel a true cardioid pattern is essential for that? I know a Blumlein array might be less flexible.

I read an explanation that the CM4's back rejection is weaker than a true cardioid. I wonder, is it going to make my life significantly harder working with compromised rooms? I also wonder if the "wide" cardioid pattern might complicate playing with stereo imaging. So I'm indecisive because:

• as neutral and cheap as the CM4 might be, I can't tell if it's polar pattern might be less useful to my specific goals than a ribbon's figure 8; and
• I am concerned that a condenser mic might not react as well as a ribbon in my "bad" rooms.

Any thoughts?

PS:
Boy am I down that hole now!

You can use almost anything as a room mic.

For room mic there's also the stereo NoHype SRM-1. It's wonderful in that application. Possibly better than a pair of LRM-2s. Can be used for normal Blumlein pickup or M/S.

Mid/Side can offer more flexibility for very cool stereo effects. More so than a pair of cards in ORTF. Can also use a ribbon for the side and a small card or omni condenser for the Mid.

The SRM-1 has possibly sweeter mids than the LRM-2b. Love my SRM-1 on most every source. Even when used in mono. Altho a pair of LRM-2s can be used both in Blumlein or as a spaced pair - more flexible. I don't care for the spaced pair stereo image that much.

A fig-8 ribbon can offer more options to enhance or minimize room tone. Great fun to work with.

Also frustrating if you're not willing to let the room speak too. I'm not a dead, treated room fan - often prefer some small room sound life than close mic'd dryness. But, that's me.

If it were me wanting room mics first... would start with ribbons. They tend to sound more natural at distance than most any cardioid condenser, because of the nature of velocity mic freq. response at distance versus a pressure gradient design.

Note: NoHype ribbons (like other passive ribbons) need good clean gain. The Camden 500 preamp modules offer lots of good clean gain for modest cost.

Your experience with condensers parallels my own. Ribbons have their natural resonance in the infrasonic range <20hz. Most LDC have their diaphragm resonant peak smack dab in the upper mids - hence the peaks and harshness if not fully dampened - most aren't. Many love the false detail of hyped highs. I don't.

Which ever pair of mics you select first... won't be your last... Once you've fallen down the mic hole, you'll discover the only thing to hold onto is... more mics.

Enjoy the fall!

Thanks for everybody's input, lots of valuable advice. For some reason I've only gone and ignored most of it and pre-ordered a pair of CM4 SDCs?
That was after discussing my needs in quite some depth with JP @ NoHype though, and on his advice. I realise I might have chosen the harder path... Hopefully I won't regret it and learn lots.

I'll still get a pair of ribbons at some point because they offer a very contrasting tone to what I expect from the CM4. Perhaps BIV1s (because cheaper and the most coloured), perhaps LRM2bs (because I really like their creamy quality); time will tell. I shall learn the CM4s in depth first. (I've set myself a constraint, to which I'll commit here in writing: I can't get other mics until I've at least finished 5 tracks using them or sold them.)

Although I will first work with the Babyface preamps, I've started looking at 500 series preamps now. I'm leaning towards clean pres for starters, with in mind to also get options for colour later. (As already mentionned, I'm big on the classic Neve sound, API also. I am intrigued by Chandler Germanium but I've never heard it.)

Right now I'm properly geeked out on the DAV Electronics BG501. The Decca heritage appeals as I love the open, subtly flattering tone of their classical recordings. I often find the same qualities in Hudson Fair's work too so I think those preamps play a good part in what I like about the sound? People here have commented that they also have a great transient response, which matters a lot to me. They are great value for money so I think they're a pretty safe bet. Still a significant investment for me though.

Per above suggestion, I also took a quick look at the Camden500 today. Clean with optional Neve or creamy "mojos" sounds slap bang on the brief: I could kill two birds with one stone, and within similar budget to BG1s... The phase shift spec stated is fantastic througout the gain range (again good transient response) and so's the THD. However I could be disapointed by its sonic signature(s) in clean (clinical?) or coloured setting(s), or even both... I'm yet to fall in love with it. (I might see if KMR will let me try one of each together before comitting?)

What's also nice about either is the Hi-Z input that I can run synths through too. That's a big plus for me.

Have fun with the CM4s. They're a great place to start!

Let us know where you end... if there is an end. ;-)

JP is one cool dude. So are his microphones.
Chris

This recording with CM3 -> BG1 sounds nice... It's really splitting hairs vs. a KM184 -> Fireface pre.

Makes me wonder—is getting clean preamps first really the best idea? If there's so little between what I can afford and RME pres, maybe I'm just fine with the Babyface pres really...