Quantcast
Am I wrong about great sounding mics? - Page 2 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Am I wrong about great sounding mics?
Old 10th February 2013 | Show parent
  #31
Deleted 99dc753
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitrax ➡️
Well, yeah; that's what measurement mics are (B&K 4007, Earthworks QTC-30M,etc.). In the realm of common LDC's, the mid-70's to 1990 version of the 414 (C414B-ULS) was pretty flat (20-20 <2db by spec, I believe).

Another area that separates great mics from good ones, (which I don't think has been addressed much) is reach. A great mic will get signal from a far-off source that is very close (if not identical) to what it captures nearfield.

I notice that even some of the more-than-decent sounding recent mic entries only shine when the source is within a certain range of distance; that wasn't the case with the Neumann M50 or the 77DX, or even (fill in this blank with your own favorite mic).
But the far away thing implies a great sounding tracking room..... which most of the HR guys do not have.
BTW my UMT 70s is great for classical guitar ..... don't know why but we steped back form the player about 2 meters and we still had the impression it is near.
Sounded very balanced.

Bach Cello Suite III Prélude - YouTube
Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #32
Lives for gear
 
Ephi82's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRobb ➡️
Throw in high mids and highs, and I think you're onto something.
too obvious,

my point is that the lower end is where the good and greats win or lose
Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #33
Lives for gear
 
Ephi82's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.HOLMES ➡️
With everything in music you cant make a general statement.
I have a friend he uses heavily Berhinger gear in mixing.
An guess what - his mixes are wonderful.

See it like this T.Monk was able to play a tuned grand piano in his own stile.
Hearing him playing you will think in many parts of the song - this piano is totally out of tune.
It was not. It was the way he was using "wrong notes" ...

I have told many times the story of a talented friend on GS...once again...he is a great funk, soul, blues singer.
He did vocal tracks with a cheap china mic.
Could the vocal parts have been sitting better in the mix with an expensive mic... maybe....
For the story he is telling in the lyrics and his art in singing it does not matter much...because this guy simply can sing.

Do some vocal tracking with someone who is a truly gifted artist.
Try different mics. Expensive ones and cheap ones...and you will learn something about the mics but as well you will learn that the major thing....the way the artist is singing is always there.

I have more respect for people who do a great song with cheap gear instead of having thousands of dollars in equipment and doing nothing with it expect being here on GS and talking about what they own.

I can not imagine that the great artists of the past would have cared if they have been tracked on X or Y mic.......
They cared about the music....and that is what counts even for the AE.
No gear will replace the way e.g. Miles Davis arranged and blowed the trumpet.
Or Hendrix was riding thorough the changes like he is from mars or pluto.
Before we think of mics and gear we buy, for our home studios, we may start to think about music first.

Its a part I really miss when I talk to young students in my guitar classes .....
Have I been a gear junk....yes too... but I stooped at the point where it became a time and money killer.
Thank you for your post. Most considerate and well thought out.

I agree that talent and performance are so much more significant than equipment, hands down. Some of the best music I have made was 4 track cassette with an Sm 57 for all recorded tracks.

However, the question was how one evaluates the performance of microphones.

I am positive that u47/U48 were much more flattering to Lennon and McCartney vocals than other choices at the time. I believe it was because the sound was well balanced, but the mids, and low mids in particular, were reproduced accurately, and with a little extra "buttah">
Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #34
Deleted 99dc753
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ephi82 ➡️
Thank you for your post. Most considerate and well thought out.

I agree that talent and performance are so much more significant than equipment, hands down. Some of the best music I have made was 4 track cassette with an Sm 57 for all recorded tracks.

However, the question was how one evaluates the performance of microphones.

I am positive that u47/U48 were much more flattering to Lennon and McCartney vocals than other choices at the time. I believe it was because the sound was well balanced, but the mids, and low mids in particular, were reproduced accurately, and with a little extra "buttah">
To me with the old sound there is also a lot of nostalgia.
You can hear that they had to fight with distortions when wished they would not have been there.
Today we have the possibilities to do everything, or near everything even with small setups.
Someone should think, at least I do, now we can hear thousands of talented musicians and the music business is jumping at them.

But alas I hear songs on the net without inner statements.
So is a new toy in the studio solving that problem for me?
NO...NO NO
Is it important to discuss about what a good mic is?
NO.... WHY.

Do an experiment.
Buy a cheap copy of the Neumann KM 140 and track something with it.
Now take the original and track again.
What you miss in the sound of the cheap mic you`ll correct by L-PH-EQ.

And than do a blind AB testing with those files....
Microphones are - EQs in tracking.
Old 11th February 2013
  #35
Lives for gear
 
Xander's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by vito ➡️
Is there such thing as a flat mic?
Yes. Measurement microphones.
Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #36
Lives for gear
 
BOWIE's Avatar
 
4 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by vito ➡️
Is there such thing as a flat mic?
This is probably the flattest one I've seen.
Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #37
Deleted 99dc753
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOWIE ➡️
This is probably the flattest one I've seen.
LOL
Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #38
Gear Guru
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOWIE ➡️
This is probably the flattest one I've seen.
this one is pretty close
Old 11th February 2013
  #39
Lives for gear
 
filipv's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I still discriminate mics by how they handle top end. :-/

I once recorded a singer with two mics at once, plugged into two channels of same preamp. One was AKG C3000, the other was U87. The difference in top end definition BLEW ME AWAY more than any other difference between two. AKGs top end had this noisey quality. Very usable sound, absolutely, but light years away from perfectly defined top end of U87 - no noisey quality there at all!

they both handled basses and mids well. But top end... they were in different leagues.
Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #40
Gear Guru
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ephi82 ➡️
too obvious,

if you were a creative writing teacher grading submissions from your students, you might feel free to deduct points for "obviousness"

however in the Real World, just because something is "obvious" does not mean it isn't true. In fact, usually quite the opposite. The sun rises in the east.


Quote:
my point is that the lower end is where the good and greats win or lose
no - your 'point' was that it was, and I quote:
Quote:
" mids, low mids and lows."
Which is actually 3 points, and most of the people here are (rightfully) feeling like you have made a really vague generalized statement and rather arbitrarily left out the highs.

Is that because 'everyone else' always talks about how rare finding a mic with crisp but smooth highs is, and you feel that being 'different' is the same thing as being 'creative'?

you titled your thread: "am I wrong?"
now you will have to take it if people say you are!

"too obvious" is not a rebuttal
Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #41
Deleted 99dc753
Guest
I just say it again I also have some cheap china mics which do a great job for different things- its not possible to make a general statement about gear, or music in general- even if people at GS love to do it.

One day you will wake up and you have to learn the lesson - there is no magic in gear, just and maybe magic in music....

If someone wants to believe in gear, or the magic microphone or the best mic or or or in god- feel free to do it.
Old 12th February 2013 | Show parent
  #42
Lives for gear
 
Ephi82's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq ➡️

if you were a creative writing teacher grading submissions from your students, you might feel free to deduct points for "obviousness"

however in the Real World, just because something is "obvious" does not mean it isn't true. In fact, usually quite the opposite. The sun rises in the east.




no - your 'point' was that it was, and I quote: Which is actually 3 points, and most of the people here are (rightfully) feeling like you have made a really vague generalized statement and rather arbitrarily left out the highs.

Is that because 'everyone else' always talks about how rare finding a mic with crisp but smooth highs is, and you feel that being 'different' is the same thing as being 'creative'?

you titled your thread: "am I wrong?"
now you will have to take it if people say you are!

"too obvious" is not a rebuttal
Wow, i think you are being way too hard on me. I hope it made you feel better!

When i said "too obvious" it was in the sense that of course mics will be judged on the entire frequency range. I cant imagine anyone disagreeing with that!

I guess the point i was trying to make is that what seems to win me over in a mics sound is the richness of its sound in the mids to the bottom. When i hear a passable attempt at the sound of a classic German like mic, it sounds good, but the classic, expensive Neumann, Telefunken, Geffell, etc have a very obvious heft in the mids to low end that the "clones" cant quite get to. I guess that if this is a stupid thought, some of you "experts" can tell me so, as i invited the critique.
Old 12th February 2013 | Show parent
  #43
Lives for gear
 
cowboycoalminer's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by filipv ➡️
I still discriminate mics by how they handle top end. :-/

I once recorded a singer with two mics at once, plugged into two channels of same preamp. One was AKG C3000, the other was U87. The difference in top end definition BLEW ME AWAY more than any other difference between two. AKGs top end had this noisey quality. Very usable sound, absolutely, but light years away from perfectly defined top end of U87 - no noisey quality there at all!

they both handled basses and mids well. But top end... they were in different leagues.
This has been my observation as well.
Old 12th February 2013 | Show parent
  #44
Gear Guru
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ephi82 ➡️
When i said "too obvious" it was in the sense that of course mics will be judged on the entire frequency range. I cant imagine anyone disagreeing with that!
OK but you are specifically disagreeing with those who say it's "the highs" that are the 'make or break' area of a great microphone. Which IMO, is the more "popular" position, correct or not.

Quote:
I guess the point i was trying to make is that what seems to win me over in a mics sound is the richness of its sound in the mids to the bottom.
well, you like what you like....

I look at it another way - what turns me off is a mic that does well in the mids, but is harsh, sibilant or hyped in the high end.

Which I personally find is a more common problem. And which I sadly find is 'usually' connected to price!

Quote:
of course mics will be judged on the entire frequency range.
yes, absolutely. You need hitting, pitching and fielding.

But when you say "it's the mids to bottom" you are including two thirds of the frequency range. Your omission of the top third is at that point, well, just a little odd.

If you came onto a baseball forum made your case for "pitching", you would at least have a coherent position to debate FROM. If you come on and say it's "pitching and hitting", then you are just ASKING for people to say: 'why not fielding'?
Old 12th February 2013 | Show parent
  #45
Lives for gear
 
Ephi82's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
well at this point it appears that most who have responded believe that smoothness and accuracy in the highs is where its at in great mics
Old 12th February 2013 | Show parent
  #46
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
I have this scientific way of judging a mic. I go up to it and I sing into it or play an acoustic through it. When I go wow that sounds expensive it usually is.
Old 12th February 2013 | Show parent
  #47
Gear Guru
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ephi82 ➡️
well at this point it appears that most who have responded believe that smoothness and accuracy in the highs is where its at in great mics
I don't think you can exactly say the Highs are "where it's at" because we are agreed that "everything matters"

I think a better construction would be to say that mics with great smooth accurate highs are "harder to come by" they're rarer than mics that perform well at other frequencies

and often, it seems, more expensive!
Old 12th February 2013 | Show parent
  #48
Lives for gear
 
Ephi82's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by doulos30 ➡️
I have this scientific way of judging a mic. I go up to it and I sing into it or play an acoustic through it. When I go wow that sounds expensive it usually is.
That puts it all into perspective!
Old 13th February 2013 | Show parent
  #49
Lives for gear
 
prizebeatz1's Avatar
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
I don't know if this contributes to the debate but when doing A/B blind comparisons I am almost always able to tell the difference between high and low end mics and preamps by concentrating on listening to the low end. It's like the more expensive mic/preamp has the fuller lows.
Old 13th February 2013 | Show parent
  #50
Lives for gear
 
Ephi82's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq ➡️
I don't think you can exactly say the Highs are "where it's at" because we are agreed that "everything matters"

I think a better construction would be to say that mics with great smooth accurate highs are "harder to come by" they're rarer than mics that perform well at other frequencies

and often, it seems, more expensive!
Ok, whatever you say, I still don't agree.......
Old 13th February 2013
  #51
Deleted 99dc753
Guest
All those tests are meaningless to me if a cheap mic works in the mix...take for example the cheap Thoman ribbon mics RB 100 - they do wonders in front of my guitar amps.... and they cost 90 Euros = 120 $....

I think 120$ is a no brainer and if you do not like it 30 days money back - send it back...
The point to me is I even try cheap mics ... if they work I keep em if they do not work I send them back....

Different example, some people use a 2000 $ compressor on their drum bus.
Mine was a used behringer MDX 1000 30$ and what did some people asked me already... they asked:
What I did you use on the drum buss.

This thing just sounds good and that is all that matters to me!!
If there is behriger on the front panel or API/SSL etc. I don't care.
The MDX 1000 just sounds right on the drums ... I use it every day and it works 8 hours a day.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 60 views: 18403
Avatar for dibravibra
dibravibra 19th October 2020
replies: 42 views: 22554
Avatar for Looccam
Looccam 15th November 2009
replies: 17 views: 11845
Avatar for u87allen
u87allen 4th April 2018
replies: 6348 views: 801780
Avatar for MandoBastardo
MandoBastardo 5 days ago
Topic:
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