AKG mics- cutting the confusion

R

Richard Monroe

Well-known member
I've been thinking about a general post for a long time, because AKG makes enough models to drive anyone to drink. My first experience was in 1980 when my friend Maureen Fleming and I were doing a sound check for a "Horsefeathers" concert. I was using an SM58, and she was using an unknown AKG. I sounded like pure mud. We switched mics, and she sounded like mud (with a voice like Carrie Underwood, that ain't right). So we put up another AKG, and the world was OK. Except for some studio shootouts, that's the last time I ever willingly sang into an SM57/58. I will admit to using SM7B extensively, including on stage, and I like it just fine.
In the 60's, 70's, and 80's, as the Shure SM series became the stage standard in the USA, European groups were more often than not using AKG's. Among other mics, AKG's were used by the Beatles, the Who, Pink Floyd, and many others. In competition, AKG began to produce cheaper and cheaper mics, with bizzillions of confusing model designations, for no good reason. Today AKG probably builds more models of cheap dynamics that suck than any other company on Earth.
For right now, I want to concentrate on handheld dynamics, but I may, in a later installment, get into such gems as C535 and C900. What I'm trying to do here is help the clueless to sort out the AKG mics that really are good for something from the el cheapos I wouldn't even use for karaoke. I plan to write more later about percussion mics, but right now, here's my spin on handhelds-

Cheap mics I have no use for- D77,88,8000,9000,2200,2300,55,2002,590.
These are all $30-50 mics, and they might as well just make 3- a cardioid, a hypercardioid, and a supercardioid. For all intents and purposes, they are all the same mic- grainy, with hyped mids, and a nasty, abrupt proximity field.

Better mics- D660 is usable, but very particular with placement. It is hypercardioid, and finicky. Much better sound.

D770- cardioid, and an underated gem. Good for backing vocals, excellent for voiceovers, and an all round good mic for snare, cabs, brass/sax, or whatever. Maybe the best overall bang for the buck in the AKG handheld dynamic line. The predecessor was D690, a very usable mic you can still find cheap. The D690 was used extensively by Pearl Jam, both on stage, and in the studio. I believe the D770 uses the same capsule, but with upgraded electronics.

D880- This is the supercardioid of the series, and everything I said about D660 holds true. The pattern on this sucker is so tight, I can't even use it for a vocal mic. It might be OK on cabs, or anything else that doesn't move around.

D3700/D3800- The "tripower" series, the D3700 is cardioid, and the D3800 is supercardioid (you will find it incorrectly called hypercardioid by numerous online dealers). These are simply great dynamics, which haven't sold well in the U.S. I think that that is largely because of AKG's confusing laundry list of model numbers for cheap bad mics. These mics sound strikingly like condensers, like an MD 421 or even an MD441. Proximity is gradual, linear, and magnificently usable. The handling noise is a bit much if you are not careful, and I prefer them in a stand. I just picked up a D3800 for cheap, and I'm still testing it on a variety of sources. These mics simply rock.

Discontinued bargains- the D320/D330 series were made in the 70's and 80's, and are more of a rock workhorse than a stage mic for a diva. If you want a mic that falls somewhere between an SM57/58 and an MD421, that can be had for $50-60 used, check ebay- they come up fairly regularly.

An old D190 can rock. I've never gotten my hands on one, but the early Beatles used them extensively.

That will do for now. In my next installment, I try to sort out the mess of AKG drum mics.-Richie
 
Good thread to have around.

AKG D224E is a good mic too. Dynamic that has a similiar sound of a KM184 without the edge. Very round and works great on things like hi hat. Nice price too.

Danny
 
my D770 ROCKS!

i recorded some great distorted guitar tracks with it live once and man the tone is just fat and sassy!

in studio i use it for acoustic guitar, violin and vocals as well as about any other thing i need to slap it on, that includes upright bass once with decent results...

once in a live set i had to mic an acoustic guitar and we used an SM57 and the tone was thin and brittle and not at all warm... i asked the sound tech if i could use my D770 instead and he cracked up and said we could "try it" well i put it up there and stuck it at about the 14th fret and let loose and it kicked the 57s butt :D

as soon as its possible i would like to order at least 2 more of these mics and hope AKG does not not stop making them.....
 
Well, TKingen, at some point I will do an overview of the condensers, but I can only report what I know. About the 414, I will have a fair amount to say, but regardong the C12 and C12VR, mostly I will say- too rich for my blood. There are a lot of AKG mics that I know and use, but about C12, I can only report what the rich kids have to say.

BTW- thanks to all who have read and commented. I only started this thread because I believe the AKG line is among the most confusing line of models ever made, and the huge number of models make it hard to find the ones that really are worth the money. There's a huge markup in AKG dynamics. Would I pay $180 for a D550 kick mic? No. I got mine brand new at GC on sale for $50. At that price, it's a no-brainer. I'll probably do percussion mics tonight in a separate thread.-Richie
 
I was able to get some A-B comparisons on the D770, SM58 and a couple of others. The guy who did this for me was a live mixer. He agreed that the D770 compared favourably, and was indeed better sounding than others. However he did say that for live mixing he preferred the more 'controllable' 58s, where this controlability stemmed from a less rich response. Nevertheless, I ended up getting a couple of the D770s, which have proved to be versatile, reliable and robust. Curiously, I don't have a single Shure in my mike set.
 
Richie,

Great thread, thanks!!

I've got a D190E on it's way. I'll try to do some comparing to other dynamics that I have when I return from the Holidays.

Joel
 
Thanks for the info!

I didnt know anything about the mic I bought. :) I bought a used D3700 S and your right. It does pickup alot of noise just from handling it. But I'll tell you its hard to make it feed back. Even on my small practice Bass amp. I admit that using a bass amp for vocals is kinda crappy but hey. what else am I gonna do untill i get the 8 track and a new pc. :P
 
PhilGood said:
I copied and pasted that into a word document I can keep in my Docs folder!

Exclellent!
Click to expand...
http://www.saturn-sound.com/Curio's/story%20of%20the%20akg%20c414.htm

From the "Famous" C12 to ........

It all started when the famous AKG C12, valve classic, was superceded by the C12a. Rather then using the 6072/12AY7 valve, as in the C12, the C12a utilsing a miniature "Nuvistor" type valve. This, together with smaller/modern components, enabled the body of the C12a to be very much smaller then it's predecessor. The C12a was our first introduction to the famous rectangular box shape that we have come to recognise as a kind of "trademark" from AKG.

When AKG introduced their modern semiconductor designs, the prefix of the figure 4 was utilised. The first microphone to carry the new number scheme, being the C412 i.e. a semiconductor version of the C12/C12a. Still using the same CK12 capsule as that in the C12 and C12a. The C412, had 2 on board switches. One for polar pattern selection, the other for attenuation. There seems to be various "Attenuator/Pad" levels e.g -10dB & -20dB, throughout the history of units produced. However ..... as the attenuator was purely a potential divider in the output stage of the microphone, there still were minor problems with distortion, as the FET amplifier could be still easily be over-driven by high SPL's. The C412 had only 3 switchable polar patterns i.e. Omni, cardioid and fig'8. Whereas, the C12 and C12a had 9 possible polar pattern settings. This was OK for some users, but many found this a move backwards. The BBC, one of AKG's respected/influential customers, found that the C412 was unable to fill the place of the C12/C12a, as 3 polar patterns were insufficient for many applications. After much back and forth conversation's between the BBC and AKG, and other users, an up-dated version of the C412 was introduced. Basically the same as the C412, with an improved attenuator i.e pre-FET amplifier stage, and more importantly, the addition of a Hyper-cardioid polar pattern. As this new microphone had 4 polar patterns, the last digit of the older C412, was changed to a 4 i.e C414. Thus the start of the C414 series of microphones.

The C414 was available in 2 versions. Either, the C414E, with cannon type connector or, the C414C with a connector to the "Din standard". The C414 proved be a strong competitor to the Neumann U77 and U87. The U77, being Neumann's first semiconductor version of the U87. Note that the U77 was one of Neumann's earliest microphones with a transformer-less output stage. Mainly due, to the 12volt "T" powering technique used at that time..

The next version of the C414, was the C414EB. Much the same as the C414, with the addition of a 3 position Attenuator switch (0,-10,-20dB) and 3 position Bass roll-off switch (Flat, 75, 150Hz). One of the major, long term, improvements, was that of the connector type. Since the introduction of the C12a, including the C412 and C414, a stand mount/connector combination had been used for mounting, and electrical connection, of the microphone. This would prove to be very unreliable throughout it's life, so the introduction of a built-in cannon type connector on the C414EB, was of great benefit to all users.

During the production years of the C414EB, manufacture of the "original" CK12 capsule ceased and a modern nylon version (2072-Z-0005) was introduced. This replacement would never live up to the standard of the famous CK12, that had previously made AKG large capsule microphones so wonderful. The tonal qualities of the nylon CK12, are just so different from it's predecessor.

A remote control version of the C414EB was produced. Known as the C414E1. This would be very useful in "Fixed Rig" situations, as the polar patterns were remotely adjustable via the S42E1 remote control box. The S42E1, offered 9 polar patterns and facilities for 2 microphones. The C414E1 looked identical to the C414EB, without the polar pattern switch. The housing used, was that of the C414EB. Hence it still had C414EB stamped on it, with the addition of the word Remote, where the polar pattern switch would have been. The capsule and pre-amplifier, were the same as that used in the C414EB. However, the polarising voltages, for both sides/faces of the capsule, were derived from a DC/DC converter in the phantom powered S42E1 box.

The "Digital Age" was now upon us, and the need for quieter microphones was very apparent. Enter the C414EB-P48. Until this time, the previous C412 & C414 series of microphones, could be powered from any "Phantom" power supply, offering +12 to +52 volts. However, the C414EB-P48, was designed to work purely on +48v phantom supplies. The polarising voltage for the capsule, is taken from the +48v supply via very high value resistors and high voltage tantalum reservoir capacitors., rather then the previous way of using a DC/DC converter. The tantalum capacitors were to be a fault liability in the "long term".

A new model, the C414B-ULS, was the next microphone to emerge. The suffix ULS, denoting that the microphone had a "completely linear transfer characteristic of all transmission parameters". Looking just like a black/matt version of a C414EB, the C414B-ULS offered better performance figures and reliability, then the C414EB-P48. The electronics took on a highly complex design. Utilising no less then 17 transistors, as opposed to the previous 4 transistors in earlier designs. Whether or not this maze of components could improve the sound quality, would be food for thought. However, we did see the return of the DC/DC converter for polarising the capsule.

Getting the iron out of the audio signal i.e. no coupling transformers, was all the rage at this time. The C414B-TL (Transformer Less) version of the C414B-ULS was introduced. Offering less distortion at high SPL's then the C414B-ULS. Sounding somewhat dryer and more clinical then it's predecessor.

AKG were to re-create the sound of the original CK12 capsule, in a new nylon version (2072-Z-0009), similar to that already in production. This new capsule was to be used in the "Gold Grill" C414B-TLII, also in the C12-VR, valve microphone. The only audible difference, between the TL and TLII, being a "Presence" boost.

Currently, we have the "New Look" C414B-XLS, and a transformer-less version, the C414B-XLII. Many new features are found on these units. The capsule being mounted on a internal elastic suspension system, rather then the previous fixed block method. Logic circuitry is used for switching of all parameters. With LED display of chosen settings and overload. A big difference, is the provision of a 5th polar pattern i.e. Soft Cardioid. Therefore, I wonder why the microphone was not called the C415B, following the tradition of the last digit being the amount of fixed polar patterns available. Who knows ?
 
i happen to like AKG mics myself....

but am running a Shure SM55 live these days

in studio though it's a mix of the D770 and a 57 but still going around with my AT4040 and V67G

so many people talk trash about AKG for some reason, i have had sales guys tell me they are crap at guitar center, never buy one of them....

all in all they are nothing to sneeze at if you ask me.
 
I'm probably in the minority here, but I like the D2300S, at least as a tom mic. I don't find it particularly hyped in the mids---not scooped, either, mind you, but not overbearing. It's bright compared to things like the SM57/58, and if anything, sounds a little thin to my ears (mostly from heavy bass roll-off).

I don't have any comment on proximity, as I don't get the mic closer than about six inches from the sound source.

Anyway, according to AKG, the D2300S is a custom-for-Musician's-Friend variation of the D60, and the response/specs should be very close.

midres1093357155_d60s4055c4196aa74.JPG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top