AT4040 Vs CAD M179

prestomation

New member
I posted a thread yesterday about taking my AT3035 back and upgrading, but i'm still wondering what I should get. I've heard that the AT4040 is very transparent, which is the direction I think I'd like to go.
The other options I'm looking at are the CAD M179 or the Rode NT1. The CAD seems to be well liked, and the multipatterns is a big plus(all my mics are cardoid). The rode is also well liked in that same price bracket. Is the AT4040 a major step up? If it is, It's no problem to spring for it. I'll be using whichever one I purchase for just about everything, has to be a workhorse. But if i had to pick one thing i'd like it to excel at, I'd have to say vocals.

Another thing, does GC carry CAD mics? That's most likely where I'd get it, but I'll order online if needbe.

I have a nice locker of crappy mics. I mosty use my 57's and a pair of SPB1's(my only LCD's). I have the AKG SDC overhead pair(C430's) which I like a lot, as well as an assorment of lower dynamics and behringer condensors.

Well, thanks alot guys for the opinions!
 
I love the CAD m179, and it's been becoming a definite go to mic in my home studio.
evt
 
The M179 is a very versatile mic, but IMO, it's not super flattering on vocals. It will certainly get the job done (I use it lots for background vocals) and not get in the way, but it doesn't add much in the way of sparkle/sheen that you might expect from an LDC. I tend to prefer the NT1 on my voice. I've not tried the 4040.
 
scrubs said:
The M179 is a very versatile mic, but IMO, it's not super flattering on vocals. It will certainly get the job done (I use it lots for background vocals) and not get in the way, but it doesn't add much in the way of sparkle/sheen that you might expect from an LDC. I tend to prefer the NT1 on my voice. I've not tried the 4040.
yeah from what I've read It's one of the darker sounding mics, which is why I want one myself.
 
I have the M-37, which is the Musician's Friend version of the M177, which is the cardioid-only version of the M179. Great mic--I got it on sale for $100 and it was definitely one of my wiser purchases. Usable for pretty much anything, but very neutral-sounding and not too flattering. When I use it for vocals I always have to bump up the high end. I still prefer it to my roommate's NT1a--with that mic the highs are there already but it's harder to mix because it's got more of a scooped sound to it. The M-37 has more midrange presence. If the M179 sounds anything like mine, it'd be a really great investment. It works great on guitar cabs in conjunction with a dynamic mic, and it's perfect on floor toms. Mine supposedly responds all the way down to 10 Hz so it really captures the floor tom rumble.
 
I think that any time you start mentioning the CAD M179 and the AT 4040 in the same sentence ... you're getting places in terms of very useful and inexpensive condensers. You could cover a lot of bases with just these two mics; build a modest but capable project studio with them as your only LDC's (if you wanted to), and you could do it withoug breaking the bank.

The M-179 is flattering in a very very subtle way. It's not aggressive at all in the midrange, with somewhat of a scoop to it - but not too much. Very subtle and controled midrange, but not lacking. It's definitely got a presence peak in the high end, but it's like way way up there. Well out of range of most male vocalist's sibilant range (usually) and/or the harsh range of most crash cymbals or high-hats. It's cool how far down this sucker goes. Try recording something with it (like a kick drum), and bring the track up on a spectral analyzer and watch all that action going on way, way to the left of the graph. Or listen to it with a good sub woofer and feel the thing shake ... it's pretty cool.

The AT 4040 is a pretty different mic. Like with any AT 40 series mic, there's never any lack of midrange presence. They're always bold and robust in the mids (much like the Shures). The high end presence peak is actually much lower on this one; more like a high / mid peak. It doesn't tend to get very sibilant either because it's presence peak falls just below most people's sibilant range. And we're talking right on the cusp. Interestingly enough, the CAD mics' presence peaks are just above most sibilant ranges, so they make for a great contrast. In short, you should consider getting both.
 
ds21 said:
yeah from what I've read It's one of the darker sounding mics, which is why I want one myself.

M179 dark sounding? Haven't read that anywhere. It's a neutral mic - doesn't hype, doesn't flatter (except I tend to agree with Chess's observation a little). Far from dark - Sorry if you're talking about another mic...
 
warble said:
M179 dark sounding? Haven't read that anywhere. It's a neutral mic - doesn't hype, doesn't flatter (except I tend to agree with Chess's observation a little). Far from dark - Sorry if you're talking about another mic...

Don't you know that anything not Hyped is dark? ;) Same as the MK-319. (well, it is black)

-RD
 
Robert D said:
Don't you know that anything not Hyped is dark? ;) Same as the MK-319. (well, it is black)

-RD

I guess I view dark differently.....my M179 doesn't evoke darkness. But as it says by my name and avatar, I'm "not an expert". :)
 
Last edited:
I'd consider the ADK Hamburg if you're looking for good vocals. I got mine for $235 new with 1 year warranty and shockmount off ebay.
 
warble said:
I guess I view dark differently.....my M179 doesn't evoke darkness. But as it says by my name and avatar, I'm "not an expert". :)

I was being fecicious (I shouldn't have even tried to spell that, I probably said I smell like shite). No, neutral is not dark, though it's kind of become wrongly skewed that way.

-RD
 
Robert D said:
I was being fecicious (I shouldn't have even tried to spell that, I probably said I smell like shite). No, neutral is not dark, though it's kind of become wrongly skewed that way.

-RD

Yeah I got it mixed up with another mic I've been looking at, I need somthing like the M179 and also something dark
 
Back
Top