The CAD M179 in context . . .

K

Kelly Dueck

New member
I've always wondered why CAD mics seem to get relatively little attention on the news groups . . . even this one!

I think the CAD M179 is one of the best mic values going . . . multi-pattern, way quieter than anything in its price, focussed, warm and accurate.

FWIW here's a 20 second clip of a couple of M179's at work in my bedroom ... er ... studio. The acoustic guitar and vocal were recorded with the M179 set to cardioid.



By the way . . . I already know my singing sucks. ;)
 
Kelly,
I like the guitar work...file dropped at :20 sec...was that intended? I've owned a CAD 100...a very good mic for anything other than vocals.
 
I kept the clip short because some folks on this board have mentioned they don't have fast connections.

The M179 has so far proven to be a pretty darn neutral mic. I want to try it on some acoustic ensembles such as bluegrass, trad jazz or string quartets, piano quintets, etc. in a nice environment.

BTW, I used no EQ on the guitar or vocal tracks in the clip. Very light compression (2.3:1) on the vocal.

Pre-amps were the ones on my Aardvark Pro 2496.

One thing about these mics is that they're flat down to 10 Hz. Yes, 10 Hz ... and as a result, you have to be careful with low-frequency leakage. The bass roll-of switch is handy in that regard, for sure!
 
Doesnt sound too bad. Maybe a little thin but that could have been the sound you were going for. It definately doesnt hurt the guitar sound but I wonder if it might sound a little better, to me anyways. I tend to prefer a tone that is a little more full on guitar.

Thanks for posting the example.
 
I was fairly happy with the sound in the context of the mix. If I were recording acoustic guitar in a more sparse arrangement I would have reached for my MXL 603's which offer a somewhat fuller, though arguably less natural, sound. Normally I find that in a fuller mix I like the acoustic guitar to have just a bit of a sheen to it. too much low mids and it would have fought with the vocal and keys (which come in later in the tune but not the intro clip I posted)

I should also mentioned that the guitar was capoed up about 5 frets! (OK, so I'm a hack on guitar, too ;) )
 
Man, I think I'm gonna have to get one or two of these now...

Is it me, or are good mics more addictive than crack?
 
They're definitely nice little mics. I used them on overheads for the project clip listed on my website. www.bigbluesound.com

I thought they sounded great. I had some 414's and intensely compared the two and my conclusion was that the m179's sounded how I wanted the kit to sound without eq, whereas the 414 seemed a little more flat, not as present and exciting. Plus, the fact that you can get the m179's for $300 for the pair made it an easy decision.

hope this helps,
Brandon
 
frist44 said:
whereas the 414 seemed a little more flat, not as present and exciting.
Click to expand...

This has been my experience with the 414 on most sources, it's a pretty flat mic.

War
 
Hey first44, I've noticed that you also own a pair of mc012s and I was just wondering how they compare with the m179s as drum overheads? I was wondering because I was thinking about getting something as an alternative to the oktavas for overheads. I was leaning towards another at4040, but now the m179s are sounding like a nice option as well.
 
I like the CAD's a little more I think. I go for a huge kit sound. The large diaphragm gives me more overall kit, rather than more cymbal with the oktava's. It probably has a lot to do with the low ceilings in my room. It's not the most ideal place to track drums, but I'm making it work. The CAD's give you a good sound right off the bat, I think the oktava's take a little more work to place and eq, at that's my experience. The's can probably be used on more sources than the oktava's and sound good. Multipatterns open up a world of opportunities. Great mics....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top