I'm not knocking the NTK, but there are other mics available that are just as good, maybe better for similar or less dollars.
I own
a Studio Projects C1 which is regularly used on acoustic and vocals and believe that they are possibly the best mic available for the money. The C3 is another step up and can be had for similar dollars to the NTK.
The following is a quote from a post I put up a few months back. It wasn't a "scientific" comparison but it was done fairly to all mics and the guys that ultimately made the judgements were not aware of which mic was which until it was all over.
QUOTE..............."Last night I had the opportunity to compare the following mics; AKG414 B-TL, AKG C1000, AKG C3000, Studio Projects C1 and
a Neumann U-87.
For the record we set the 5 mics up in a close cluster, ran each one through my Soundcraft Studio console, (EQ was flat on all channels) and through to seperate tracks on my Fostex D160 H/d recorder. Faders were at 0. The first run was done with gains set to maximise the signal from each mic, then 2 more recordings with all gains set the same to compare the signal strength of each mic.
We decided to record acoustic guitar, (newly strung) in preference to voice, and the outcome...........................
AKG414 B-TL...... (Yes I know it is supposedly baised to vocals) Second lowest signal strength, very "muddy" lacking top-end definition. Imagine having cotton wool stuck in your ears. The guy that owns it was shattered.
AKGC1000...... (not a large diaphragm condenser) Lowest signal strength, clear defined sound but lacking body compared to the following 3 mics.
AKGC3000......Third highest or lowest (OK it was in the middle) signal strength, clear defined sound across the tonal range, somewhat transparent or glassy quality. Definitely not unpleasant.
Studio Projects C1......Signal strength was almost identical to the U-87, clear defined sound across the tonal range, definitely true to the original acoustic sound.
Neumann U-87......Signal strength, "as above". Again a clear defined sound, but with more bottom end or "body" not heard naturally from the guitar. Unpleasant?.....NO. Unnatural?......YES.
Am I surprised at the results?........definitely, even though I had read the glowing reviews if the C1 and the comparisons made by some people of high repute to the U-87, and considering I bought the C1 on the basis of these reviews, I really expected the U-87 to stand head and shoulders above the rest. Maybe in other circumstances with certain instruments or vocalists it may, but tonight, with an acoustic guitar, this U-87 was eclipsed by the C1.
And the guy that owns the AKGs and the U-87 will be buying 2 C1s as soon as he can get the money together. Enough said! "
Peace..........ChrisO
