I bought a CAD GXL2200.

L

leadfootdriver

New member
It's my first large diaphram mic, and I'm happy that I only paid $70 for it. I've been working with it for a few weeks now, I think I have it down for what I do.

I recorded these guitars with it. I like it much better than the 57 by far. BTW, I hate the 57 for guitars! Try to tolerate the drum machine sounds though, as I'm in the process of upgrading to samples.

I ran it into an ART MPA Gold. Check it out and tell me what you think.

 
dude, this is some rich-ass tone! i think it sounds great, and the lead especially is far more detailed and extended than i would expect from a 57. i've been considering the CAD trion 7000 ribbon mic for guitar, but this gxl is definitely something to consider.
what's your amp?

edit: also, what's your placement?
 
If you guys can't make a 57 sound that good or better then you really need some help. I'm only half serious, the tone doesn't sound too bad but keep in mound thousands of songs have been done with a single 57 on a cab. What was the rest of the recording chain on guitars?
 
drossfile said:
dude, this is some rich-ass tone! i think it sounds great, and the lead especially is far more detailed and extended than i would expect from a 57. i've been considering the CAD trion 7000 ribbon mic for guitar, but this gxl is definitely something to consider.
what's your amp?

edit: also, what's your placement?
Click to expand...

Thanks mang. And yes, the 57 sounds dull, plastiky and compressed compared to the GXL. I've always hated the sound I got from the 57 from the 1st day I got one. :D Even with the ART Golds variable impeadance, it still has that hard and dull sound that I hate. :D I thought the GXL came to life with the ART Gold.

I bought the GXL, and then I bought the Trion 7000 on hype alone. The CAD website and other ribbon mic makers that I researched made it sound like ribbons are THEE mic for guitar. But I thought I got a much more detailed and more easily repeatable sound from the GXL. I just engage the low cut inside the mic and put it right on the grill.

I'm not a believer in multi mic setups for recording; that is close micing. I haven't yet had the pleasure of recording in a good room to use a room mic. So I approached the GXL mic with the idea that I wanted the near exact tone from the amp, and I wanted it to be easily repeatable, so I stuck with one mic position that I thought was best, and worked with it.

The 7000 is REAL sensitive with the proximity effect, and I think it's a mic to use with the room sound in mind. I don't have a good room where I'd like to capture the sound, so I kinda' want to sell it. But I think I'm stuck with it. It might be a decent vocal mic, but I haven't experimented to much with it. I stopped experimenting simply because the GXL was easily more sensitive.

My amp is a Mesa TriAxis and 2:90 power amp.
 
jonnyc said:
If you guys can't make a 57 sound that good or better then you really need some help. I'm only half serious, the tone doesn't sound too bad but keep in mound thousands of songs have been done with a single 57 on a cab. What was the rest of the recording chain on guitars?
Click to expand...

The 57 has a hard characteristic to it that can't be equed out. I hate that mic. The GXL was by far more neutral and sensitive. I actually recorded that track with a 57 a while back, but then re-recorded it when I got the GXL. My takes are now by far more expressive.

57's are dull and compressed. Nobody will ever change my mind. :D+

I recorded from the Art strait to a Fostex 16 track stand alone harddisc recorder. Then I monitor and eq with a Mackie 8-buss. No compression. The guitar effects are as they come out of my guitar cab.
 
I just finished comparing the GXL 2200 with an AT2020, AT 2035, MCA SP1, and MXL 990 Stereo in mono mode using a Tascam recorder set on WAV 44.1, and played back through Grado phones and then Klipsch 2.1 Pro Logic speakers.

For the most pleasing clarinet sound and a punchier vocal sound, the GXL 2200 clearly sounded better to me. By "better", I'm referring to a slightly warmer sound, less harshness, good presence, and a smoother overall pleasing sound, plus a bit higher output. I'm going to try another test comparison of these mics in a different room tomorrow before I pack up the second place finishers and send them back. Listening carefully to the noise floor of each, the GXL and MXL had slightly more noise when listening in a totally silent room (AC off, lights off, doors and windows closed, wife and dogs asleep in another room, and me sweating) using headphones. But in a typical room with average ambient noise, the noise level is irrelevant for my purposes.

If you want absolutely NO noise for anything less than $200, the built-in small diaphragm condenser mics in my Tascam DR40 recorded fits that bill. But the sound from the Tascam mics is a bit thinner than the other 5 I tested. I'll sacrifice a little noise that makes no difference in my application for a better overall sounding mic.
 
leadfootdriver said:
It's my first large diaphram mic, and I'm happy that I only paid $70 for it. I've been working with it for a few weeks now, I think I have it down for what I do.

I recorded these guitars with it. I like it much better than the 57 by far. BTW, I hate the 57 for guitars! Try to tolerate the drum machine sounds though, as I'm in the process of upgrading to samples.

I ran it into an ART MPA Gold. Check it out and tell me what you think.

XFINITY - Sorry, we couldn't find that page
Click to expand...

When you are on a budge, like me, the CAD GXL2200 is a pretty good choice. I am also using (since 2014) and been quite happy. I also reviewed the mic as well - CAD GXL2200 – A Solid Choice For Beginners | www.recordingexpert.net If I had a bigger budget I would of went with the Rode NTK but unfortunately I do not have that kind of money to invest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top