View Poll Results: What's your verdict

Voters
10. You may not vote on this poll
  • Excellent: Highly recommend

    2 20.00%
  • Decent quality: still recomend though

    7 70.00%
  • Poor: not worth the money

    0 0%
  • It all depends on the artist: just like any other mic

    1 10.00%
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Just How Good Is The MXl V67G?

  1. #1
    Jude2010 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    104
    Rep Power
    214751

    Lightbulb Just How Good Is The MXl V67G?

    Sign in to disable this ad
    I've read alot of good mic reviews on the MXL V67G both on homerecrording.com and elsewhere but just how good is it?

    I mean has anyone here used it and if so on what kind of vocal type, i.e baritone, tenor etc, and how did it work out

    What were it's pros and cons

    And just how much would you recommend it as as a first mic for someone who is looking to start out in the Hip-Hop and R&B genre

    Thanks,
    Jude

  2. #2
    thebigcheese's Avatar
    thebigcheese is offline "Hi, I'm in Delaware."
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC area
    Posts
    1,234
    Rep Power
    945893
    I used to use it for everything, but these days I'm not so sure. I still think it is pretty good on acoustic guitar, but both the singer in my band and I have midrangey voices that the mic doesn't compliment very well. I have also used the mic on clean electric guitar with pretty nice results. I think it would also sound better with a better preamp--I was always using the ones built into my MOTU unit, but lately I don't think those are so hot, either.

  3. #3
    Jude2010 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    104
    Rep Power
    214751
    Quote Originally Posted by thebigcheese View Post
    I used to use it for everything, but these days I'm not so sure. I still think it is pretty good on acoustic guitar, but both the singer in my band and I have midrangey voices that the mic doesn't compliment very well. I have also used the mic on clean electric guitar with pretty nice results. I think it would also sound better with a better preamp--I was always using the ones built into my MOTU unit, but lately I don't think those are so hot, either.
    Yeah I heard the Mic PreAmp is just as important, if not more, for getting the best out of your mic
    I hope the Fast Track MK2 will Get me good enough audio with this mic
    Thanks for your input

  4. #4
    kcearl's Avatar
    kcearl is offline i see deaf people
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    close to the edge
    Posts
    9,248
    Rep Power
    21474850
    its great for a $100 mic.....


    ive tracked an acoustic on it and recorded my own vocals, which arent great, with good results...I didnt find it overly bright or harsh, I havent tried high quality mics, theyd probably blow it away, but ive tried a few in its price range and it was the best all rounder for me

  5. #5
    Jude2010 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    104
    Rep Power
    214751
    Quote Originally Posted by kcearl View Post
    its great for a $100 mic.....


    ive tracked an acoustic on it and recorded my own vocals, which arent great, with good results...I didnt find it overly bright or harsh, I havent tried high quality mics, theyd probably blow it away, but ive tried a few in its price range and it was the best all rounder for me
    Yea but it's €142/£125 in the EU which is $200 ha
    But I'm buying on eBay.com save myself a good bit of cash
    Can't wait to get this now

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    75
    Posts
    5,112
    Rep Power
    8120968
    Here's a review I did of the Marshall line of microphones on January 12th, 2001. It was written for rec.audio.pro, but got picked up and quoted in a lot of newsgoups, magazines, and BBS groups. I think I pointed out some bad products and why I thought they were bad.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Alex and I finally got around to finally listening to all the mics in the Marshall line. None of the testing was done formally, and it's all pretty subjective, but in talking to Brent Casey at Marshall, he pretty well confirmed what I heard, so I think my comments will be of some use to people here.

    Let me also add that Brent is NOT just buying Chinese mics as they roll off the assembly line. He is working on specing the actual diaphragms materials, the porting, new designs, and he's making a really great effort to keep the line consistant. He impressed the hell out of me with his passion about mics (about the same kind of passion about products that people like Taylor Johnson, Karl Winkler, Stephen Paul, and Brad Lunde have). I honestly believe that Brent Casey is 100% committed to making the Marshall line a serious contender in the mic market.

    All the mics looked well made, and we had no problems with any of them, or the supplied shock mounts. Noise levels weren't a problem with any of the mics, although we didn't do any testing with really quiet instruments.

    One of my concerns was consistency from unit to unit. After we got the first batch, I had Brent send some extra units (off the shelf) so I could actually compare two units for possible differences. I'm happy to report that all the units I received were consistent and would do fine as stereo pairs.

    All tests were done thru a Great River MP-2, with the microphone under test polarity reversed and nulled (to match initial levels), then normalled to do the actual comparison. We used the level controls on the GR to note differences in gain.

    While I listened to the mics in the studio using headphones, Alex listened in the control room, using our main speakers (wall-mounted JBL-4311Bs, with a Cerwin Vega subwoofer). We compared notes and in almost every case, Alex and I agreed completely on the results (so we didn't hafta trust my "rock-n-roll shot ears").

    The units we listened to included:

    1 Marshall MXL "The Fox" hand-held dynamic.
    1 Marshall MXL-1000 hand-held condensor
    2 Marshall MXL-600 small condensor mics
    2 Marshall MXL-603 small condensor mics
    1 Marshall MXL-2001 large condensor mic
    2 Marshall MXL-2003 large condensor mics
    1 Marshall MXL-V67 large condensor mic
    2 Marshall MXL-V77 tube large condensor mics

    Comparison mics included:

    1 Neumann TLM-103
    2 matched Oktava MC012s w/cardioid capsules
    1 Lomo M3 large condensor mic on MC012 body
    1 Shure SM-7 dynamic
    1 Shure SM-58 dynamic
    1 Nady SCM-1000 multi-pattern condensor

    The results:
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The mics we didn't like:

    Marshall MXL-2001 $130?? Sorry, I can't find the MSRP right now. Harsh top end, thin bottom, compared to the TLM-103. It was a little warmer than the Nady SCM-1000, but the Nady had a smoother top end. The 2001 is everything that I don't like about all the really inexpensive large diaphragm condensor mics that I've listened to over the years, including the AKG C3000, the Oktava 219, and some of the early AT low cost units.

    Marshall MXL-600 $270 Veiled top end and exaggerated low-mid, compared to the Oktava MC-012. About 1 dB lower output than the Oktava. It just sounded very dull and lifeless. Very easy to bottom out as well.

    The mics we did like:

    The $30 Marshall Fox hand-held dynamic mic was a little harder to judge - it had good high end, good bottom end, but it had scooped mids, compared to the Shure SM-7. Alex said it did fine as a vocal mic at a live gig, although it fed back sooner than the Shure SM-58. Still, at roughly $30 retail, I can see people having a few around for live gigs.

    Marshall MXL-2003 $399 I thought the 2003 sounded pretty smooth overall. Alex thought it had a little less bottom than the 103, but a little more hi mids and top end than a 103. The Nady had a little less bottom. Alex felt it was similar to the AKG C3000, but it sounded smoother than a C3000, to me anyway.

    (The lack of proximity effect that I noted in an earlier report about the 2003, was due to me accidentally hitting the bass roll-off switch while I was putting it in its shock mount. When I noticed normal proximity effect with a second unit, I discovered my screw-up.)

    Marshall MXL-603 $99 This was a flat-out winner, folks. Almost identical to the MC012 in sound, with a wide cardioid pattern, almost approaching omni. We used them as drum overhead mics, and they did a great job. The diaphragms are easy to bottom out on voice, but with a pop filter (and positioned above the singer's mouth), they wouldn't be bad as a vocal mic on some singers, and they'd probably do fine on acoustic guitar, and many other instruments. They were also a good match to the Oktava MC012 - they sounded nearly identical.

    Marshall MXL 1000 $99 This was the hand-held condensor mic that Marshall was pushing as a KM-105. It totally sucked as a hand-held vocal mic. Brent Casey suggested I try it without the end ball, and I discovered it was basically the 603 in a Shure-type body. Without the ball end fucking up the sound, it was identical in sound to the 603.

    Marshall MXL-V77 $600 This is the top of the line Marshall tube mic, and it's very similar to the TLM-103 in sound (with a little more proximity effect). It's a very nice tube mic, especially at the price. There was a 1 dB difference in the level between the two V77s we tested, but the sound was identical.

    Marshall MXL-V67 $270 This was the other flat-out winner, both in the looks, and sound categories. It's the green-bodied, gold topped Bejing 797 copy of a C12, and it looks like it costs around $2500. Lots of proximity effect (even more than my RCA ribbon mics) and about 1.5 dB more bottom than the TLM-103, with a similar top end to the TLM-103. This is a real winner for some male vocals, especially singers that make use of the proximity effect. It compared very favorably with the LOMO M3 head for that "bigger than life" sound. If you wanna make your studio "look" more expensive than it really is, get the V67. And it just happens to sound great, too.

    The studio wound up buying the Marshall MXL-V67, the Marshall MXL-603s, and the Marshall MXL-1000 (as an extra 603). I wouldn't hesitate to buy the 2003s or the V77 as well, if we could afford them (which we can't, at the moment).

    Well, that's the results - it wasn't a fancy test, and YMMV, but overall, I think it might be helpful to some people, especially if you're a "bottom feeder" studio as we are. As I mentioned earlier, Brent said that our tests pretty much agreed with his findings, and that at least confirmed that we were all hearing pretty much the same things.
    _________________

  7. #7
    moresound's Avatar
    moresound is offline Loud Sun Studios
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire Lat/Lng: 42.8129750,-72.0248270
    Age
    99
    Posts
    22,646
    Rep Power
    21474862
    Well ..... there you go Jude, why not pick up two of them.







    ♫♪♫ I have a fever and the cure is cowbell ♫♪♫ .......... *LIVE FREE OR DIE* .......... ♫ I'm all ears ♫

    ☼ Mucho Loco Henry Areebah! ☼

    Any mic you buy will be perfectly suited to your needs, until you use it long enough to learn that it's not.

  8. #8
    Lt. Bob's Avatar
    Lt. Bob is offline Spread the Daf!
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    America's wang
    Age
    61
    Posts
    8,509
    Rep Power
    21474858
    I have a V67 and it's my favorite mic. Works GREAT on sax ....... works good on my vox although I often choose to go for my EV767 'cause ........ well, I don't have to take it out of a case and set it up!

    For the price I don't see how you can beat it as a general purpose mic.
    If you know the secret codes you can get by the mastering boss on level 8.

  9. #9
    Nakatira's Avatar
    Nakatira is offline That Norwegian Bastard
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Stord
    Age
    33
    Posts
    3,003
    Rep Power
    9944256
    I really like it on vocals

  10. #10
    NoahF is offline Newbie
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    33
    Rep Power
    0

    Mxl v67g = mxl 9090

    Don't forget that the MXL 9090 has the same circuit as the V67G,
    plus a second (switch selectable) "bright" capsule.

    Even better, several of the components are higher quality than
    those in the V67G, so if you decide to get it modded, those won't
    need to be replaced. That results in a lower cost mod.

    It also has a single layer headbasket, stock, so that's another
    cost to subtract from a mod.

    In fact, the 9090 actually has even more features:

    * low cut filter

    * 10 DB pad

    Why the 9090 didn't catch on is an oddity, but you can still
    snag brand new ones on Ebay, cheaper than they sold in stores.

    HTH,
    NoahF
    Last edited by NoahF; 11-04-2010 at 14:39. Reason: mistated feature: wrote "low pass", meant "low cut"

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. MXL V67G or MXL v69 Mogami Tube? Cast Your Vote!
    By craven in forum Microphones
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-05-2011, 14:04
  2. FS: MXL V67G, MXL 990, MXL 603, Morley Classic Wah
    By Harlequin Man in forum Free Ads for Music/Recording Equipment
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-03-2008, 16:55
  3. FS: MXL V69, MXL V67g, Studio Projects C3.
    By ametth in forum Free Ads for Music/Recording Equipment
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-18-2007, 23:23
  4. mxl v67g vs MXL V69
    By thehook in forum Microphones
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-22-2006, 05:42
  5. Rode NTK vs Neumann TLM103 vs MXL V69M vs MXL V67G
    By John Mayes in forum Microphones
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-05-2003, 06:09

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
GearFest Mixing Contest

Biggest Ever Audio Mixing Contest is ON!