Ribbon vs. Tube Mics

O

osz

New member
I've read about how they work, but what are the sonic differences in non-technical terms between ribbon and tube mics?

Also, historically when did tube mics come into wide usage? Did they supplant ribbon mics at some point and become the dominant vocal mic in major studios? If so, when?

I'm asking because I am trying to equip my new home studio with as much vintage-type gear as I can scrape together. I'm hung up on whether or not I should equip for ribbon mics and, thus, invest in an expensive tube preamp with lots of gain or not.

I really don't know much about tube mics so any input would be appreciated.
 
There are so many ribbon mics and so many tube mics that it's really not appropriate to talk about sonic differences. If tubes sound like "X" and ribbons like "Y" there may be tube mics that sound more Y and vice versa...
Just keep in mind that tube mics are condensor mics.

Ribbons are known for flat frequency response, smooth but not extended high frequencies, natural figure-of-eight pattern (with corresponding very effective null spots), great transient response, and lots of proximity effect.

The condensor microphone (Neumann) has been around for longer than ribbons but was not in wide use in the U.S. until the early fifties. You will see pictures of performers recording with U47s in the fifties, but I think that the RCA 77 and 44 were probably still more common in that decade. In the early sixties, condensors overtook ribbons in popularity. But ribbons have always been used.

It's good to have both!
 
It's probably not true to consider tube mics as the dominant studio mic. If you believe the hype, that would be the U87 which is not a tube mic. Certainly the tube varieties of large condensers like the U47 are legendary, but they aren't ubiquitous, probably because there aren't enough of them.

Anyway, tube condensers and ribbons are probably as different as two mics can be. AGCurry did a good job describing ribbons. Tube condensers, like any condenser, are known for high-end response--sometimes exaggerated; high sensitivity (especially compared to ribbons), and fine detail. The tube is supposed to add smoothness and warmth to the equation, but for the lower-end tube models, that may or may not be true. It might simply add some harmonic distortion, which could be pleasant--or it could be muddy.

A nice ribbon will sound natural and silky smooth with a gradual high-end rolloff; a bad one will sound dull, lifeless, with no output and no high end at all.
 
Ribbon refers to the transducer element, where-as tube refers to the amplification circuit in a certain condensor mics. A ribbon transducer has almost no mass, so it can respond very quickly to transients. It also has less resonances, so the response is generally smoother. A lot of people think ribbons sound more "natural," like how the ear actually hears things.

A tube mic uses a vacuum tube to amplify the very small changes in voltage generated by a condensor mic's capacitor diaphram. It has a distinctive sound compared to a condensor mic amplified by a solidstate/FET circuit. The tube generates a small amount of harmonic distortion that's pleasing to the ear, also the transformer needed in a tube circuit adds a characteristic sound as well.
 
AGCurry said:
Ribbons are known for....natural figure-of-eight pattern (with corresponding very effective null spots)
Click to expand...

It should be noted here, there also cardioid and omni ribbons.

AGCurry said:
The condensor microphone (Neumann) has been around for longer than ribbons but was not in wide use in the U.S. until the early fifties. You will see pictures of performers recording with U47s in the fifties, but I think that the RCA 77 and 44 were probably still more common in that decade. In the early sixties, condensors overtook ribbons in popularity. But ribbons have always been used.
Click to expand...

The first condenser was invented by Wente for Western Electric in 1917. The first mics were quite crude and their sound described as quite low-Fi. It is worth noticing here that the same Wente invented moving coil speakers in 1926, and two years later, in 1928 moving coil (dynamic) microphone.
Neumann started developing condensers only in 1928.

In early 20's Harry Olson, the RCA cheaf designer, started developing ribbon mics. The first--the Photofone PB-31 appeared on the market in 1931, and only a very few were made. Few months later it was replaced by RCA 44-A. In fact, both microphones sound was much superior to any of the condenser mics of that day, and they are still superb ribbon mics, even by our time standards.

There were a few reasons for ribbon microphones to dominate US market at that time. Probably the most important was a rise of broadcasting and mass communication. These microphones had perfect characteristics for this kind of use. Harry Olson, who had a contract with broadcasting companies, mainly worked on ribbons, to suit demands of the market. His marketing abilities, as well as his personal belief in ribbons, contributed into development of ribbon mics a lot, and were also part of the reason for their dominating on the market for such a long time.

After WWII, there was a noticable rise in studio application demands, which brought to US market the first German and Austrian condenser microphones.
 
reshp1 said:
It also has less resonances, so the response is generally smoother. A lot of people think ribbons sound more "natural," like how the ear actually hears things.
Click to expand...

Ribbon microphones do not have "less" resonances. The resonances are just different and in different band.

The principles of ribbon mic and "how our ear hears things" are very differrent. Our ears are omni, with tiny ear drum tuned into high band. Ribbon mics naturally are fig8, with tuning resonance in the lowest part of audio band.


reshp1 said:
A tube mic... has a distinctive sound compared to a condensor mic amplified by a solidstate/FET circuit. The tube generates a small amount of harmonic distortion that's pleasing to the ear, also the transformer needed in a tube circuit adds a characteristic sound as well.
Click to expand...

It MAY BE like that, but also MAY BE NOT, and depends on design parameters. The tube circuit can be designed as very clean one. Likewise, FET circuit can be designed to have that pleasing distortion. The transformers are used in many FET mics, as well.
 
I'll give a very generalized, oversimplified explanation :

A lot of tube mics will tend to have a certain thickness to the sound; sort of naturally compressed in a subtle way. Most often, tube condensers tend to be of the large-diaphragm vocal mic variety, and as such, can have anywhere from mild to very obvious presence peaks.

Ribbon mics, on the other hand, sound fairly natural, but tend to be less detailed; there doesn't tend to be the same shimmering presence peak you get with a lot of Large-diaphragm vocal condensers.

That's about the best oversimplified explanation I can come up with.
 
Marik said:
It should be noted here, there also cardioid and omni ribbons.
Click to expand...

Yes! I love my Shure SM33/330/333 (one of each)! I also have some Beyerdynamic ribbons, but don't like them as much.

I don't know of any omnidirectional ribbon mics.
 
AGCurry said:
.

I don't know of any omnidirectional ribbon mics.
Click to expand...

Both RCA-77D and DX multipatterns have an omni mode, BK-4A is an omni mic.
I heard early Siemens had an omni model.

Some more cardioid ribbons are RCA-77A, B1, and C1; BK-5A, KU-2A, KU-3A, BK-10A hypercardioid, and Fostex M77RP printed ribbon mic.

There were also a few multipattern hybrid ribbon/dynamic-pressure models: Altec/Western Electric 639A and B, and American DR330.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top