Should I buy 1 used AKG C541B or a matched pair of Rode NT5's???

pisces7378

New member
I went to a music store this afternoon looking for a good solution for recording an acoustic guitar for my rock/indi/altern/whatever songs. I have had my eye on a matched set of Rode NT5's for around $370 (NT5's are $299 in the US but remember I am in Germany, where things are normally more expensive than the US). Now as I was talking to the guy there he didn't have any Rode NT5s in stock so I was just looking around and my eye was caught by the AKG C 451B. It had a higher price tag of $399. (Now the AKG C541B costs $450 in the US... international prices are fucking odd... NT5's cost $70 more in Germany, where as an AKG C541B costs $50 less in Germany... go figure???)

Anyway, well the guy at the store is a really nice guy. I have known him for a long time from coming in and out of the store for 3 years. He told me that he himself, for personal use, bought 2 AKG C 451B's when they first came out but now he wants to sell them and get a real STEREO MATCHED pair from AKG. He said that AKG did not offer "stereo Matched" pairs when they fuirst came out. So he said that he would sell me one of his AKG C 451B mics for $300. That is a $150 discount from the US price and he still has the receipt showing that the mic is only 6 months old.

Now the only reason I wanted the Stereo pair from Rode is basically because it seems like two mics would be better than one for recording acoustic guitar. But this guy tried to explain to me how much nicer 1 of the AKG C 451B is than the matched pair Rode NT5s.

I would have to agree with him in the thought that I would rather have one truely sweet professional mic than two not so sparkling mics.

So basically the question is as follows:

Would you pay $300 for a used AKG C 451B or would you pay $370 for the matched pair from Rode?

(also... could someone please tell me how dramtically different it is to have a "factory matched stereo pair" and to just simply buy two of the same microphones? In the case I wanted to get a second AKG C 451B later on down the road.)
 
I'd say you're caught between a rock and a hard spot, not having the Rode's at hand to make a comparison. Why don't you offer the guy $500 for both of his 451B's and see if he blinks...
 
mics

AKG's mics have sounded like shit lately, IMHO..plus the new 451 is an electret condenser <ew>.

Rode makes good sounding stuff cheaply, and they're true <externally polarized> condensers.

Plus you'll get a stereo pair instead of 1 mic, which will open up your sonic/musical capabilities.

...or you can buy a pair of Oktava MC012's <try www.oktava.com> $400 for 2 single mics <not ''matched'' but I doubt you'll ever hear the difference between the 2>.

...since ya live in Germany, why don't ya drive over to Neumann and see if they'll give you a pair of KM184's :)
 
Do a search at electronic musician or mix magazine. One of them had a review on these mics and said they they were a tad darker, but were very close in sound to km184's. They tested on acoustic, and stereo recordings, maybe piano too, although I can't remember. I'll look and see if I can find the review and I'll post a link.

I say go for the NT5's. 2 are less than 1 AKG C451B. But for a little more than the price of a 451, you can get a km184, which will sound better than both. So if you are willing to shell out the money for a 451, then why not just get the Neumanns?

Beezoboy
 
Are you people freaking crazy. The guy has a chance to by a 451B for $300, and you're advising him not to do it. I see that both Bruce Blue Bear and tom Cram think highly of the AKG, and that, alone, is good enough for me.

Screw the rodents. Get the AKG while you can.
 
well

You can buy a new one for $450...I just think it's a better bang for the buck to have 2 NT5's than 1 451. He'd be able to record in stereo, and that alone makes it more practical. I personally like Rode's mics, they sound like they cost a lot more, and they're well made...IMHO.
 
Is anyone able to explain in "real" terms the difference between the C451EB and the later C451B..........is one more suited to certain applications than the other., etc., etc.

:cool:
 
using some sources, "The C 414 EB was introduced in 1977 and has a totally metal construction. The early versions came with a brass capsule, the newer ones with the plastic type. It is said that with the older versions the capacitors are going bad with progressing time. If there is EB only, the mic runs from 12 to 48 V phantom voltage, if there is EB/P48 the mic is designed for 48 V phantom voltage only."

Does this mean that in AKG speak "B" stands for brass? I can't figure out what the E would stand for. The site is http://members.aol.com/mihartkopf/ pretty decent.
 
Kristian, I think you're not quite right here. First of all, we're talking about the 451, not the 414. The 451 was introduced in 1969 (according to www.akg-acoustics.com) and was a modular mic with interchangeable capsules. The body was metal, but the capsules had plastic housings. The new 451 B is not modular and is pretty much the same as an old 451 plus the CK1 caridoid capsule. The new 451 B's body is all metall.

Also - I haven't found confirmation on this, but I'm pretty sure - the 451B is *not* an electret condenser as someone above said. At least I've never seen that "accusation" before. I do agree, however, that AKG's more recent designs (C1000/2000/3000) were less than stellar. The 451 B seems to be an exception, though. But then again, it's basically an old design.

BTW: AKG claim that the mic's actual response curve is within +/- 1.5 dB of the published curve. So I don't think you'll have to worry too much about matched pairs. Another 451 B should do fine, I guess.
 
Blue Bear Sound said:
I haven't heard the Rode NT5 -- they may indeed be good.... but I'm 98% sure the 451'll better it in many applications......

Is this because the 451 is just THAT good. I'm still fairly new to the recording mic game. I hear folks praise the Oktava 012's a lot and I'm not sure if it is because of their relatively low price or if it is because they are really stellar. I've heard less talk about the NT5's but I wonder if it is because they are more money or if it is because they are not as useful.

Has anyone here used all three that can give us a comparison? That would be quite useful.

Thanks, Terry
 
akg

I read the specs when they were first introducing them, and I'm pretty sure I saw the word 'electret' mentioned somewhere. Plus it operates on as little as 9V, which indicates it's electret, as a true condenser would need a lot more.

AKG has been very 'fishy' with the whole electret image/word; in their manual for the C3000b for example, they call it a "True" large diaphragm, with active mylar foil diameter of 1" ....I called them on that mis-leading statement, and they said it means "It has a true 1" diaphragm" not that is a 'true' condenser as most people are used to seeing, to indicate DC Bias/externally polarized.

(although the 414 ULS also says 9-48V they also come out and SAY 'externally polarized' right in the specs.) So my instinct tells me, them omitting any description whatsoever, their 'fishy-ness' with the C3000b wording, and their newer microphones they've released all being electrets..plus operating on as low as 9V...
..it's gotta be an electret.

---AH HA, I just found proof:

RE:Is C-451B an electret? (modified 0 times) horst

Hi Tom,
Yes, this is correct. The C451B uses a back-electret capsule. Thus it is ensured, that the diaphragm is ident regarding material and dimensions with those of externally polarized caps.

Electret technology made strong progress during the last 20 years.
Depending upon the environment conditions, an electret mic will have a loss of 3dB in outputlevel during 30 to 40 years.
In practice, one would not hear or measure any difference during the first 20 years.
 
wow, that's sad news. What's the source for that quote, is it from a guy at AKG?

I mean the new ones do sound good, but I'm really not crazy about electrets. People keep telling me that the technology has improved, but I'm still suspicious. I can live with electrets if there's no other choice like in very small 1/4" capsules, but other than that I try to avoid them. I still own a 15-year-old EV BK1, which is electret as well. I liked it fine when I bought it, but I hardly use it anymore. I still works, but it just doesn't sound that good. It's definitely not as brilliant as it ought to be according to the frequency plot - I wonder if that's the effect of the polarization voltage loss.
 
So, by the same token, are NT5's electret? If the original poster is deciding between two mics that are electret, then it's a moot point.

p.s. I just checked, the NT5's are indeed electret.

Tom Cram
dbx Senior Technical Support
(801) 568-7530
tcram@dbxpro.com

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
-Thomas Jefferson-
 
hmm

No, the NT5's aren't electret, their specs say it outright and the power requirements are 18v+...granted, the choice should be made on what sounds best, and/or is most practical. I'd go with a stereo pair any day as it offers the most versatility for recording purposes..IMHO


NT5
Specifications:
Acoustic Principle: Externally polarised single diaphragm
condenser transducer
Capsule Size: 0.5” (13mm)

Power Requirements: 4 mA, P48 Supply (38V–52V) 2 mA,
P24 Supply (20V-26V) The microphone operates in
accordance with the above specifications to a minimum of
18V. It will operate with some performance degradation
below 18V.)
 
Really?

Hmmm, really. My lit must be incorrect, I'll dig deeper. Maybe Harvey can weigh in, he most certainly would know.

p.s., I just did a search on Google and Guardian is right, the NT5 is NOT an electret, my apologies for any confusion. This would indeed factor into the original poster's decision. An electret's loss of -0.45dB output per 7 years might be a deal-breaker.

Tom Cram
dbx Senior Technical Support
(801) 568-7530
tcram@dbxpro.com

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
-Thomas Jefferson-
 
Last edited:
hmm

Hehe, was that sarcastic, or serious? :)

Maybe it's me, but I'm 'weird' when it comes to my gear..I treat everything from my SM57 to my Neumann like it was made of glass...so I expect it to still work down the line.. it goes against my 'grain' knowing that something is slowly dying over the years, as in the case of electrets...granted, most things get replaced and obsolete over the years..but microphones seem to be the exception, and typically maintain their value, or go up, in some cases...

I dunno, AKG just seems to be cutting a lot of corners lately with their gear..to compete with the imports and knockoffs...look at Neumann, who as far as I know, doesn't make ANY electret products..

I owned a pair of C3000b's, but I sold them after I found out that the Electronic Musician reviewer had done the same thing I had; fallen for AKG's tricky-wording in their specs, thinking it was a true DC bias condenser and not an electret...and then I heard some nicer mic's and realized that I didn't like the sound all that much enough to bother holding onto it., and I was able to sell them for exactly what I paid for them, because I had kept them in pristine condition.

My philosophy as I grow as a sound engineer is basically evolving into 'get it right AT the mic..before the mic <instrument, etc> and AT the mic <mic itself>'
 
Back
Top