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

[pisces7378]

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.)

[kid klash]

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...

[Guardian]

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

[Beezoboy]

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

[tdukex]

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.

[Guardian]

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.

[Blue Bear Sound]

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......

[ausrock]

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.

[kristian]

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.

[ausrock]

AKG are kind enough to explain all prefixes and suffixes here:

http://www.akg-acoustics.com/english...pli_prefix.htm


Now I understand why there was no C451EB model number, as it was just a variant of the C451B.

[ausrock]

BTW, Kristian, thanks for that link........it is interesting.

[Rossi]

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]

I've used both the old and new 451s.... the new 451s are every bit as impressive as the old ones I've rented............

[still4given]

Originally posted by Blue Bear Sound
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

[Guardian]

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.

[Rossi]

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.

[Tom Cram]

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-

[Guardian]

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.)

[Tom Cram]

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-

[Guardian]

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>'

[Tom Cram]

Ha! I didn't mean for it to be sarcastic. However, re-reading it I can see how such a minimal loss over a long period of time could be seen as ridiculous. I was actually being serious, it really does add a new spin to the decision.

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-

[DJL]

I don't know about the AKG C541B because I don't own any. However, I do own a pair of matched Rode NT5's and IMO they're really nice.

[Simmons]

Or for approx. the same cash....you could wait on the release of the stereo pair Studio Projects C4's in about 45 days....I believe the "bang for the buck" on these mics will be enormous.

http://www.studioprojectsusa.com/c4.html

By the way...I'm a US citizen living in France and have purchased SP mics at US prices plus shipping (about $20) from Magic Audio in Atlanta. They DO have a shipping backlog because of the strikes however....

Simmons

[pundit]

I have four original AKG 451EB's. The newest of these I bought second hand about twelve years ago, when it was only three months old, and still in the original packaging. Upon comparing it to the three ex studio mics I'd purchased previously I found a rather dramatic difference between them all. Upon inspection I found the diaphragms in all the ex studio mics to be torn around the edge where they are glued to the capsule element.

I purchased four brand new CK1 capsule elements about two years ago for around $110 Australian ea. (About $65 USD). If I was considering purchasing a 451 I'd go for the second hand original versions with the interchangeable capsules and be prepared to replace the elements if neccessary to bring them up to spec. I've had no experience with the reissues or the Rodes.

However if the 451's tickle your fancy, then the originals, if you can find some in resonable condition within your price range, would be a far better investment in the long run. The same applies to any of the original classic AKG or Neumann mics... less so for the Rodes or any of the Asian mics.

I regularly have people asking me if I want to sell my 451's. While they are not a neutral sounding mic, they give that distinctive classic bright crisp sound on acoustic guitars and high hats etc.

But in reality... buy TWO of whatever YOU prefer the sound of!

YMMV

[Guardian]

I'd rather pay more money for something and have it last 'forever' as opposed to buy the cheap model and have it die,break, need to be repaired(hence my dislike for electrets)
...that said, the only Studio Projects stuff I own are a pair of VTB1 pre-amps..and they're definitely better than the Mackie's I'm used to..

..and I'd also feel really bad if the bigger companies that make the 'best' stuff went under because of companies cloning their gear and undercutting their prices by using offshore labor, manufacturing, etc...

however..sometimes, not everyone has the money to afford the more expensive gear..and if a piece of gear that costs far less can match the sonic performance of the more costly/bigger name gear...then it's logically worth checking out.

but, I bet that down the line, one will wind up buying the 'big name' gear eventually anyway...and if the cheaper stuff will survive..who knows?

just a few thoughts....