GB mic's, first impressions.

giraffe

giraffe

i love negative rep
so i got a chance to briefly play with my new mics today, and here are my non-scientific opinions.

test was me siting, talking (this is always my first test when i get a mic)
control mic was my nt2a.

first, the 583.
wow. this is the brightest mic i own, hands down.
uses don't quickly pop to mind. maybe good for that
acu "pick sound" percussive thing to fill out a mix, possibly on back up harm depending on the effect you want. but bright.

then the 310
much rejoicing, especially after the 583.
hi end in control. fairly neutral, could be used on any number of things.
no internal pop filtering at all. (just saying) removable capsule much like an o12 etc..... (are there pads/ other polar patterns to be had?)
happy.


acm-4
front. dark "smooth" but not very present. ribbon for sure, will be useful.
back. if i made these mics this would be the front. a bit more present, but still plenty "smooth"

6802t
bright, but in a better way. not at all like the 583.
nice mid range "growl" not as much body as my nt2a.
i especially like the mid range, if i decide to keep this (kinda bought this one to sell) it will get use.

but that's just me mind you.
let me know what you think.
 
Cool:D I ordered a pair of 310s and and ACM4 (to hopefully match a very similar Avant ribbon mic I own). I'm interested in seeing how the 310s compare to the GT44/AM40s I have for acoustic instruments.
 
giraffe, interested in any trades for the 6802T? I'm really pleased with the sound of mine, and I wouldn't mind another one for stereo stuff.

I haven't used the 583 extensively. I thought it was bright, but not unusably so.
 
Glad to hear about the 310. I ordered two of these... Thinking stereo micing applications... acoustics, overheads, sounds like they may just work out as planned.

Can't wait to hear some reviews on the ACM-3.
 
So all I had laying around here at the moment was an AKG C414, so this is a comparison between a C414 and the ACM 6802T. I know, kind of apples and oranges, but at least its SOME frame of reference.
Sample A
Sample B
Can anyone guess which is which?

They are both running through Amek 9098 Preamps with no EQ.


Used the ACM-3 on a guitar cabinet and it sounds great. Can't wait to put it side by side with it's brand name counterpart.
late 1950s Telecaster through a Laney 1x12 combo with ACM-3 about a foot to a foot and a half back aimed down slightly also through an Amek 9098 with no EQ.


Also, the 310 sounded phenominal on an acoustic guitar. keep it away from the sound hole though, it can get a little boomy. PERFECT when aimed where the neck meets the body. guitar just sounds like it sounds.
 
I'm not sure which is which as I don't have a C414 to base things off. I probably should have used something other than my cheap computer speakers... but...

Sample B seems to have a little more "life" to it than does A. By itself, I'd probably lean towards "B"... in a mix though, it seemed to have some low end that may cloud things ever so slightly.

Regardless... Definitely useable.

I'm geeked to get the ACM-3. Sounded good. Nice and clean with good definition. Down the road it will be interesting to see how the mods will effect it. Guitar is exactly what I was planning for that little puppy.
 
I'm going to guess that A is the 6802T. I have no experience with the 414, but I did just get a 6802T. Reason for my vote is that A seems to have the little bit of shimmer that the 6802T seems to have to my ears, along with the nice midrange. Of course, I'm still not the greatest at these comparisons (even when they are apples and oranges).
 
I think:

A = C414
B = ACM 6802T

A sounds more natural with better high freq definition
B sounds more colored and has more bass.

Thanks for posting the examples!
 
Wow, just sat down in the studio... and A & B sound comletely different here. For your voice, now I'd gp with A. The bass that I iiked on the cheap speakers, now seems to make it dull and a little muddy. The brightness in A sounds like it might really sit on top of a mix nicely.

The ACM-3 still sounds nice, But maybe just a light more bite would really bring out the tone.

Yep... thatnks for posting.
 
anybody know how much gain a motu 828 mkII preamp has? I was thinking that I wouldn't have enough gain for the ribbon mics, but I was just testing out the ACM-2, and I had plenty. I like the sound on acoustic guitar. gotta roll off the bass though, otherwise it sounds a little muddy.
 
Caotico said:
anybody know how much gain a...Your Preamp Here...preamp has? I was thinking that I wouldn't have enough gain for the ribbon mics, but I was just testing out the ACM-2, and I had plenty....
Click to expand...

This addresses a question I had, too. My preamp (at this point) is an Audio Buddy, and I ordered two of the ribbons from the GB (the ACM-1 and -3). I've been wondering how much gain was needed to drive them, having heard ribbons need more....

Can anyone who gets one of these ribbons report back about how much gain was needed to drive them? I know this is an inexact science, guesstimating the gain needed...It sounds like Caotico is saying it's not something I need to worry about overly, but other observations would be appreciated, as well...

It would be nice to get something before the mics come, if I need something more than my Buddy...
 
i've searched for this info a lot, and I finally found it on a sweetwater forum. the motu has 46 db of gain. I had the trim all the way up. Using the ACM-2 ribbon to record finger picked/lightly strummed guitar about a foot away from just above the sound hole, I didn't peak out, but I came pretty close in a few parts, higher than my normal recording levels.
 
Thanks--this looks good for me and my setup. The Audio Buddy claims 60 dB gain for mics, so that should be workable.

Part of me was hoping I would have to upgrade, though. ;)
 
I tried out the ACM3 the other night and it did fine on a guitar cab. I didn't need to overly push it at all. I wouldn't worry about it.
 
got to play a little more this weekend.

used the acm-2 on a guitar amp, and liked it.
gave a nice "oomph" to the mids, added body to a 57 nicely.
(something that was needed as it was a marshal mg, and i don't really like those amps, ANYTHING helps)

was not super impressed with the acm-4 on the amp here, it was too bassey.

happy surprise with the 583 on acu, bright in a way that i was looking for.
actually boosted the hi mids for a nice harpsicord-ish sound on some backing rythms.

without the same boost did good things to a acu that was a main, and not a backing track.
some weird/intresting over tones resulted from the combo of this guitar/mic combo.
kind of a phasey top end thing going on there, still deciding what i think of it.
but the over all effect was clean and clear.

a better mic for cheaper guitars like this one (which seem to tend toward shitty bass and lackluster hi end)
possibly not so much on an expensive one?
time will tell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top