Oktava MK-101 for taming high end

P

pietro79

New member
Hello

I'm interested in getting the MK-101 for the MK-012's I already have

I'd like to capture very warm vocals... by warm I mean reduced highs...

Yes, frequency response is the relationship between all the equipment and the performer and room, etc.. but I'm convinced my current mic is most "at fault"

I've been using my ADK Vienna for recording vocals... sometimes it works fine, other times I find (in relation to the singer) it captures too much high end...

just recently, I recorded male vocals and was trying to get a 50's type darkness... instead I got raspy, hissy, saliva.... I had to roll off heavily at 9k...I don't want to hear every little molecule of saliva

Looking at the capsules for oktava 012, the MK-101 is the best for what I want, right? Or else, which one?

Anything I should know about the MK-101?
Comparisons to others? Or suggest other mics in similar price range for same application...

Thank you sincerely
Pietro
 
Last edited:
yea, that's neat.
any one used it?
i'm also curious about the 101, and now the red too......

someone must have used these mics....
 
There was just a similar question over at the www.TapeOp.com, here's the answer I originally posted there.

The MK-101 uses the same "mid range forward / soft-but-accurate top end" capsule found in the MK-219 and MK-319. The stock 3-layer headbasket in the MK-101 has good lateral and vertical continuity for minimal refraction problems. However, I modify this headbasket to be a single-layer grille to be consistent with the open sound I prefer in my other work. I also install a capsule base diffuser to break up the reflections off the flat floor of the capsule platform and re-wire the capsule with Evidence Audio wire using a single conductor in a minimal stray-capacitance routing scheme to improve HF detail.

Like the 219/319 before it, the MK-101 does a fine job of presenting a robust lower-midrange and midrange spectral balance while keeping the top sibilant-free.

This LDC capsule works off the MK-012 head amp body and is somewhat (intentionally) under-biased to impart a signature characteristic to the sound. A few years ago, Indian Trail Recording owner and all-around audio guru Harvey Gerst did a review of the Lomo 33mm large diaphragm capsule for the MK-012. He found that underbiasing a large diaphragm capsule by the '012 circuit increased distortion slightly at high levels (in a good way) and added some warmth reminiscent of old Neumann mics. So yeah, Oktava's 26mm 219 capsule in the 101 head coupled to the '012 circuit is going to provide a classic mid range-forward vocal sound.

The MK-104 on the other hand is a different animal. This mic features Oktava's most recently developed, all-brass back plate capsule (the 219 capsule is endearingly made of metalized bakelite) with a 27mm diameter diaphram of 5 micron Lavsan which helps (along with a new backplate hole pattern design) avoid the nasty shrillness heard in a lot of new, inexpensive mics with 3 micron diaphrams.

It's interesting to note that the 104 has a series of four acoustical vents in the bottom of the capsule platform to reduce internal headbasket reflections. A very clever, factory-originated "mod" to aleviate a typical problem found in LDC microphone headbaskets - boxiness caused by internal headbasket reflections. The 104 also has a 3-layer grille mesh so two of them come out in my mods. The overall spectral balance of the MK-104 is tipped toward the HF. Low frequencies are somewhat lean and there's a very flat midrange which is followed by presence and air peaks at 5kHz and 12kHz with a dip in the sibilance range in between. So this is a mic that on the top end at least, resembles an "airy"AKG sound (doesn't have the big bottom) more than a meaty Neumann sound.

So for tom use, my preference would probably be the 219/319 because it has a rich lower midrange, handles high SPLs well and delivers a delicious crunch when pushed due to the the FET / transformer circuit.

The MK-101 would provide a similar overal timbre but not respond the same way during peak clipping due to the FET / bipolor transistor circuit.

The MK-104 I hear as being too lean, clean and airy for tom use but makes a wonderful, more cost effective alternative to the highly regarded Gefell M930 (You can hear this comparison on my site) and totally leaves the TLM-103 in the dust for a lot less money.

Hope this helps, Michael
 
Big Kenny said:
http://www.vintagemicrophone.com/JShop/product.php?xProd=45&jssCart=a23f14c788ac28277845de22a2bfcec6
option b
Click to expand...
It actually looks scooped in the mids (A shape I want to try out.) Does it sound soft on top?

I've noticed that 'flat (QTC-1) or 'smooth w/roll-off (R121) both can fit 'warm well. It looks to be more 'just don't have the peak (or a rise) at the top.

Trying out a Cascade 'Flat Head. $170, should be fun.
http://www.cascademicrophones.com/fh2_mic_report_p.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top