VOCAL MICS
- Thread starter LSA100X
- Start date
rode NT1 is the one that everybody likes here $170 in zZounds... (the shockmount $20)
also check the Audio Tachnica AT3525 $190. (with shockmount)
these are the ones in the price range,
theres a lot of threads about theme...
ps- the rode NT1 is an exellent mic,
but it looks better in photo then in real life.
(maybe you like the shure SM94 with a popfilter... and you can use it as overheads too, just an idea)
also check the Audio Tachnica AT3525 $190. (with shockmount)
these are the ones in the price range,
theres a lot of threads about theme...
ps- the rode NT1 is an exellent mic,
but it looks better in photo then in real life.
(maybe you like the shure SM94 with a popfilter... and you can use it as overheads too, just an idea)
CyanJaguar
New member
Guess what
Sound on sound magazine just reviewed the MXL 2001 this month. The reviewer was real impressed, and it is a very beautiful mic and has an included shock mount
http://www.sospubs.co.uk/sos/oct00/articles/mxl.htm
I think it's also cheaper than a rode nt1. I liked the sound of it on http://www.christinabbott.com/newcd.html
Sound on sound magazine just reviewed the MXL 2001 this month. The reviewer was real impressed, and it is a very beautiful mic and has an included shock mount
http://www.sospubs.co.uk/sos/oct00/articles/mxl.htm
I think it's also cheaper than a rode nt1. I liked the sound of it on http://www.christinabbott.com/newcd.html
Gear_Junky
New member
Proveras, where did you see a shockmount for NT1 for $20? That's good price.
Recording Engineer
Moderator
Just Beware
Of the MXL 2001's extremely bad quality control. Make sure you listen and compare to others of the same model and pick the one you like the BEST; considering I'm not sure if anyone knows what they're suppose to sound like.
Of the MXL 2001's extremely bad quality control. Make sure you listen and compare to others of the same model and pick the one you like the BEST; considering I'm not sure if anyone knows what they're suppose to sound like.
Gear_Junky
New member
Considering that NT1 is $169 at zzounds.com, why not just buy it, everybody says that they're good, even the reviewer says that the MXL isn't quite as good. Even if we're talking $50 dif., why not get better instead of cheaper? Sure, the MXL gives you a shockmount, but somebody already kindly pointed out a source of cheap good shockmounts:
http://www.tensimount.com
http://www.tensimount.com
G
Guest
Guest
The above mentioned AudioTechnica mic is nice.
Listen to that NT1 before you buy it, I won't spend the money on it, sounds very harsh and weak to me, and I know I am not the only one who shudders. But some people, no I take that back many people do like them so I guess its just personal pref. Enjoy whatever you get and let us know
Shakes,
Have you hugged your JoeMeek today
Listen to that NT1 before you buy it, I won't spend the money on it, sounds very harsh and weak to me, and I know I am not the only one who shudders. But some people, no I take that back many people do like them so I guess its just personal pref. Enjoy whatever you get and let us know
Shakes,
Have you hugged your JoeMeek today
Thanx everybody, I got a Shure SM-58. It sounds nice except I have to get used to my vs 840......I've tried to lay vocals about seven times and I can't get it to stop clipping.....maybe I need to use some compression from the vs or lower the gain on my mackie......but that's another chapter in another book.....Happy trails!!!!!!!
CyanJaguar
New member
just for archive purposes and future readers of this thread:
the reviewer of the Marshall mxl 2001 did not prefer the rode nt1 he just said that it had more body, but that you could get that body with the MXL 2001 if you move up close.
He stated though that the mxl was more shiny on top.
subjectively, that body that the rode has is absolute crap. combine that with lack of top end and you have a mic that is muddy. I would take an MXL 1 over a rodent1 ANYDAY.
the reviewer of the Marshall mxl 2001 did not prefer the rode nt1 he just said that it had more body, but that you could get that body with the MXL 2001 if you move up close.
He stated though that the mxl was more shiny on top.
subjectively, that body that the rode has is absolute crap. combine that with lack of top end and you have a mic that is muddy. I would take an MXL 1 over a rodent1 ANYDAY.
Ears
ADA
rodent1......ha. a little joke CJ
I use CAD and AT, but I thought the Rode NT and NTV were not bad.
The thing I found with the NT1 was up front almost extreme presence. With a voice that is top/bottom, (like one of my clients) and not middy this has been successful.
$200.00 is a tough range to get that great of quality.
It only stands to reason.
I have also used the KSM32 Shure and TLM103 Neumann. (In my opinion) a good investment although 3 times the price, along with the NTV Rode. I'm sure there are a lot more that I haven't tried, but are still in the price range.
I use CAD and AT, but I thought the Rode NT and NTV were not bad.
The thing I found with the NT1 was up front almost extreme presence. With a voice that is top/bottom, (like one of my clients) and not middy this has been successful.
$200.00 is a tough range to get that great of quality.
It only stands to reason.
I have also used the KSM32 Shure and TLM103 Neumann. (In my opinion) a good investment although 3 times the price, along with the NTV Rode. I'm sure there are a lot more that I haven't tried, but are still in the price range.
I hate and despise you all...
Well, not really. Actually, I love this page and all of you. But, I'm officially hedging; I was all set to get a Rode NT1 based on previous comments in this forum, and this thread has sown the seeds of doubt in my head. So now, I have four candidates in the under $200 range:
1. Rode NT1 - seems to be the recommendation of many people, but the dissenters are loud. I like "Rodent 1", btw.
2. Marshall Electronics MXL2001 - it sounds pretty damn good on the Christina Abbott recording (http://www.christinabbott.com/newcd.html),
3. AKG C1000S - recommended by homerecording.com's own Dragon and others.
4. Audio Technica AT3525 - haven't heard much but Proveras mentioned it.
My setup: I'll be using the mic I buy primarily for vocals, and possibly a little acoustic guitar. I'll be plugging it into a Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro and going straight to the computer, and basically want as warm and natural a vocal sound as possible; maybe a little reverb, but that's it (I suppose EQ and compression as necessary, but ideally totally transparently). I'm a tenor in a straight-ahead rock band, with my range varying something like Chris Cornell or Jeff Buckley (except not *quite* as high, and suckier.
I'm leaning toward the MXL 2001 right now because I've heard it - anyone have recorded examples of the others? And alas, I haven't found a music store around here that stocks any of these, so I'll have to rely primarily on reviews and recommendations.
Anyone have further thoughts? Willing to offer clarifications and/or definitive reasons that I shouldn't go with the MXL 2001 instead of the NT1? Anyone?
-brennan
[Edited by brennan on 10-12-2000 at 19:24]
Well, not really. Actually, I love this page and all of you. But, I'm officially hedging; I was all set to get a Rode NT1 based on previous comments in this forum, and this thread has sown the seeds of doubt in my head. So now, I have four candidates in the under $200 range:
1. Rode NT1 - seems to be the recommendation of many people, but the dissenters are loud. I like "Rodent 1", btw.
2. Marshall Electronics MXL2001 - it sounds pretty damn good on the Christina Abbott recording (http://www.christinabbott.com/newcd.html),
3. AKG C1000S - recommended by homerecording.com's own Dragon and others.
4. Audio Technica AT3525 - haven't heard much but Proveras mentioned it.
My setup: I'll be using the mic I buy primarily for vocals, and possibly a little acoustic guitar. I'll be plugging it into a Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro and going straight to the computer, and basically want as warm and natural a vocal sound as possible; maybe a little reverb, but that's it (I suppose EQ and compression as necessary, but ideally totally transparently). I'm a tenor in a straight-ahead rock band, with my range varying something like Chris Cornell or Jeff Buckley (except not *quite* as high, and suckier
.I'm leaning toward the MXL 2001 right now because I've heard it - anyone have recorded examples of the others? And alas, I haven't found a music store around here that stocks any of these, so I'll have to rely primarily on reviews and recommendations.
Anyone have further thoughts? Willing to offer clarifications and/or definitive reasons that I shouldn't go with the MXL 2001 instead of the NT1? Anyone?
-brennan
[Edited by brennan on 10-12-2000 at 19:24]
Check out "Dead Alibis" at http://www.mp3.com/37point5/ to hear what the Rode NT1 sounds like on vocals (through an ART Tube MP into Cakewalk). Note that there was hardly any EQ on the vocal tracks except for a low end cut; the only other processing was a decent amount of compression and some reverb.
I think this microphone is amazing. It sounds great on my voice, and it also works well on guitar amps, as an overhead, etc. (it was also used for these purposes on "Dead Alibis".
Bottom line, though: go to a Mars Music, test all of these mics on your voice, and pick the one you think complements your style the best.
Good luck!
Ryan
p.s. Jeff Buckley was incredible, and if you sound anything like him, I'd love to hear your stuff when you get done with it. Keep us posted.
I think this microphone is amazing. It sounds great on my voice, and it also works well on guitar amps, as an overhead, etc. (it was also used for these purposes on "Dead Alibis".
Bottom line, though: go to a Mars Music, test all of these mics on your voice, and pick the one you think complements your style the best.
Good luck!
Ryan
p.s. Jeff Buckley was incredible, and if you sound anything like him, I'd love to hear your stuff when you get done with it. Keep us posted.
Ears
ADA
We are all individuals.
From SM58 to U87.
I don't mind people's opinions, as long as they don't tell other people what their's should be.......
It's a personal thing microphones. I waited and went for the big picture. I can definitely hear the difference it has made along with the Envoice. I wish I had all we have listed. Each has their benefit. None. SUCK.
Check the post (under microphones) from Tom Hicks.
From SM58 to U87.
I don't mind people's opinions, as long as they don't tell other people what their's should be.......
It's a personal thing microphones. I waited and went for the big picture. I can definitely hear the difference it has made along with the Envoice. I wish I had all we have listed. Each has their benefit. None. SUCK.
Check the post (under microphones) from Tom Hicks.
Kelly Holdridge
New member
A hot mic that works well in both live and studio shit (provided you like proximity, and less pre-amp noise):
USED Audix OM-6.
Don't have to worry about phantom power, either. Had the chance to buy a couple, fucked up, didn't get'em. Wished we had...
Audix makes very good live mics, and if you want that live mic sound (maybe as the dummy mic w/ option to use later on), the Audix's have a good flat range on them (proximity, of course).
USED Audix OM-6.
Don't have to worry about phantom power, either. Had the chance to buy a couple, fucked up, didn't get'em. Wished we had...
Audix makes very good live mics, and if you want that live mic sound (maybe as the dummy mic w/ option to use later on), the Audix's have a good flat range on them (proximity, of course).
Well LSA 100X,
I´d just like to express my humble opinion.
I´ve used both NT 1 and C1000S and there´s no doubt in my ears that the C1000S mic sounds a lot better.
If you have some old vinyls left to sell of for extra cash I would strongly recommend you to buy a C2000 instead. The 1" membran sure helps you kick ass. I use it all the time in the studio without complaints. Don´t really know how much it costs in USA tho since I´m located in Sweden...
And last, I´m not sponsored by AKG, hehehe. They just make good mics. I´m glad tho that more and more 'cheap' mics appear in the market. It puts some pressure on AKG to put out high quality stuff and in the end we will hopefully benefit from this, right
giggsy
I´d just like to express my humble opinion.
I´ve used both NT 1 and C1000S and there´s no doubt in my ears that the C1000S mic sounds a lot better.
If you have some old vinyls left to sell of for extra cash I would strongly recommend you to buy a C2000 instead. The 1" membran sure helps you kick ass. I use it all the time in the studio without complaints. Don´t really know how much it costs in USA tho since I´m located in Sweden...
And last, I´m not sponsored by AKG, hehehe. They just make good mics. I´m glad tho that more and more 'cheap' mics appear in the market. It puts some pressure on AKG to put out high quality stuff and in the end we will hopefully benefit from this, right
giggsy
Gear_Junky
New member
I'm recording an acoustic album for a friend (he sings and plays all the guitars) and I used NT1 to track the guitar (it was in front of it, and I also had the c1000s overhead), then I tracked the vocals with the Rodent. I haven't tried other large condensers, but I just want to say that the sound is very pleasing. Presence it has - it's very intimate and cuts through very well (4 tracks of acoustic guitars). By no means is it "in your face" in any bad way, it's just sweet. I record everything flat. So it's still a good mic, even if MXL is good, too.
A grain of salt
I don't mean to display a "holier than thou attitude", but just remember we are talking about $200 mics. Even the difference of only a few hundred dollars ($200 to $300) would yield a significant, I repeat significant, improvement in sound, build quality and consistency from mic to mic.
Just my 2 pesetas.
Rev E
BTW, I do agree with CyanJaguar that Christina Abbott sounded great with the Marshall mic, but some of that had to do with the Mindprint pre, reasonably good engineering & mixing, and great songs sung by a great voice who kept my interest on the song rather than the gear. That recording spoke volumes about the irrelevance of the "hyper gear junky craze" that we are living in.
[Edited by Rev E on 10-13-2000 at 06:29]
I don't mean to display a "holier than thou attitude", but just remember we are talking about $200 mics. Even the difference of only a few hundred dollars ($200 to $300) would yield a significant, I repeat significant, improvement in sound, build quality and consistency from mic to mic.
Just my 2 pesetas.
Rev E
BTW, I do agree with CyanJaguar that Christina Abbott sounded great with the Marshall mic, but some of that had to do with the Mindprint pre, reasonably good engineering & mixing, and great songs sung by a great voice who kept my interest on the song rather than the gear. That recording spoke volumes about the irrelevance of the "hyper gear junky craze" that we are living in.
[Edited by Rev E on 10-13-2000 at 06:29]
CyanJaguar
New member
Amen to that, REV E
I agree with you totally rev e. about the fact that on the C. Abott recording they were "great songs sung by a great voice" and that took all the focus off the gear.
I had never previously heard 37.5 before but I must say that, after listening to some songs on his page, he makes pretty good music, and that the rode mic work well with his voice
finally, Brennan, I also have a tenor voice, that sounds like (in my best dreams) Andrea Bocelli, and whether it was the fact that the dude who recorded me with the nt1 and also recorded a whole commercial CD with it did a terribly bad job on eq and/or mic placement(5 inches), or the mic just does not work well with my kind of voice. As I said it sounded very good on 37.5's voice. One thing that Recording engineer said though, these MIT (made in taiwan) mics are not known for consistency from one mic to the other, so you might have to listen to it to make sure you are getting a good one.
peace
I agree with you totally rev e. about the fact that on the C. Abott recording they were "great songs sung by a great voice" and that took all the focus off the gear.
I had never previously heard 37.5 before but I must say that, after listening to some songs on his page, he makes pretty good music, and that the rode mic work well with his voice
finally, Brennan, I also have a tenor voice, that sounds like (in my best dreams) Andrea Bocelli, and whether it was the fact that the dude who recorded me with the nt1 and also recorded a whole commercial CD with it did a terribly bad job on eq and/or mic placement(5 inches), or the mic just does not work well with my kind of voice. As I said it sounded very good on 37.5's voice. One thing that Recording engineer said though, these MIT (made in taiwan) mics are not known for consistency from one mic to the other, so you might have to listen to it to make sure you are getting a good one.
peace