AT4040 in comparision to a B1?

C

CanopuS

Amateur music since 1847
OK - this will probably turn into a flame war, but please try and resist if you're tempted! :D

I have a SP B1 which I'm perfectly happy with when it comes to recording guitar or piano, but doesn't suit my voice as it accentuates the "crispiness" around 6-8k. I'm using a VTB-1 with the mic. I'm looking for a second mic, and WOULD choose a B1 if I liked it on my voice to give me a pair, but I'd much rather get something I can use on my voice even if it doesn't mean a perfect pair when recording guitar etc...

The AT4040 has been recommended relentlessly, but I'm worried about the frequency graphs of the two mics. Is the frequency graph representative of the sound I'll be getting? They both have boosts in the same areas, does that mean the crispiness I get will still be present in the AT4040?

The frequency graphs can be found below:

http://www.studioprojectsusa.com/pdf/b1.pdf
http://www.audio-technica.com/prodp...ne/audio-technica/AT4040/user_reviews/]AT4040_english.pdf[/url]

Thanks for any help :)
 
To me, these mics are sort of in the same ballpark (speaking very broadly) as to what they'll do and how they sound (with the AT4040 having better fidelity and more mojo but it should considering it costs more).

I think the AT4040 works well on many vocals (usually not the very best but respectable) where the B1 works well on vocals on rare occasions. YMMV, by the way.

Can you try the AT4040? If not, then I think I can see why you're being apprehensive.
 
I most likely wont get the oppurtunity to try the AT4040 - especially living in the UK where rental and allsorts are even rarer....

I guess its hard to tell, but does the fact that the AT4040 has a similar boost in the area thats causing problems mean it will treat those frequencies with the same harshness?

Cheers
 
While on the topic of comparisons to AT mics (sorry if I'm hi-jacking the thread), if I already have an M-179, would a 4050 be more of the same, or a good addition? On Dot's graph the 4050 is much bighter, but about equally as transparent. Is that accurate? Also how similar is the 4050 to a 414? Thanks, and CanopuS, like I said, I don't mean to hi-jack you thread, I just had a similar question.

-Peter
 
CanopuS said:
I guess its hard to tell, but does the fact that the AT4040 has a similar boost in the area thats causing problems mean it will treat those frequencies with the same harshness?
Click to expand...


It doesn't look to me like their graphs are very similar. On the 4040 you have the typical AT 6 khz peak, while the B1 has a broader boost up a bit higher between 8-12 khz.
 
Fair enough, but then again, there's a 3-4db boost at around 6khz on the SP graph, and the "problem area" appears to be around 6-8, so does the fact that the AT4040 graph appears to have a greater boost at about 6 mean that it's likely to sound even harsher, or do the graphs not necessarily represent the way the frequencies are treated?
 
CanopuS said:
Fair enough, but then again, there's a 3-4db boost at around 6khz on the SP graph, and the "problem area" appears to be around 6-8, so does the fact that the AT4040 graph appears to have a greater boost at about 6 mean that it's likely to sound even harsher ...
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. If you look even closer, you'll notice the B-1 is up about 5-6 dbs or so @ 8-9 khz, whereas the 4040 actually has a dip in that region. :D So it just depends. If you want to get all technical, then one might suppose that if 6 khz was without question the offending frequency, then I'd probably stay far away from either of these two mics ... and instead use something like an Oktava MK-319 (which has kind of a noticeable dip in that region).

A lot of it also has to do with distortion. A mic that distorts and produces crazy odd-order harmonics in the higher frequencies will sound harsher regardless of the shape of it's graph.
 
CanopuS said:
Fair enough, but then again, there's a 3-4db boost at around 6khz on the SP graph, and the "problem area" appears to be around 6-8, so does the fact that the AT4040 graph appears to have a greater boost at about 6 mean that it's likely to sound even harsher, or do the graphs not necessarily represent the way the frequencies are treated?
Click to expand...
My guess (from some experience) is that published frequency plots for these these low cost mics don't have a lot to do with reality, particularly of individual microphones. Very few of these mics come with a graph for your individual unit. So you're just seeing an average graph, one that has probably been "doctored" to some degree to make it look better.

Also, even though two mics might have comparable plots, they may sound quite different because of the different harmonic content (as chessrock notes above) produced by their circuitry, particularly the capsule. So unfortunately, the only way you're going to find the right mic is to try them.

Might I also suggest, in addition to the Oktava MK319 as suggested above, the MXL V67, which can give your voice more "balls", if that's what you're looking for, partially due to its notable proximity effect. It is not "hyped" to the degree the other two are in the 6k-8k region also.
 
CanopuS, if you're in the UK and want another nuetral mic that's better on vocals than the B1 - and also more airy - the Red5 Audio RV8 is a great mic. Only £99.01 with a 14-day trial. You don't love it - you return it.

The RV8 is in the same neutral family as the B1 and 4040 but I think - especially for vocals [ and even amps and drum OH's ] sounds better than both. The 4040 has sort of a grainy sound to it. The RV8 is much smoother.

OneRoomStudios, the 4050 is brighter than the M179. The 4050 also picks up more off-axis than than the M179. So, if you're liking the neutral thing with the M179 but wanting something brighter, the 4050 might be a good choice. I think the 4050 is a considerably better mic than the 4040. The 4050 is used a lot on female vox, sometimes amps and drum OH's. The 4050 is definitely in the neighborhood of the 414's. And so is the ADK TL. The 4050 still has a little of that AT "grain" - which some people like. Also there's a couple versions of the 4050...the AT4050/CM5 powers the capsule with an electret capacitor. The AT4050 is a real condenser mic. Then there's obviously different varieties of 414's - the EB, B-ULS, TLII and now the new B-XL II and B-XLS - which each have an additional 5th pattern and lower self-noise.

I'll generalize - but I think in rock and alt situations you might find people favoring the 4050 a bit more - as that touch of "grain" gives just a little more edge than the 414's. In general recording - pop, r&b, jazz - you might see people favoring the 414 more. I've used 414's since the 70's. 4050's since the mid-90's. And ADK TL's in the last couple of years. I prefer the ADK TL in omni over the 414. I prefer the 414's - especially B-ULS - over the ADK TL in cardioid. I prefer the 4050 on amps. I prefer the 414 and ADK TL when I want to capture dimension and imagery - which is something the Shure KSM models [ also in the neutral camp ] aren't particularly good at doing - as Shure sort of has a two-dimensional, close sound throughout its entire line.

Truth is 4050's, 414's and TL's are excellent in a lot of applications. And then you also have to consider the moola. You can almost get a pair of TL's for what a newer 414 costs. If money didn't matter I might prefer a pair of 414's. If money did matter, I'd rather have a pair of TL's and the extra $800/$900 in my pocket from not forking out for newer 414's. 4050's run about a grand a pair. A great buy - while they last - are the discountinued AKG 414 B-ULS and 414 TLII that are still available at certain dealers. I've seen them for as low as $650.

Hope that helps. Or maybe adds to the confusion. : ) If you've got a specific question - shoot. Maybe we can whittle things down.
 
Last edited:
Yeah that definitely helps, thanks a ton for such a detailed post. I don't have anyother specific questions on the topic right now, just going over my options.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top