kidvybes
New member
Hey Kid ....come to find out my MXL V77 was modded by David Thomas in Canada.
He made the switch of the tube holder and some electrical modding.
...how's it sound?...
...how's it sound?...
M
moresound
Loud Sun Studios
Really, Really nice!
Sounds good as an abeyance single room microphone on a drum set.
Or other percussive instruments.
D
drBill
New member
Absolutepower - although you guessed completely wrong, you are the winner!!! By default, being the only one with enough cajones to state your thoughts in public. Bravo!!
For you, here are the results. Hope they are helpful in your search of microphones!
Neumann U67
Mic1
Neumann U48
Mic2
Michael Joly modded 1050
Mic3
mshilarious
Banned
Given that most of us were too lazy to listen, what was the final score over at that other board? 
Sound is funny, I am mellowing out listening to jazzradio.com on a 8" POS full-range driver I use as a handy white noise generator. Why am I listening on that speaker rather than the mains I so lovingly designed? Because several channels of my DAC are on the fritz (German product again, I am starting to dislike them
), and rather than fixing that (which I can't take out of the rack for more than a day), I'm stuffing circuit boards 
But it doesn't really matter, mellow tunes stripped of all of their highs are just that much mellower . . .
Sound is funny, I am mellowing out listening to jazzradio.com on a 8" POS full-range driver I use as a handy white noise generator. Why am I listening on that speaker rather than the mains I so lovingly designed? Because several channels of my DAC are on the fritz (German product again, I am starting to dislike them
), and rather than fixing that (which I can't take out of the rack for more than a day), I'm stuffing circuit boards But it doesn't really matter, mellow tunes stripped of all of their highs are just that much mellower . . .
D
drBill
New member
Given that most of us were too lazy to listen, what was the final score over at that other board?
There was no real "score". Just people who listened and gave their thoughts. The clips speak for themselves. I'd be happy to own ANY of the three. I can AFFORD one of the three though.....
mshilarious
Banned
Well, y'know, when you call it a shootout . . . it ain't like the Earps and Clantons hugged after it was over and proclaimed everyone a winner
S
sound125
New member
The mic tests don't amount to a hill of beans to anyone with a recording background, since there are so many variables involved, not to mention the positioning of the mics, selection of pres which can have a dramatic effect on a particular mic, including factors such as a room's humidity.
MXLs are sonic turds insofar as most REs are concerned. Buying one to modify it is backwards thinking at best, when one can readily buy a great sounding mic from Schoeps, Beyer, Geffel, Neumann, etc. The reason REs spend money on high dollar mics is because the companies that produce them generally have vast engineering resources, technical expertise and experience culminating in long established histories and track records.
The bottom line is *great sounding* mics don't need mods. Instead of whining about "nay-sayers", perhaps you would be better served by actually producing an original idea like Neumann did with the U47, instead of reinventing the mic wheel.
I've been fortunate to engineer and produce projects in some exceptional facilities using exceptional equipment. Not all of us here fell off the turnip truck, Michael.
Enjoy the thread.
C
chessparov
New member
I tend to hang out more at GS but wanted to check out the "action" on this thread.
Anyway...
Remember when the late, great mic modder Stephen Paul used to visit, and was surprised/saddened by the occasional inappropriate remark by fellow HR members.
Alan Hyatt (Studio Projects) and Harvey Gerst have taken their measure of undeserved flak at times here in the past too.
So when someone like Bill Pearson AKA "drBill" voices their opinion, suggesting let's all
be more respectful in response. It took me a long time, for example, to understand
why Bob Ohlsson (legendary Motown AE) praised the EV 635a so much for vocals. That was simply a factor of me being more ignorant then, compared to the lesser ignorance of today!
FWIW convinced that all the modders involved in this thread are providing great value to their client, along with several others who frequent audio BBS's.
BTW in agreement that the 2 Neumann's, AND the 1050 each sounded terrific respectively.
Listened just once to each clip, thought the Neumann's were slighty thicker in the mid's,
whereas the 1050's midrange had a bit more detail-on track here? (not sure)
Chris
Anyway...
Remember when the late, great mic modder Stephen Paul used to visit, and was surprised/saddened by the occasional inappropriate remark by fellow HR members.
Alan Hyatt (Studio Projects) and Harvey Gerst have taken their measure of undeserved flak at times here in the past too.
So when someone like Bill Pearson AKA "drBill" voices their opinion, suggesting let's all
be more respectful in response. It took me a long time, for example, to understand
why Bob Ohlsson (legendary Motown AE) praised the EV 635a so much for vocals. That was simply a factor of me being more ignorant then, compared to the lesser ignorance of today!
FWIW convinced that all the modders involved in this thread are providing great value to their client, along with several others who frequent audio BBS's.
BTW in agreement that the 2 Neumann's, AND the 1050 each sounded terrific respectively.
Listened just once to each clip, thought the Neumann's were slighty thicker in the mid's,
whereas the 1050's midrange had a bit more detail-on track here? (not sure)
Chris
PhilGood
Juice box hero
Well, it looks like you've missed not only the point of the thread and modding, but the entire point of this website. The point for modding a cheap mic to make something better out of it is to put a better sound in the hands of a HOME engineer. Someone who doesn't have the dough to shell out for a Neumann, Geffel, blah blah.
After all...this is HOMErecording.com...not PROrecording.com
O
omtayslick
New member
Sure. It would be silly to listen to the mics to see which one works for a given task.
MichaelJoly
Banned
That's an interesting perspective.
Because the sessions Dr. Bill produced were held in pro commercial studios with award winning talent in front of the mics and behind the boards.
In fact Robert Fernandez, a top Hollywood scoring engineer and colleague of Bill's, sat in on the playbacks at that "iconic" studio in the round building. The session was structured and run as if it was a vocal date for a major label artist. That is, a bunch of mics were put up and the gold/patinum-winning singer and Grammy-winning engineers recorded and listened to them. Except for the fact the audio was not intended to hit the top 40 chart everything else about the session was pro - just like a classic Hollywood record date.
Fernandez found the performance of the OktavaMod'd mics quite impressive. I don't have a direct quote, but perhaps Bill could flesh out the story of how one of the highest paid Hollywood engineers thought the tests were more than just a hill of beans. And Fernandez' positive impressions are from just one of many pro engineers and talent with a "recording background" who were similarly impressed during that week of LA shoot outs.
But perhaps I should stop calling them "mic tests" or "shoot outs". Because what when down that week in LA were actual recording sessions where technical and aesthetic judgements about microphones were made by top industry talent.
Last edited:
O
omtayslick
New member
True in many cases. But some are "ok", and some are "one trick ponies" that really do their one trick well.
I have one Michael Joly modded MXL. An MXL 603. I was among the first to order this mod, so I did not get the full mod he now offers for this mic. I got the premium electronics mod only, as it was the only mod available at the time I ordered.
The mic is bright, but no longer screechy. And it is much more articulate in the low mids.
For sdc, I alternate between this mic and a Shure SM81. (depending on which trick the pony is doing) A few days ago I recorded a fingerstyle guitar track and the modded MXL with its brighter top end was just the ticket, while the 81 was too dull. Sometimes it goes the other way around.
But the point is that with mods the MXL is a useful tool. In its original screechy/masked lows condition it was far less useful.
D
drBill
New member
Michael, you got the wrong imDb link. (Too many Robert Fernandez's I guess....
) Here's the proper link for Bobby :http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0273044/
Maybe you can change it in your post. Cheers,
bp
PS -
Bob's involvement was very casual, and actually one of those fun chance encounters in life. I had booked a morning slot at "the studio that cannot be named because their seconds told management how good MJ's mics sounded against their classics and management became intent on protecting their brand name" and Bob was coming in to set up in the afternoon slot for an Orchestra session he was having the next day in the same room. Bob has owned U48's and C12's in the past and currently has one of if not the largest collection of vintage M50's of anyone that I'm aware of. He is an audiophile, and superb engineer wrapped up in one. There are very few that can engineer and handle large (70+) groups of musicians like he can, and I have always been in awe of his expertise and experience. He is at the top of the game IMO with a handful of other LA/London scoring engineers. (These days, his mic collection is focused more on orchestral recording in larger venue's....) When he serendipitously showed up early for his time slot, I asked him if he would listen to some vocals / mics and give his impression. After a few minutes of listening to over a dozen mics, he kept coming back to the U48 and MJ1050 as his favorites on this singer. Passing on the U67, M249, C12a, 44bx, 77dx, and misc. other MJ mics. I believe if he had to choose only one, that would have been the U48. That's pretty much all there is to tell there......
Last edited:
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
I've been staying out of this thread because I just don't see the point, but, well...
Fuck it.
Here's the thing, man. The two things, to be precise, because I think that there are two observations that you need to make before this thread will make any sense at all to you.
First... maybe you missed the logo up top, but this is Home Recording dot com. We're a bunch of enthusiastic, sometimes rabidly so, hobbyists. Some of us have even gotten quite good (I've heard some shockingly good recordings in the mp3 clinic, along with the stuff you'd expect from a bunch of home enthusiasts). All else equal, is it a better idea to buy a Neumann than it is to buy and mid a MXL? Probably, but all else is NOT equal. I'd have to sit down and do the math to be sure, but I suspect my entire home studio costs less than a U87. Most of us are working under an unavoidable budgetary constraint.
Second... Past a point, this is all a moot point. Yes, Neumann makes some pretty spectacularly nice, almost magically so, products. However, if there's anything I've learned over the years, the gear you use matters a LOT less than the person using a gear. If you sat me down with a U87 and a really primo pre, and a world-class engineer of your choice with a modded MXL and a prosumer-grade preamp, even in the same room with the same vocalist, my money says the pro engineer would hand my ass to me and pretty much every single person, possibly excluding you it seems, would agree that the pro engineer's recording of the singer would wipe the floor with mine. A guy who can make a great recording using a U87 can probably also make a great recording using a carefully-selected cheaper mic. Sure, he or she might prefer the more expensive mic, but at the end of the day they can get the job done, with style.
So, why all this needless haranguing about modded mics? Obviously, the right MXL with the right mods can become a very musical microphone, even if it's not nearly as hallowed or respected as a Neumann. So what's the big deal? It's a perfectly viable option that clearly works, and not everyone can drop three grand on a single mic, nor would it make sense to do so for a few of the ones who can. At the end of the day, if it works...
A
Absolutepower
New member
You can't just tell people, "Forget about about these mods, or trying to find less expensive mics that sound good, just go buy a Neumann."
This forum is HOME recording, who the hell is going to have a U48 for their bedroom?
My only goal is to make demos without them sounding like absolute garbage.
This forum is HOME recording, who the hell is going to have a U48 for their bedroom?
My only goal is to make demos without them sounding like absolute garbage.
H
Harvey Gerst
New member
And that's exactly the point I've been trying to make all these years; home recordists can make perfectly acceptable recordings with a lot of the new crop of lower cost microphones. We do not own one single modified microphone at our studio. (I lied; I do have a couple of old Fairchilds that Dan Kennedy modified to run on phantom power.)
All the MXL's, the Studio Projects, the Avant's, and the Behringer ECM8000's (and every other mic we own) are straight out of the box and that's what we use.
A U47 or 48, or 67, or a U87 can be a fine choice for a lot of vocals, but sometimes, it can be beat by a less costly mic. The Shure SM7 comes to mind as a notable example. But the MXL V67g (with a little eq fiddling) can get you close, too.
Don't have an old Telefunken ELA M251, or an AKG C12? Try the Studio Projects T3.
Please, try to just listen to some of these new mics with an open mind, and consider the person singing into the mic, not the brand, or where it was made. It should be all about what's best for the singer (and your budget).
All the MXL's, the Studio Projects, the Avant's, and the Behringer ECM8000's (and every other mic we own) are straight out of the box and that's what we use.
A U47 or 48, or 67, or a U87 can be a fine choice for a lot of vocals, but sometimes, it can be beat by a less costly mic. The Shure SM7 comes to mind as a notable example. But the MXL V67g (with a little eq fiddling) can get you close, too.
Don't have an old Telefunken ELA M251, or an AKG C12? Try the Studio Projects T3.
Please, try to just listen to some of these new mics with an open mind, and consider the person singing into the mic, not the brand, or where it was made. It should be all about what's best for the singer (and your budget).
kidvybes
New member
...Harvey, good to hear your comments...and now that you're here, I gotta ask...have you had any experience with the recently revised MXL 2003A?...your input is always most appreciated & valuable...
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
I just realized sound125 and IMHO weren't the same guy. Sorry about that, sound125, you just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
D
drumslinger
New member
kidvybes,
you beat me to it. I was going to ask Harvey the same question about the MXL 2003a. Has anyone been able to compare the MXL 2003a to other mics?
DS
you beat me to it. I was going to ask Harvey the same question about the MXL 2003a. Has anyone been able to compare the MXL 2003a to other mics?
DS
mshilarious
Banned
Well let's be fair, AH took *plenty* of abuse a while back on GS . . . until he was proved right. I don't recall very many apologies there . . .
But this is not always bad, we shouldn't accept appeals to authority without chewing on them for a moment first. The expert generally can describe why their expertise is correct, then it remains for the novice to verify that with the same methodology.
This is why Marik's posts on components and topologies, for example on the other thread with respect to tube mic design (grid capacitance, Miller effect, and so on) is interesting, because anybody can try that out for themselves.
I would like to see less emphasis on performance in comparisons, because most listeners are too biased by material. I recall Klaus Heyne prefers to test microphones with his own voice by counting. Perhaps the ideal source would be a very short phrase that possessed adequate dynamic and frequency range repeated many times. But then that wouldn't tickle the ear, would it?