A Truly Fine Vocal Mic for live performance.

pohaku said:
Yet another great performing vocal mic is the Sennheiser MD441. A very hi-fi dynamic mic with roll off switches. There is an all black touring version (MD541 I think) that is a little hardier than the studio version although either could be used. Used by Stevie Nicks and Elton John. They are about $300 or so on e-bay.
Click to expand...
The MD431 that I mentioned a couple of posts back is just a 441 in a handheld stage vocal format. Same capsule. I've never seen anyone use a 441 as a stage vocal mic, but the 431 is perfect for it.
 
I don't think the MD431 and the MD441 are the same mic reconfigured for stage. The specs for the original MD431 Profipower are:

Polar Pattern Uni (Supercardioid)
Frequency Range 40 ... 16000 Hz
Sensitivity 1.4 mV/Pa
Impedance 250 Ohms
Dimensions 31 Ø (shaft) x 205 mm
Weight 0.250 kg


Specs for the newer MD431 (II) are:

Polar Pattern Uni (Supercardioid)
Frequency Range 40 ... 18000 Hz
Sensitivity 2.2 mV/Pa
Impedance 250 Ohms
Dimensions 49 Ø x 200 mm
Weight 0.250 kg

The specs for the 441/541 are:

Polar Pattern Uni (Supercardioid)
Frequency Range 30 ... 20000 Hz
Sensitivity 1.8 mV/Pa
Impedance 200 Ohms
Dimensions 33 x 36 x 265 mm
Weight 0.450 kg

The MD441 ($935) lists at about twice the price of the MD431 ($549).

If they were the same mic simply reconfigured for stage work, no one would buy the MD441 with that price differential.

I have both and they do sound different. The MD441 is definitely much more hifi - almost condenser like. That said, the MD431 is a nice mic and can be found pretty cheap on e-bay -- @$160 or so. Prince used to use it early on in his career and they do look pretty cool.
 
cpl_crud said:
If you've got the money, try the Neumann KMS 105... that's a really good mic, espically for the whole jazz singer scene. I did a gig with one last year at the City Recital Hall (Sydney) and it blew me away... so much clearer and warmer than a Beta58...
Click to expand...

Yeah. I have used just about EVERY handheld you can think of, and I think the Neumann KMS 105 is the best of the bunch by far! It handles loud well, and it never get harsh or muddy like so many other mics to. It just always sounds clear.

Good mic. Expensive as hell though!
 
The Audix OM 5 is another good choice on SOME voices! On baritone singers, they are a god send. On females, they are like alley cats being tortured!
 
In looking at my first post in this thread, I see that my remarks about the Beyer M88 may be confusing with respect to the other mics (Audix VX-10, Neumann KMS-105 and AE5400). :eek:

I meant to say:

IMHO, the top handheld condensor mics are the Neumann KMS105, Audix VX-10 and the Audio Technica AE5400. The AT can probably be had for a little less money than the others. It uses the same capsule as the AT-4050 recordimg mic. I have several of the Audix mics (as well as the AKG C535eb and Beyer M88 mentioned above) and they are simply great performing (and recording) mics. I think the Audix VX-10 is very comparable to the Neumann and can be bought for reasonable money on e-bay if you are so inclined (less than a used Neumann on e-bay). I think I paid an average of $300 each or so for mine. The Beyer M88 is a nice mic but has whomping proximity effect which may or may not be what you need.

The Neumann is definitely a nice mic but pricey and used ones aren't discounted much.
 
pohaku said:
I have both and they do sound different. The MD441 is definitely much more hifi - almost condenser like.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. Those specs certainly do make it appear to be pretty dissimilar. Maybe it's just the capsule that's the same. My description of it as "the same" is based on discussions with some pretty knowledgeable people on r.a.p., but now that I think of it, I think it was just described as having the same capsule.
 
Actually, I'd be surprised if they used the same capsule. They are physically so dissimilar that I doubt that the 431 capsule would fit in a 441 body -- too big I think. But I've been surprised before. :D
 
pohaku said:
Actually, I'd be surprised if they used the same capsule. They are physically so dissimilar that I doubt that the 431 capsule would fit in a 441 body -- too big I think. But I've been surprised before. :D
Click to expand...
A google search of rec.audio.pro brings up comments like these...

Will Miho: "Speaking of Rob Thomas, he also sings into a 431 in one of his videos, which is basically the 441 in a handheld futuristic looking model..."

Wll again: "The Sennheiser MD431 is a pretty good mic for snare, it's a great dynamic with the same capsule as the MD441. It's a hypercardiod too, the narrow pattern gives you good off axis rejection.

Scott Dorsey: "True, but also a substantially lower cost. With the 441, you are paying for some very extensive internal shockmounting and baffling which there is no space inside the more compact 431 for.

"The response on the 431 is close to that of the 441, though admittedly narrower due to the smaller grille, and the pattern is close too. It's not as clean a sound, but it's something like a third the price."

Scott again: "The 431 has about as tight a pattern as the 441, and about the same sound, but it's rigged up in a package that looks more like a normal PA mike than the 441, it costs about half what the 441 does, and it is harder to pop than the 441. I think the 441 is a little cleaner on the top, but the 431 is more useful on vocals because the 441 is so easy to pop.

JP Gerard: "I took a look inside and sure enough, the 431 assemly looks just like a 441 assembly."

There are dozens more, but you get the idea. It's not exactly authoritative, but if they're wrong, they're all wrong together <g>.
 
Cool. I'm surprised. The microphones look so different and are such different shapes. Scott and Will generally do know what they are talking about and they have been more than helpful to me from time to time. Thanks for doing the search!
 
OK, I went with the Neumann KMS 105 and I'm glad I did. This is a wonderful mic and thank all of you for your input.
I compare this mic to a really great camera that has a wide depth of field where objects in the forground and background to an object aren't blurry but remain in good focus.
I can still work the mic's proximity effect but I don't have to worry about staying in a narrow range for the sweet spot. My voice shows every nuance with it -- both good and bad -- so it makes me sing better. I've been working it with studio headphones and I'm amazed at its clarity throughout my vocal range and dynamics.
Thanks again.
Regards,
Mike Gilles
 
I know this is a dead thread, but for those who come searching for answers like I did, I’ll leave this here:



In the video at 13:26 Dave holds up a md441 capsule next to the disassembled Profi md431.

I’ll point out that the sound of the 431 he is repairing is awful compared to the two vintage versions I own, so clearly something else needing repair other than just the grounding hum (as he also states in conclusion)
 
After many mics over the years bit the bullet as they say and went with 3 Shure KMS-8 and a KSM-9hs (the hyper cardioid -also the least hyped top end of the condenser versions (..have no use for 'sizzle top end :>)
 
I've used this comparison for years....The SM56 basically a sm57 in a different body was good enough for every band in this line up and the movie that followed.....I suppose for a live venue you're going to be hard pressed trying make a point that some other mic is going to be "better" perhaps so but is it really worth expense and the effort ...They are everywhere , cheap and do a perfectly fine job of bringing your voice to the mixing board and room...I also include the SM 58 but am a big fan of the 57... Now in the studio oh hell yeak,,break out the check book...but for live,,,nah least not me.



1671122636856.png
 
TAE said:
I've used this comparison for years....The SM56 basically a sm57 in a different body was good enough for every band in this line up and the movie that followed.....I suppose for a live venue you're going to be hard pressed trying make a point that some other mic is going to be "better" perhaps so but is it really worth expense and the effort ...They are everywhere , cheap and do a perfectly fine job of bringing your voice to the mixing board and room...I also include the SM 58 but am a big fan of the 57... Now in the studio oh hell yeak,,break out the check book...but for live,,,nah least not me.
Click to expand...
I'd offer very ..very often many times the addition of the foam wind screen on 'live mics makes an improvement.
I'll see ya' your Monterey Pop and raise you..

Add.. grins :>)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TAE
mixsit said:
I'd offer very ..very often many times the addition of the foam wind screen on 'live mics makes an improvement.
I'll see ya' your Monterey Pop and raise you..

Add.. grins :>)
Click to expand...

Yup I I keep a pack of the foam covers around for those rare occasions where wind is a factor. I use a pop filter in the studio
 
Second the 935. It fits in a mix so much better than a 58 without needing EQ and is much more detailed. It's almost like it has some natural compression to it.
 
nosir512a said:
Second the 935. It fits in a mix so much better than a 58 without needing EQ and is much more detailed. It's almost like it has some natural compression to it.
Click to expand...
I'm partial to the Sennheisers as well. I've got 1 SM57 just because you have to have one, 3 835s and 1 935. They are great live vocal mics. No need for a 58.
 
oops :eek: Never mind... looks like I've already expounded upon my ignorance in the thread previously see post #34
 

Attachments

  • 1678905773558.png
    1678905773558.png
    188.5 KB · Views: 8
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top