AKG C1000s

[pundit]

I do indeed mean the Beyer M201! Actually it's the TG version. But we're not going to let that spoil things are we!?

I have no idea!

And what makes you think I want to get rid of it? And what's with the Beyer, Beyerdynamic thing? (note, I'm not blaming you for that) Which is correct?

The company was originally called 'Beyer Dynamic'.
However they do produce condenser mics as well. I think they may have dropped the 'dynamic' from their name these days.

The NT4 seems a little too gimmicky for my tastes. I think I'd sooner buy a pair of NT5s. Actually I'd rather get a pair of MK012s or the C4s as I like the idea of interchangeable capsules.

My mistake! I got the NT4 and the NT5's ass about!
The interchangeable capsules are a definate bonus!

 

[DJL]

I just got the new Musician's Friend catalog and they have a limited quantity of Oktava MK-012K mic's with all 3 capsules for $149.99. It's not listed on their website but it is in their catalog. I own the Rode NT3's, NT5's, Marshall 603S's, AKG C1000S's, Oktava MK-012's and other SDC. I think the Oktava MK-012's are great mic's.

 

[Mark7]

Hey Pundit! (Or,indeed, anyone else!)

So. In my situation would you
A: Take what's available and hope for the best
Or
B: Buy some better mics by mail. And hope for the best.

I'm really torn on this. I have to tell you that I did buy three mics (the M201, an M99 and an MD421 II) by mail order. But they're dynamics. For some reason I don't feel too comfortable about purchasing condensors that way. There's something that makes me want to obsessively scrutinise a condensor before I hand over the readies. I think it's probably paranoia

 

[Lopp]

It's common for a newbie to choose the brightest mic in his/her budget. Although I wonder if most women entering the recording arena are as forgiving of bright mics as we males are?

The problem with microphones that add excessive high frequency coloration is that the effect can be cumulative, or is only best suited for one or two particular situations.

This limits their usefulness in a professional studio and it may not be a good investment as a general use mic. A smoother mic may be a better choice, at a lower cost, and some judicious eq to duplicate the desired brightness.

The other problem is that many new recordists mistake the extra brightness for "increased high frequency detail", and only later (often, many months later) find out that they were listening for the wrong characteristics.

It may well be that many people who like the AKG C1000 use them on, or with, other equipment that may not have the desired high end response, and the C1000s become system compensators.

I've never advised using them as a general purpose mic, but if they work well for their owners, you can't argue with success. If I had a pair, I would only use them for a small number of things and their value would not be worth the price to me.

Cool.

I did a search in C3000 to find out why it's soooo "bad." These statemets helped explain.

Ya see, when I bought my first LD Condensor, I followed some advice and auditioned them at the store. I fell prey to the hype and got the C3000.

I recently compared it to my v67 on some female vox. I found the C3000 accentuated them nicely. However, this may be due to equipment limitations and my own high frequency hearing loss.

Thanks for the clarifications on the hype. It will help me pay attention to what to listen for in the future.


Matt

 

[littledog]

I recently compared it to my v67 on some female vox. I found the C3000 accentuated them nicely. However, this may be due to equipment limitations and my own high frequency hearing loss.

You might be able to talk AKG into an endorsement contract to coincide with their new ad campaign:

"The AKG C3000! Favorite mic among the hearing impaired!"

 

[BobOC]

Just wanted to say thanks to most everyone who contributed to this thread...I learn a lot by reading these things!

I own a C1000s...actually, it came as a "freebie" with my Akai DPS16 recorder.

I like it...I think it sounds good on my acoustic guitar. However, the two mics that I've set up for "full-time" use in my studio (er...bedroom) are the Studio Projects C1 and B1. The B1 was just $79. Amazing.

Harvey...your comment about hearing the undesired high-end "months later" is right on the money! It's amazing how often I go back and listen to a mix, only to say, "WHAT was I hearing?!?!?"

I've learned my lesson, hopefully, and now usually eq by subtraction only, rather than boosting all the high ends like I used to.

 

[Lopp]

Huh? D'ya say something Littledog? Speak up dammit!

 

[Hard2Hear]

I think Mark raises a good point with his questioning, though.

Digital recording, being sterile and pure, makes any high frequency harshness accentuated. Thats why all this cheap "tube" gear is so popular, you know.... cause homerecording is done in the digital domain more often than not. All of these tube pre amps didn't start popping up until digital became so popular, and now everyone wants to "warm it up". Tape does react differently than recording digital. It really depends on the kind of machine you are using, but the highs are really different.

I think the C1000 became popular before the digital thing hit, and people liked those highs on tape. You get those highs on a PC and it doesn't sound so good. So in your case Mark, you may like the C1000. I used to own a couple, and I liked them waay back when I was recording on a Tascam tape recorder. I did sell them when I started using a DAW because I didnt like the sound any more. I think in your case, it's worth a try to check them out, especially if you can return them.

H2H