I used them for a lot of my recordings last Year, Most of the sampling for my Early Patches Sampling CD was done with these Mics.
<shameless self plug>
Sound on Sound wrote:"The recording quality of all instruments (and the looping of wind and string sounds) is very good, and this has obviously been a labour of love." I mean they seemed to like it. (full review here:
http://www.dausenkunz.de/early_patches/dokumentation/english/reviews.htm
</shameless self plug>
In december last Year I had recorded a medieval recital using these Microphones (AT3525). The musicians liked it so much that they decided to release a CD of the recording. Interestingly they played the same program at the next day in concert for a big radio station where the recording was done with some _really_ expensive Mics and preamps. however they preferred the sound of my humble attempt over that. That does also not really speak against the 3525.
That all said I have to add that I had to apply heavy EQing on all my recordings before I played them to anyone else to restore the clearity of sound. Otherwise the recordings would have just been not acceptable. I have moved on now to a pair of AKG 3000 which IMO are way better than the AT3525 although they are still regarded as unacceptable by people who have the privilege to use the really quality gear.
So why is it that I am telling You two contradicting storys? firstly Yeah, yeah great gear! then: Bah, even worse than the crap that I am forced to use now???
The point is: As long as You can´t afford anything better You won´t go wrong using these microphones. You can even achieve professional results using them. But then, if You have some more bucks to spend, do it and go for something better, You will achieve much better results more easily with better microphones.
Andreas
