Best mic for vocals and acoustic guitar1

[Bryan34120]

Hey, right now I am trying to decide on whether to get the Studio Projects C1 Condenser mic ($200) or the MXL 990 Condenser mic($50). I am interesting in doing some recording for vocals and an acoustic guitar. i have heard great things about both of these mics and I am lost on which one, if any of them, that I should purchase. If there are better ones, I would appreciate it if people would give me their opinions. thank you

 

[soundchaser59]

I think mics in that price range you should compare the C1 to one of the Rode mics, like an NT1. But the C1 should definitely prove to be quite superior to the MXL.

 

[Dags]

I think mics in that price range you should compare the C1 to one of the Rode mics, like an NT1. But the C1 should definitely prove to be quite superior to the MXL.

Definitely check out the Rode NT1-a. I own one of these myself and for the price, they are really good value! I have used it on vocals and acoustic guitar with pleasing results.
Will distort when a really loud signal is pushed through it (shouting or whatever) which you can use to add a bit of grit to vocals.
Dags

 

[scrubs]

It's tough to cover both of these well in a single inexpensive mic. Some folks like the Studio Projects B1 (the opinion seems to be that the B1 is slightly better on guitar, while the C1 is better on most vocals). In your situation, I might get the CAD M179. It's fairly neutral and will work well on both sources, plus it's multipattern.

 

[Big Kenny]

Yup 179, definitely 179...I'm starting to feel like Rainman

 

[sdelsolray]

Ditto (or is it tritto??) on the CAD M179.

 

[tadmaz]

I'd take a look at the ADK Hamburg/Vienna as well. I have a hamburg and use it for vocals only, but it's supposedly great on acoustic as well.

 

[Big Kenny]

Yuop thats a niceone too. ADK has a great spec sheet

 

[EVT]

I have both the cad m179 and the adk hamburg, and like them both very much, on vocals, and on acoustic guitar, and other things as well.

You can hear some of what I've been doing with these mics. I have some of my latest recordings with the info. about the mic's used, and other recording info. here:

http://corrientesmusic.com/EVT_recordings.html

evt

 

[rayc]

Expensive Tastes

Hi,
You folk have either expensive tastes or extensive budgets. I had to double take the Home part or home recording.
Seriously though, I know
(good gear + good taste) X good skills = good sound
I've been using a variety of mics, from ancient crystal jobs through to the "recommended" Shures but have found that of the range 2 do wonders - 1 is a "no name" dynamic that has suprised quite a few semi pro musos that have sung into it and the other(s) - Sony Electret 19B. The variety of sound from the latter, depending on proximity & angle, is really useful. These latter turn up on eBay infrequently but I've seen three in the last month.
Is this heresy?
Is it just my lack of finesse?
I record into Cakewalk Pro running under Win98 with a P3 processor using a Turtle Beach card.
Cheers
rayC

 

[BigRay]

Ditto on the ADK reccomendations..I say the Hamburg might fit the bill a little better for double duty on vocals and acoustic guitar...

ADKs arent expensive at all....2-300 for a mic is pretty cheap . Especially at the level of quality that comes from ADK. .I havent heard the CAD m179 but Ive heard so many great things about it, I am convinced it is probably an excellent mic. Ugly as homemade soap though.

 

[gitrguy87]

For acoustic guitar, I'd go with the Shure SM81.

 

[Big Kenny]

Not for vocals, he wants a mic for both.

 

[mayonaise33]

what about an Apex 460 or Apex 415?

 

[honedawg]

I agree with scrubs, I like the C1 for vocals, especially female. I find it way to bright for acoustic guitar though. I have also noticed a staccato crackle when doing heavy strumming.

 

[fenderlady]

I have both the C1 and a B3 (the b3 is multi pattern), The C1 works well for vocals, but seems a little too bright on an accoustic, although there are ways around that. The B3 sounds absolutely great on my Martin, and it does a really nice job with vocals. By far the B3 is my most versatile mic.

 

[emergencyexit]

Many of you have said x or y is a "good" mic. Well, what the hell does that mean? Last time I checked the word "good" didn't help me choose a mic for a clients acoustic. Would you all care to contribute more to WHY that mic is "good". For the few of you who had the comments about bright mics, this doesn't apply to you.

Ok now for my non-ass side... To me a mic is like a color of paint on a pallet filled with all sorts of colors. If I want a bright yellow, I'll through on an MXL 603s or a Rode NT1-a. If I want a nice purple I'll give you my beta 52, AKG D-112 or Audix D-6 for a lighter purple . If I want white or a watery blue, I'll give you my sm-81 or my earthworks or even my Kel HM-1. If I want that firy red I'll through on the 57 or 58. Mics aren't "good" because mics aren't vague, they are specific... so lets try to be a bit more specific shall we?

Sorry to be a dick about it, but somebody had to kick you into shape.

Ben

 

[scrubs]

Ok now for my non-ass side... To me a mic is like a color of paint on a pallet filled with all sorts of colors. If I want a bright yellow, I'll through on an MXL 603s or a Rode NT1-a. If I want a nice purple I'll give you my beta 52, AKG D-112 or Audix D-6 for a lighter purple . If I want white or a watery blue, I'll give you my sm-81 or my earthworks or even my Kel HM-1. If I want that firy red I'll through on the 57 or 58. Mics aren't "good" because mics aren't vague, they are specific... so lets try to be a bit more specific shall we?

Yes, because yellow, purple, red and blue are such specific terms when talking about audio. If some dude says to me, "I need more yellow in my vocals," I'm going to punch him in the ovaries.

Yes, each mic has its own sound and uses, but the original poster was looking for something to use on both vocals and acoustic guitar. That involves some sort of compromise. In which case, I think a fairly neutral LDC would fit the bill, hence the M179 recommendation.

 

[Big Kenny]

Many of you have said x or y is a "good" mic. Well, what the hell does that mean? Last time I checked the word "good" didn't help me choose a mic for a clients acoustic. Would you all care to contribute more to WHY that mic is "good". For the few of you who had the comments about bright mics, this doesn't apply to you.

Ok now for my non-ass side... To me a mic is like a color of paint on a pallet filled with all sorts of colors. If I want a bright yellow, I'll through on an MXL 603s or a Rode NT1-a. If I want a nice purple I'll give you my beta 52, AKG D-112 or Audix D-6 for a lighter purple . If I want white or a watery blue, I'll give you my sm-81 or my earthworks or even my Kel HM-1. If I want that firy red I'll through on the 57 or 58. Mics aren't "good" because mics aren't vague, they are specific... so lets try to be a bit more specific shall we?

Sorry to be a dick about it, but somebody had to kick you into shape.

Ben

Well that's clear as mud, er I mean, brown.

 

[smuffjules]

I recently recorded a whole bunch of mics one after the other from a C1000 to a AT4033 an AT 873R, MXL 990 and 991, a Rode NT2 a Neumann U87 to a $50 stageworks mic. There were eight different mics on the CD demo I produced, and I made sure that the volume was all the same level so that there would be no bias.
I first spoke into each mic, then played my nylon string guitar into it.
I played this tape back to the guy who lent me the U87 and he said that he didn't like the U 87 as much as some of the other ones. (Honest guy!)
I also played the recording to a bunch of band members on the way to a gig, and the AT 873R got top marks.
I can honestly say after A/B-ing all these mics that spending $3000 on a Nuemann may be a good finacial investment, as they may keep their value or even rise in value, but as far as sound goes, there's no difference, at least on my voice and guitar. However, there may be a difference when you blow horn into a cheaper mic. They can crap out real easy on some of the small diaphragm mics. The large diaphragm (cheap) mics work a lot better for this.
I recently bought a Nady ribbon mic, (an RCA 44 knock off) and a Nady tcm 105 (a U 47 fet Knock off). They both sound great, and if you blind A/B a bunch of musicians on the $3000 mics against the $300 mics, they will all come up with different answers. Of course, most engineers who've spent five grand on a mic will fiercely defend the "deep", "rich", "warm", "transparent" sound of the real thing right!
I'm not buyin' it!
The other electronics companies have streamlined the manufacturing techniques in countries where the cost of labour can be as little as $300 a year. That's why these mics are soooo cheap. You're getting the same product made by guys who will build it for a lot less money.
Just like buying a Mexican Fender instead of a USA Fender. Same product, less money.
The best thing to do is BLIND A/B a bunch of expensive mics against a bunch of cheaper mics for yourself.
I guarantee everyone will have a different opinion.