best mic under $500?

  • Thread starter Thread starter djessence
  • Start date Start date
SM-57

This is like the philips screwdriver of microphones.

You have to have one in your arsenal and they usually cost around $80.
 
.

actually, i have the sm-58 and really like it. i'm wondering about condenser mics though. i have the rode nt-1, but would like to upgrade to something nicer. thanks anyways though
 
Frankly, I prefer the 57 to the 58.

That might just be me though.

Have you considered the AKG 414?

Really good for male vocals.

More expensive, but should be in your price range at around $500.
 
Re: Frankly, I prefer the 57 to the 58.

Krakit said:
Have you considered the AKG 414?
Really good for male vocals.
More expensive, but should be in your price range at around $500.
Click to expand...
For ALL male vocals?
Wow, that's a pretty sweeping endorsement.
 
Uh...maybe you want to reread that?

Harvey Gerst said:
For ALL male vocals?
Wow, that's a pretty sweeping endorsement.
Click to expand...

Or else stop putting words in other folks mouths. :D
 
Rode NT1000

I recently picked up the new Rode NT1000 for $350. This LD condenser has a crisp sound, nice high end, and a smooth finish that reminds me of raspberries in spring....

Seriously-- it's a great mic, and I like it for vocals and acoustic guitar. I'm not a recording engineer. But check out Bruce Richardson's review on prorec:

http://www.prorec.com/prorec/articles.nsf/files/60D13B8C0E0AFA5986256A1D005425AB


And also check out his very negative commentary on one of the Marshall models, and low-end LD condensers in general:

http://www.prorec.com/prorec/articles.nsf/articles/7E01340C209C8C99862568AD0072955B


Pete
 
yup,

I think that we can all agree that the 2001 is a terrible sounding mic. :D

While I agree that the 414 won't work on every voice, it is pretty ubiquitous. That is one of the reasons I don't like it much, it is a very overused sound.

Tom Cram
dbx Senior Technical Support
(801) 568-7530
tcram@dbxpro.com
 
With all due respect

The reason that this microphone is ubiquitous, is because it gets the job done.

My understanding of the orginal poster was to find something that will do just that.

Yeah, you could work on points for style, but there's still something to be said for tried and true.

:D :D :D :D
 
yup, again,

Krakit, I'm agreeing with you. (albeit in a backhanded sort of way).

Tom Cram
dbx Senior Technical Support
(801) 568-7530
tcram@dbxpro.com
 
Re: yup,

Tom Cram said:
I think that we can all agree that the 2001 is a terrible sounding mic. :D
Click to expand...
I agree -- BUT -- it can still have its use. I was trying to get a clean (but murky at the same time) Jazz kinda tone and neither the 57 or Beta 57 were cutting it for that purpose. I tried an NT2 and it was too clean... so for fun I tried the 2001 - sure enough - added just the right amount of honkiness to the tone. Was exactly what the track was looking for.........

Will it ever be what I reach for first? Not on your life... but there are times when a certain color is needed in a palette!

Bruce
 
Don't I know it!

I've got a crappy RadShack and model unknown EV mic I use for similar FX.

They'll (MARS/GC)probably be running a "free 2001 with every car wash" special soon, I'll pick one up then for special FX.

Or maybe use it for a classy looking talkback mic, hmmmm.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D


Tom Cram
dbx Senior Technical Support
(801) 568-7530
tcram@dbxpro.com
 
Uh...maybe you want to reread that?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Harvey Gerst
For ALL male vocals?
Wow, that's a pretty sweeping endorsement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Or else stop putting words in other folks mouths.

Sorry, I did just re-read it and my response DID come off sounding pretty harsh, and I apologize for that. My initial reaction was surprise since I find the 414 usually more usefull for female vocals, not male vocals. I assume you're talking about the UBS (or whatever it's called). I would think the 414-TLII would be more suitable for male vocals, but either way, I certainly didn't intend to come off sounding like an asshole (which I somehow managed to achieve in that post - without even trying hard).
 
Think nothing of it!

That's why there are erasers on the ends of pencils. I hope you noticed my smiley face!

I haven't used an AKG 414 since I gave up engineering many years ago. I think there was only one kind back then (1984-1989). I found that for high pitched vocals, like females, children and yes the occasional Slim Witman or M. Jackson types, there was a harshness to the high end. I found that unacceptable and would opt for the SM57 in those cases.

Interestingly enough, I used to reach for the AKG over the 57 for the very reasons that Tom Cram brought up to forgo the 414.

:D :D :D :D
 
Ahhh, that explains it. They made them a little differently back then. But like you, I got rid of the 414, for much the same reasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top