JFogarty
New member
I think that that crapshack tone would be pretty cool in context. It would add a nice little feel to the mix, maybe, a little panned off center from another, better tone...
CMiller
New member
I tried downloading the clips at my wife's office today and it worked just fine. Of course her speakers are shit so I tried downloading it on my studio computer but when I try to unzip it it tells me the its corrupt and I can't access the files...although I see them sitting there as MP3s. Very weird, but its pissing me off.
VOXVENDOR
New member
CMILLER
I didn't have to unzip.. they just downloaded into my computer as MP3's
Give it a shot, you should be able to play them as is...
Good luck..
Joe
I didn't have to unzip.. they just downloaded into my computer as MP3's
Give it a shot, you should be able to play them as is...
Good luck..
Joe
J
jet-rocker
New member
I liked the 4033 (which I own), the Beyer, the 4041, and then believe it or not the Rat Shack mic, then the 57.
The C1 and 2001 are at the bottom of my list.
The 4033 and the Beyer would be a great pair as far as evening eachother out.
(I have a Sank modded Beyer on the way. I sat on the NTK fence for a lonk time, and decided to jump off in the opposite direction. Great price too.)
Something about that Rat Shack ruled my world... Garbage is in the eye of the beholder I guess. But man, what a great butt ugly harsh, well defined midrange.
-Jett
The C1 and 2001 are at the bottom of my list.
The 4033 and the Beyer would be a great pair as far as evening eachother out.
(I have a Sank modded Beyer on the way. I sat on the NTK fence for a lonk time, and decided to jump off in the opposite direction. Great price too.)
Something about that Rat Shack ruled my world... Garbage is in the eye of the beholder I guess. But man, what a great butt ugly harsh, well defined midrange.
-Jett
Queue
Active member
I'm still such a newb..... 
Ok, so they sound different, but the only one I really didn't like was the m160. I thought it sounded dull and muddy.
What does this test tell me?
1. I still have a long way to go...
2. This stuff is so friggin subjective...
Queue
Ok, so they sound different, but the only one I really didn't like was the m160. I thought it sounded dull and muddy.
What does this test tell me?
1. I still have a long way to go...
2. This stuff is so friggin subjective...
Queue
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Well... I know what the issue was...
It's ENTIRELY in the mic placement... The strangeness came from my hand as it interfered with the sound radiation from the soundhole as I strummed.....
I did new C1 and 4033 clips... the zip is at http://207.176.147.104/bbs.nsf/c558...6b57000788ef/$FILE/micShootout2Update_MP3.ZIP...
It contains the following:
C1.mp3 - the original clip from yesterday
C1_2a.mp3 - the mic was placed at a 45-degree angle from the floor, about 6-inches from the guitar, angled up towards the body end... the mic is in line with my nose and perpendicular to the neck of the guitar.
C1_2b.mp3 - this is the exact same placement as in 2a, but with the guitar neck position moved 1-inch to the left -- notice the richer and fuller sound from only a one inch difference! And if I varied my position during playing, the tone would change....
C1-rotation.mp3 - I strummed an E-chord continuously as I rotated the guitar. I start with the guitar as in C1_2a - then rotate 90-degrees to the left, then back to center, then 90-degrees to the right. You can easily hear the difference in tone and depth as the position changes.
4033.mp3 - The 4033 clip from yesterday.
4033_2.mp3 - This is the same mic position as c1_2b but using the 4033...
4033_rotation.mp3 - Same rotation pattern as for the C1, but notice that the tonal change is not as varied as it was for the C1... it seems the C1 is extremely sensitive to position - so much so, that even a small deviation can cause noticeable changes in sound. This could be a concern if trying to mic a guitarist that moves while playing....
So... that's about as far as I want to take this particular exercise for the time being...
Eventually, I will try do a vocal comparison... Buck's idea of using backing tracks from karaoke stuff may be useful - save me some trouble of getting some arrangement down... we'll see! I hate the sound of those canned things though!!!
Bruce
It's ENTIRELY in the mic placement... The strangeness came from my hand as it interfered with the sound radiation from the soundhole as I strummed.....
I did new C1 and 4033 clips... the zip is at http://207.176.147.104/bbs.nsf/c558...6b57000788ef/$FILE/micShootout2Update_MP3.ZIP...
It contains the following:
C1.mp3 - the original clip from yesterday
C1_2a.mp3 - the mic was placed at a 45-degree angle from the floor, about 6-inches from the guitar, angled up towards the body end... the mic is in line with my nose and perpendicular to the neck of the guitar.
C1_2b.mp3 - this is the exact same placement as in 2a, but with the guitar neck position moved 1-inch to the left -- notice the richer and fuller sound from only a one inch difference! And if I varied my position during playing, the tone would change....
C1-rotation.mp3 - I strummed an E-chord continuously as I rotated the guitar. I start with the guitar as in C1_2a - then rotate 90-degrees to the left, then back to center, then 90-degrees to the right. You can easily hear the difference in tone and depth as the position changes.
4033.mp3 - The 4033 clip from yesterday.
4033_2.mp3 - This is the same mic position as c1_2b but using the 4033...
4033_rotation.mp3 - Same rotation pattern as for the C1, but notice that the tonal change is not as varied as it was for the C1... it seems the C1 is extremely sensitive to position - so much so, that even a small deviation can cause noticeable changes in sound. This could be a concern if trying to mic a guitarist that moves while playing....
So... that's about as far as I want to take this particular exercise for the time being...
Eventually, I will try do a vocal comparison... Buck's idea of using backing tracks from karaoke stuff may be useful - save me some trouble of getting some arrangement down... we'll see! I hate the sound of those canned things though!!!
Bruce
VOXVENDOR
New member
I too thought the M160 was shit.... But they aren't really for Acoustic are they?, Aren't they made for Piano and things like that?
I heard a difference clearly between all the mics and Alot of the Mics were unfavourable.... Like I said earlier, just the MXL2001 and 4033 appealed to me.... even the 4041 was a little funny sounding..
JET ROCKER..
I am a 4033 owner and Im a die hard AT man.... But man, that MXL was sweet.... Im suprised you didn't hear the same thing.... I heard basically the same crisp highs and mid definition that the 4033 has, but the mxl2001 had that nice fat bottom end at the same time.....
I guess we all have different ears, and thats good.. or everything would sound the same
I heard a difference clearly between all the mics and Alot of the Mics were unfavourable.... Like I said earlier, just the MXL2001 and 4033 appealed to me.... even the 4041 was a little funny sounding..
JET ROCKER..
I am a 4033 owner and Im a die hard AT man.... But man, that MXL was sweet.... Im suprised you didn't hear the same thing.... I heard basically the same crisp highs and mid definition that the 4033 has, but the mxl2001 had that nice fat bottom end at the same time.....
I guess we all have different ears, and thats good.. or everything would sound the same
VOXVENDOR
New member
Bruce...
Thanks for fixing up that C1.... I will hear it tommorow and post comments... It's 9:14PM and Im Crashing!!
(Up at 5 tomorrow)
ARRRGH!
Thanks for fixing up that C1.... I will hear it tommorow and post comments... It's 9:14PM and Im Crashing!!
(Up at 5 tomorrow)
ARRRGH!
JFogarty
New member
Maybe I just have bad ears, but it seemed to me that all the takes had some kind of wierd low end thingy going on, hard for me to describe though...
oh yeah, and by the way, I like the new 4033 one the best, seems to have gotten rid of that wierd low endy thing. The reason I hate that is because, for me, it always sounds like shit in the mix...
oh yeah, and by the way, I like the new 4033 one the best, seems to have gotten rid of that wierd low endy thing. The reason I hate that is because, for me, it always sounds like shit in the mix...
Blue Bear Sound
New member
I'm not sure what you heard there, J?!?! In my monitors and my Beyer's, I didn't hear any "weird low-end" thingy! Even in the sub it was fine...
It *could* also be the MP3s -- I didn't play them back in the control room.
Bruce
It *could* also be the MP3s -- I didn't play them back in the control room.
Bruce
alanhyatt
PMI Audio Group
While I won't comment on any of the mics, I will say this. As an engineer, not all mics will sound good right at the f-hole of an acoustic guitar as proximity and gain (unless matched) will play havoc with the results. This is another reason why these tests are hard to do no matter who wins.
I have worked with several of the mics used, and I know I have had much better results with them. Everyone is of course free to make judgements on any mic they choose, but I know these files do not do many of these mics justice. So no matter what mic you choose, just know that what you choose as a result of this may not get you the same results. This is of course "my" opinion, and it is based on my 30 years engineering experience.
Alan Hyatt
PMI Audio Group
I have worked with several of the mics used, and I know I have had much better results with them. Everyone is of course free to make judgements on any mic they choose, but I know these files do not do many of these mics justice. So no matter what mic you choose, just know that what you choose as a result of this may not get you the same results. This is of course "my" opinion, and it is based on my 30 years engineering experience.
Alan Hyatt
PMI Audio Group
JFogarty
New member
Blue Bear Sound said:
Now that I think of it, I'm listening to them on a bose wave radio
These things have the wierdest low end response...
mixmkr
we don't need rest!!
my "30 years of engineering experience" tells me with this test, that it doesn't mean doodilee-squat which mic you may use for HOME RECORDING. For many of the recordists here, the radio shack mic might be the answer IN A MIX with all the low end gone, while the beyer would have completely overhwhelmed a mixes low end with all the boominess (which that mic certainly does not inherintly exihibit those qualities). But then, you roll off the low end on the Beyer, and 99.9% of the people couldn't tell the difference. Why??...because the guitar isn't being faithfully reproduced by any mic. ...NOT UNLIKE much of the popular music now anyway...so it doesn't matter. ..as long as it sounds *good* in the end. Did the guitar clips sound good to me??...yes and no. Would they suit a modern pop song ..once properly processed...maybe . Would it have mattered which tonal *choice* was used? Not in my opinion...as long as it wasn't defective sounding...like boomy, tinny, etc. On the other hand, a Segovia *type*...or himself would have puked. As we all know, mic differences are appealing because they can "enhance" a sound from its original. Otherwise, wouldn't we just want all mics to be ruler flat, preamps, compressors, tape machines, etc, included?? Personally, I prefer transducers, and processors that don't alter the sound going into it (unless its my whammy wah ), and try to get the sound how I want it before it hits the mic grill. Besides, my ears can't tell crap anywazzz!!
Bruce...thanks with "high fives" on all your efforts to do such a thing. Its actions like this that make recording such a gas, and visiting boards such as this, so addicting. Keep up the good work.
. Would it have mattered which tonal *choice* was used? Not in my opinion...as long as it wasn't defective sounding...like boomy, tinny, etc. On the other hand, a Segovia *type*...or himself would have puked. As we all know, mic differences are appealing because they can "enhance" a sound from its original. Otherwise, wouldn't we just want all mics to be ruler flat, preamps, compressors, tape machines, etc, included?? Personally, I prefer transducers, and processors that don't alter the sound going into it (unless its my whammy wah ), and try to get the sound how I want it before it hits the mic grill. Besides, my ears can't tell crap anywazzz!!Bruce...thanks with "high fives" on all your efforts to do such a thing. Its actions like this that make recording such a gas, and visiting boards such as this, so addicting. Keep up the good work.
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Alan...
You missed one of the first things I said when I posted....
THIS IS NOT ABOUT "WINNING/LOSING" -- it was a quick 'n dirty, throw the mic up and see where it lands comparison, and I made it quite clear what and where the limitations to the comparison's usefulness were, and how subjective this was.
Of course all those mics would normally have been optimized for placement - that's NOT what I was trying to do! Since they were all placed in the same position, it was a "common ground" to hear how each mic picked up the source at one spot... It's kind of like putting a mic in one spot to measure pink noise -- that may not be the "best" spot, but it is comparable against other mics if they're all located there too...............
I could re-test each time and come up with different sounding clips (as I did with re-clipping the 4033 and the C1 tonight)... I was clear that it was AT THE TIME, WITH THAT PLACEMENT... yadda, yadda.... as well as not spending a lot of time "engineering" it... my time IS limited....
Beleive me, if I was shooting for recording technique, those would not be the clips I'd have posted.............
You were right about one thing though -- I think maybe posting these clips WAS a mistake -- people don't seem to take them in the light that was intended......... it was just to give people an idea of the flavour of the mic...
If I ever do this again, I'm just going to run the clips thru my Klark-Teknik DN60 and post pics of the goddamn waveforms. Then everyone can interpret them any way they like - they will anyways!
Bruce
PS... and just to put a bit of perspective on the quality of these clips (quick 'N dirty, notwithstanding) here's a ZIP of the C1 clip, 4033 clip, and a clip of the original Supertramp intro... so don't go telling me how "really bad" they are and how much better they could have been!!
http://207.176.147.104/bbs.nsf/c558...b57001d58b9/$FILE/micShootout2Compare_MP3.ZIP
You missed one of the first things I said when I posted....
THIS IS NOT ABOUT "WINNING/LOSING" -- it was a quick 'n dirty, throw the mic up and see where it lands comparison, and I made it quite clear what and where the limitations to the comparison's usefulness were, and how subjective this was.
Of course all those mics would normally have been optimized for placement - that's NOT what I was trying to do! Since they were all placed in the same position, it was a "common ground" to hear how each mic picked up the source at one spot... It's kind of like putting a mic in one spot to measure pink noise -- that may not be the "best" spot, but it is comparable against other mics if they're all located there too...............
I could re-test each time and come up with different sounding clips (as I did with re-clipping the 4033 and the C1 tonight)... I was clear that it was AT THE TIME, WITH THAT PLACEMENT... yadda, yadda.... as well as not spending a lot of time "engineering" it... my time IS limited....
Beleive me, if I was shooting for recording technique, those would not be the clips I'd have posted.............
You were right about one thing though -- I think maybe posting these clips WAS a mistake -- people don't seem to take them in the light that was intended......... it was just to give people an idea of the flavour of the mic...
If I ever do this again, I'm just going to run the clips thru my Klark-Teknik DN60 and post pics of the goddamn waveforms. Then everyone can interpret them any way they like - they will anyways!
Bruce
PS... and just to put a bit of perspective on the quality of these clips (quick 'N dirty, notwithstanding) here's a ZIP of the C1 clip, 4033 clip, and a clip of the original Supertramp intro... so don't go telling me how "really bad" they are and how much better they could have been!!
http://207.176.147.104/bbs.nsf/c558...b57001d58b9/$FILE/micShootout2Compare_MP3.ZIP
Last edited:
F
frist44
New member
Is anyone else having problems downloading the new sets of clips???
Brandon
Brandon
J
jet-rocker
New member
Bruce, I took it as is.
Sorry this was a discouraging experience. It was interesting to me. Maybe even helpful. It just some of the different flavors that these mikes have.
And if anyone would/would not buy a mic based on what they heard here......
Well... that's not really your problem...
Your intentions were stated clearly. This was great for me. Thanks.
-Jett
Sorry this was a discouraging experience. It was interesting to me. Maybe even helpful. It just some of the different flavors that these mikes have.
And if anyone would/would not buy a mic based on what they heard here......
Well... that's not really your problem...
Your intentions were stated clearly. This was great for me. Thanks.
-Jett
Leeking
New member
Thanks for the effort bruce....
really give people like me (who don't have access to lotsa mics) to have a better idea of things...
out of them, I really like how the 4033 sounded.
well, at least I have a used SM57...
really give people like me (who don't have access to lotsa mics) to have a better idea of things...
out of them, I really like how the 4033 sounded.
well, at least I have a used SM57...
philboyd studge
New member
Well in the second test the C-1 is improved but still in a mix I'd go for the 4033 in a mix. Still I'm happy with my C-1's and would not consider the 4033 as an alternative. The pick noise in the test the C-1 picks up, to me, is unuseable, cause it hears things the 4033 doesn't.
I dunno, when recording with the C-1 I just put the headphones on, take a few seconds and locate my spot with whatever instrument or vocal I'm doing and things come out great. When I use finger picks (autoharp, banjo, or dobro) I have to use another mic cause the sheen on the highs accents the metal pick noise too much.
I dunno, when recording with the C-1 I just put the headphones on, take a few seconds and locate my spot with whatever instrument or vocal I'm doing and things come out great. When I use finger picks (autoharp, banjo, or dobro) I have to use another mic cause the sheen on the highs accents the metal pick noise too much.
Queue
Active member
Bias
I'm talking from a research angle.
I'd say many of us were biased by knowing which mic was which...
If we were blinded to the mics, I'd bet the opinions would change.
Queue
ps - Bruce, thanks for the continued efforts in educating the masses...
I'm talking from a research angle.
I'd say many of us were biased by knowing which mic was which...
If we were blinded to the mics, I'd bet the opinions would change.
Queue
ps - Bruce, thanks for the continued efforts in educating the masses...
ausrock
Well-known member
QUOTE;........"-- I think maybe posting these clips WAS a mistake -- people don't seem to take them in the light that was intended........."
Bruce,
About a week ago in your C1 thread I asked if you had "fire-proof" underware...........even though this thread hasn't generated too much heat, you may now understand why I said that.
It's unlikely that I will ever post either text or audio comparisons here again..........too many people here take too many things totally out of context.
Bruce,
About a week ago in your C1 thread I asked if you had "fire-proof" underware...........even though this thread hasn't generated too much heat, you may now understand why I said that.
It's unlikely that I will ever post either text or audio comparisons here again..........too many people here take too many things totally out of context.
Similar threads
- Mack Caster
- Microphones
