Got the V67G ... & Question about 603

  • Thread starter Thread starter Slackmaster2K
  • Start date Start date
Slackmaster2K

Slackmaster2K

Gone
Ok, I received my V67G from abemusic.com yesterday. $219 for the green bodied, gold screened V67 plus shockmount & free cheap 20' cable...shipped UPS 2nd Day. It would have been $199 if I had shipped ground, but I didn't like the idea of the mic sitting on a truck for 10 days. If you order from abe, be sure to call as their website can be goofy...they're a small operation but decent.

First impressions from a total newbie. The mic itself isn't as cheap feeling as I expected it to be, although the gold screen looks cheap. This is a very very nice sounding microphone and seems to match my voice fairly well. The samples that I heard in this forum all seemed a little too "full bodied"...too much low end for my taste....but pulling back a ways seems to offer a bit more natural sound, but very colored in a good way. This thing isn't so great for acoustic guitar, but from what I read that was to be expected. It does an ok job of picking up the higher end of the guitar, but the lower end gets really muddy...regardless of the mic position.

So, I still need a mic for the acoustic guitar. Ametth pointed me at some posts on RAP where people were really talking up the MXL 603. I have a concern about the price of this mic, and at the same time I don't. I can get the sucker for $79...and that's just so cheap that I fear it can't possibly be any good. But then for $79, I wouldn't be blowing the farm or anything, and it at least looks nice :) I can see two things happening...either these cheap marshalls will one day be semi-expensive vintage gear and people will say "I can't believe that I bough this thing for 80 bucks in 2001"....or they'll be forgotten by next year. I've avoided Ed's advice a few times over these past couple years, and I've been burned almost every time...so I'm a little nervous about anything with a low low price tag.

I guess I'm just looking for some feedback in regards to the 603 as an INSTRUMENT condensor. I've heard the vocal clips and they don't count, because that's not what I want to use it for. If it'll do a considerably better job than the SM57 on acoustic guitar (which I don't like), then I'll buy it....especially considering that there aren't any mic's on the market at this (supposed) price / performance level, except for the MC012 which I do not want to buy (e.g. I'd have to buy a cheap one blindly, or buy a good one from the sound room which is out of this price range)

Things are looking up for me it seems. I finally have a microphone that'll help my vocals stand out smoothly in my mixes. I might be able to score a decent condensor for my acoustic guitar for a very reasonable price. Then Matthew just pointed out to me earlier today that Canare and Mogami Quad cable can be had for $0.50 - 0.70 a foot, and Neutrik connectors are only a few bucks apiece...I never looked into good cable because I thought it was way out of my price range (thanks monster), so I'll be doing some rewiring. Plus, I recently remembered that my grandpa used to make *very* nice acoustic guitars, and if he still has one around that's in good shape, my acoustic sound will improve dramatically. Now, if a fender princeton would just fall from the sky and land gently on my front lawn, I'd be set!

Slackmaster 2000
 
Ya know, Harvey Gerst likes the 603 a lot. That and the fact it's only $79 would be enough for me, but I'm saving for a monitoring system instead. Get it.
 
Buy the 603

The 603's are great. They have quite a wide cardioid pattern (Also known as a "sub-cardioid") which gives them certain omni-like qualities in terms of picking up ambience, plus they just have a nice smooth airy sound overall. For $80 you can't really go wrong. I actually took my chances and bought two of them sight-unseen ... er ... unheard ... and use them as a stereo pair all the time. No they're not a "matched pair" but the qc seems to have been good enough on these mics that they make a very usable stereo pair (Unless you're planning to produce a string quartet recording for Deutsche Grammaphone, of course). Two mics is also good because the acoustic guitar produces a fairly complex sound that emanates from many different parts of the guitar -- not just the hole -- that's pretty damn near impossible to capture satisfactorily with just one microphone (unless the git's going to be buried in the backof a mix somewhere)

Kelly Dueck
 
Hey Slack, anything is better than a 57 for acoustic guitar. Anyway, I ordered two of the 603s from Abe's and should get them today or tomorrow. I am going to do exactly what you are doing, acoustic guitar. I will let you know what I think, and I will compare them to the MC-012 which I have a pair of also. And BTW, you can get them from Abe's for $65 plus shipping. And while I am at it, they matched the Mars price on the V-67 that I ordered, $169. So I got a V-67 and 2 603s for 169 + 65 + 65 + 8 shipping = $307 Now that is a deal.

PS...the $169 V-67 from Abe's came with the shockmount but not the cable, exactly like the Mars deal.
 
Damn, I should have tried to get them to match mars!

BTW, did you notice that if you order an MXL 2001 from abe's, you get a free MXL 603? Total cost, $174.

I'm glad to be getting this positive feedback. I'll probably buy a 603. I got an email from Harvey last night and he definately stands by his review of it.

So I might just get one next month. Harvey mentioned that he heard something about the prices possibly going up, which does kind of concern me. I'd like to get a pair, but then I only have one decent preamp so I don't know if I can justify it at this point. I suppose I could pick up another ART pre for cheap....i dunno.

Anyways, another semi-pointless thread by sm2k...but if anyone else would like to comment, I'd like to hear it.

Slackmaster 2000
 
The mic that everyone is talking up is the 603s, which is apparently a different mic from the plain old 603. I bought a pair of 603s's (?) from 8th street, and they get a GREAT sound for acoustic guitar - very clean, very clear, all that you would want. They also do a nice job with grand piano. I haven't tried using just one, but what works so well for me is using them as a stereo pair in the x/y configuration (as per - ALL HAIL - Harvey's mic thread). For guitar, there are many ways to use a pair of them, but the superclean STEREO image is what impressed me when I first tried them....and at that price, you can afford to get two and still not risk much.

My computer is too slow for MP3, but if you're nervous about these mics, I could snail mail you a copy of some acoustic bass/archtop guitar tracks I did with a pair or 603s mics on the guitar to give you an idea what they sound like. Email me if so.
 
Thanks for the offer Chris, but a generous soul has lent me his 603S to try for a couple days. If I like what I hear, I'll definately buy. Thanks for clearing up the 603 vs 603S issue...I thought the 603S was the only one they currently made...I'll have to watch out for that. I'd love to get a stereo pair, but I've only got one decent pre and can't afford another just yet...but perhaps I should still pick up a pair anyhow...hmmm. We'll see.

More newbie news on the V67. I sang through it for a couple hours tonight, and never really got a very good sound. However, I did get some fairly ok sounds after playing around a bit. The mic itself seems to be fairly detailed and pretty clear, but I think that both my room and technique are seriously flawed. See, I've never been able to actually hear the room before...and now I know what people have been talking about all this time. Argh, I've got some reading to do I guess. At any rate, I wasn't *blown away* by the sound at any point...but then it's the first 2 hours I've ever spent with any vocal condensor, so what the hell do i know. We'll see how things sound after I'm a bit more educated and get some better mic cables built.

Slackmaster 2000
 
Chris,

Just to clarify, there is no MXL-603, just the 603S so when people are talking about the 603, MXL-603, 603S, or MXL-603S its all the same.

Slack,

I think you'll like the 603, its a great mic for the $$$. I honestly think I could do everything I record (vocals, acoustic and electric guitar) with a 603 and an SM-57. Yeah, its one of those mics that work on a lot of stuff. I would like to have a large diaphragm condenser (though I feel no immediate need for one) so I will be interested how you think your loaned 603 compares to the MXL-V67, especially on vocals. You really have to watch placement and use a good pop filter when recording vocals on a 603, though.
 
I could have sworn I saw a separate listing for 603 and 603s at the Marshall Electronics site, but if there's only one, I guess there's no harm done. DOH!!!

The room thing - yeah, that's a bitch sometimes. I was at Home Depot the other day and was looking at 2'x2' soundproof panels (originally for drop ceilings)...I'll probably try making some *portable* sound partitions by cross bracing the backs and attatching 3 of them together to make 3 or 4 2'x6' panels that I can configure as needed (and then store in the garage so I don't have to look at them when I'm not recording). They 2'x2' panels sell for $50 for a box of 12.

I've tried starting threads in the "Studio Building" forum about tuning and taming the acoustics of an existing room, but haven't gotten much in the way of any replies. Those guys down there play hardball. It would be nice if there was a resource about taming acoustically live rooms to make them more friendly without rebuilding your home, but I there doesn't seem to be another Harvey Gerst type down in that forum. Any of you guys know where to research the "treating an existing room topic?"
 
Hey Chris, you might consider looking at Auralex. They sell it at Mars and I think about any large music store. The stuff is fairly expensive, however, they offer a great service: you can send them a complete diagram of your room with a full description of the wall materials, etc., and they will design the setup for where and how to put this stuff to produce an acoustically balanced room. I read about this and was going to try it, but found myself having to move at about that time, so I never actually tried them out. For me, I have my studio in the basement which I finished myself. For the walls, I went to a local sawmill and bought a load of rough cut pine boards, 1 x 6. I made the walls of the basement with these, after insulating behind them. My recording space is dead, with practically no ambience. I know that most recording studios now like some natural reverberation, but for the average home recordist like me, it is probably safer to deaden as much as possible and add reverb after the fact. It works pretty well, but if that kind of thing is not practical for you, try Auralex.
 
Originally posted by Slackmaster2K
Click to expand...
Thanks for the offer Chris, but a generous soul has lent me his 603S to try for a couple days. If I like what I hear, I'll definately buy. Thanks for clearing up the 603 vs 603S issue...I thought the 603S was the only one they currently made...I'll have to watch out for that. I'd love to get a stereo pair, but I've only got one decent pre and can't afford another just yet...but perhaps I should still pick up a pair anyhow...hmmm. We'll see.

I loaned mine to Slack, since I'm the one that's been touting these things so much. It wasn't any big deal, so I just emailed him privately, instead of plastering it all over the net (like I'm doing now).

The S probably stands for Small. I sometimes forget and call it a 603 instead of a 603S. But there's only that one mic - the 603S.

More newbie news on the V67. I sang through it for a couple hours tonight, and never really got a very good sound. However, I did get some fairly ok sounds after playing around a bit. The mic itself seems to be fairly detailed and pretty clear, but I think that both my room and technique are seriously flawed. See, I've never been able to actually hear the room before...and now I know what people have been talking about all this time. Argh, I've got some reading to do I guess. At any rate, I wasn't *blown away* by the sound at any point...but then it's the first 2 hours I've ever spent with any vocal condensor, so what the hell do i know. We'll see how things sound after I'm a bit more educated and get some better mic cables built.

Try to stay within about 8 inches or less for large vocal mics. If you sing quietly, get in around 2 inches or less {off axis about 30° will reduce any popping), and watch out that you're not overdriving your mic preamp. Start with all eq turned off. Getting in close will reduce the room artifacts. Big mics are like race cars - very high performance and very tempermental. Move around till you find the "magic zone".
 
A large part of your problem is your preamp. The ART is not going to open up this mic at all. Your not going to hear the potential of this mic with it. If you want to send the mic (v67) to me for a few days I would love to try it out and post some clips.
 
Harvey Gerst wrote:

"The S probably stands for Small. I sometimes forget and call it a 603 instead of a 603S. But there's only that one mic - the 603S."

Harvey,

Marshall bills the 603s as a "sub-cardioid". Maybe the "s" stands for that.?.?.?

Kelly Dueck
 
Kelly, your guess is as good as mine. I don't have clue what the S really stands for.
 
Ametth: I still have faith in the ART on because of Ed's recommendation, but I agree that it was sounding like shit.

So I went down to the music store today and picked up a groove tubes AX7 to replace the stock tube, and so far so good! The hollowness I complained about seems to be gone. I'm also getting more USABLE gain...a lot more.

16 bucks made a lot of difference. The mic sounds a lot better to me now.

Slackmaster 2000
 
Ok, I got Harvey's 603.

Impressions from a newbie: the mic is really easy to bottom out on vocals...and I mean easy. The sound is pretty good to my untrained ears....but maybe a little boomy. In fact, the sound is very similar to what I can get with the 67.

I made two simple recordings, one with the 603 and one with the V67. It's a simple little acoustic jam...all one take tracks and I won't appologize for the bad playing. In each case, I positioned the mic about two feet above the neck/body joint on the guitar, which was about the point where both stopped being boomy. The V67 was pointing downward, and the the 603 was pointing slightly downward. The guitar is a CRAPPY Dean acoustic, one of those $250 deals. The thumping noise is my foot, as neither mic was in a shock mount. Background noise is from a bunch of computer fans, and some crappy room reflections.

I'm not even going to say which clip is from which mic.




I'd love some discussion.

Slackmaster 2000
 
Slack, lemme quote from my Jan 12th review of this mic:

Marshall MXL-603 $99 This was a flat-out winner, folks. Almost identical to the MC012 in sound, with a wide cardioid pattern, almost approaching omni. We used them as drum overhead mics, and they did a great job. The diaphragms are easy to bottom out on voice, but with a pop filter (and positioned above the singer's mouth), they wouldn't be bad as a vocal mic on some singers, and they'd probably do fine on acoustic guitar, and many other instruments. They were also a perfect match to the Oktava MC012 - they sounded nearly identical.

OK, now, did you use a pop filter and position the mic above the mouth, as I recommended. Most small diaphragm mics are seldom a first choice for vocals. This is what I suggested for your acoustic guitar, plus I hope you read the long thread on mic placement for acoustic guitar. Boomy is "proximity effect". The neck body joint is seldom the best choice for mic placement. Did you try the over the shoulder approach?

Finally, if the 603 sounds very similar to the V67, you may need to do some more critical listening.
 
Slackmaster2K said:
Ok, I got Harvey's 603.

Impressions from a newbie: the mic is really easy to bottom out on vocals...and I mean easy. The sound is pretty good to my untrained ears....but maybe a little boomy. In fact, the sound is very similar to what I can get with the 67.
Click to expand...

Boominess is often a problem with stringed instruments. Like voices, they seem to have their own "Plosive" consonant frequencies which can easily bottom out a mic. My own observations (with a little help/prodding from Harvey) are:

1) Each instrument has one or two basic resonant frequencies which are inherently stronger than the rest of the range of the instrument. Part of the onus is on the performer to control these in the performance, and another part is on the recording engineer to avoid bringing them out with the mic.

2) For guitar, acoustic bass, and cello, the most dangerous place to put a mic is close to and directly in front of the soundholes - this tends to have the same effect as placing a mic about
2" from a singer's face and asking them to sing "Peter Piper Picked a Peck of Pickled Peppers". Try micing about 9-12" off the bridge or top, which should get rid of some of the boom.

3) Harvey's "over the shoulder" technique really works!

4) Don't be afraid to experiment with weird mic placements. I've been surprised more than a few times....Once, I got a great sound by playing into a live corner and placing the mic facing into the corner. I was a couple of feet away from the mic, but it sounded extremely close, and for some reason, didn't pick up any weird room noise. Go figure.


Good luck. The learning process on this subject is difficult, but fun.
 
Harvey, I read that post a while ago, and never wanted to use the mic for vocals. I tried it just for the heck of it and it bottomed out really quick so I backed off. Then it was fine. Can the 603 be used on high volume sources like guitar amps?

From the minimal acoustic guitar-only recording I did tonight, the V67 was definately better sounding. They both sounded "similar" only in that I'm suprised at the good sound of the 603 at its 65 dollar price tag.

Chris F: I did pull the mics back and got rid of much of the boominess. I positioned the mics up above my left shoulder, about 1 1/2 - 2 feet above the top of the guitar. Basically I was in a hurry and found this to be a good position where both mics sounded pretty ok. Listen to the clips and tell me which one you like best.

Of course I'm not done playing with this stuff. The V67 reproduced the crappy sound of my crappy guitar a bit more realistically and fully than the 603 did. I'm not downing the 603, I'm just impressed with the V67.

Slackmaster 2000
 
I rathered the test1 clip...both were very similar....test1 was slightly brighter IMO.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top