I Love This Quote - Oh So True

  • Thread starter Thread starter Recording Engineer
  • Start date Start date
R

Recording Engineer

Moderator
"The big problem is that if you're used to the sound of the SM-57, you'll be thrilled when you sing into ANY big condenser mic for the first time. It's only after a year or so (or when you hear yourself on a better mic) that the glaring deficiencies and peaky response of the AKG C3000 become apparent. That's why people rave when they first buy a large diaphragm mic - any large diaphragm mic sounds way "better" than what they're used to - at first, anyway."

~Harvey Gerst
 
That is oh so true. I'm a prime example of this!
 
Um, yep. I think my Marshall 2001 sounds way better than my SM57, but I'd rather have something ten times more expensive! Oh yeah, I don't have that kind of money.

As the U2 song goes--I still haven't found what I'm looking for.

Peace, Jim
 
R.E., I guess you don't have a high opinion of the C3000.
 
Probably my second least favorite large diaphragm condenser (if quality to price ratios are not considered). First would be the MXL 2001 (though I do like it on electric guitar cabs; but would still take a C3000 over it for anything else). Although, I haven't heard/used that Carvin CM-87S...

But that's not the reason why I posted that quote; though I do like that it gave an example of a mic I never did like in the first place. For me, it just gives that little extra kick which makes me say softly: Oh so true.
 
I'd have to say I'm one of those whose jaw dropped to the floor upon switching from an AKG D770 to the Røde NT-1.
But while I'm looking forward to the day when I can appreciate the difference between the NT-1 and the more expensive spread, I see no reason to try to rush the learning process.
Don't disturb my Rodent Honeymoon... :)
 
You like it, at a great price,Enjoy the honeymonn. I might join you, so to speak. And yet the C3000 used sells for anywhere from 200.00 to 275.00 used.Are you buying the AKG name? What other conclusion can you draw? I'm glad I paid 235.00 for a new one as opposed to the 500.00+ they cost a few years back.I have'nt used my 3000 yet other than a vocal test, and I'm not bowled over by it's performance,In fact the AT 3525 seems just as good. I had one for a short time but needed money and sold it. I recorded a drum kit, Just that mic and liked what I heard, So... but for a home recording guy, it was either the NT1 or the 3000.I never heard a rode NT1 and I may yet aquire one but I figure the 3000 is like a honda of cheap mics, So I'll see.I know I'll get at least what I paid for it
 
I like the NT1. When my friend was ready to take the next step from his SM57 (actually his last step; he'll most likely never buy another mic again), I suggested the NT-1 or the Audio Technica 4033; I didn't suggest the MC-319 from The Sound Room only because it needs to be an "all-around" mic Nor the MC-012; see below for why. He went down to the local music store and tried the C3000, NT-1, and 4033. In his opinion (he's not much of a music guy at all either) he liked the 4033 a lot (but didn't have the extra money for it) and said the NT-1 "dominated" the C3000. He ended-up with the NT-1.

Now if someone says they're gonna be taking the next step (not their final step) from an SM57, I usually suggest an Oktava MC-012 from The Sound Room only (they're just as impressed even though it's not a large diaphragm condenser). I also add that when they're ready to take the next step after that (and it's always good to plan ahead), the M1/M3 cardioid large diaphragm cap is only half the price of the "next-step" mic from that because you already have half of it; not to mention, in my opinion, it beats out a lot of the other "next-step" in most situations.
 
RE: "The M1/M3 cardioid large diaphragm cap is only half the price of the "next-step" mic from that because you already have half of it; not to mention, in my opinion, it beats out a lot of the other "next-step" in most situations."

RE, I was going to by the Rode NT1 for acoustic guitar, vocals, clarinet, and whistle. But I'm intrigued with the MC-012 for $80 more. Now you're throwing in the large diaphragm option--which I think is an additional $350. So now we are talking about $630 total invested for two mics: one large and one small condensor.

My questions: 1) For one person who is mainly only going to record voice and acoustic guitar, are both a large and small condensor worth the combined cash. 2) If only one is really needed, do you recommend the MC-012 over the Rode NT-1. 3)Is the MC-012 with the M1/M3 cap superior to the MC-319. 4)At $630 for this M1/M3 mic, that is a big step up from a $200 NT-1 or similar mic. What other large condensors in that price range would you compare it with--or more expensive mics if that's what it would be comparable to.

I guess what I'm getting at is does a little song writer guy making pre-demos need this much mic? It certainly is seductive.
 
Well one MC-012 mic with 4 different capsules; small diaphragm cardioid, hypercardioid, and omni, and large diaphragm cardioid (33mm); all for $630US.

1)Absolutely if you can afford it. If you can't afford it all at once, and you don't already own a small diaphragm condenser, and you're planning to make another mic purchase after this one, then I recommend buying the MC-012 now and the M1 later. But if you're budget is too low for that and don't plan to buy another mic at all or even not for years to come, then I recommend the NT-1 or AT4033.

2)When considering the two: I recommend the MC-012 if you're not planning to buy another mic, or even for years to come, and it won't be used on vocals. I recommend the MC-012 if you don't already own a small diaphragm condenser, you're planning to buy another mic in the future, and it will be used on vocals.
I recommend the NT-1 if you are not planning to buy another mic, or even for years to come, and it will be used on vocals.

3)Far superior in my opinion.

4)RTT VM100
Shure KSM32
Audio Technica AT4050/CM5, AT4047/SV, AT4060
AKG C414B/TLII, C414B/ULS
Neumann TLM 103
Beyerdynamic MC 834, MC 740
Alesis AM51,AM52, AM61, AM62
ADK A-51sd
Elation KM901
Rode Classic
The ones I'm forgetting
Plus other large diaphragm models and brands (which I would compare to) I really haven't heard such as some of the comparable models from Soundelux, Marshall, Pearl, Groovetubes, etc.

Realize I sure as hell wouldn't necessarily pick the MC-012 and M1/M3 over any these if I was ever going to buy only one or two condenser mics (small or large diaphragm). But I most likely would if that was all I was going to most likely ever have. Why? Well when your mic selection is very limited, then the mics you do have need to be very versetile.

"I guess what I'm getting at is does a little song writer guy making pre-demos need this much mic?"

Well since the little song writer guy usually doesn't have an entire mic cab of all sorts of different mics for different applications, but usually one or two mics, don't you think mics the guy does have should be extremely versetile?

You decide. I do realize however, unfortunately, our pocket books do most of our decision making; and most of us can't do anything about that (myself included).
 
RE: Thanks for your fast and extensive reply. I place great value on your opinion, and the information you have provided on this thread and others will help me make my own decision. Thanks again.
 
Man alivin'! First I find out my Mackie board sucks, then my AKG3000s, next you guys will tell me my girlfriend is runnin' around and my dog only licks my hand for the salt.
 
RE..

Have you had any experience with the Equitek E-200 (CAD). I recently bought one used and have been really impressed - I jumped on the marshall bandwagon after only having Sure SM57s and 58s - I also picked up a new AT3525. I use the mics mainly on vocals. I would rate the equitek as being the most natural of the three - Marshall - AT3525 or the E-200. I don't see much if anything posted on the E-200 on this BBS. I just wish there was a music store in my part of the earth that would have the NT-1 available to try. But............ I have heard lots of praise on the Rode.
 
Singking:

Damn near next to no-experiences with the E-200 myself; not even enough to guess my own opinion on it. However, I do know some "big-time" names at the rec.audio.pro who have not spoken too highly on the Equitek series; mainly the capsules in them. Have you compared other mics in the E-200's price range; such as the AT4033 or Rode NT-2 to the E-200?

I recently read good things on the AT3525 on r.a.p., but have never tried it myself. They all say it has a very good mic to price ratio.

I like the NT-1 the most of large diaphragm mics in the $200US range.

By the way, which Marshall are you talking about?
 
Recording Engineer, you need to stop slamming the c3000 until you have used one.
First of all, they've been out of production for months, replaced by the c3000b, which is even quiter and sounds a bit better.
And second, if you had ever used one next to a 414, you would know that the c3000 sounds very similar to one set to cardioid.
In fact, with the improved c3000b, they sound nearly identical (in that position, of course). I've used them together for stereo miking of acoustic guitars, etc., and when compared they are extremely close in sound.
It seems strange that you could talk about
deficiencies in a mic that for about 300 bucks sounds alot like a 414.
This is a great mic, but it seems someones convinced you that it isn't, probably the sound room people that have got you brainwashed into spending extra money for crappy mics and trying to get everyone else to do the same.
 
If you really want to talk, lets talk...

But don't forget to read before you shout.
 
So you want to reveal who you really are?

You probably already who I really am...

Weston Ray
 
Dang ns, first post and you are already making friends. I think you need to re-read the post's here. I don't see one place where RE is slamming the C3000. In fact, he made reference to where he prefered it to another mic... :(

On another note, I have HEARD RE's recordings, and even am in possession of some of his ADAT tapes (sorry RE, just haven't around to mixing any of the other songs yet..maybe tomorrow... :)) but have not heard ANY of your stuff yet ns. So, if I was looking to make a decision about a mic, I would certainly favor opinions set forth by RE (and a few others on this BBS who have been nice enough to share their work with the world) over a guy who's first post is a bitching session because his favorite mic was used in a statement that the person posting didn't even make, but rather just posted. So, if you are really sold on the C3000, well, post a damn mp3 somewhere and let all take a listen to your work so they may get a feel for what your skill level is.

Personally, the only AKG mic I have used that I thought was worth a shit was the 414. Used one on many occasions and really dig it's sound. On the other hand, while I don't have any experience using a C3000, I have heard a lot of recordings that have used it and did not care for some of the sounds I have heard. Was is just the skill of the engineer? Was it the quality of all the other components in their system? I don't know. Let me hear something from you so I can have another source to gauge from.

Personally, I favor my pair of 4033's. But I tell ya, a pair of 414's would rock my world. But I have a hard time accepting that the C3000 is a comparable mic to the 414. If you feel it is, well, there are many things that could effect that comparison. You could have an inferior monitoring system. You could be using a SB soundcard, or even worse, a 4 track cassette for recording (neither of which could possibly recreate the nuiance of large diaphram microphone differences if both mics are at least decent). You could have crappy cable. Hell, you may be using Peavey console preamps for all I know. But I do know this, not too many mics actually "compare" to a 414. That is why you see them in all the better studios mic list. I don't come across the C3000 in many mic lists of studios that put out good work. You ever wonder why? :D In fact, I am more likely to see the 4033, or a 4050 then the C3000. But still, the 4033 and 4050 are just not as good as a 414. I doubt that any of the sub $1000 mic are except in very rare specific applications.

So, take it easy on RE there big guy. He has recorded some very nice sounding stuff, and does his research, and tends not to talk out his ass...(hint hint)....

Ed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top