Is it worth spending $2000 on Mic?

[chessparov]

Tube, did you try any EQing on the dynamics?

You may be surprised at the difference, if you didn't.
Those mic's were made to be pounded (EQ'd) into submission.

Just "offf the shelf", I'd be surprised if the U195 didn't kick the others butt.

Chris

 

[A Reel Person]

Is a mic worth $2000?

Two words: Hell no!

 

[acorec]

I own a project studio with a fairly decent signal chain. I am running an Avalon 737 into a Apogee Rosetta into a Roland VS2480. Drums are recorded direct using Roland Vdrums, Electric Guitars are recorded direct using a Mesa Boogie Recording preramp and a Rocktron Prophesy. Bass Is recorded direct through the Avalon. I currently own 1 microphone--an AKG 414 T11 which I use for recording vocals and acoustic 6 & 12 string guitars. I need to buy a 2nd mic that will be primarly used for recording my vocals and also for acoustic guitars. I definitley want to buy a tube mic and I was told that the Soundelux U99 is the way to go. I am wondering if $2000 is too much to spend on a mic. I guess my question is, are mics like the Audio Technica 4060 which sell for $1000, comparable to the "higher end" mics like the Soundelux which are twice the price? Are there other tube mics that I should be looking into that record male vocals and acoustic guitar fairly well? Is anyone using a Soundelux U99 or an Audio Technica 4060 with an Avalon 737?

Thanks for your response

In general, a $1000 mic is not better than a $2000 mic period. That is fact. The real question is a $1000 better sounding for your application in your studio than a $2000 mic. Only you will know for sure. Might be, might not be. This question is asked so much around here and the sad fact is that if you cannot audition mics in your studio with your equipment, reading posts is pretty useless. Posts are useful for really unreliable and totally bad sounding mics. But, in the $1000 and up catagories, it is totally a matter of personal taste, and that is one thing that people cannot agree upon.

Bobby

 

[glynb]

Some advice here is useful.
For example the general advice (which I followed) that a condenser mic will be better than a sure sm58. Things of that nature. But you do get conflicting opinions too with regard to brands and models, which can add to confusion.

What i did in the end was to follow another piece of advice I got here. Buy one from a company who let you have it on approval for a period with a money back no quibble returns policy. I was able to audition the mic knowing i could send it back if it was crap. It wasn't, but I had that assurance.

I spent £165 on it.

I guess if you have the money spare then whuy not spend $2000 on a mic, like if you have the money to spend on cars then you'll buy a cadillac. The rest of us can just dream.

 

[acorec]

Some advice here is useful.
For example the general advice (which I followed) that a condenser mic will be better than a sure sm58. Things of that nature. But you do get conflicting opinions too with regard to brands and models, which can add to confusion.

What i did in the end was to follow another piece of advice I got here. Buy one from a company who let you have it on approval for a period with a money back no quibble returns policy. I was able to audition the mic knowing i could send it back if it was crap. It wasn't, but I had that assurance.

I spent £165 on it.

I guess if you have the money spare then whuy not spend $2000 on a mic, like if you have the money to spend on cars then you'll buy a cadillac. The rest of us can just dream.

You hit on a very interesting difference. How many people buy a car without trying it? People tend not to think when posting and hope that they can get an answer that they can bank on. You have to try anything to see if you like it or not. If you cannot try it before you buy it, then it is a desparite attempt when you have to post with questions like "What is the best mic for $200?"
Stores have mics. If the salesperson will not let you try, then don't buy. Simple. If you live nowhere around a store, then you are taking a gamble everytime. Listening to people on a BBS is fine for some aspects of mics, but ultimately, it is your ears and equipment that will make the decision.

 

[chessparov]

For 99%+ of all singers, the best use for $2000 is $200 or less on the microphone, and the rest on vocal lessons/coaching.

Chris

 

[Jeroleen]

I was at the AES convention this past weekend. I checked out the Studioprojects C1. In fact, they had all of thier mics set up so that you could just walk up and with the touch of a button you could audition each mic. I also checked out the Lawson booth.

The Lawson mics are a great deal. They sound great and they have interhcangable heads so that you can get a real variety of mic sounds. You can put the 47 type head on the FET base or the FET head on the Tube base. They all sounded great I must say.

I then checked out the C1 which I had never used and was curious about. It is certainly a good mic though it does not sound anywhere near as good as the high end mics like the Soundelux or the Lawson or Neuman mics. There is a kind of presence or clarity that is missing on a mic like the C1.

In the end though, if you have an absolutely great performance sung on a C1 and a miserable performance on a Neuman U47, the great performance beats the great mic. When the song plays on the radio, the audience could care less what type of mic the singer used as long as they get a clean, well mixed vocal and a great performance of a great song. No mic, not even a Telefunken 251 for 10k will turn a crap song and rotten performance into a hit. However, a C1 or less will not prevent a great song and great performance from becoming a hit.

In the end, you decide what your budget can handle and get what you like. It does not matter if it costs ten dollars or ten thousand dollars as long as you love the sound and can work with it.

None of the mics, either the C1 or a Sure SM57 or 81 or what have you, sound bad. Sure, you can make them sound bad with a bad recording, messed up EQ or compression but for the most part, they all have a decent sound. Its just that those expensive mics have a clarity, presence, tone and naturalness that is just beautiful.

I use a Soundelux E47. Before that I had a Rode NT1. The NT1 never sounded really bad however, the difference was night and day. When I starting using the E47 it was like someone took the blanket off of the mic. Everything just came into focus. It was like looking through a camera lens completely out of focus and turning the knob until it comes into focus. That is the difference and it is certainly worth the money if you have it to spend.

 

[A Reel Person]

Sure. Speaking of the SM57, my favorite and most utiltarian mic,...

I think some EQ is required to bring the best sound from the 57, on any source.

I don't think that the SM57 sounds all that hot or fabulous without some EQ.

However, with judicious mic placement, attention to gain-staging, and some moderate EQ, I am able to get the sound I want from the SM57, every time, without too much trouble. That's why I use the SM57 almost exclusively, and am inclined to recommend it.

The SM57 is not like, or meant to be like the $2000 mic, but FWIW, I don't think you'll hear $1900 difference in audio, when comparing the 57 to the high end $2000 mic.

IMO, [here I go!], when comparing quality mics, [not Mr. Microphone or Radio Shack], what you get in mic sourced audio has more to do with it's use, placement and technique in the hands of who's using it. [The human element].

Then again, I've heard a few individuals swear by Radio Shack mics, as they're clones of more popular mics, and in many cases are actually manufactured by name mic manufacturers, to be sold under the "stealth" Radio Shack name.

There'ya go, it's my opinion, so YMMV.

 

[chessparov]

The reason why so many home recordists underestimate the SM57 (and so many pro AE's like it) is due to the following IMHO;

1) Pro enginners are generally better at mic placement.
2) They're using better pre's than a Mackie or Behringer board.
3) High end EQ (in line with Reel's comment).
4) Apprehension of home recordists to USE EQ even if they have
a nice unit.

Chris