Marshall MXL 990 and B.L.U.E. KIWI vocal demos

[Bergen]

Thought I'd share some vocal demos I did at GC. Wanted to compare the best GC had to offer against my MXL 990 which I have been fairly happy with but am looking to upgrade. This demo was done approx 6 inches away from both mics with a pop filter
in their monitor demo room, which has minor reverberations. The mics were run through crappy-looking cream colored mic cables into a trident preamp and through a mackie mixer into a cd recorder. The vocal piece was chosen because it uses soft
melodic as well as harder driven vocals. This created variable dynamics, so even though I've posted them dry, some compression and reverb may help in the comparison. See what you think. Here is the link:

http://www.nowhereradio.com/bergen/singles

 

[musical5]

Wow the clarity of the 1st track is miles ahead. The 1st just sounds huge. Number 2 sounds feeble in comparison.
Thanks for sharing.



Justin

 

[tom18222]

blink 182s new record, they use the blue kiwi

 

[cominginsecond]

Even on $10 sony headphones I can tell a significant difference. The Kiwi is much smoother and rounder, and the 990 is a little harsh in the upper mids.

 

[chessrock]

The kiwi just has something about it that will lock the vocal right in to it's spot in a mix.

Very pop music - friendly.

 

[dwillis45]

Vocal Mic Comparison

The differences are not immediate to my ears but that's partially a function of my laptop's speakers. After doing a couple of A/B comparisons, however, the Blue Kiwi sounds much more open and detailed. How much more open and detailed? I would say about $1,800 more! I would be curious to see a similar test using a Blue Dragonfly, which is less than half the price of the Kiwi.

 

[mixmkr]

after listening to the two clips, my opinion is that the 990 is a fine mic[in comparison] and that spending $1800 more (or whatever it would be)for the Kiwi would be a waste of money for my current uses.

even though the 990 is a ripoff appearance wise, I even think it looks better too.

thanks for the clips. You helped me to scratch off a mic off my "lust for" list....even though I'd listen[live] for myself first!...and for some reason, a b.l.u.e mic isn't on my list anyway.

If you're looking for an upgrade, you might consider an Audio Technica....one of their models....and save a significant amount of cash.

I personally even like an electrovoice re20 on many vocals.

If money was a no-object scenario, and you had a professional caliber signal chain except for the mic...well....that'd be another story.

 

[ozraves]

On this voice, I'd probably try a Blue Baby Bottle first (of the Blue mics) or an Audio-Technica AT4040. I think an EV RE20 would be cool as well. I think the third mic I'd put up would be a Blue Dragonfly.

Steve
www.mojopie.com

 

[chessrock]

The dragonfly is really good for people with edgy, nasaly voices. Helps fill them out and sound more natural. There's a noticeable dip in the higher midrange . . . which is exactly the opposite of how the Audio Technicas behave -- they tend to have a little bit of an edge in the upper mids to help cut through in a mix. The Dragonfly's peaks are more in the mid-midrange . . . and in the extreme highs for all that airy, shiny stuff.

The guy's voice in question sounds like he already has a pretty full voice (no midrange squeekies that I can hear), so I can imagine in a mix it might need a little juice in the upper-mids to help maintain it's focus / lock in a pop/rock mix. Just a guess, so I would think an AT mic would work nice for him.

The Dragonfly and something like an AT 4040, 4047, etc. are very complimentary mics; if you don't sound good on one, then you'll probably sound good on the other.

The baby bottle, on the other hand, has a pretty even response in either direction.

 

[ozraves]

I don't think his voice needs any help in any direction which is why I said the Blue Baby Bottle might be the thing. But, if that didn't do it, then I'd move on.

BTW, Chessrock, what is a lower priced mic you'd put in place of a Blue Dragonfly? The Chinese mics with the high-end hype all seem a little too brittle to me. Would a better solution be additive EQ or do you got to spend the money for the Dragonfly?

Steve
www.mojopie.com

 

[chessrock]

Yea, the Dragonfly's really the only thing I can think of that does what it does. The Blue Berry kind of has a similar thing going on in the high end, but I think it's just a tad too much. Kind of like a DF on steroids. But there's no denying there's something very sweet about the high-high end on a lot of the Blues. It's definitely not a Chinese high end. A Rode NTK (or even an NT2) comes kind of close, though. Just a tad too close to most people's sibilant ranges, too, unfortunately.

Once you learn to work with it, you really come to appreciate it.

Because of that high-midrange dip, on some voices that need that edge to cut through, it just doesn't do it, and winds up sounding dull. But once you learn where the dip is, you can just EQ it back in there (usually around 4-5 khz with a wide Q), and whoala -- there it is, and it sounds great (like it was there all the time, just hiding).

 

[Bergen]

Thank you all for taking such an interest in this comparison. Since some of you commented what mics might work well for my voice, I thought I might ask some advice...

Do you think a v67g is a good upgrade from my MXL990 in the $200 and under category? (Oh, please say yes, my wallet will thank you). I can get it for $95 with shockmount. The only other mic I was considering was the studio projects C1, and even though it is a great deal at $200, the v67g seems like an insane deal and after all I'm only a solo, fair-weathered home recorder. Besides, I need the extra cash to upgrade to yorkies from my crappy computer speakers. Thanks.

Oh, my signal chain in mic-audiobuddy-echo mia if anyone cared.

 

[malcolm123]

Do you think a v67g is a good upgrade from my MXL990 in the $200 and under category?

Yes

If you can, take a listen to one and A/B it with the 990.
For 95 bucks you cant go wrong.

Good Luck

Malcolm

 

[Gidge]

yes the v67 would be a step up since it is a LD and the 990 is a SD.....

and Im sure everyone appreciates a $2000 LD condenser being compared to a $69 SD condenser, though some may be surprised how well it fared........

 

[malcolm123]

yes the v67 would be a step up since it is a LD and the 990 is a SD.....

and Im sure everyone appreciates a $2000 LD condenser being compared to a $69 SD condenser, though some may be surprised how well it fared........

I mean d@mn,,, I could hear the difference. The kiwi sounds better but $$ much better? Im still really trying to figure out why there is so much of a price range between " Good " Mics and "Budget " Mics to justify that much money.

Not being a @sshole or nothing, but the price ranges are just so huge. not trying to beat a dead horse either.

I cant wait to get my hands on the U87i and compare it to my little mic selection.


Malcolm

 

[Bergen]

Hey, I sense a fun little debate brewing....

Red Rover, Red Rover, have c7sus come on over!

 

[chessrock]

With all due respect, Malcolm . . . I really think you need to hear these mics side-by-side under more ideal conditions.

ie -- not in a busy guitar center store . . .

And you really need to hear them on a variety of different voices, and most importantly, within the context of a mix. In my opinion, the mxlv67 sounds awesome, untill you actually start adding music, then you kind of start wondering where your vocal track went. ? ? ? It was here just a second ago! Now all I hear is this muddy muffly thing in the background that sounds like it could be a vocal track.

 

[Bergen]

Chessrock,

What if I were to use my mxl 990 for dense hard rock songs, something even Harvey Gerst uses it for(some of my stuff sounds like creed or some of the harder third eye blind stuff), and the v67g for the mellower, less busy acoustic-based songs (the rest of my stuff borders on John Mayer or the new album by Dishwalla(great under-recognized album btw)). I use a pretty bright acoustic that might match well with a "larger than life"(as Harvey describes the v67g) though slightly muddy vocal presence. Harvey says the v67g is very similar to the C1. Do people have the same problems with the C1? Thanks

 

[chessrock]

Hey Bergen,


All I'm really saying is that an important attribute of any mic is how it's going to interact with other tracks. Try not to approach it as if it's on an island or in a vaccum . . . listening to a solo vocal with it and concluding your thoughts on it from that alone, because that only tells part of the story.

If you try these mics out in the way you're suggesting, and it works for you, then that's the whole point of it. You've just applied this priciple, and used your noggin for some creative solutions to typical audio dilemnas. Using the right tool for the right situation; knowing it's strengths and working around it's shortcomings . . . that's what this is all about, dude.

 

[ozraves]

Yea, the Dragonfly's really the only thing I can think of that does what it does.

I agree with you. Getting to use a Dragonfly was one of the reasons I sold my Studio Projects C1. Now, I just need to afford this Dragonfly.