Mics are a funny thing. If you really want the kinds of sounds you hear on other recordings, well, you are going to have to have some pretty "standard" mics around to get those sounds.
Here is a question. Do you really know what sounds good when you hear it? Are your monitors telling you the truth about the sound?
Not only will bad mic pre's mess with your sound, but crappy monitors will cause you to think you are getting a sound on tape that you really are not.
virtual.ray Take that 10 to 20% difference in quality, and times that by how many tracks you are going to record. Sure, you are still only down 10 or 20% in audio quality, but I tell you what, 10 to 20 % difference is a HUGE difference in audio. Bottom line there friend. Diminished returns are not something that should be ever accepted in audio, if you are in the game to do it well. Sure, that NT1 may be 70% as good as
a Neumann U 87, but cost 1/10th the price. But, paying that extra 900% for the Neumann is totally worth it in my book. When you consider that I can win clients just from having one, well, can I afford NOT to have one. Plus, I think that you will find that the better quality mics wind up being used far more in your recordings. So, their price vs. usage ratio is excellent.
It is one thing if you are just trying to hear your songs back. But when you are going for a "sound", price should never come into play at two stages in audio, the mics, and the monitors. These are the two mechanical interfaces of audio, and have the biggest bearing on the over quality of the finished product. I would rather skimp on compressors, and effect processors then skimp on mics and monitors.
There are some mics which just plain don't sound good for most things. Sure, they will have a good use here and there, but mostly, they are just cheap sounding mics. On the other hand, there are many mics out there that have multiple uses that they sound good on.
The Shure SM-57, and 81 are killer examples of this. The AKG 414 is another. The RE 20, or better yet, 27 n/d is another. These are staples in studios because they deliver predictable results, and the results are very pleasing to most peoples ears. There are some of the mics that have defined great recordings for a few decades now. There really is no argueing whether they are a better choice, because inevitably they are. Many of these "newcomer" mics just don't provide the consistent quality sound, and many of them are of very poor contruction.
There are many cases where some of these newer mics out are much higher priced then older, more established mics for the similar uses. The Audex D series stuff is an example. They are pushed as being better sounding them SM-57, but, to my ears, I have yet to hear how they are. In fact, many engineer who were intitially impressed with the Audex mics went back to the 57's after just a few sessions with the Audex stuff. They found that they were never able to get wholesome sounding snare and tom tracks at mix with them. Those D series mics are like twice the price of the old tried and true 57.
I think there are far too many people trying to get into the mic game, and are not producing product that is worthy of consideration. If you want the sure bets, well, buy Shure....
, and looks into the other "staples" that grace many top notch recording studios. I am certainly glad that many out there are buying these new cheap knock off mics, because it is starting to drive the price of the mics I want down quite a bit....
So, those of you who just can't seem to get over the $400 mark on a mic, THANKS!!! Keep up the good work! I will continue to purchase the old stand by's, and hopefully, my recordings will reflect the superior characteristics of these proven mics for years to come.
Ed
