Mic Shootout Results: AKG C414, MXL 603s, Shure SM7, AT-822

[joshw]

For anyone who's interested, I did a acoustic guitar microphone shootout with an AKG C414, MXL 603s, Shure SM7 and an AT-822.

Here are the results, including an audio clip. The MXL 603S won hands-down.

 

[Robert D]

Nice pickin Wow, I've never heard an MXL before........I'm impressed. You're right, it was the hands down winner for that recording. I wish there was an Oktava Mk-012 in the lineup. As always, the 414 failed to impress me, especially given it's price. My ranking was 603, 414, SM7, 822.

RD

 

[Dot]

From what I hear, IMO, I'd give the 603 3rd place.

414 - best overall definition and balance
SM7 - sounds nice, smooth and even
603 - sounds cheap, thin, no body
AT-822 - sounds really cheap, really thin

I think if you would work with mic positioning you'd find you could get a much better sound with the 414 than you got in this recording. Don't really understand the comment on the 414, "As usual, this sounds too dark and muddy...". The 414's actually a pretty bright mic.

 

[noisedude]

Hmmm ... well ... on my cheapy monitors they'd go in this order:

1. C414
2. 603
3. SM7
4 - 9. Anything at all
10 or lower. AT-822

 

[Neeps]

1. Mxl 603
2. C414
3. Sm7
4. At-822

 

[joshw]

From what I hear, IMO, I'd give the 603 3rd place.

414 - best overall definition and balance
SM7 - sounds nice, smooth and even
603 - sounds cheap, thin, no body
AT-822 - sounds really cheap, really thin

I think if you would work with mic positioning you'd find you could get a much better sound with the 414 than you got in this recording. Don't really understand the comment on the 414, "As usual, this sounds too dark and muddy...". The 414's actually a pretty bright mic.

Yeah, I've had the 414s for the better part of a decade, and have tried every conceivable mic scheme for those. Part of the problem is that the guitar itself has a bit of a dark tone, and when fingerpicking, I'm looking for a bright sound. Plus, the 414 is invariably boomy as all get-out. Even putting it in the neck position, it still needs a +5ish high shelf to sound right. The 603 gives me that right out of the box.

 

[noisedude]

Doesn't the 603 have a super-wide pattern? Isn't that why you find it gives you the right sound so easily?

Not trying to aggravate, just asking.

EDIT - For me, there's just too much missing from the 603 sound. With the C414, at least you can subtract what you don't want. You can't put the body back into the 603, though I totally understand that if you don't want that body, then the 603 is ideal for your purpose.

 

[Dot]

Well, there's no law that says you have to like a given mic. Go with what you think works. Josh, if you want to try a really bright mic – to balance the darker tone of your guitar – see if you can get your hands on an AKG 451 to audition.

It's very common for engineers to roll-off @ around 100Hz on acoustic guitar tracks.

Acoustic treatment in the room where you're recording can make a huge difference – much more so than even individual mic selection.

 

[chessrock]

SM-7 on accoustic guitar? Was that thrown in there for comic effect?

Here's my interperatation of what I heard from each clip:

1) Mmmf, mmff, muff-mfff ... Mmmf, muff-mffff

2) Ching, ching-ching chime ching ...

3) Twang, twang-twang, twang-honk

4) Tink, tink-tink ting ting ...

 

[joshw]

SM-7 on accoustic guitar? Was that thrown in there for comic effect?

Yes. ;-) He picked one up for vocals, and the noise floor was killing him, so I tried it on my preamp to find the same results.

 

[junplugged]

SM-7 on accoustic guitar? Was that thrown in there for comic effect?

Here's my interperatation of what I heard from each clip:

1) Mmmf, mmff, muff-mfff ... Mmmf, muff-mffff

2) Ching, ching-ching chime ching ...

3) Twang, twang-twang, twang-honk

4) Tink, tink-tink ting ting ...

show us the way, or let's hear your better clip, using what mic?

 

[chessrock]

show us the way, or let's hear your better clip, using what mic?

What the fuck are you asking again?

 

[treymonfauntre]

i like the sound of the fingers sliding through the sm7.. thats about it. the 822 sounds like garbage. the 414 and 603 are close. i imagine the 603 would be better for lead and the 414 good for background. the sm7 seriously has an interesting tone though... sounds like it'd be good for palm muted quiet bluesy stuff

 

[Nakatira]

I liked the audio technica the most.

I have the 603`s but only use them for overheads on drums, I think the sp b1 is good on acoustic guitar.

 

[jayridge]

Ok, I'm rebuking the general concensus:
1) 414 - This one has the body to get your booty bumpin (sorry, don't know what came over me).
2) AT-822 - This didn't necessarily sound good as much as it sounded real. It was the only recording that made me feel like the guitarist was in the room. An interesting concept given todays music.
3) 603 - Usable in a mix.
4) SM7 - I think I fell asleep during this one... what did it sound like?

Jay

 

[ozraves]

Not a fan of any of them.

 

[gemsbok]

something about the at822 i likes too. isint that the stereo field recording mic? overall the 414 would be my favorite. the 603 close second. the sm7 was a bit boxy weird . my polk audio computer speakers wouldnt lie!

 

[omtayslick]

Some kind of strangeness almost like feedback in the background on this track at 9-10 seconds and at 46 seconds. Anybody else hearing that?

I agree with the comment that the Shure midrange could be cool on an old acoustic blues tune. And I agree that the AT sounded the most "live".

Overall I think the AKG could be best molded into what you want it to be because more of the frequencies are present. But, considering the price difference, the MXL's performance was impressive.

 

[junplugged]

What the fuck are you asking again?

u know, what mics do you like, since it seems like you didn't like this group....unless the chip clang and twang were compliments?

 

[chessrock]

u know, what mics do you like, since it seems like you didn't like this group....unless the chip clang and twang were compliments?

You got it all wrong.

The first one sounded a little muffled. Hence the "mmf"

The second was nice and chimey. Hence the "ching-chime"

Third was twangy and nasal. Hence the "twang-honk."

Fourth was kind of thin and sharp; hence the "ting."

And before you get all hypersensitive on me and assume these were insults, this is very generally and comparatively / relatively speaking. This, to me, is very obviously how each one sounded relative to each other. Nothing wrong with the playing, recording technique, etc. So relax, dude rancher. Take a long drag o' that peace pipe, and swallow that chill pill hard. I'm trying to help some of you idiots*, but you make it hard sometimes.


* With tongue placed in cheek.