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

[tdukex]

What I heard, listening on cheap headphones through headphone jack on cheap speakers through cheap soundcard:

I liked the "ching-chime" best and the "twang-honk" second best. Did not care for "mmf" or "ting," but again, this was listening on a crap monitoring system so I could very well change my mind.

I own the "ching-chime" and like it a lot paired with an MC012 on my Webber OM for solo acoustic guit.

 

[Lanny Cox]

Hmm..

1) MXL603 - Nice and balanced, low noise floor, my favorite.
2) 414B-ULS - Also like this one.. it had a bit less definition though.. would still not hesitate to try it out.
3) SM-7 - Had a nice lo-fi sound to it, but I'd never use it. This isn't really a good acoustic mic anyways.
4) AT-822 - Made the guitar sound like a harpsichord. Seriously.

 

[johnsuitcase]

I'm wondering whether pointing at the 15th fret is a good place for micing that guitar. I think with a more directional mic, it's going to sound tinny and small, with something with a wider pattern it'll at least get a little of the soundboard.

With the sample, I liked them right in order 1,2,3,4 with 1 and 2 being very close.

Personally, I like GT44s, one up above the neck pointing down, and one down by the bridge, pointing at the soundboard. Of course you have to move things around a little to get the phase right, etc.

The Ven Ven song on my site uses these mics, in the described manner:

http://suitcaserecordings.com/demoreels.html

Vocal is a SP B1, and it added a bit to the guitar, as we tracked it in one take, vox and guitar together.

 

[juineaux]

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.

funny seeing you here....
yea, I was fairly dissapointed with that mic(sm7) all around. I'm sure it's great for a specific style, but it doesn't work for me. Glad you liked the 603, I still think the 414's are great but not quite as much detail-

 

[Stefan Elmblad]

LMAO <--- too short message so I add another ROFLMAO

 

[Matheon]

well don't hate a mic because it gave a twangy sound to your acoustic.. and don't say a mic is bad because it made the acoustic bright with nothing but high end presence..

sometimes that may be just what you want from the acoustic.
every mic can have its place

the 603 is no more better than the AT than green is better than purple. it just might get picked out more often.

i understand this is just a general comparison and i really appreciate that you did this. people are just too quick to say a mic sounds like garbage sometimes. that same mic could save you from having to EQ out a lot of low end and EQ in a lot of presence, should the situation call for it.

 

[junplugged]

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.

gee, thanks for all that help....

 

[Middleman]

I would choose the 414 for a vocal and guitar only. It had a nice woody sound, more professional, whatever that means.

The 603 in a denser mix, your gonna need the highs to punch through.

I could use the 822 for some things, very dense mix maybe.

SM7 - Not on this guitar.

 

[chessrock]

gee, thanks for all that help....

And what have you done that's been of any help, Skippy? All I've gotten out of you so far are sarcastic remarks and criticisms of the adjectives I use to describe characteristics of mics.

What are your takes on the differences? Why don't you actively participate in this, rather than pick out one guy's post you don't like and and snip at it? That's really productive. Did you notice someone posted a bunch of clips? Or did you somehow overlook that in your quest to criticize my post?

 

[freshmattyp]

And what have you done that's been of any help, Skippy? All I've gotten out of you so far are sarcastic remarks and criticisms of the adjectives I use to describe characteristics of mics.

What are your takes on the differences? Why don't you actively participate in this, rather than pick out one guy's post you don't like and and snip at it? That's really productive. Did you notice someone posted a bunch of clips? Or did you somehow overlook that in your quest to criticize my post?

I think it's a reaction to your well known tendency to be a smart ass first, then helpful when pressed. You have some good knowledge to share, it usually just takes a bit of prodding. But that's just my opionion. I may very well be wrong.

I wasn't blown away by any of them, but I think the 603's and the 414 could be combined into a decent track. Again, just my opinion.

 

[asulger]

I agree with all the others about the SM7 - dreadful for this application.
414 and 603 was nice. The AT-822 was interesting enough for me to think about it for my 12-string.
Miking acoustics is hard for a guitarist. The guitarist never hears what the audience hears, and the guitar just has so many tonalities when you're playing 'cause you're so close.

Might be too late, but shouldn't you be testing off-axis response? xy or ortf configurations will be 'listening' to the guitar off-axis by at least 45 degrees.

Thanks for posting the shootout clip. I've been struggling for years trying to get the 'right' sound.

 

[johnsuitcase]

I agree, I don't think mic shootouts can prove that one mic is "better" than another, though it can be a useful way to compare the different tonal characteristics and "flavors". Really, if you learn your mic collection well enough, you'll find applications for all of them.

If you want to get a good acoustic sound, the first step is to have someone play the guitar, then move your head around until you hear what you're looking for. Or put on some phones and move the mic around while they play. There are so many tonal variations available just by moving the mic a few inches over this way or that.

Personally, I think a good acoustic sound is about 70% soundboard, 20% fret and pick/finger, and 10% room mic (assuming you have a decent room to record in.)

But all a mic comparsion like this really does is show you what these mics sound like, on this source, at this position. It's good for education, but not really for information, if you know what I mean...

 

[chessrock]

I think it's a reaction to your well known tendency to be a smart ass first, then helpful when pressed. You have some good knowledge to share, it usually just takes a bit of prodding.

Yea, you're pretty much spot on with that one.

I just didn't take the bait, I guess.

Not much more to add. There were a bunch of mics used on accoustic ... they all sounded different. Any one of them could work brilliantly or suck, depending on the circumstances and context of how they're used.

 

[acorec]

I agree with all the others about the SM7 - dreadful for this application.
414 and 603 was nice. The AT-822 was interesting enough for me to think about it for my 12-string.
Miking acoustics is hard for a guitarist. The guitarist never hears what the audience hears, and the guitar just has so many tonalities when you're playing 'cause you're so close.

Might be too late, but shouldn't you be testing off-axis response? xy or ortf configurations will be 'listening' to the guitar off-axis by at least 45 degrees.

Thanks for posting the shootout clip. I've been struggling for years trying to get the 'right' sound.

The problem is that how sure are you that you are hearing the mic? I have no idea what the room sounds like or the guitar. Without knowing how the source sounds, I have no opinion of which mic sounds better, I can only say which *recording* I like better. So, since the only one here who knows the source sound and was there is the poster, he is right about the MXL winning "hands down" as he states.

 

[joshw]

The problem is that how sure are you that you are hearing the mic? I have no idea what the room sounds like or the guitar. Without knowing how the source sounds, I have no opinion of which mic sounds better, I can only say which *recording* I like better. So, since the only one here who knows the source sound and was there is the poster, he is right about the MXL winning "hands down" as he states.

True, and that's a problem in any equipment shootout. The best you can do is to equalize all the other variables in the equation at some arbitrary standard, and compare. Either way, it's one possibility out of the millions of possible variations, and is better than none.

 

[Janesaid2me]

I have a pair of 603s and i love them on my acoustic...i also use them for drum overheads which they work nicely on...i know many have complained about them sounding to bright or tinny sounding on the overheads, but ive never had that problem...maybe its my mic placement....i think for the price the 603s is a wonderful deal and the way to go for anyone on a budget.

 

[Robert D]

Hmm..

1) MXL603 - Nice and balanced, low noise floor, my favorite.
2) 414B-ULS - Also like this one.. it had a bit less definition though.. would still not hesitate to try it out.
3) SM-7 - Had a nice lo-fi sound to it, but I'd never use it. This isn't really a good acoustic mic anyways.
4) AT-822 - Made the guitar sound like a harpsichord. Seriously.

EXACTLY! the SM7 and 822 were total throwouts, and the 414 lacked definition that was there with the 603. Now maybe in a different position the 414 would have earned it's rep, and as always with these shootouts, it's only which mic sounded best on THAT source, in THAT room, with THAT pre...yada yada. But in this set of circumstances, that 603 was the most balanced of the bunch, with the right amount of body and strings.

Man, it's amazing how differently we hear!

-RD

 

[Robert D]

Just listened again......6 seconds into the cut the 414 sounds great for a couple of seconds.

You know what would be great is a database of these samples, with everyone contributing. Somewhere in between all the various samples of a given mic you could probably get an idea of how it tends to sound. Same with the pres.

RD

 

[wesley tanner]

I might've missed this obvious question... but what polar pattern is the 414 in?

 

[omtayslick]

You know what would be great is a database of these samples, with everyone contributing. Somewhere in between all the various samples of a given mic you could probably get an idea of how it tends to sound. Same with the pres.

RD

That is an interesting idea indeed! Sort of like the Home Recording "Listening Sessions".