Mic test...

[justharold]

No, I did not try the other Shure KSM's nor the AT stuff. Mostly because...they didn't have them.

They did have a couple of Telefunken mics, however they were WAY expensive!

And, oh...I bought the Neumann (and plan on getting the KSM44 soon)

 

[baekgaard]

Interesting

No doubt in my mind that number 4 is heads and shoulders above the others... With 2 and 6 as contenders.

Number 7 sounds pretty compressed/limited, almost as if it could be a bad sample you tested. At least it sounds somewhat different from what I'm used to hear from it. I also have number 1, and that sounds as I expected it to. Number 2 sound as I would have expected number 7 to sound, and vice versa... you're sure you didn't swap the two ;-)

Thanks for sharing, btw. Interesting test!


-- Per.

 

[Flatpicker]

Well now I feel stupid!

I knew there had to be a problem on my end, so I took DJL's advice and gave them another listen, first with headphones and then speakers. After finding the phones noticeably brighter and lacking in lows (should have used them before but was in a hurry and didn’t think about it), I realized I had pushed my KRKs back closer to the wall to access some table space. After pulling them out away from the wall where they belong, the low-end dropped dramatically! They are elevated about 4” off the table on foam blocks, but were just too close to the wall.

Now #2 sounds thinner and even a bit harsh on the loud part and #4 sounds great! (I’m going to have to get one of these!). I still don’t particularly like #6, though - the highs are just too smeared. For what it cost, I’d expect it to sound clearer. No surprise, though. I don't think I've every heard a clip from this mic that I really liked.

I still put #7 in last place.

The volume miss-matches do make back-to-back judging difficult, but I appreciate the effort, non-the-less!

 

[Flatpicker]

BTW, I’m assuming you measured and used the same distance between the your mouth and the mic's diaphragm from take to take, same preamp gain, cardioid setting on each mic, etc...?

What was the approx. distance? Just curious because I'm trying to get an idea of how much proximity effect was involved.

 

[steve350]

Harold what made you chose the TLM103 over the KSM44?

 

[krs]

What's with the noise floor on No.5?? (SPC3)

Weird. Great samples, I just learned a lot. You got a great voice too

 

[justharold]

baekgaard,

I too was amazed (and disappointed) in just how crappy the NT1000 sounded in comparison. Especially since it has been the mic that I would reach for first, in the past. Mostly because it was one of my most expensive mics. The same with the C3. Probably THE biggest surprise to me in the test was the NT1A. It does sound quite good.

Flatpicker,

You're going to hate me when I tell you this, but...I was actually HOLDING each one of these mics when I sang into them. Obviously, that would not have been my chosen method. However, the Guitar Center where I recorded the Neumann and the Shure did not have a room for recording. They did have a Korg D1600 (which I also have) on display. So I asked them if I could plug the mics into it and record, then burn to CD. They'd never had anybody do that before, but they let me. I had to step back into the next room and shut the door. Where I had to hold on to the mic. I did try to keep them both equadistant from my mouth (about 4-5 inches) and slightly off-axis. So...in order to keep it constant...I did the same at home with my mics. All mics were cardiod and at the same preamp setting. There was however a HUGE difference in gain (some have commented on the difference in volume etc. Believe me, it was WORSE). I normalized the tracks to make them somewhat equal. however, I did not want to color them by adding limiting/compression.

steve350,

Personally, I liked the TLM103 better (albeit only slightly). It had more of the sound that I was after. To me, though, a Cappella the Shure sounds better with a tad more "body". However, in a mix, I'm thinking the Neumann might "fit" better.

Besides all that...I got a really good price on the Neumann that I couldn't pass up. AND, since the Shure is cheaper (and easier to find)...I plan on getting that one soon, as well!

 

[Flatpicker]

THE biggest surprise to me in the test was the NT1A. It does sound quite good.

I agree. On second listen it was a little screechy on the loud part, but by getting a little closer and slightly off axis, it might just be the thing for your voice. It all depends on what else is in the mix, too. When you find a mic that sounds good a Cappella, it usually doesn't in a dense mix and you end up cutting lows to minimize the low-end clutter.

I love mic test, though - even when they are not "scientific". Most of us don't record "scientifically" anyway so it's probably not that big a deal.

Thanks again for taking the time to do this.

 

[sdelsolray]

Good thread. Good anecdotal testing. Five years ago I wouldn't have been able to hear much, if any, difference between any of the mics. Let's all remember that each of those mics will react differently, some by quite a bit, depending on (i) source material and (ii) preamp used. Nonetheless, to my ears, the mics of higher quality stood out in the tests. I used to own a TLM103, used only for solo fingerstyle acoustic guitar. It's a very good mic overall. Many don't like it, but I think that's just because it doesn't copy a U67, etc., hence a disappointment. The Shure KSM44 was nice too, very nice. I've never used that mic. I can see why many like it.

 

[chessrock]

I think the mic comparison results followed right along with my own experiences.

In other words, I've had much better luck with nicer mics in general . . . and have had mostly satisfactory to great experiences with all of the Shure condensers I've used. They're good mics, and they tend to record superior tracks compared to their lower-priced competitors.

Same deal with the Audio Technicas.

 

[justharold]

I'm glad this was helpful. You all helped me out in deciding.

What I will probably do in the next few days is post a seperate thread with ALL of the mics that I did in the origianl test (which included some handheld condensers). I will also clearly name them in the list (you know, not just "numbers"). People can use that fro some sort of reference if they would like.

I would have liked to have come across something like that when I was looking for a mic...

 

[baekgaard]

Still puzzled about the NT1000

baekgaard,
I too was amazed (and disappointed) in just how crappy the NT1000 sounded in comparison. Especially since it has been the mic that I would reach for first, in the past. Mostly because it was one of my most expensive mics. The same with the C3. Probably THE biggest surprise to me in the test was the NT1A. It does sound quite good.

Understood... but I'm still quite puzzled.

Especially with a bright or lower quality preamp, the NT1000 is usually accused of being bright, overbright, edgy or harsh. But this one sounds squashed, lifeless/overcompressed to me... Nothing like the sound of the NT1000 that I have.

Were your preamp perhaps overdriven on the input stage? Does this correspond to what you have heard from it earlier on (assuming you have the NT1000 yourself and have been using it before)?

I still find it strange... although you could have a bad sample, of course, or it could be just my sample that is "better" than the average lots.

Thanks for clarifying. If you want to discuss this offline, PM me.


-- Per.

 

[krs]

So much for the sweeping claims of SP mics being "as good or better" than Neumann mics (and keep in mind this is a budget Neumann...)

SP just got smoked on that source.

 

[leddy]

So much for the sweeping claims of SP mics being "as good or better" than Neumann mics (and keep in mind this is a budget Neumann...)

SP just got smoked on that source.

Yeah. I was ready to buy some SP's. This will make me shop a little harder and save a little more money. I would not have expected the Sp to sound that bad in comparison. I have to say, in defense of SP though, by the time the signal gets compressed, EQ'd and added to a mix the difference MAY not be quite as obvious. And then there's the price...

I own a VTB-1 pre, and it is an excellent pre; I'm sure their mics are usable.

I'm still going to lust after some Neumanns though.

 

[sdelsolray]

Yeah. I was ready to buy some SP's. This will make me shop a little harder and save a little more money. I would not have expected the Sp to sound that bad in comparison. I have to say, in defense of SP though, by the time the signal gets compressed, EQ'd and added to a mix the difference MAY not be quite as obvious. And then there's the price...

I own a VTB-1 pre, and it is an excellent pre; I'm sure their mics are usable.

I'm still going to lust after some Neumanns though.

Neumann has several mics that are within reach of home recording budgets. I'm thinking of used TLM 103s, TLM 193s and KM 184s. Typically, 103s and 193s can be had for $600 or so, maybe $700 with the elastic shockmount. Pairs of 184s are often under $1,000. Of course, there are many nice mics in these price ranges besides used Neumanns. One thing about Neumanns, you can pretty much count on replacement parts and service 20 years from now on current production models.

 

[krs]

I have to say, in defense of SP though, by the time the signal gets compressed, EQ'd and added to a mix the difference MAY not be quite as obvious.

No doubt. But the time you waste doing that would account for the price difference in about 3 weeks

Was that C3 new out of the box or a rental? There's got to be something wrong with it there. All that noise - I don't get it.

 

[charles383]

Number four was it for me...sounded like maybe a Nady TCM 1050 or some other tube mic. I was also impressed with mic six, but it didn't have quite the dynamics as four. Mic seven...AT4033?...just curious.
Charles