microphone bias and reasons

[CoolCat]

Rob's video 210 stoked some interesting points and got me wondering too.


I had watched this video, thought right away "is there's any "magic"?" Answer: no, I didn't hear any magic.
All the mics used are very decent, the Rode is very decent and well built and sounds fine. SM7b, AKG414, U87AI..classics.
(Mic Preamps too, and again, no "Magic Dust Sound" in my preamps.)

At least I could hear some differences with mics in tracks Ive done past 6 months, more so than preamps , in a listening session this morning.
Group 1. bass present, boomier in the lows HPF could take some out, but more Radio DJ bass present
Group 2. clarity in speech, with less boomer-bass, which would sit well in a song mix, or where clarity is wanted.
meh...not much there.

some mics and preamps are 1/.10 the cost. hmm? how bias does price of an item impact our ears?

Bias- I read a book, Glyn Johns or Ken Scott and they were talking about how biased they were for using only the standard Neumann and tube mics for all sessions for years!...but were one day forced into using different mics in a session and found these "other mics" worked just fine too, changing the bias.
Bias can be changed apparently. Mics other than a U47 or 67 are ok to use too.

Good video Rob.... and interesting topic imo.

Don't you have the AKG with the transformer?
those prices have gone up.
U87AI prices have gone up.
Rode NT...not so much. ...I noticed my $129 AKG P420 is back up to $259 at guitar center.

 

[rob aylestone]

Re: the transformer - no. All the 414's I have are XLS versions and none have the extra polar patterns, which always annoyed me - One I bought after 2010, which was when the extra ones were added, but it must have been old stock. I never even noticed as for 90% of the time they stay on cardioid. after I did the video, I put the 414 back in the case with the other two, a bit kind of disappointed with the way the video went. I was really guilty of just memory insisting the 414 beat everything else. You can pick up NT1-A for really silly money now, so I do think that for many people who perhaps just have one dynamic, and want something a bit brighter/cleaner/clinical/revealing (enter your own words here) then a second hand NT1-A could be really sensible if you don't have lots of money. I have a pair of TLM103 mics that I use for stereo recordings when the 414s were in use elsewhere, but I always thought they were a sort of second choice. Perhaps I should get one of those out and see if they too beat the 414 - but I'm not sure two mistakes close together would make me very happy.

What other weird opinions do I have? Well I prefer the EV 320 to the RE20. Again, I made this decision a while back too. Maybe this is also a faulty memory?

 

[TalismanRich]

Things I noticed in the video:

The background noise of the SM7b was notably higher than the 414. It was thinnner sounding.
The 414 had a fuller low range on the voice. More "chest". Overall pretty natural sounding.
The U87ai had more upper mids and less low range than the 414. Sibilants (like when you said "seven") were higher.
The NT1A was closer in overall balance to the U87ai than the 414. Sibilants were stronger than the U87. I think that's where most complaints come from. There's probably a peak in the 8-10K range that gets excited.

I've never use the NT1A. I have the NT1 which from comparisons I've heard vs the NT1A seems to tame the sibilants and adds a bit of fullness to the bottom. I've done comparisons of my mics, all in a similar price range. NT1, Miktek 300, Warm 47jr, Studio Projects B3, AKG P420, MXL992 and V67. They all have slightly different tonal character, but they all give a pretty decent representation of the actual voice or instrument.

Usually when I get a new mic, I'll set it up vs others I own and have used successfully and test it on acoustic guitar, voice and tambourine. Of those tests, the tambourine usually shows the greatest difference. It's probably related to the high frequency bump that most condenser mics have in the 8-15kHz range. They all seem to vary in frequency and level.

I've done the same with my SDC mics. AKG P170, Rode M5, Lauten LA120, CAD GXL1200, even some cheap Behringer C2 mics. The CAD and AKG sound nearly identical. The M5 has less bottom, which works with my Taylor 310. The Lautens are very well balanced but a touch noisier. The C2s were ok but noisy.

I have used other mics, AT 4040, Rode NT2a and NTK. They all work, and can make good recordings. None have opened the heavens and let the light shine with the power and glory! Likewise none have made everything sound like it was covered in molasses. Maybe I'm not as sophisticated as some users, and I'm sure my aural acuity is much worse than many younger folks.

Just because two things aren't identical, it doesn't mean that one is bad and the other good. They might be equally wrong, but in opposite directions.

 

[rob aylestone]

I think my choice to use the SM7B as a sort of constant was perhaps less sensible than I intended. I do have an SM7dB too that doesn't need the in-line preamp, but too late to change now I think. One thing that did occur to me a few weeks back was when watching (of all things) a 40 year old kids program - Sooty and Sweep - and one episode was set in a TV studio and they were messing with a Fisher Boom. All those old, and still quite a few currently, get recorded with quite distant mics, and nobody ever comments on the sound, yet in audio recording we put it under a microscope?

 

[TalismanRich]

I don't know if it's putting things under a microscope, but since it was a comparison, it's a natural tendency to note differences. It would really need to be noisy for things to be noticeable on something like a TV, and you wouldn't know if it was self noise or ambient noise. As you are typically a good bit away from the mic, the S/N would be quite different if you were 6-8 inches away.

It was actually surprising to me that the noise was higher with the SM7b. I don't know if it's from the inline preamp or not. Condenser mics all have amplifier circuits which contribute noise. Dynamics don't have that, so self noise isn't an issue, but then you have to decide if the inline preamp is quieter than just turning up the gain on the preamp itself. Is the preamp circuit in the SM7dB better than the inline preamp you are using? It's easy enough to test.

 

[rob aylestone]

The noise I think is because the sm7b input path is different. Certainly not optimised for best possible quality, because the mic is using one of the camera preamps, with a cloudlifter, but then is sent down an SDI video feed to the switcher where it goes to the video recorder, a hyper deck. That has 48KHz recording which goes into the edit. The other audio channels are via a Behringer 1820 interface which has pretty quiet preamps. That probably explains the noise differences.

 

[CoolCat]

Bias for me is leaning towards cheaper mics and gear.
Recent years, less playing, less recording, more gear comparing, more buying, returning, test driving and no Magic found really.
There's well done things, impressive builds, interesting designs and gear, and learning how stuffs made....

Bias of Neuman high end mic was it would be X, but it wasn't for me. Its a classic , pro studios etc..the U87ai is what it is.
But when you think wow, this it ! and it wasn't that spectacular, it wasn't bad, it was well made but so are the others that are 1/10th the price and that's at used $2k price.

I've never tried the Rode NT 1x x series, I had the NT2 illegal U87- swapped it for something. Rodes impressive factory videos and is making their own brand. They've done well.

 

[Papanate]

Bias for me is leaning towards cheaper mics and gear.
Recent years, less playing, less recording, more gear comparing, more buying, returning, test driving and no Magic found really.
There's well done things, impressive builds, interesting designs and gear, and learning how stuffs made....

Bias of Neuman high end mic was it would be X, but it wasn't for me. Its a classic , pro studios etc..the U87ai is what it is.
But when you think wow, this it ! and it wasn't that spectacular, it wasn't bad, it was well made but so are the others that are 1/10th the price and that's at used $2k price.

I've never tried the Rode NT 1x x series, I had the NT2 illegal U87- swapped it for something. Rodes impressive factory videos and is making their own brand. They've done well.

The Classic Microphones are just that - built in a time when inexpensive wasn’t an option - now days there are many competitors to all the classics - and some people charge almost as much for their repros - but the point is there are options available now for not very much money - and in mix I doubt anyone could tell - and Considering the Plugin EQ’s available - It would even be harder to tell on an exposed mic.

 

[rob aylestone]

We seem to choose mics because of tone, but ignore EQ. You record a vocal and then tweak the EQ till you like it. Doesnt that really mean the mics original frequency response was a bit pointless? I’m also the opposite when I use those wonderful evolving synth sounds. A random dip into some old projects that are currently making money reveals most of those don’t have any EQ on those sounds at all. Clearly whoever designed them before I bought them did a great job.

The point is we use all kinds of rules for recording, that really either get rigidly enforced or totally ignored if the results are good. If the results are bad, we blame them!

 

[LazerBeakShiek]

The Classic Microphones are just that - built in a time when inexpensive wasn’t an option - now days there are many competitors to all the classics - and some people charge almost as much for their repros - but the point is there are options available now for not very much money - and in mix I doubt anyone could tell - and Considering the Plugin EQ’s available - It would even be harder to tell on an exposed mic.

There are 2 microphone preamps of mine that are inexpensive and do not sound the same. They are kinda swiss army knives that color the sound in a useable way and definitely not clean.
1 Studio Projects VTB-1 tube preamp colors with tube, thickness, less than $100
2 Golden Era Pre73 neve clone colors with transformer, classic, around $200

These inexpensive pre's have a character and impart classic vibes.

 

[Papanate]

1 Studio Projects VTB-1 tube preamp colors with tube, thickness, less than $100

I had that one for a while - didn’t really float my boat - but then again it really floated
my boat - IOWs it was a preamp - it had somewhat of a sound.

2 Golden Era Pre73 neve clone colors with transformer, classic, around $200

I tried out a Behringer 1273 against a Vintage Neve 1273 - they were different but niether was bad - I think the Neve had not been updated with new caps - I actually liked the Behringer more - it was solid and crisp - with a coloration I couldn’t put my finger on - but neither preamps were ‘the preamp’ - I may just be to jaded to appreciate the tone - or the tones don’t matter as much as material I’m recording.

 

[LazerBeakShiek]

I had that one for a while - didn’t really float my boat - but then again it really floated
my boat - IOWs it was a preamp - it had somewhat of a sound.

Yes, give credit where it is due.

I tried out a Behringer 1273 against a Vintage Neve 1273 - they were different but niether was bad

The cheaper neve 73's 'sound' better than the expensive ones. Turn the gain up and the output down. except if it is tube then the opposite is target. You will find coloration and difference.

Nothing that is 'Art' useless. Real preamps. Not Joe Meek. Know what you want. Get into the diligence of it all. Fight . Win. Be proud.

 

[LazerBeakShiek]

ever notice that in all my threads, I get about half way through an idea, then forget what I was doing..Lose my place in it all.. like its almost believable that I know what Im talking about.

Then it turns into a motivational speech..

 

[R D Smith]

If you forget what you were going to do, you can always check your notes (previous posts).

Motivational speeches are good if they motivate...

 

[CoolCat]

We seem to choose mics because of tone, but ignore EQ. You record a vocal and then tweak the EQ till you like it. Doesnt that really mean the mics original frequency response was a bit pointless? I’m also the opposite when I use those wonderful evolving synth sounds. A random dip into some old projects that are currently making money reveals most of those don’t have any EQ on those sounds at all. Clearly whoever designed them before I bought them did a great job.

The point is we use all kinds of rules for recording, that really either get rigidly enforced or totally ignored if the results are good. If the results are bad, we blame them!

I realized a choice factor bias is for example, the Beatles. They had Neumanns everywhere. The GetBack session Neumanns 87 or 67's were everywhere on amps and drums and walls and so how can that not "bias" people to thinking there's the Best Mics...if you want quality you buy what the pro's use. simple. the Beatles were so over phot'd and studied and popular their gear is obviously going to be noticed at least in the studio sessions. So Bias = Neumann = Pictures of the Pro's.
then maybe someday you get one and compare it to a $200 mic and realize with EQ all the specs from the anechoic chamber don't mean anything again.

and monitoring, Geoff Emerick- Beatles engineer said "monitoring is # 1 , its what you make all your decisions from",
so if the room is whacked, then all the decisions made mixing would be tainted to that room sound.....like mixing with closed back headphones....
or even Tracking with Closed back headphones and making EQ adjustments for the closed back headphones not the "man behind the glass" who can make better decisions of tone when tracking. Seems in the old days they had to get it right early on, and today all the EQ and tweaking can be processed later and tracking isn't as important.
Still the Monitoring determines the EQ and Mic placement etc..

??
1. we buy mics because we see them in pictures of famous people and famous studios

2. we spend a life trying to acquire the $$$ gear, blaming the cheaper gear along the way, then maybe finally, we rent or lease or buy the "pro gear" only to find out it needs EQ to sound good too. Of course if ego's big enough self gas lighting can make anything golden.

3. in confusion, the $200 mic is paid for and sounds as good with EQ and even better with a KT76....and plugins are free...but we like knobs and gear sometimes...and still a Neumann mic isn't a bad investment if taken care of, and a Dachman and WarmAudio are copy's of the older low sensitivity U87 and the AKGP420 is a copy of the new 87AI ..and there's 40000 other mics that work well. So we find ourself at Guitar Center a lot, returning stuff.

 

[TalismanRich]

??
1. we buy mics because we see them in pictures of famous people and famous studios

I've been scanning various books about artists I like, Beatles, CSN, Led Zepplin, Hendrix, Elvis plus the Wrecking Crew movie and others. In not ONE picture have I seen anyone using a Studio Projects B3 or Rode NT1. DId I make the wrong choice in buying those? I was in Sweetwater a few hours ago, and they had a TF ELAM251, AEA ribbon, a C800 and a C12 in the showcase. Should I sell my current mics and get a 2nd mortgage on my house so I can buy one of each?

2. we spend a life trying to acquire the $$$ gear, blaming the cheaper gear along the way, then maybe finally, we rent or lease or buy the "pro gear" only to find out it needs EQ to sound good too. Of course if ego's big enough self gas lighting can make anything golden.

Sweetwater also had lots of rack mount gear, channel strips, preamps, even some nice looking consoles. Will that turn my voice into something like Sinatra, Pavarotti, or even a lower tier singer like Josh Groban? Some people have commented that my current vocal chain makes me sound a bit like Kermit the Frog! I see I can buy a 32 channel Neve board for only $175,000. It will mostly just be me recording my Rogue acoustic guitar and singing.

3. in confusion, the $200 mic is paid for and sounds as good with EQ and even better with a KT76....and plugins are free...but we like knobs and gear sometimes...and still a Neumann mic isn't a bad investment if taken care of, and a Dachman and WarmAudio are copy's of the older low sensitivity U87 and the AKGP420 is a copy of the new 87AI ..and there's 40000 other mics that work well. So we find ourself at Guitar Center a lot, returning stuff.

Will buying a used U47, a 45 yr old used Neve board, or even a new Neve console outperform the S&P500 fund as an investment for my 401K? Will my financial advisor insist that they keep them in the office, or can I store them in the garage?

It's important that I make some hard decisions soon on my musical future, as I'm planning to enroll in the Dewey, Cheatem and Howe School of Recording next semester.

 

[LazerBeakShiek]

. In not ONE picture have I seen anyone using a Studio Projects B3 or Rode NT1. DId I make the wrong choice in buying those?

yes

I was in Sweetwater a few hours ago, and they had a TF ELAM251, AEA ribbon, a C800 and a C12 in the showcase. Should I sell my current mics and get a 2nd mortgage on my house so I can buy one of each?

no

Sweetwater also had lots of rack mount gear, channel strips, preamps, even some nice looking consoles. Will that turn my voice into something like Sinatra, Pavarotti, or even a lower tier singer like Josh Groban?

no

can I store them in the garage?

yes

It's important that I make some hard decisions soon on my musical future, as I'm planning to enroll in the Dewey, Cheatem and Howe School of Recording next semester.

they will teach you all about the DAW, Compressors, microphones, preamps, levels, ad nauseum. And never get the sound you want.

 

[Slouching Raymond]

I see I can buy a 32 channel Neve board for only $175,000.

I'd snap it up quick.

 

[CoolCat]

Will buying a used U47, a 45 yr old used Neve board, or even a new Neve console outperform the S&P500 fund as an investment for my 401K?

I think this is more a financial HR thread question but ....depends on the future and when you cash out which is best financially.

..some say the Super Crash is coming! worse than the Great Depression! Everything going to crap! start buying Water bottles!
I saw some podcasters predicting this, so if they are correct...yes the gear is a better investment than S&P..
I clicked on one podcast and now I get hundreds of them popping up...all saying the End of Wall Street is near! SELL and GET OUT NOW!

and since when did an advisor ever get everyone out before the crash? never.
Example Enron and Bernie Maddoff

At some point you have to choose. We all do...buy a Microphone or invest in a shaky 401k.
One requires us to"believe in the system"...like believe in Trump for now, maybe Gavin is next savior...or JD...

If you do cash out your 401k based on S&P500 predicting to crash.any day now.....
if you buy a microphone, why not buy like 300qty Rode NT1 instead of a U47? why not buy a pile of Alesis ADAT mixers cheap instead of betting on one Neve console?

maybe financial worth has to do with Microphone BIAS purchasing, could be another factor in our mental decision of microphone preference?

 

[TalismanRich]

I have found the ultimate solution. One side says buy the microphone, the other says buy gold! How about I combine the two?

Gold Microphones | 24K Gold Luxury Studio & Performance Microphones by Goldgenie®

Explore the world’s most luxurious 24K Gold Microphones, customised by Goldgenie®. Crafted for artists, studios and collectors. Genuine 24-carat gold, lifetime craftsmanship warranty, global DHL delivery.

goldmicrophones.com

Sorry, I'm making a mockery of Rob's thread, but it seems today so many people are only guided by internet chatter, especially people new to the hobby. They read such and such forum and parrot things as if they are absolute irrefutable fact. In many cases, they have no inkling of the history behind recording from the 30s up until today. They hear that the pros always used this or that on the great records and they think it's the only way. And the one guy who still had a working U47 for sale is laughing all the way to the bank, where he meets up with the guy who just sold his 1959 Les Paul.

To me, it's like the people who just can't stand to use a DAW, so they buy a used cassette Portastudio that doesn't work. They read that they were the best, even Bruce Springsteen did albums on them!

I feel like saying "yeah, I am tired of driving a new car that gets 200,000 miles, has AC, airbags, backup cameras, satellite and Bluetooth stereo, navigation. I'm selling it and bought this for my daily driving, if I can get it running. I like to feel the wind in my hair when I drive! Anyone know how to fix a carburetor? What's it look like?"