BigRay
New member
it wasnt my recording, but it was the ORTF>sound devices mp-2>m1
PhilGood
Juice box hero
BigRay said:
Actually that's not too bad. Quite good in fact! Though it begs the question "how much better would it sound with a 2003 or better mic." In an electric situation with heavy guitars or drums, the 2001 still gets lost in the mix on vocals.
guitar junkie
Guitar User.
but that was done with a 2001?
noisedude
New member
I'm not being funny, but to me that song sounds exactly how people have described this mic - boxy and grainy. Not dissing it cos that's a good song and a talented performer but the voice and guitar both sound just ... wrong. You could probably mask it with some sympathetic reverb but that's not really idealBigRay said:
There's a couple of glitches in the audio too, if you are using a computer you might want to have a look at your latency settings or update your drivers. It sounds like what's called PCI Latency problems which a lot of PC users (including myself) have come across ... very stubborn to sort out.
On response curves - Brent Casey and Harvey Gerst were discussing this on the PMI Audio forum recently and, discussing the MXL V67, ADK Hamburg and Joemeek JM47a mics he said: "By the way, the deal with the "darker" sound that these mics get is due to the preponderance of low end relative to the overall bandwidth. IOW, ignore published response curves."
The full explanation was very helpful, but it won't make sense in the context of this conversation.
Nik
guitar junkie
Guitar User.
well see the thing is i don't care about distorted guitars and crap! we are a folk band doing stuff just about like that clip on we have two singers and three things (2 guits and a fiddle) nothing huge sounding at all.PhilGood said:
guitar junkie
Guitar User.
noisedude said:I'm not being funny, but to me that song sounds exactly how people have described this mic - boxy and grainy. Not dissing it cos that's a good song and a talented performer but the voice and guitar both sound just ... wrong. You could probably mask it with some sympathetic reverb but that's not really ideal
There's a couple of glitches in the audio too, if you are using a computer you might want to have a look at your latency settings or update your drivers. It sounds like what's called PCI Latency problems which a lot of PC users (including myself) have come across ... very stubborn to sort out.
On response curves - Brent Casey and Harvey Gerst were discussing this on the PMI Audio forum recently and, discussing the MXL V67, ADK Hamburg and Joemeek JM47a mics he said: "By the way, the deal with the "darker" sound that these mics get is due to the preponderance of low end relative to the overall bandwidth. IOW, ignore published response curves."
The full explanation was very helpful, but it won't make sense in the context of this conversation.
Nik
any chance of you sending me a link to that thread? Noisedude? thanks man.
PhilGood
Juice box hero
guitar junkie said:
Well, then you have to ask yourself, is a mediocre mic good enough? If it is, great!
You could spend a little more on a Studio Projects B1, which is perfectly suited for that situation and gives really nice results.
noisedude
New member
It was actually in a non-public thread about new product developments that only a handful of moderators could read ... so I can't do that really! Sorry!guitar junkie said:
I've just had another listen to that track and I can't see that it's a great advert for the mic ... I'm not being funny ... it just doesn't sound that good ... !
BigRay
New member
Opinions are a great thing.You obviously think it sounds less than ideal. I think it sounds pretty damn good myself. I dont try to pass my opinion off as fact and noone else should either..."sound just wrong"<< according to you, perhaps, I however, think it sounds perfectly natural...and the many people that complimented this recording obviously disagree. And it is the music loving public and ourselves that some folks are making the music for. While the discussion , description,technical terms etc.. are nice and all, there is no substitute for ones own ears. I heard the recording, I liked it, and dont particularly care what anyone else has to say about it. For acoustic music, it is my opinion that it will serve him well, and he seems to like it, so again, that is all that matters, a fact that a lifetime of technical discussions and theories will not negate. The sound is the only thing that matters. I was posting the info about them having response similar to schoeps but then realized that that BS doesnt matter, it is the samples that will matter. Sure, nerds like myself care about that stuff, as do studio heads and tech-obsessed audio folks..but the proof is in the pudding.
Teddy
Teddy
noisedude said:I'm not being funny, but to me that song sounds exactly how people have described this mic - boxy and grainy. Not dissing it cos that's a good song and a talented performer but the voice and guitar both sound just ... wrong. You could probably mask it with some sympathetic reverb but that's not really ideal
There's a couple of glitches in the audio too, if you are using a computer you might want to have a look at your latency settings or update your drivers. It sounds like what's called PCI Latency problems which a lot of PC users (including myself) have come across ... very stubborn to sort out.
On response curves - Brent Casey and Harvey Gerst were discussing this on the PMI Audio forum recently and, discussing the MXL V67, ADK Hamburg and Joemeek JM47a mics he said: "By the way, the deal with the "darker" sound that these mics get is due to the preponderance of low end relative to the overall bandwidth. IOW, ignore published response curves."
The full explanation was very helpful, but it won't make sense in the context of this conversation.
Nik
guitar junkie
Guitar User.
well i must say that this has been a good debate and i have learned a lot about mics through all this. i am planning on watching the christmas sales that they like to have and see what comes up new and cool and also what gets price cut after new years to screw up taxes for all the dealers. thanks for all the info everybody! i learned a lot about stuff here. thanks so much. later on i will ask about other things when i need more info but i am going to try and just sort of slip out of this thread if it will die...
BigRay
New member
PhilGood said:
Mediocre according to who, Phil?and "perfectly suited for that situation according to who?" I am not trying to be disagreeable..but The best thing for him to do is listen to the mics himself.Mediocre is more of a "rooted in opinion" rather than fact statement. I , for example..think Oktavas are the absolute bottom of the food chain, but I would never try to steer anyone away from them because they obviously work well for many. The guy may be missing out on the best sound for his ears ever, who knows.
Guitar dude...listen to samples, dont ignore any of the opinions here, but dont take them as gospel either. You have to please your own ears.
noisedude
New member
Totally, and my opinion is the pudding showed that the mics weren't particularly good. I don't know anything about these mics, or how much they cost or what they look like. I am going on your 'pudding' ... and I would expect much better results with any of Røde NT5s, SP C4s, SE SE1As or even the much-reviled AKG C1000Ss. What you posted would undoubtedly be fine as a live demo, but as a home hobbyist I would not be happy with that sound.BigRay said:
My opinion is that it sounds 'just wrong'.
Absolutely. I'm not talking technical - I've used my ears ... and you definitely do seem to care about the fact that I said I was disappointed with it!
PhilGood
Juice box hero
BigRay said:
Well, mediocre accoding to anyone who has heard a decent mic. Mediocre to people who know what a mic should sound like. If you put the 2001 against a U47, how do you think the 2001 would stack up? If you put it against an AT4040, which do you think would sound better?
You have the right mindset in that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If it sounds good to you, it is good. No aurgument there. If you like how it sounds, that's all that matters. I have done recordings I thought were outstanding and played them to an audiophyle and they just pick it apart. It's still good enough for me.
I'm just saying if you can spend $70 for a mic that is 'eh', vs. paying $30 more for a mic most people agree is a good workhorse, pay the extra $30.
I'm not trying to be disagreeable either. Just offering my own opinion and experience.
noisedude
New member
Ok, let's look at this song here. It's obviously some nice playing and singing, so any lack of transparency or clarity should be easy enough to spot.
Listen to the intro - the sound is 'up-front' and 'present', but the guitar is very boxy - not a natural sound. The singing starts, listen to the word 'for'. This is typical of the problem with lots of different consonants in the track. Every time we hear her breathe, or hear any of the letters c, f, s, t etc, we can hear a strange and rather unpleasant sibilance.
Listen to "softly before" (or whatever the words are!) at 00:56 on the track. That is NOT a good sound. This isn't an opinion, or a technical nit-pick, it's just plain wrong. Don't panic, in a studio setting a pop filter might rescue you from a lot of this ... but it doesn't help us escape from the fact that it IS there on this recording.
When she sings high notes it's a lot more natural, and much more pleasant.
On audio glitches, listen to 1:11 and 3:38. This is usually a sign of a fairly base-level problem with the DAW. I had BIG problems with this and it turned out that it was a combination of my mobo chipset, graphics card and sound card (relating to usage of the PCI bus). I never quite fixed it so I opted to change PCs.
Anyhow, I would genuinely like to hear this song recorded for real ... not with $1k+ mics, but with the same $100-200 mics that the rest of us hobbyists are using. Because I have NEVER heard an acoustic guitar that sounds like that!
Take it easy Teddy, this isn't a personal thing, it's just becoming clear that cream rises, and the mics that most commonly get recommended do so because they are better than most of the rest. I don't genuinely think the MXL2001 is going to be a massive hit with people who get a listen beforehand. Apparently some of the other MXL mics are very good value though.
Nik
Listen to the intro - the sound is 'up-front' and 'present', but the guitar is very boxy - not a natural sound. The singing starts, listen to the word 'for'. This is typical of the problem with lots of different consonants in the track. Every time we hear her breathe, or hear any of the letters c, f, s, t etc, we can hear a strange and rather unpleasant sibilance.
Listen to "softly before" (or whatever the words are!) at 00:56 on the track. That is NOT a good sound. This isn't an opinion, or a technical nit-pick, it's just plain wrong. Don't panic, in a studio setting a pop filter might rescue you from a lot of this ... but it doesn't help us escape from the fact that it IS there on this recording.
When she sings high notes it's a lot more natural, and much more pleasant.
On audio glitches, listen to 1:11 and 3:38. This is usually a sign of a fairly base-level problem with the DAW. I had BIG problems with this and it turned out that it was a combination of my mobo chipset, graphics card and sound card (relating to usage of the PCI bus). I never quite fixed it so I opted to change PCs.
Anyhow, I would genuinely like to hear this song recorded for real ... not with $1k+ mics, but with the same $100-200 mics that the rest of us hobbyists are using. Because I have NEVER heard an acoustic guitar that sounds like that!
Take it easy Teddy, this isn't a personal thing, it's just becoming clear that cream rises, and the mics that most commonly get recommended do so because they are better than most of the rest. I don't genuinely think the MXL2001 is going to be a massive hit with people who get a listen beforehand. Apparently some of the other MXL mics are very good value though.
Nik
BigRay
New member
I am completely fine bud. I was just under the impression that opinions were trying to get passed off as facts, and for someone who comes here seeking advice, that is a no-no. Of course against a u47 it wont sound as great, but that is apples and oranges..For the price point and what it does, it is maybe a good choice. I thought the track sounded good, its not a E.A.R or MG recording, but it sounds good, nonetheless. I didnt take any thing personal. I dont even own any MXL Mics, I own Gefells, Josephson, Neumanns, and DPAs. I have been a professional musician for 15+ years though, and know bad mics when I hear em. Nothing personal , I promise. I am very easy to get along with. 
, and very laid back.
Teddy
, and very laid back.Teddy
mshilarious
Banned
noisedude said:
Sounds to me like maybe close to the soundhole micing. It is a live show so that's going to be the instinct for an untrained guitarist. There are also a few wolf notes which I expect is an issue with the instrument.
I agree regarding sibilance. It might sound clever in this sort of a sparse arrangement, but with a hat in the mix, especially with the same mic, I foresee problems. It's odd how there are peaks at 10kHz and up that seem to come from nowhere, because there is nothing between that and 4kHz.
For my tastes, the nasal, breathy female voice has been done, so I think I would look to deemphasize those qualities.
Cool tune though
BigRay
New member
How dare you review the music, I have started a Tristan Prettyman(the artists name) review section in the cave! This is about the mxl2001 for goodness sake. ! 
noisedude
New member
BigRay said:How dare you review the music, I have started a Tristan Prettyman(the artists name) review section in the cave! This is about the mxl2001 for goodness sake. !
...
S
sleep over jack
New member
PhilGood said:
please tell me those component changes Phil, because my 2003 sucks! and if the 2001 is anything like the 2003, it ALSO sucks...
i mean, seriously, i'd like to know. i'm handy with a soldering iron and i'm not going to get anything for the 2003 if I sell it...
thanks
PhilGood
Juice box hero
sleep over jack said:
Well, it's been a while since I did it, but let me see if I remember correctly. First, swap capacitor C10 with a 1000pf polystyrene. Replace C9 with a 100v 1uF polyester or mylar. Replace C8 (and the one that mirrors it on the other side of the circuit board with 100v .33uF or .56uF (to open up the low end more) polyester or mylar.
Similar threads
- astokesmusic
- Studio Building & Acoustic Treatment
- sumitsimlai
- Analog Recording & Mixing - Tape & Gear
