D
DJL
Self Banned
Which respected engineers cite certain LDCs as some of their favorite kick mics... and which LDCs mics are their favorites for kick? Thanksnoiseportrait said:
H
Harvey Gerst
New member
You mean sneaky, like the Audio Technica 4033, or the CAD E200?DJL said:
D
DJL
Self Banned
Yes... but I'm not so sure Marshall did it for the same reasons... I have a feeling (IMO) that Marshall did it more to fool newbee's rather than to add another flavor to their mic line while saving some design cost... but, I could be wrong. What do you think?Harvey Gerst said:
PS... do you know if the MXL990 and MXL603S use the same electronics or not? Thanks
H
Harvey Gerst
New member
DJL said:
It probably uses similar electronics. The original MXL990 had a grill similar to the TLM103, which was probably intentional on Musician's Friend's part (for whom it was designed, as an exclusive product). Neumann wasn't too fond of that, so Marshall changed it to the current look. It wasn't designed to "fool newbies"; it's simply a low cost design to give MF an entry level MXL mic at a specific price point.
I bought one when they first came out, tried it, liked it, and bought 3 more.
And you think the fact that AT doesn't mention anywhere in their literature that the AT4033 is a small diaphragm condenser is not an attempt to mislead newbies?
Innovations
New member
I have never taken them apart, I was going by their similar specifications and descriptions.DJL said:
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
Yo Harvey! Not to hijack this thread too much, but I was under the impression that the AT4033 had approximately a 3/4" diaphragm, and has been described as a "mid size" diaphragm mic, along with several others, such as AKG C2000B and Shure KSM32. Have I been misinformed? BTW, I find the 3 mics listed above to be effective, versatile mics, good for a variety of sources, both instrumental and vocal.
As far as this thread goes, here is my 2 cents worth:
1. I have never used an MXL 990, but it is obvious that people have widely varying opinions. Harvey likes it, DJL hates it. It's too easy to say, "well, Harvey's a mic god, and DJL is a troll, so Harvey must be right". DJL is right about one thing. The Chinese, left to their own devices, are not world leaders in quality control, and it may be that whatever mic or mics DJL auditioned simply sucked. It may be that a high percentage of them suck. But, just like cheap guitars, they don't necessarily all suck. If Harvey likes it, I will assume that some of them are good for something some of the time.
2. Yep, this is homerecording.com, and there are quite a few people on this board who have more than $25,000 sunk into recording gear that aren't recording professionals. Just because your budget is limited, don't assume that any person who is willing and able to invest a lot of dinero in top flight gear has opinions that are somehow less valid. I believe that a kickass project studio is always an unholy alliance of top flight gear that works, and cheap gear that works. Yep, I've shelled out for a pair of Neumanns, a B.L.U.E. Kiwi, an Avalon pre, a Taylor guitar, and a bunch of other cool gear. However, my studio would be greatly diminished without my Oktavas, Studio Projects, and Behringers, my RNC, M300, VAMP-2, and a bunch of other cheap gear.
3. A mic does not suck because it is Chinese. It may suck to buy it, but that's a purely political decision. I am fully aware that every time I buy a Chinese product, I am paying for a nuclear tipped missile that's pointed at *me*. I will even grant that a mic is more likely to suck because it's Chinese, but that has a lot to do with the American/Australian/European firms buying components and finished products. If the manufacturers/distributors are willing to accept poor workmanship and bad quality control, the Chinese will be more than happy to provide it. If the purchaser demands better, the Chinese will do that too. Studio Projects and Rode in particular, have distributed some rather good mics built in part or completely in China. As an addendum, it is also true that mics built in Europe or the USA can also suck plenty.
4. Whatever DJL is, I'm fairly sure he's not a girl.-Richie
As far as this thread goes, here is my 2 cents worth:
1. I have never used an MXL 990, but it is obvious that people have widely varying opinions. Harvey likes it, DJL hates it. It's too easy to say, "well, Harvey's a mic god, and DJL is a troll, so Harvey must be right". DJL is right about one thing. The Chinese, left to their own devices, are not world leaders in quality control, and it may be that whatever mic or mics DJL auditioned simply sucked. It may be that a high percentage of them suck. But, just like cheap guitars, they don't necessarily all suck. If Harvey likes it, I will assume that some of them are good for something some of the time.
2. Yep, this is homerecording.com, and there are quite a few people on this board who have more than $25,000 sunk into recording gear that aren't recording professionals. Just because your budget is limited, don't assume that any person who is willing and able to invest a lot of dinero in top flight gear has opinions that are somehow less valid. I believe that a kickass project studio is always an unholy alliance of top flight gear that works, and cheap gear that works. Yep, I've shelled out for a pair of Neumanns, a B.L.U.E. Kiwi, an Avalon pre, a Taylor guitar, and a bunch of other cool gear. However, my studio would be greatly diminished without my Oktavas, Studio Projects, and Behringers, my RNC, M300, VAMP-2, and a bunch of other cheap gear.
3. A mic does not suck because it is Chinese. It may suck to buy it, but that's a purely political decision. I am fully aware that every time I buy a Chinese product, I am paying for a nuclear tipped missile that's pointed at *me*. I will even grant that a mic is more likely to suck because it's Chinese, but that has a lot to do with the American/Australian/European firms buying components and finished products. If the manufacturers/distributors are willing to accept poor workmanship and bad quality control, the Chinese will be more than happy to provide it. If the purchaser demands better, the Chinese will do that too. Studio Projects and Rode in particular, have distributed some rather good mics built in part or completely in China. As an addendum, it is also true that mics built in Europe or the USA can also suck plenty.
4. Whatever DJL is, I'm fairly sure he's not a girl.-Richie
Mark7
Well-known member
According to MXL's website the 603 and 990 share a common 200mm capsule which, if I'm not mistaken, places them both firmly in the medium diaphragm family (along with the AKG C2000, Audio Technica AT4033 and Shure KSM32 cited above).
Correction. According to the datasheet available at akg.com the C2000 has a 1/2" capsule; thus making it a small diaphragm microphone.
Unless they changed it without bothering to inform whoever writes the datasheets
Correction. According to the datasheet available at akg.com the C2000 has a 1/2" capsule; thus making it a small diaphragm microphone.
Unless they changed it without bothering to inform whoever writes the datasheets
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
Thanks, Mark- I can always count on you to know AKG. That explains a lot. The only thing it doesn't explain is why the damn things (C2000B) work on vocals. I think it's that housing thing again. Many people assume that identical capsules mean identical sound, but Oktava MK219/319 has proven to me that it isn't so. I stand corrected.-Richie
Mark7
Well-known member
So, it's definitely a half-inch capsule then?
Maybe Marshall Electronics were thinking of the C2000 when they designed the MXL990
Maybe Marshall Electronics were thinking of the C2000 when they designed the MXL990
H
Harvey Gerst
New member
The AT4033 has a 5/8" diaphragm. That's pretty damn close to 1/2".Richard Monroe said:
Yes, that line of reasoning upsets me too. I try to think of reviews and opinions like this: Did this person ever review something I already own? Does his opinion match mine? From their descriptions, does it sound like they have enough experience to really know what they're hearing? Is there a possibility for bias or do they make wild claims about the gear?
If my opinions (on gear that you already own) match your opinions of that piece of gear, you may want to investigate a new piece of gear that I may have found. But if every piece I mention makes you go, "That sucks!", you can probably safely ignore anything I say about any piece of gear. And all it means is that either our taste in equipment is very different, or the gear works well in the chain of equipment I use, but not yours.
Absolutely.
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
Yep, I checked the architect's specs, and the C2000B is definitely 0.5". I was surprised that they rendered it in inches rather than mm. No doubt in my mind that the C2000B is one of the most useful cheap studio mics that gets no respect. It has qualities very similar to AT4033, perhaps a bit darker, and a little more colored, for a lot less money. It rocks as an overhead, on toms, congas, djembe, and is a fair vocal mic. I liked it enough to buy a second one. Aside from that, the H100 shock that you get with it (in most online deals) is an excellent versatile shock mount that also accommadates Studio Projects B-1, AKG C414B-ULS, and most small diaphragm pencil mics, from Oktava MC012 to Neumann KM184. Thanks Mark and Harvey, I learn something new every day.-Richie
BTW Mark, I think you meant 20mm, not 200mm, which would be 1/5 of a meter! Now that would be a kickass mic. given that a cm is 1/100 of a meter, and a mm is 1/1000 of a meter, there are 2.54cm or 25.4mm to the inch. That makes the 603s/990 diaphagm=.787", which is almost a large diaphragm mic. Golly, that adds new perspective to the 603 for sure.-Richie
BTW Mark, I think you meant 20mm, not 200mm, which would be 1/5 of a meter! Now that would be a kickass mic. given that a cm is 1/100 of a meter, and a mm is 1/1000 of a meter, there are 2.54cm or 25.4mm to the inch. That makes the 603s/990 diaphagm=.787", which is almost a large diaphragm mic. Golly, that adds new perspective to the 603 for sure.-Richie
Last edited:
Middleman
Professional Amateur
Innovations said:
This is not accurate. I have the 990 and the 991(which is supposed to be a 603 renumbered).
There are 14 resistors on the 990 and only 12 on the 991/603. The values only match in a couple of cases. There are 6 diodes on the 991/603 and only 5 on the 990. Capacitors in some cases match but only about half the time.
Capsules are entirely different too. I have pictures but an old digital camera so everything was too blurry to post.
D
DJL
Self Banned
Richard... if calling me a troll makes you feel better, then so be it.Harvey Gerst said:
Harvey, I think you have great info... like when you take apart a mic and tell us what capsule it uses and if the mic is built good or not and etc. However, lets face it... you are a much older man now and your hearing is not as good as it use to be, it's hard for you to hear the difference between mics and etc now... as we know happened with the 603S/MC-012 and C1/V67 for example. Anyway, I really do like your help, and I'm not trying to put you down or anything... but sometimes we just can't ignore some facts of life... and you must admit that your hearing is not as good as it use to be anymore.
With that said... in the future, those who think the MXL990 is great a mic may be more interested in your opinion... and those who think the MXL990 sucks may be more interested in my opinion how a mic sounds from here on.
Last edited:
D
DJL
Self Banned
Thanks for the info Middleman... I wonder if anyone has compared the 991 and 603S?Middleman said:
H
Harvey Gerst
New member
Yup, I turn 67 in two days and my hearing ain't what it use to be. On the other hand, at the last AES show I attended, I could hear distortion in a mastering studio that everybody else there missed. The rest of the people there were high dollar engineers, ranging in age from their early 30s to mid 40s.DJL said:
Listening to various monitoring systems at the show, I could easily pick out crossover phase problems and high end weirdness (that were later confirmed privately by the manufacturers).
As far as the C1/V67 issue, I said they were both good mics, with the C1 having a slight scoop in the mids (which is true). I basically said that either mic would be a fine vocal mic choice for a lot of voices (which I still believe to be true). To me, they're similar enough so that it wouldn't make sense to have both in my mic locker. I never said or implied they were identical.
I probably didn't spend enough time on the MC012/603S comparison, and yes, I did miss the high frequency bump in the 603, but on the sources I tried, it wasn't all that different from the MC012, so yes, that's my fault.
Perhaps the main differences between us is that in addition to hearing most of these older classic mics when they were new, I spent a good part of my life designing speakers and microphones for a living; you haven't. I understand their construction, and the tradeoffs. I've spent hours on the phone talking to people like Stephen Paul and Dick Rosmini about esoteric mic design and mic theory in general.
I guess the biggest differences between us is that I understand the why something sucks, so I don't just blast it from an uninformed opinion. The other problem I have with your opinions is that they are often influenced by your personal biases against some of the people in the company, or by the country of origin. You often make unsubstantiated statements as if they were fact. I've pointed that out to you a large number of times, far more than I've ever had to correct Alan Hyatt for example, when he made errors.
If you wanna take over the task of finding and reporting about mics here, that's fine with me. Just make sure of your facts and present the information without personal biases. If you don't know something for sure, don't speculate and try to present it as fact.
For example, I "suspected" a big part of the problems I had with the AKG C3000 was due to their trying to combine the large diaphragm with the small 1/4" electret omni. Did you know there were actually two capsules in the AKG C3000, and one of them was a small electret omni? I knew it because I took the damn thing apart and looked at the schematic as well.
In private discussions with Ty Ford (a well-respected microphone reviewer), he said that in talks with AKG, they privately confirmed my suspicions. Even though I didn't find the AKG C3000 valuable enough to keep in my locker, it worked perfectly on several projects I did during the 2 years I owned it.
I hope you can learn to maintain that kind of objectivity when you review products here. And I hope your reviews will have more to offer than "it sucks".
cominginsecond
Decentralized Media Mogul
DJL said:
Further proof that DJL is a troll and an a**hole.
C
chessrock
Banned
Yea, DJL.
I hear they're hiring some new prison guards in Iraq.
This might be your big break.
I hear they're hiring some new prison guards in Iraq.
This might be your big break.
B
BlindCowboy
New member
Ha, Ha!
Thanks Harvey. It really brightens my day and puts a giggle on my lips to read something as eloquent and well stated as your last reply.
And it was very cool to watch DJL get his/her/it's ass handed to him/her/it.
Thanks Harvey. It really brightens my day and puts a giggle on my lips to read something as eloquent and well stated as your last reply.
And it was very cool to watch DJL get his/her/it's ass handed to him/her/it.
H
Harvey Gerst
New member
It wasn't my intent or desire to insult DJL. I just felt his charges against me needed some clarification.BlindCowboy said:
Old and hard of hearing? You bet, but still better than most.
Wrong on the MC012/603? Yup, but not enough to make a big difference.
Wrong on the C1/V67? Nope, I was pretty accurate.
Who to listen to? Not my call. Judge me on my posts. Judge DJL on his posts.
The rest of it was problems that I had with DJL's habit of stating his opinions presented as fact. There was no intended rancor in my post. If it came out that way, then I sincerely apologize to DJL.
I've always felt that respect here should be earned, not blindly given. Since I started posting here, I've done posts on how to test and match mics in stores, how to build a cheap phantom power supply, how to mic various instruments, and a fairly complete course on how microphones work. I have made a serious effort to "earn" the respect of everybody here.
I also have my own forum on another BBS, where I'm surrounded by such notables as Klause Heyne, George Massenburg, Fletcher, and Bob Olhsson. You don't get to hang out with people of that caliber by being a jerk, or by being wrong more than you're right, so I remain somewhat confident that most of my opinions are still pretty accurate.
DJL has a lot of opinions (and we do agree on some things), but his obvious biases prevent me from giving him a lot of respect. Maybe next year...
B
BlindCowboy
New member
Mr Gerst,
My comment was meant with tongue in cheek. I have read many of your posts, and take your opinions and evaluations very seriously. You are one of the few that I know who have the ability to give an unbiased opinion on the performance and abilities of a device. I am always thrilled to see someone who can deliver a point in a professional and polite manner, without resorting to the usual banter that occurs on a BBS. It is refreshing, and appreciated.
Blind Cowboy...
My comment was meant with tongue in cheek. I have read many of your posts, and take your opinions and evaluations very seriously. You are one of the few that I know who have the ability to give an unbiased opinion on the performance and abilities of a device. I am always thrilled to see someone who can deliver a point in a professional and polite manner, without resorting to the usual banter that occurs on a BBS. It is refreshing, and appreciated.
Blind Cowboy...