andycerrone
Banned
Since their around the same price, which would you suggest for either A) recording an acoustic guitar or B) using as overheads?
G
Gilliland
New member
Either one might work on guitar (depending on the guitar, mic placement, and your preferences). In general, the MXL will be brighter.andycerrone said:
I'd choose the B1s for overheads (among these two anyway), but again, it's all subject to preference.
E
emergencyexit
New member
I'd second the B1 for overheads. Although I don't own the MXL, complaints of how bright they are on specific acoustic instruments (namely drums) tend to come up a lot in what I have seen. Is there a reason why you don't want a pair of SDCs for overheads?
Ben
Ben
Middleman
Professional Amateur
I tracked a church band this weekend and used the V67 about 4 feet out from the kick drum, very impressive results. I have also used it on vocals and found that it’s very good if you have a decent preamp to match it to. Some of my lower priced preamps don't light it up properly and I get a grainier sound. I ran it through a Neve 5012 and was truly amazed at the result. One of the best valued mics out there in my opinion.
That said, I would rather use an SM58 on acoustic than the V67 in that price range but it might make a decent OH. Things could get a little smeary if you're working with low end preamps however.
That said, I would rather use an SM58 on acoustic than the V67 in that price range but it might make a decent OH. Things could get a little smeary if you're working with low end preamps however.
andycerrone
Banned
I haven't really decided on any at all, SDC's are possible still, but I was trying to figure out which of those would be better if I go with LDC's. Around the same price range (up to $300 for a pair), which would you suggest for SDC's?
Middleman
Professional Amateur
Oktava 012s - a little smeary (I know, I just recorded OH with them) but they have a nice smear like putting the cymbals through an 1176 compressor. But it works fine.
MXL 603s or one of their derivations (A little too bright for my blood but EQ will tame this)
For more clarity I would opt for the AT Pro 37s or a used pair of AT 4051a mics.
MXL 603s or one of their derivations (A little too bright for my blood but EQ will tame this)
For more clarity I would opt for the AT Pro 37s or a used pair of AT 4051a mics.
G
Gilliland
New member
I would second the MC012s for overheads. Put the Dorsey mod on them to get rid of the smeariness.Middleman said:
Middleman
Professional Amateur
Gilliland said:
I was going to do this mod but was concerned that they would end up too hard sounding. So you think this adds some clarity? I want to use these on some jazz recordings but as they come, they are just not pristine enough.
M
mrface2112
Well-known member
What V67 have *you* been using?Gilliland said:
the V67 *i* am familiar with has been called a LOT of things......but bright was never one of em. in fact, it's just the opposite compared to the harsh brightness you find in a lot of modern chinese mics. and it's certainly NOT brighter than the B1.
i currently have a V67 hanging over the left side of my drums (with a blue dragonfly over the right-hand side). if you record in a pretty crappy sounding room, the V67 may help mitigate that some--it's "relative darkness" helps roll off some of the harshness of cheap cymbals and crappy rooms. it's also got a mushy midrange which i think helps bring out the crack and woodiness of the drums.
i've also used the B1 as an overhead. much like it is on everything--it's a very neutral mic and what goes in comes out. i like it on snare, toms and cymbals provided they sound good in the first place. in fact, it makes a great snare mic from about 3 inches aimed at the shell.
both of them are "fine" overheads, but i personally prefer the V67 slightly more.
on acoustics, the B1 is, hands down, the better mic. i've never gotten a usable tone out of the V67 on acoustic. this is where the mushy midrange that helps the V67 really hurts it on acoustics--it just makes the acoustic smeared and grainy. again, what goes into the B1 comes out. it neither improves nor detracts from the sound and provided that the acoustic sounds good, the B1 will capture that.
personally, as mentioned, i would look into a pair of mc012's for overheads and a pair of MXL 603's for guitar. the mc012's tend to be "darker" and the 603's have a bit of a high-end bump, so each of them are good in certain situations. granted a pair of either will run you a tad more than the $100 you'd get a V67 or B1 for.....but i think you'd get a happier result.
cheers,
wade
G
Gilliland
New member
Yes, definitely. Scott's mod generally cleans them up and extends their response slightly in both directions. It doesn't change their overall character, just makes them a bit cleaner and crisper - not brighter, just less "smeary" (using your word).Middleman said:
G
Gilliland
New member
mrface2112 said:What V67 have *you* been using?
One of the fun things about asking for opinions is that you are always likely to get two that directly contradict each other. 
I suppose I should offer a caveat - my mics are both slightly different than the two that you are asking about.
I don't own the SP B1s, I own the SP B3s. While the capsule and basic electronics are the same (assuming that the B3 is set in cardioid), there may be subtle differences between them.
And my V67 has had the electronics replaced by Scott Dorsey's Schoeps-circuit from Recording magazine about five years ago. So it, too, is a somewhat different mic. It is quite possible that the cheap transformer that is included in the stock V67 may lose some of the high end, darkening the tone somewhat. The modded version of the V67 seems slightly brighter to me than the SP B series, which I agree is a very neutral mic. And I certainly wouldn't call my V67 "mushy".
And it's only fair to point out that these various Chinese mics aren't always consistent from sample to sample - even absent of any of these known differences. I think that both MXL and Studio Projects do their best to maintain consistency, but some variation may still exist.
S
sloop
Active member
MXL 603's
MXL 603's can be tamed with a simple replacement of three capacitors. It turns them into very fine microphones. If you are handy with a soldering iron, it takes about 10 minutes per mic.
Here is a link to a classical recording using all MXL mics.
http://www.recordingproject.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=20918
the stereo pair are the modified 603's
MXL 603's can be tamed with a simple replacement of three capacitors. It turns them into very fine microphones. If you are handy with a soldering iron, it takes about 10 minutes per mic.
Here is a link to a classical recording using all MXL mics.
http://www.recordingproject.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=20918
the stereo pair are the modified 603's
E
emergencyexit
New member
Got my vote for KEL HM-1s for overheads.
MXL 603s aren't bad either but wayyy to bright when you get crappy sets and like someone else stated, cheap cymbals. Plus the KELs are cheaper and if you don't like them you can send them back to Kel no questions asked! What a deal!
Ben
MXL 603s aren't bad either but wayyy to bright when you get crappy sets and like someone else stated, cheap cymbals. Plus the KELs are cheaper and if you don't like them you can send them back to Kel no questions asked! What a deal!
Ben
M
mrface2112
Well-known member
Gilliland said:
that's the beauty of places like this.
Gilliland said:
actually, there are noted differences between the B1 and the B3 in cardiod pattern. the B3 is in fact, a bit brighter (or at minimum "less neutral"). This was discussed around here at length a couple years ago and i remember Alan Hyatt being on record as stating that there is a difference. i'm sure if we were to dig through the archives, we could pull up the thread.....but i'm lazy.
Gilliland said:
ah, i bet it is!
i missed that issue, though. if you have a minute (or an online reference), i'd love to hear more about that mod.
Gilliland said:
I'm sure it does. cheap transformers can either make or break a mic--and in most cases, break.
but the stock V67 is indeed darker sounding than the stock B1. Gilliland said:
oh i certainly would.
Gilliland said:
i agree--but even with the minor variations in response from sample to sample, if you widen the crosssample far enough, the "generalities" across a line are going to come out.
regardless......the V67 and B1 are both very capable entry level mics and the original poster could do a LOT worse than either. although i must admit that now that i've acquired a few "higher class" mics, i don't use mine much anymore. regardless--i still think the B1 is an excellent sleeper mic on guitar cabs.
cheers,
wade
G
Gilliland
New member
I wish I could point to an online reference, but I'm afraid it's another case where the only way to get it is to buy the back issue:mrface2112 said:
http://musicmakerpub.com//store/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=64
There's been a lot of discussion of it on rec.audio.pro (back when it was current), and I've seen it referenced on boards like this one from time to time, but the actual details of the project are only available in the magazine.
BTW, the PC board layout in the article has an error. If you buy the actual board from Scott, he has the corrected board. If you make your own, be sure to google the r.a.p discussion of the article - Scott discussed the errata in a thread there back when the article was new.
Gilliland said:
No, you'd call YOUR V67 mushy.mrface2112 said:oh i certainly would.
G
Gilliland
New member
Interestingly, there is a thread going on right now on r.a.p concerning these mics. Robert Angst is experimenting with Scott Dorsey's mods on an unnamed mic that he describes as a Shanghai-manufactured U87 clone that came originally with a transformer-based circuit (so it's either a V67 or one of the various other brands of the identical mic). He did some testing before and after the mod, but he also tested the effect of removing and/or replacing some of the filtering and damping materials in the mic. You may want to go read the entire thread but this one statement tends to confirm the idea that the transformer itself may make the V67 darker than it would be otherwise: "The original mic exhibited a treble roll off starting around 4 kHz and ending at 22 kHz with -3.4 dB."Gilliland said:
M
mrface2112
Well-known member
Gilliland said:
fantastic, thanks for the link!
Gilliland said:
i've noticed from several of the Dorsey mods that Recording's published (i started subbing a few years ago but after the V67 mod article) that buying the parts from Scott certainly decreases the "pain in the ass" aspect.
Gilliland said:No, you'd call YOUR V67 mushy.
yes, i certainly would. you would too.
cheers,
wade
M
mrface2112
Well-known member
Gilliland said:
i'm gonna give that thread a read this evening--thanks for the heads up!
as for the transformer making the mic darker than it otherwise would be......the "darkness" is a large part of what i like about the mic. it's useful for those situations where i've got an overly bright (or harsh) source that i need to attenuate some.
the goal for me in modding a v67 would be to find a way to improve/open up the midrange clarity without dramatically changing the high-end. there are plenty of cheap chinese mics with a rise in the high end and i don't really want to turn my V67 into another one.
in the end, i guess it boils down to what we really expect from a $100 mic. i personally think it out-performs what I'd expect to get for $100.....and the fact that there are so many different "flavors" of $100 mic out there is a wonderful thing. it really helps the beginner/hobbyist elevate their home recordings for a minimal amount of scratch. and the v67's so bloody cheap that it's relatively painless to buy a used one to experiment with.
and of course, i don't expect my V67 to come anywhere near the sonic delight that my Dragonfly is (and it certainly doesn't).
cheers,
wade
H
heroics321
New member
I dunno if this will help anyone, but here's a little jem of a link I found.
http://www.pfarrell.com/music/shanghaimic.html
http://www.pfarrell.com/music/shanghaimic.html
G
Gilliland
New member
I'm afraid you'll probably get both the improved midrange and the stronger high-end if you do Scott's mod to your mic. I'm not convinced that the terms "overly bright or harsh" would apply, but based on what we've discussed and read so far, I do believe that it will be brighter than it is now. In other words, you may not get a rise in the high end, but you may lose the 3db rolloff that seems to be caused by the original transformer.mrface2112 said: