New to Ribbons. Which one for a pair?
- Thread starter redddog
- Start date
For those I'd have to say the ACM2. Out of the 2,3,4 I'm guessing (don't know cause I haven't used the 3/4) I'd reach for the 2 first. The overweight noggin mic (ACM2) gets rave reviews on Gtr Cabinets and OH and some room mics. For AC gtr, I have not yet turned to ribbons. I still like a good SDC or LDC or combination of both. Despite all the math (or in agreement with all the math
) in my ACM200 vs 300 thread, I'm still not completely sold on a dual ribbon mic due to phase issues and time delay between the transducers - especially in how it relates to off axis coloration. The ACM4 is a dual ribbon and while I think it might work well on some things (I"m getting one to try out on Tpt.), I don't think it would be my go to ribbon.
dgatwood
is out. Leave a message.
That's been my experience in limited testing. The ACM-2 has less crap in the way to smear the sound than either of the others. The ACM-3 has those metal bars that reflect sound back and forth inside the head and ring. The ACM-4 has this thick plastic which, though it doesn't ring, significantly changes the character of the sound.
All three of the powered ribbons look much more sane in this regard, though I won't be able to say for sure until I have them in my hands. My gut would be to go for the single ribbon designs if you're only buying one or a single pair---either the phantom powered single or the tube ribbon. If the electronics are reasonable, the tube ribbon would be my pick because it basically appears to be the ACM-2 with a larger body and active electronics... but again, until I actually touch one, it's anybody's guess.
Somnium7
Noise Criminal
Yes and remember the transformer. The stock unit makes the mids smeary to my ears.
mshilarious
Banned
The great worry with a tube ribbon design would be noise. A tube condenser mic is often 5-6dB noisier than a similar FET mic. In a ribbon mic, that could be a serious problem, since the ribbon motor is far less sensitive than a condenser capsule. The way around that is to use a higher-ratio transformer (which might be harder to find a swap if that is of interest).
In the absence of a published noise spec, I'd be a little wary.
So would you go for the acm-3 or the acm-300?
No 900 for me.
I'd say the 2 would be similar to the 300. Same motors I'd guess, but the big IF on the 300 is the electronics. Personally, I'm in for a PAIR of the 2's - I KNOW what I'm getting there. I'll probably experiment and get 1 of the 300's as an experiment. Personally, I'm leaning towards NON-active ribbons. Hey, that's how all the classics were. If it ain't broke.....
I'd say the 2 would be similar to the 300. Same motors I'd guess, but the big IF on the 300 is the electronics. Personally, I'm in for a PAIR of the 2's - I KNOW what I'm getting there. I'll probably experiment and get 1 of the 300's as an experiment. Personally, I'm leaning towards NON-active ribbons. Hey, that's how all the classics were. If it ain't broke.....
dgatwood
is out. Leave a message.
It's a big question, yes. I'd probably lean towards the active ribbons, and specifically the 300. Here's the logic.
If the electronics are good, it should, at least in theory, sound better than a passive ribbon because the amp stage is closer to the capsule. It will also work much better with less expensive pres that would not sound good at the high gain levels needed for recording quiet stuff with ribbons.
If the electronics suck, in the worst case, you rip out the electronics and throw in a transformer in for about twenty or thirty bucks, and you're basically no worse off than if you'd bought the passive model, differences in the acoustics of the headbasket notwithstanding. Five minutes of soldering and you're done.
More to the point, even after buying the slightly more expensive active ribbon and a decent ribbon transformer, you've still spent less than if you'd bought the passive ribbon from a major manufacturer, since you probably would have decided to upgrade the crappy stock transformer anyway.
