Opinions on CAD M179

[Robert D]

Sure I can search it.....and will, but for those of you who like talking about this stuff rather than complaining about how it's been discussed already, fire away. Tell me what you know about the CAD M179?

Thx,
RD

 

[scrubs]

Pretty neutral sounding multi-pattern condenser for not much money. Not harsh or brittle like many inexpensive condensers. Not really flattering for vocals, but gets the job done. Hard to go wrong with it. And, yes, it has been discussed at length before.

 

[Robert D]

Well yeah, but nobody said how it would be as the figure 8 mic in an M/S config for violin. Hmmm....what about that?

I did read the previous discussions on it.....seems to have gotten a near universal thumbs up. Oh yeah, now I remember why that mic stuck out in my mind. It's in the listening sessions, and stood out to my ear as particularly nice.

-RD

 

[punkin]

Point well taken Robert. I agree that there isn't much feedback to be found regarding how it behaves when used in various pattern configs. But as Scrubs said, the thing isn't dazzling as voice mic and this has been mentioned in previous threads.

As for instrumentals, I worked with it a little...mostly acoustic guitar, accordion, and I've even tried it on some brass instruments...sorry no violin. The figure 8 is effective but since the sound of the mic never grabbed my attention, I rarely use it. Once in awhile I'll set it up as a boundary mic. Oh...just remembered, I had a vocal trio way back...It was my only multpattern at the time. I remember it worked out fairly well. Just a touch bright but a little flat through the middle and bottom.

To it's favor however, it's priced right, it most certainly is useable and opens up some options for multipattern uses as these creatures tend to be a little more expensive.

Best luck to you.

 

[chessrock]

Punkin, that's a great description.

It's solid, not spectacular. Practical, but not sexy.

Very usable; rarely sucks. Multipattern is very functional and a nice feature.

It really does kind of stand out in the Listening Sessions, which isn't a shock. It will catch you off guard and surprize you from time-to-time.

You may/may not find this interesting, but we recently found out, on this board, that the CAD mics all utilize the same Chinese capsules as a lot of the other budget mics utilize. Only everything else about it is just extremely clean and flat; adding almost no coloration of it's own with the circuitry, so you hear the capsule the way it was meant to sound, moreless.

 

[Robert D]

Thanks guys, sounds like about as much as you could expect out of a $200 multi-pattern condenser. Of course the stand out track in the listening sessions could be a case of just the right guitar/strings/room/placement/etc. for that mic on that day, and not neccesarily indicitave of how it would sound in my world. I think I'll put it in the catagory of "if I see a great deal on one I'll grab it".
Funny about the capsule source. I thought I just read that they make em in the states, I think in an SOS review. Could have been true at the time, and changed for cost reduction.

Thanks again,
RD

 

[cominginsecond]

Another vote for "won't knock your socks off, but rarely stinks." It's pretty good on 85 percent of sources, but not really amazing on anything, in my experience.

 

[chessrock]

I think I'll put it in the catagory of "if I see a great deal on one I'll grab it". Funny about the capsule source. I thought I just read that they make em in the states, I think in an SOS review. Could have been true at the time, and changed for cost reduction.

They've always been made in China, but the mic itself is assembled in the States, apparently. Rode does the same thing, as do many others (assembles in their facility in Australia, but outsources the capsule).

 

[Robert D]

They've always been made in China, but the mic itself is assembled in the States, apparently. Rode does the same thing, as do many others (assembles in their facility in Australia, but outsources the capsule).

Hey Chess......found it - from the SOS review on the M177 &179.......

"A lot of the budget condenser mics available today are manufactured in the Far East, almost regardless of whose badge appears on the body. It is worth noting, then, that CAD construct their own Optema capsule designs in a special clean-room facility within their factory in Ohio in the USA, and install them in microphones manufactured entirely on site."

Now what they don't say is whether the Optema capsule has anything to do with the M179. It would be pretty misleading of them if not, which I certainly wouldn't put past them.

-RD

 

[PhilGood]

Hey Chess......found it - from the SOS review on the M177 &179.......

"A lot of the budget condenser mics available today are manufactured in the Far East, almost regardless of whose badge appears on the body. It is worth noting, then, that CAD construct their own Optema capsule designs in a special clean-room facility within their factory in Ohio in the USA, and install them in microphones manufactured entirely on site."

Now what they don't say is whether the Optema capsule has anything to do with the M179. It would be pretty misleading of them if not, which I certainly wouldn't put past them.

-RD

If the Optema capsule is a CAD design, then they must have licensed the design to 797 in china. I took apart my M37 and found the exact same capsule as the shanghai version in the MXL V67, and then took apart my M177 and found the same capsule as in my MXL 2003. The backplates are the same, the dimensions are the same, screw placement, everything! If this is their design, why is everyone else using it? Also, why is their design for the Optema the same as Nuemann's design for the KK67 capsule?

They might do the same thing as John Peluso, where they have the metalwork done in china, and then strech the diaphragms themsleves, but how they retain the right to call this capsule by a CAD exlusive name is beyond me.

 

[Robert D]

Hmmm. I also read (elsewhere) it uses the E-300 capsule, with a newer head amp design.

-RD