Opinions please on these mics

  • Thread starter Thread starter classic_rocks
  • Start date Start date
C

classic_rocks

New member
Hi guys, I'm only 16 and want to get into recording (starting a home studio) I have been looking around for some different mics to use as my first condenser mic. I am looking for a mic that would work well on male vocals and acoustic guitar and deliver a crisp, clear, warm sound.

so far I have had my eye on the CAD M179, the RODE NT-1a, and the MXL v67.....although I'm skeptical of the v67 b/c some people I've talked to loved it and othere tell me its a piece of crap....?

so I'd love to get some opinions....and also if anyone knows of some other mics I should look at I'm open to suggestions.
 
Of the ones you mention, I like the CAD. I think it has a nice mildly scooped sound with with only a slightly exaggerated top end ... not at all harsh, from my experience. I think one could easily record a platinum selling album with one of them, and the general listening public wouldn't be any to the wiser. On the other hand, I think the v67 and Rodent are both pieces of crap. But that's just me, and not everyone agrees with my estimations on these things (one man's crap is another man's feces), so take my opinion with a grain of salt.

.
 
classic_rocks said:
Hi guys, I'm only 16 and want to get into recording (starting a home studio) I have been looking around for some different mics to use as my first condenser mic. I am looking for a mic that would work well on male vocals and acoustic guitar and deliver a crisp, clear, warm sound.

so far I have had my eye on the CAD M179, the RODE NT-1a, and the MXL v67.....although I'm skeptical of the v67 b/c some people I've talked to loved it and othere tell me its a piece of crap....?

so I'd love to get some opinions....and also if anyone knows of some other mics I should look at I'm open to suggestions.
Click to expand...

What exactly do you mean by "crisp, clear, and warm" ? To me Crisp means a boost in the high end, Clear means flat response, Warm means attenuated highs and/or boosted lows. One mic meeting all 3 criteria would be a stretch (if not impossible), especially in a budget price range.

I use the AT2020 which I would consider on the crisp side of things and perfect for acoustic guitar. It works for voice as well, but lately I've been wanting something a little warmer. My next purchase will probably be the CAD M179, which in your list looks to be the most versitile mic in spec...
 
WB sound does make a good point. Terminology is often subjective (and many people consider 'warm' to be almost the opposite of 'crisp'), so if you want the best possible recommendations, you might try being more descriptive. Just a suggestion.

.
 
wbcsound said:
To me Crisp means a boost in the high end, Clear means flat response, Warm means attenuated highs and/or boosted lows.
Click to expand...

Crisp could mean a boost in the high end. Clear I would say has more to do with transient response and sensitivity. Something with a less complicated signal path (transformerless) and a thinner, more responsive diaphragm will generally give you a "clear" sound with greater definition.

Warm, on the other hand, I think of as having perhaps a less responsive sound; a little slower on the transients with more stuff in the signal path; i.e. large transformers, tubes, etc. Perhaps something with less sensitivity, like a dynamic mic, or a condenser with a thicker diaphragm.

So according to some commonly held definitions, warm and clear could very well be opposing goals.
 
I havent tried the CAD.

But I have tried the Røde mic, and it sounded OK, to me.
Nothing special, to my ears and my voice that is.

The V67g, is my main Vocal mike, I bought it after some recomandations on this board.
I think it rawks for my uses, I`ve also tried it as a drum Overhead, and I thought it sounded good.

My vox are quite high pitched so I dont know if it would suit your needs.

Anyways my 2 cents.
 
ok....so basically when I say crisp....I mean something clear... I want a mic that will sound lively and not muddy, dull, or muffled....and by warm I don't want a mic thats thin sounding. I want it to sound rounded and full.

....and by lively I mean that it will pick up the subleties in your voice and have some presence to it.

so basically I want a full rich sounding mic thats chrystal clear and can capture the subtleties of ones singing or playing.


also I've heard really good things about the RODE NT-1a.....is it really a piece of crap?
 
classic_rocks said:
also I've heard really good things about the RODE NT-1a.....is it really a piece of crap?
Click to expand...


NO by all means its not.

It might not be everyones favorite, but its not crap.
The one I`ve tried did a more than good enough job. :)
 
While I don't have the NT1a, I have an original NT1. Warm is not a word I would use to describe it. I think it is crisp and clear, with some high frequency sheen (= bright). On a deep male voice (mine), it is good for poppy stuff where I want to vocal to stand out. Although, lately, I've been turning more to the Apex 460 tube mic for that sound (and I'm looking into the Studio Projects T3 based on recordings and recommendations I've heard about this mic). Both the Rode and Apex can emphasize sibilance in a not-so-nice way and I wouldn't use them on any harsh/grating voices.

I also have a CAD M179, and I generally agree with chessrock's description. To my ears, it's fairly neutral in sound, which is good if you're going to be using it on multiple sources/voices. It won't make the source sound any better or worse than it does in the room. For a first mic, I think it's tough to beat and a hell of a bargain. It is my go-to mic for background/harmony vocals, because it doesn't seem to have any annoying artifacts that build up when you stack several tracks together. I've also used it quite a bit on acoustic guitars and as a room mic.
 
wbcsound said:
What exactly do you mean by "crisp, clear, and warm" ? To me Crisp means a boost in the high end, Clear means flat response, Warm means attenuated highs and/or boosted lows. One mic meeting all 3 criteria would be a stretch (if not impossible), especially in a budget price range.
Click to expand...

A stretch? Not at all, you can achieve this with countless microphones, depending on a thousand and one factors, in fact this is what many producers strive for and capture all the time. Warm doesn't mean the opposite of crisp or clear in any way shape or form.
 
EDAN said:
A stretch? Not at all ... Warm doesn't mean the opposite of crisp or clear in any way shape or form.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it could. Again, depending on your definition of said terminology. That's why generic terms like "warm" are almost completely meaningless, depending on the context, without further elaboration. That's what I believe WB was refering to.

.
 
the rode is a nice mic, better for midrange/deeper vox. not incredible on the high pitched singers, i think.
 
chessrock said:
Yes, but it could. Again, depending on your definition of said terminology. That's why generic terms like "warm" are almost completely meaningless, depending on the context, without further elaboration. That's what I believe WB was refering to.

.
Click to expand...

Exactly. When talking to someone just getting started, the modern catch phases we all use to describe sound could be completely misinterpreted and/or misused. Warm is generally used to describe almost anything that's good so saying I want a warm mic...well are you just saying that you want a good mic or something else?

And I understand that there are many factors including placement, room, pre, etc that will affect the end sound which furthers my debate that to someone starting out, words like warm have no real value.

My soft recommendation of the CAD is based on a bunch of research, listening to samples online (can't find a local retailer) of similar sound sources, the fact that the pattern is variable (which could be very useful to a noob in an untreated room to minimize unwanted reflections), and low $$.
 
I have an mxl v67g and it is ok. I find it fairly useful and similiar in sound to a gt55 that I have, although I don't use it often. I've had experience with the original Rode nt1 but not the NT1a. I didn't like the Nt1 much and couldn't get too many useful tracks out of it. It was kind of "harsh" on the top end. That was the last piece of equipment I ever bought based on reviews. When that mic first came out it received rave reviews from most of the major audio publications and cost $400 and in my opinion it was a total dog. I had plenty of other large diaphragm mics in my studio at that point to compare it to also, so i feel i definitely had an well-informed impression of the mic. If this is any indication I payed nearly four hundred for it new then sold it on ebay a year later and got $80 for it! Hopefully the NT1a sounds better! I don't have any experience with the CAD mic but my studio partner has one of the CAD drum kit packs and I find it un-useful but of course this says nothing about the m179. Good luck!
 
classic_rocks said:
I'm skeptical of the v67 b/c some people I've talked to loved it and othere tell me its a piece of crap....?
Click to expand...

I'd take the V67 out of your selection. It's terrible on acoustic guitar due to muddy lower mids. Of the five vocal-oriented condensor mics I own, it's always the last mic I turn to. However, on rare occasion it ends up being the best mic of the bunch for some voices - even in comparision to a few mics that are six times the cost.

If I was buying a first mic I'd get as nuetral a mic as possible for the price range. This way you can record multiple sources without building up too much of the same frequency. Also, you'll learn more about the sound of the instruments themselves by searching out the sweet spots and finding where a more natural balance lies.
 
Try a CAD M9 if you need the "crisp"
Try the sE 2200A if you need smooth and somewhat flat.
Both go for $299 if that is in your price range.
If not, I'd vouch for the NT1A.
Wish I knew more about the sE Electronics M1C.
It is about the size and design of the Neumann TLM 103.
It uses a larger 1.07" single cardioid-only version of the Z3300A diaphragm and is only $169.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top