rode nt1a

  • Thread starter Thread starter ryan79
  • Start date Start date
R

ryan79

Member
Hi I know this has been covered before so feel free to click off in disgust.

In short I have accidently purchased a rode nt1a for recording acoustic guitar.

Someone has told me ive wasted money as I should be using small condensers for guitar. Should I return please advise.
 
ryan79 said:
Hi I know this has been covered before so feel free to click off in disgust.

In short I have accidently purchased a rode nt1a for recording acoustic guitar.

Someone has told me ive wasted money as I should be using small condensers for guitar. Should I return please advise.
Click to expand...

the mic is mainly good at vocals and if you wanted to record acoustic guitar u would have been better off buying SM57 or something better. well u mighty say its a mistake but if you dont have a vocal mic, no need to take back. jst buy the sm57.
 
Maybe - maybe not.

I think the idea that you need small condensers for acoustic is misinformation to a point.

Small condensers can sound really good on acoustic and they're popular in that application. On the other hand, a mic doesn't know or care what it's recording. Depending on your level of experience it might be a better idea to experiment with what you have and learn the craft of recording. There are a lot of factors besides the microphone. When you're ready, you might prefer something else to the rodent, but your ears will tell you why rather than the internet or some kind of paint by numbers methodology.

LDC's have been used successfully on acoustic. Small condensers are popular in that role for a reason - typically they're less hyped and have more neutral off axis response. Ribbon mics and even some moving coil mics have been used with great success.

I don't understand all the hype over large condensers. Good dynamic mics and a pair of good small condensers can give you lots of mileage with recording anything you need, and they're much less expensive than good LDC's. The important part is how the mic is voiced, and how well that voicing matches the source it's in front of, not what type it is.

It's a bit like saying you need an LDC to record vocals. It helps to have a mic that doesn't have a harsh or grainy high end, and something that doesn't emphasize the range of sibilance too much. With a few exceptions, lots of the cheap LDC's do this. It might also be nice on a given source to have a mic that has excellent midrange response. Again, lots of cheap LDC's do not do this. Sometimes a small condenser can really shine for a given vocalist and song, but people think it's wrong because it's not a large diaphragm.

ANY mic will usually have SOMEWHERE where it sounds good, and possibly better than really popular mics costing a lot more.
 
izman said:
the mic is mainly good at vocals and if you wanted to record acoustic guitar u would have been better off buying SM57 or something better. well u mighty say its a mistake but if you dont have a vocal mic, no need to take back. jst buy the sm57.
Click to expand...

The SM57 is a good vocal mic. For acoustic it might work in a pinch if there's nothing else, but I'd probably use something else that could handle more detail if that's what the track calls for. Condensers are good that way. If I wanted a moving coil mic on acoustic it would probably be something more like the Beyer M201.
 
snow lizard said:
The SM57 is a good vocal mic. For acoustic it might work in a pinch if there's nothing else, but I'd probably use something else that could handle more detail if that's what the track calls for. Condensers are good that way. If I wanted a moving coil mic on acoustic it would probably be something more like the Beyer M201.
Click to expand...

yeah ..... for me about the last mic I would use for acoustics would be a SM57.
I'd way prefer the Rode over that.


ummm, how do you accidently buy something?
:)
 
Or you can mix it up now if you get a small diaphragm condenser microphone (like the Oktava MK 012) and use both the Rodes and that, to mic up your acoustic!
For example LDC on or near the hole/body of the guitar and the SDC on or near the 12th fret or where ever the sweat spot is any where on your guitar with those or other microphones. ;) I'm sure that you'll get plenty of millage out of your Nt1a.








:cool:
 
NT-1a was my first mic, and I used it on everything. It did fine on guitar - nice full low end with a little crispness on the highs. Try putting it 12"-18" out from the 12th fret.

Use it until you gain experience with it, so you know what different sound you are looking for. Then supplement it according to your newfound taste with an SDC or whatever you think you need at that point (variety is nice), and experiment and listen to your recordings.

My first two mics were the NT-1a and an sm81 (SDC). I have several more now, but I still use the NT-1a and sm81 a lot.

One of my favorite recording methods for ac guitar is to use both LDC and an SDC.
 
Last edited:
It's a mic, it converts sound into electronic signals. It might not be a first call mic for that application. But it should function fine. As long as you can sell it for what you paid for it, and don't have immediate need for the cash, keep it.

The real question is how much work in post will it take to make it be what you want it to be? And if it's worth the effort exchange to go with something different instead of hanging on to that mic in particular. The NT1a seems to be a well liked mic in other applications, so it's probably worth giving it a try. If only for the price of education.
 
ryan79 said:
Someone has told me ive wasted money as I should be using small condensers for guitar. Should I return please advise.
Click to expand...

Have you tried it on acoustic guitar?

How does it SOUND?

There's no law that says you MUST use SDC's on acoustic guitar. People use all kinds of LDC's with great results. Every hear acoustic guitar with a C12, U87 or U47? AKG414? Those mics all do a fantastic job.
 
So in light of all that, is maybe the question could you have spent less for something that does as well?
 
I recorded an entire full length CD using a large diaphragm condenser on acoustic, and it's a primarily acoustic album. The idea that you need a small diaphragm mic for acoustic is *bogus*. Moreover, an SM57 would be very close to my last choice for recording acoustic guitar. There is no magic in an SM57. It's just an over-rated cheap dynamic mic. Go ahead- use the NT1a and be happy. It has a lot more to do with the acoustic itself, the room it's in, and mic placement, than it has to do with the mic itself.-Richie
 
Richard Monroe said:
.. There is no magic in an SM57. It's just an over-rated cheap dynamic mic. Go ahead- use the NT1a and be happy. It has a lot more to do with the acoustic itself, the room it's in, and mic placement, than it has to do with the mic itself.-Richie
Click to expand...

Gentlemen, the Eagle has landed.
 
Richard Monroe said:
There is no magic in an SM57. It's just an over-rated cheap dynamic mic. Go ahead- use the NT1a and be happy. It has a lot more to do with the acoustic itself, the room it's in, and mic placement, than it has to do with the mic itself.-Richie
Click to expand...

+1

There are far better mics out there. I don't know why everybody hates Behringer and loves Shure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top