So what's wrong with C3000?

[soundchaser59]

That song is 38 tracks. I used a certain "very modest tube preamp" on all but 4 tracks. Tell me, which 4 tracks were the Class A pre's used on?

This song had about 17 or 18 tracks. Half of them were a certain "very modest tube preamp", the rest were real Class A pres. Which are which? Should be pretty easy to tell really!

Well, normally I would say "Piss on Ford" (Ford Motors, that is! LOL!! Not the sound engineer!) but.......I must say that after listening to these two tunes I think it is pretty obvious which pre's are which...... I could tell right away, first listen.....the el cheapo pre's really stick out like a sore thumb.......that "modesty" just screams out from the track bed....

Yeah, right!

I'm still patiently waiting for someone else to point out which pre's were the "modest" ones.....

I have tested a tube preamp, even if it is what I would call "modest".......my modest tube preamp is light years better than no tube preamp at all. And it is different than the straight solid state stuff on my board, a very useful kind of different. And it does change the way I think about using my mics now. And I stand by my recommendation that everyone should experiment with one (and I aint talking about Behringer here!) before they decide if they are getting everything they can outa their mics.

By the way, Ford, that "Heavy Brother" track is absolutely superb! First Rate! As Captain Picard would say, "Nicely Done!"

 

[up-fiddler]

Getting back to the 3000, I have the c3000b and it fits great with acoustic guitar, high vocals, drum overheads, and harmonies. I don't think it is a great all-around mike since the low end is a bit grainy and lacking but for a specific use it is great. I'm not about to sell mine. If anyone out there is throwing theirs away I'll pay shipping on it . Dave

 

[Garik]

I have a c3000b and i tell ya it sucks on vocals!! I have recently recorded a clean guitar with it,and i liked it a lot,it came out very chrisp sounding ,but the vocals were too harsh and brittle.Me no likie this mike,i might consider selling it,since i record guitars once every blue moon.It doesnt make sence to keep a mic only for one thing...or does it?

 

[sile2001]

And then you have the C2000, which is a sharp contrast to both the C1000 and the C3000, in that it's actually GOOD. I got to spend some time using a pair of C2000's and I was fairly impressed. Very crisp and clean, but without sounding overly harsh or bright, and they had very good transient response. If you get a chance to get one of these for cheap, you might want to check them out. They're not all multi-pattern and stuff, but what they do, they do well.

 

[Gilliland]

My friend, Jeff, has a pair of the old 3000's and uses them for vocals and for drum overheads among other things. Personally, having heard the old and new, I prefer the old. It is not as bright a mic as the new and if I remember correctly, the old is also cardioid, and omni (maybe figure 8 too?) and has a 10dB pad.

Actually, it has two patterns, cardioid and hypercardioid. I bought one on closeout just as the C3000b was coming out - I bought the old model for $150 from a store that was trying to get rid of them. I've used it mostly as a broadcast voice mic (in cardioid), and it's not bad for that at all. I've never really tried the hypercardioid setting - I wonder if that might sound better.

Harvey, how would AKG combine those two capsules to create the mic's two patterns?

 

[Harvey Gerst]

Actually, it has two patterns, cardioid and hypercardioid. I bought one on closeout just as the C3000b was coming out - I bought the old model for $150 from a store that was trying to get rid of them. I've used it mostly as a broadcast voice mic (in cardioid), and it's not bad for that at all. I've never really tried the hypercardioid setting - I wonder if that might sound better.

Harvey, how would AKG combine those two capsules to create the mic's two patterns?

If the big capsule was designed to be hypercardioid, adding a small amount of omni would widen the pattern to cardioid.

Conversely, adding a negative (reversed phase) omni to a cardioid would make it more hypercardioid. The mic circuit (that showed both capsules and how they were connected) came with the original C3000, but that went with the mic when I sold it.

 

[Gilliland]

If the big capsule was designed to be hypercardioid, adding a small amount of omni would widen the pattern to cardioid.

Conversely, adding a negative (reversed phase) omni to a cardioid would make it more hypercardioid. The mic circuit (that showed both capsules and how they were connected) came with the original C3000, but that went with the mic when I sold it.

I had considered both of those possibilities. It seems to me that the mic is likely to have better characteristics when it is using just one capsule than when it is using both - there would have to be some phase relationship stuff that would come into play when the omni was engaged. And that may account for some of the mic's reported weirdness. On the other hand, the C3000b didn't have the dual patterns, and most people report that it made things worse rather than better. So who knows?

Since my mic was a store sample, I didn't get any paperwork either. So I have no idea which way it works. There may be something about it on the web somewhere. When I get some time, I'll do a search.

 

[usekgb]

I have an original C3000 (not the b) and I have found it useful on upright bass, and percussion. That's about it. I does sound quite a bit better than the C3000b in my opinion. I picked mine up used for around $100 3 or 4 years ago, and I've only used it 5 or six times since then.

Cheers,
Zach