Sound-on-Sound review of Oktava Tube Mic

[chessrock]

Just got done reading up on SOS's review of the Oktava MKL2500.


Now, someone help me out, here, because I don't know if I've got my shit straight on this . . .


Quote from the article: " . . . the power supply has been designed so as to deliberately introduce a measure of third-harmonic distortion with a view to adding both brightness and warmth."

Now this is where I'm a little confused. Isn't third-harmonic distortion the dirty, gritty, yucky kind that makes things sound either muddy or brittle? I mean, whouldn't you be better off running your vocal track through a Marshall JCM2000 or a big muff pie or something?

Maybe I'm just confused. Someone set me straight on this.

Thanks in advance!

 

[crazydoc]

It seems you would be right, sir!

Even order good, odd order bad.

"Harmonics: Also called overtones, these are vibrations at frequencies that are multiples of the fundamental. Harmonics extend without limit beyond the audible range. They are characterized as even-order and odd-order harmonics. A second-order harmonic is two times the frequency of the fundamental; a third order is three times the fundamental; a fourth order is four times the fundamental; and so forth. Each even-order harmonic: second, fourth, sixth, etc.-is one octave or multiples of one octave higher than the fundamental; these even-order overtones are therefore musically related to the fundamental. Odd-order harmonics, on the other hand: third, fifth, seventh, and up-create a series of notes that are not related to any octave overtones and therefore may have an unpleasant sound. Audio systems that emphasize odd-order harmonics tend to have a harsh, hard quality."
From http://www.wildwestelectronics.net/ghi.html

Here's an effects pedal that uses this principle
http://pages.prodigy.net/chuckcollins/percolator.html

However maybe a very small "measure of third order harmonic distortion" might change the signal so it sounds a little brighter (a little fzzz?)

 

[chessrock]

That's what I thought . . . but I wasn't sure if I was reading it correctly. I mean something just seemed wrong with it.

Why on earth would anyone want to "deliberately induce a measure" of stale, brittle fizzies?

 

[CanopuS]

The neumann u87 is getting old, so they've tried to emulate the "Mr. Microphone" instead, top range quality

 

[Flatpicker]

What else does the review say? Did they like it?

 

[chessrock]

Testing (the mic) with vocals confirmed that the tube circuitry has been tweaked to give the mic a slightly larger-than-live sound, which comes accross mainly as emphasised presence, though that slightly chesty character that comes with many valve mics is also in evidence. The result is quite flattering on most voice types, and though the sound doesn't have the same degree of silky smoothnessas the best tube mics, switching back to an otherwise comparable solid-state mic demonstrates that the tube is doing something musically attractive.

Reviewer goes on to say that the third harmonic distortion "certainly works, musically."

So the dude seems to like it well enough.

 

[PapillonIrl]

I have yet to see SOS give anything a bad review, but I always thought that some third-level harmonic distortion could be musically pleasing, certainly not unpleasant like a clipped waveform.

Gotta try find some info about that. I remember the first studio we tracked with in Dublin, we could only afford to pay for a day's drum tracking, so I asked for the drum mic tracks to be burned to CD for me to mix/use. Anywho, the engineer/studio owner was quick in with the sales pitch saying: "...digital eq is very harsh, this desks eq introduces third-level harmonics which gives you the sound you hear now..."

 

[chessrock]

Even if the mic does sound just fine . . .

I'm just not sure that I trust it.

First of all, it's from Oktava, which right there raises some red flags that say "Quality Control?"

Now this whole odd-order harmonics thing.

 

[Nd:Apricot Stu]

Physics is nutty sometimes

There is some inconsistancy in the ordering of harmonics. For some bizarre reason, no one has ever really agreed on a standard. My girlfriend was studying for an acoustics class in Linguistics and they have decided "for clarity" (HA!) to call the 2x frequency after the fundamental tone the first harmonic since the fundamental is not a harmonic. So in a way it's the first harmonic in the series.

So if Oktava's using the same convention, then when they say third harmonic, they may mean 4x the fundamental freq which is up two octaves, possibly creating some warmth. The Russians may have some QC problems but they kick ass at science - so I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one...

 

[Middleman]

I have yet to see SOS give anything a bad review, but I always thought that some third-level harmonic distortion could be musically pleasing, certainly not unpleasant like a clipped waveform.

I had a subscriptioin to Sound on Sound and dumped it because their reviews are bought and paid for, everything sounds great, innocuous BS. Nothing ever sounds bad and when it does they generate ambiguous comments and read between the lines inuendo.

However, they have at least one good article per issue so its easier to just check the newstand than to buy a subscription.

I think they do the industry a disservice by not doing a better job of weeding out expensive rehash equipment or strongly supporting value based gear.

They always take the middle road instead of calling a spade a spade.

 

[chessrock]

I have to disagree somewhat, and the reason I say this is because I think Sound on Sound are very very transparent; in other words, I think it's pretty easy to read between the lines in order to tell what they really think of something. It's like they speak in sort of a secret code . . . and as long as you have your SOS Decoder ring, you can pretty much tell when they like something and when they don't.

One thing that really caught my eye was the review of the Safe Sound channel strip. http://www.safesoundaudio.com

They really seem to like that thing, and it sounds like a really useful box. I'm going to be keeping my eye on that one; a decent mic pre with a good-sounding compressor and a peak limiter that doesn't suck (supposedly) -- that's a pretty rare thing for something in the $500 range.

 

[Middleman]

Decoder ring, that's so true. Perhaps I was a bit harsh, I just ate an Oreo Ice Cream Cookie and was running on a sugar high.

I also keyed in on that strip and it looked very cool. My only concern was the power supply in the box and the heat that it might bring. However the circuitry looked extremely clean and well designed.

I will give them kudos for covering a lot of gear but for $60 a year I did not find their reviews that compelling.

 

[ozraves]

One thing that really caught my eye was the review of the Safe Sound channel strip. http://www.safesoundaudio.com

Mojo Pie has the very first unit ever in the USA and we're reviewing it. I'm hoping to get a month or so with it after the reviewer gets finished. It doesn't have a wall wart so they had to make a special transformer for us.

It is one of the four preamps that Warhead posted clips of in the Mojo Pie forum.

Steve
www.mojopie.com

 

[chessrock]

That's very good to know.

What really gets my curiosity, though, is that compressor and peak limiter. Right now, there just isn't anything on the market that can peak limit with any degree of transparency or musicality . . . untill you get in to something like the Aphex Domitator, which usually goes for between like $500-700.

I wonder if you can bypass the mic pre section.

 

[Middleman]

Oz, let me know what you think on that box as my b-day is coming up and I am looking. The wife says that box is in the budget.

I heard the clips. I could opt for 3 or 4 with a slight lean towards 4.

 

[littledog]

Heh heh. All you anti-odd harmonic guys, here's a few words of advice so you don't waste your money buying gear that introduces evil brittle fizzy etc.

Don't buy a Distressor.

If someone should give you one, just ship it right to me. Wouldn't want you to be tempted to add those ugly third harmonics to your pristine mixes.

 

[acorec]

Just got done reading up on SOS's review of the Oktava MKL2500.


Now, someone help me out, here, because I don't know if I've got my shit straight on this . . .


Quote from the article: " . . . the power supply has been designed so as to deliberately introduce a measure of third-harmonic distortion with a view to adding both brightness and warmth."

Now this is where I'm a little confused. Isn't third-harmonic distortion the dirty, gritty, yucky kind that makes things sound either muddy or brittle? I mean, whouldn't you be better off running your vocal track through a Marshall JCM2000 or a big muff pie or something?

Maybe I'm just confused. Someone set me straight on this.

Thanks in advance!

The fundamental flaw here is that you BELIEVE what some idot wrote. Shame on you Chess. The MKL2500 is a damn sweet mic. I really like this thing and will get another WHEN the price goes back to $199 or less.

 

[DJL]

Humm, can a tube mic powered by a wall wart really be any good... or did I misunderstand?

 

[Flatpicker]

Humm, can a tube mic powered by a wall wart really be any good...

Sure! Wall-warts can supply lots of current.

 

[Son of Mixerman]

Heh heh. All you anti-odd harmonic guys, here's a few words of advice so you don't waste your money buying gear that introduces evil brittle fizzy etc.

Don't buy a Distressor.

If someone should give you one, just ship it right to me. Wouldn't want you to be tempted to add those ugly third harmonics to your pristine mixes.

I think it would only be fair to the audio community to ship it to me instead. Im a certified disposal technician of audio hazardous materials. Im required to do significant testing prior to disposal to make sure the equipment meets all FCC Class B and Class C specifications, my testing facility is also a secure enviroment.

SoMm