Under The Hood - Pt. 2 - Nady SCM1000 vs. Studio Projects C3

  • Thread starter Thread starter Harvey Gerst
  • Start date Start date
H

Harvey Gerst

New member
Both are multipatten (omni, cardioid, & figure 8) with tiny switches for pattern selection, roll off, and a -10 dB pad.

The Nady is similar in construction to the Marshall V67G except with a shorter, heavier body, and a U87 type grille. The SP C3 is built exactly the same as the C1. Each had 5 transistors.

Except for one or two observations, I will avoid making comments and drawing conclusions.

Mvc-041f.jpg


This is the front side of the two mic capsules. The capsule on the left had a thicker gold sputtering. The capsule on the right had an almost transparent sputtering.

Mvc-042f.jpg


This is the rear of the two mic capsules. The capsule on the right had a thick gold sputtering on the back. The capsule on the left had an almost transparent sputtering on the back.

In person, I could see no difference in manufacturing between the two capsules other than that sputtering difference (and the red wire comes in from the left on the back side of one of the mics.

Mvc-043f.jpg


This is the back side of the two mics. The Nady SCM1000 is on the left and the Studio Projects C3 is on the right.

Mvc-044f.jpg


This is the front of the two mics. The Nady SCM1000 is on the left and the Studio Projects C3 is on the right.

The Nady SCM1000 has a street price of around $150. The Studio Projects C3 has a street price of around $400 and a suggested retail of $599.99.
 
Nady

You may have said it before, but I don't recall... is the Nady a good sounding mic? I've never heard you do any reviews on the Nady itself. Or is this the 1st? :)
$150 isn't bad at all if its a good mic.
 
While I never did a full blown test of the Nady, basically, I thought the Nady was pretty good in Omni (with an on-axis rising high frequency response), just ok as a Figure 8 (but it did null nicely at 90°), and it was only fair in Cardioid mode with some hi end peaks that were annoying. Not a great mic overall, but not bad for a $150 multi-pattern mic.
 
the saga continues...

Harvey, I thought you were done with the Studio Projects mics (and Alan's interference)? Are you back to reviewing them, or are you just doing the C3? If so, let's hope we can handle this without stirring up as much controversy as before!

Either that or just have an all out brawl between c7sus and Alan Hyatt!

TWO MEN ENTER, ONE MAN LEAVE!

TWO MEN ENTER, ONE MAN LEAVE!

TWO MEN ENTER, ONE MAN LEAVE!

....

In all seriousness, I guess I'm a little disappointed to see how cheap some of these mics look. I'm no EE but honestly, the damn things look like they cost all of about $8 bucks to put together! Maybe it would be more impressive to see firsthand. I know they're "low-end" for large-diaphragm condensers but $400 or even $150 seems like an awful lot of money to me and I'd hope that a good portion of it went into the parts and the design. Harv, have you seen the pics from that prorec NT1000 and NTK review? I know the key thing is the sound, but form follows function and those things just look like they we're intelligently designed and made out of quality components, especially in comparison to these 797 mics. Any thought on this?

Also, you comment on the thickness of the gold sputtering. What affect might this have on the sound? BTW, does it appear to you (as it does to me) that these two mics may just have the same capsules but in a reverse arrangement? Why might they have done this?
 
I'm gonna try to finish the review on the Studio Project's mic line, but I'm still waiting for the second C1 to compare for consistency. If I don't get the second unit, I'll just finish up the tests as far as I can and put in a strong warning that these mics I tested may not be typical of what you might receive.

I don't know the effect that different thicknesses of gold would have between the front and back diaphragms. My question to 797 would be "which is the front diaphragm, the thick gold coating, or the transparant coating, or does it matter?"
 
great pics and pointers to look at Harvey. Keep 'em coming...pleezzz

this "walking on eggshells" idea, however sucks to me.
I think *most* people have an idea of what is going on here, and what are the jerky posts and what are not. So...I'd not be afraid to spit out any comments/opinions you might have on your in depth, factual posts. That's why we're all here, as far as I am concerned,...to read others opinions, and make our own judgements (whether or not the author has credibilty or not) ...and that is why they make chocolate and vanilla.
 
So nady is not so bad after all. I remember after I got my nady scm1000 I read a thread that made me think twice the purchase I had made.

Harvey have you seen anything on the berringer mic; It has been said that the guts are Rode nt2 and the outside case is the only berringer part on it?
 
I don't have any information about the Behringer mic.
 
Dolemite

No brawls for me, but I am sure he will be lurking in the bushes to attack where and when he can.

What I did want to address is two points, one of them are capsules. There are only three, maybe four manufacturers of large diaphragm capsules in China.

As discussed in earlier threads, many well known manufacturers use these Chinese capsules. So if you are going to use them, you have three places to get them, so you are bound to get crossover between companies, but most companies use a very thin gold sputtering, while Studio Projects prefers to use a thicker Mylar, so of course the capsules will look almost identical if you use a 797 Audio capsule, as will those who use the same capsule from another vendor.

I will be doing a technical post on capsules in the next day or so to address the differences between the different materials used, and what makes them different. No opinions will be offered in that post, so it will just be information based post that may address some unanswered questions.

To answer one of your questions, the thinner Mylar has a tendency to produce very accentuated high end, reasonable mids, and a decent low end. The thinner Mylar tends to ripple more and break up on high sound pressure, where the thicker capsule used on the Studio Projects will offer a more transparent high end, smooth mids, and a more full low end.

What this all means is not that one is better than the other, but only that one will sound better on certain applications than the other, and by using eq, you can compensate in either direction. I think the best mic is always one that you do not have to eq at all, or at best, very little.

As for the mics looking cheap, some do, some don't, but none of them can be made for $8.00. Some use stock housings so they cost less. You can obviously see the brands that use the same or similar housing, so they retail for less. Anything you do to customize the chassis, body, or capsule, adds to the cost, and if you include a case, and shockmount, it adds as well.

I hope this helps.
 
the extreme rookie has a question...

I have downloaded, and am reading the PDF "Methods of operation and type examples". These questions may be adressed there, but I thought I'd throw this out . What are the components on the circuit boards in the picures? I read somewhere yesterday that mics could be loosely compared to a speakers construction and operation in reverse, which is a concept that, if accurate I can digest easily.
If so, I'm assuming that the PC boards act as a cross-over of sorts.
If I'm way off base, I'll retreat back to my reading! :)
 
Nope, definitely not a crossover since these capsules are all meant to be "full range" or at least have a tailored response over a wide range of frequencies. Interestingly enough there are a few mics that have a different element for both low and high frequencies so those mics probably have some sort of crossover circuit. The circuitry that you're seeing here is a preamp, yes another preamp in addition to what we call a "mic preamp." This preamp is there to bring the levels up a bit and, in some cases, affect the sound in certain ways.
 
Hey Dolemite, not so fast!

God, I wish I'd shut up! :D

Then help me understand the working relationship (that I thought I understood) between this mic that is getting a "bit of a level boost" internaly, and the preamp. I thought the preamp supplied the 48v and boosted the signal on the way to, or in the mixer.

....10 free flying lessons to who ever helps me pass my finals!!
 
Re: Hey Dolemite, not so fast!

getuhgrip said:
God, I wish I'd shut up! :D

Then help me understand the working relationship (that I thought I understood) between this mic that is getting a "bit of a level boost" internaly, and the preamp.
Click to expand...

Heh, well that's where my comprehension (or at least knowledge) drops off. ;)

Hopefully Harvey will step in and clear that up for us.


Alan,

Have you had a chance to hear/work with the new Rode mics (NT1000 and NTK)? If so, what's your opinion of them?
 
Actually the 48v phantom power is for the capsule and the op-amps on the board

You see the condenser mic is capacitive in nature Which you can compare it to an electrostatic speaker(like the locally made martin logans, or magnaplaners) the dynamic mics are inductive. the inductive mics move a coil attached to a diaphram back and fourth over an Electromagnet to convert the sound waves to electricidy.

But the condencer mic works diferently by developing a wave from the space between two mylar diaphrams that need to be charged which is like a variable capacitor controlled by the sound wave.

I hope you understood my answer. Thats about as simple as it gets.
 
Dolemite,

I never liked the NT1, and always thought the NT2 was the best sounding mic they offered in the entire line.

The new NT models sound good, but a bit brassy on the top end for my taste, so take that for what its worth, but if your looking for that sound, they will work well.
 
Hey Harvey,

I just got back from Singapore, and the new shipment just got in, so I am sending you another C1 next week. Sorry for the delay, I just had no mics in stock to send you.

I actually prefer it this way since they are from different runs, this way your report can be based on two different build runs.

regards,
 
Interesting. I think I know what you mean by "brassy." So you're saying the C1, and maybe the V67 by inference, have a smoother top end? I'm not a fan of their old mics myself, but I keep hearing good things about the new ones. You've gotta be jealous of that design though, eh?
 
Brassy. hard edged, edgy, bright, shrill, harsh - all synonyms for sharp, high-end peaks in some microphones. The C-1 and the V67G are pretty smooth by comparison.
 
Well, smoother is your term. I think it best if I let Harvey and others answer that one, otherwise I open myself up to a holy war.

I am happy to comment on any mic that I have used, but despite my use of the Studio Projects, I am best to remain neutral on that, but what I can say, is it is typical of a thicker mylar capsule to have a fuller sound with a more natural sounding top end. Studio Projects is not the only mic to use thicker capsules, but I think 95% of the Chinese capsules are thin, about 2.5 to 3 um, where I use 6 um.
 
Maybe this is a good spot to ask this

Where can I purchase a replacement capsule for one of my nady mics, The holder for the capsule failed and tore the mylar on both sides and I would like to replace it if I can Any suggestions?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top