Which Mic. with Mid Boost and Clear High End for under $1000?

  • Thread starter Thread starter gvdv
  • Start date Start date
G

gvdv

Member
I have been testing microphones, and was wondering if people could make some recommendations.

Budget
Maximum $1000

Requirements / Preferences
1. Microphone must boost mid-frequencies, as my voice is thin ('reedy' sounding), particularly in the mids..
2. Preferably clear high frequencies
3. Preferably a multi-pattern polar response, but I will consider a single pattern only
4. Preferably a condenser, but will consider a dynamic

'Tests' and 'Short-List'
Shure SM 57 dynamic vs. Studio Projects C1 Large-diaphragm Cardioid Condenser Microphone
In doing some tests with these two microphones recently, my friend and I noticed that the C1 was a lot clearer in the upper frequencies than the SM 57, and provided much more information about the room in which we were recording.

Plosives were non-existent with the C1, but were a problem with the SM 57.

HOWEVER, I really liked the mid-range colour that the SM 57 gave my voice - quite a difference from the very 'honest' picture that the C1 provided of my voice, and also less 'honest' than my own SM 58 (although I like the 'highs' of the SM 58).

Potential 'Candidates'
I am going to audition the following mics.:
  • Shure SM7b Cardioid dynamic - I have read that this mic. has a mid. freq. boost, and I like some of the video tests that I have seen and heard
  • Rode NT2000 - I have read that to get a warm, tube/valve sound out of the NT2000, one needs to use a tube/valve pre-amp
  • Audio Technica AT Range - although I have read that most of these mics. provide very flat frequency response
  • AKG C414 XLII (someone recommended the XLS, but I noticed that the XLII is supposed to have a mid-range boost)

So, is there a microphone out there for me that you would recommend that I add to my list of 'candidates'? And if so, why?


Thanks,
GVDV.
 
Last edited:
Well, of your shortlist, The AKG C414 is a clear winner for me. It has a lovely sound and even features the multiple patterns you like. FYI, the B XLS model is discontinued anyway so, unless you found one on the second hand market, you'd be getting an XLII anyhow.

However, one thought--most mic manufacturers strive for a flat and nice sound. So long as any mic sounds decent on your voice, you can add very precisely the boost you want with a bit of EQ during the mix. That's probably a better way of working than trying to find a mic that does it all during tracking.

Having said that, you won't go far wrong with the C414--it's a mic I have a lot of time for.

Bob
 
Last edited:
I'll go the other way and say the 414 isn't a favorite of mine for vocals...always found it kinda' strident, rather metallic sounding to my ears. I remember the first time I used one, I was all set for this famous AKG mic...and it was a letdown.
Same thing with some of the AT mics.

If your voice sounds "reedy"...I would avoid upper-mid or high-end boost.
I would say your solution is in the lower mids to lows.

I've been recommending ADK mics lately ...they have quite a large variety, and for $1000 budget...there are several that would work, but without actually hearing your voice, it's hard to say which one, because even a minor difference in their frequency response could be good or bad for your voice.
I would go for one of their multi-pattern tube mics...because you can dial through 19 tone flavors...and if you can't find your tone, something is wrong.
 
Hmmm...we'll have to agree to differ then Miroslav. I'd describe the 414 as "clean and open" sounding rather than "strident and metallic".

(But I'm the one who, heresy of heresies) thinks the RE20 is muddy and lacking in detail!)
 
Since when is XLII discontinued? The 5-pattern C414B-XLS is discontinued, replaced by the 9-pattern C414 XLS, and the 5-pattern C414B XLII was replaced by the 9-pattern C414 XLII. Both now have the gold colored grill. and both have a bit of midrange boost. The XLS is voiced for acoustic instruments, and the XLII for vocals. And no, I don't think the C414 makes Whitney Houston sound "strident" or "metallic". The C414 is an *excellent* vocal mic, but only for certain voices. Along with the B.L.U.E. Bottle, it's the standard studio vocal mic for "American Idol", often used on female vocals. Would I put it in front of Willie Nelson? No. Would I put it in front of Mariah Carey? Yes. Freddy Mercury? Yes. Meatloaf? No. If your voice needs a little more airbrushing, consider Rode K2. In general, the C414 is a standard studio main vocal mic for a *minority* of singers, generally really good ones.-Richie
 
I was having a discussion with someone a few days ago about mics and flavors, and when the 414 came up, we both pretty much said the same thing....so I guess it's all in how one hears things.

I have a sensitivity to the 2kHz-8kHz region, and even a little bump and it comes off too bright/strident to my ears on certain sources. The C414 has a bump around 3k-4kHz and again around 6k-7kHz.
Some folks might like that edge and presence.
AFA the pro singers...I doubt what any one of us hears on a finished album was straight mic to final mix without any processing or equalization.

The other part of the discussion I was having with this guy, was that now days people go for more "forward/edgy" vocals, so mics that have that upper-end sheen/edge are more the norm, but I don't care for them.

I just put a new ($350) custom capsule in a mic, and while its frequency curve is almost flat, there is the smallest bump in the 2k-3kHz region...and it's bugging me. I know I can easily adjust my rig for it and otherwise the mic sounds quite good, it's just that it's not what I was going for straight out of the box. I may swap the capsule out again, but I'm going to see if I can dial it in before I do that.
I like more warmer and creamier upper end, not edgy...but in a mix, the upper end bumps sometimes are what is needed.
 
Hi Bobbsy, miroslav, and Richie,
Thanks for your thoughts about this.

Just to clear up a misconception that I might have been responsible for creating in my original post, I don't expect the mic. I buy to do the whole job, and over the years I have tried my best to use EQ, compression and other processing/effects to get the sound I want, but to no avail. Hence, my renewed search for a mic. that works with my voice.

So, the idea of getting a mic. which does some of the job (i.e., which makes successful EQ'ing possible) is very appealing.

If I could EQ the humble old SM 57 to have clear, warm, highs, my problems would be solved, as the mids. on that mic. are great for my voice (and it would be an incredibly cheap solution, too). But, alas, I can't get the kinds of highs that I want out of the 57.

Also, miroslav, if you read my original post, you'll see that I said that I prefer clear highs (not a boost there), and require a mid boost, not a boost in the highs (as you thought I said)...we are both advocating the same kind of 'solution' to the problem of my reedy voice.

Richie, I had read on the AKG website that the C414 XLS (not sure if it was the 'B') differed from the XLII in that the latter provided a bit of a mid range boost, so a bit confused about that....and thanks for the suggestion of the Rode K2. I had actually tested the mic. a few years ago, and had liked it (but did not love it).

I'm ruling the K2 out because I do not want to have to have a separate power supply (I should have said that in my original post).

Keep those suggestions and discussions coming.

Thanks,
GVDV.
 
Well, if we're throwing in other mics to try, my present favourite in the mid-price range is the SE2200A. I bought one about 2 years ago and was so impressed that I've gone back and purchased another. It has a lovely clear sound but is just a bit warmer in the mids than the C414. I now sometimes trot out the 2200As in preference to rather more expensive microphones. It's certainly worth an audition if you have the chance.

Bob
 
Bobbsy said:
Well, if we're throwing in other mics to try, my present favourite in the mid-price range is the SE2200A. I bought one about 2 years ago and was so impressed that I've gone back and purchased another. It has a lovely clear sound but is just a bit warmer in the mids than the C414. I now sometimes trot out the 2200As in preference to rather more expensive microphones. It's certainly worth an audition if you have the chance.

Bob
Click to expand...

Hi Bobbsy,
Thanks for this; I will try to get hold of an SE 2200 A to audition.

GVDV.
 
There are three companies I have experience with that do not 'hype' the responses in their mics..ADK. Avantone. Miktek.

They all build both tube condensers and FET condensers. All build mics well within your budget.

I'm not sure what the problem with a power supply for a tube mic is for you, but your description of your voice leads me to believe that a tube condenser is exactly what you've been looking.

That or a ribbon.

The Avantone CR14 ribbon mic is a brighter(dont think hyped, think present) more detailed ribbon than a lot of the other budget ribbons. It has a lot of that large diaphram dynamic vibe to it. Clear and defined and sturdy.

The ADK company voices their mics to older standards. The TC and the TT are both great mics, the TT being a tube and the TC being an FET mic.

Miktek is a newer company but their mics have quite the wow factor. Solid build, and extremely low-noise. I'd put the CV-4 mic up against any budget condenser made and against many high-end mics for its warmth and detail.

Again, I dont know your reasoning for lack of a power supply, but I think a tube is what you should be looking at.
 
cavedog101 said:
There are three companies I have experience with that do not 'hype' the responses in their mics..ADK. Avantone. Miktek.

They all build both tube condensers and FET condensers. All build mics well within your budget.

I'm not sure what the problem with a power supply for a tube mic is for you, but your description of your voice leads me to believe that a tube condenser is exactly what you've been looking.

That or a ribbon.

The Avantone CR14 ribbon mic is a brighter(dont think hyped, think present) more detailed ribbon than a lot of the other budget ribbons. It has a lot of that large diaphram dynamic vibe to it. Clear and defined and sturdy.

The ADK company voices their mics to older standards. The TC and the TT are both great mics, the TT being a tube and the TC being an FET mic.

Miktek is a newer company but their mics have quite the wow factor. Solid build, and extremely low-noise. I'd put the CV-4 mic up against any budget condenser made and against many high-end mics for its warmth and detail.

Again, I dont know your reasoning for lack of a power supply, but I think a tube is what you should be looking at.
Click to expand...

Hi cavedog101,
Many thanks for your thoughtful and very helpful reply.

Coincidentally, just before I saw your message I was looking at the specs. and a video of the Miktek C7, and will also be looking at the C4 (although I think that it may be a little out of my budget range).

Thanks for mentioning ribbons in general, and the Avantone CR14 specifically. I have been wondering why more people don't talk about ribbons for vocals, and would like to hear your take on this.

Unfortunately, the wiring in the building in which I live doesn't have a proper ground/earth circuit, so I am reluctant to use equipment with separate power supplies. Also, space is not at a premium here. Those are the main reasons for not wanting a separate power supply.

Thanks, once again,
GVDV.
 
I think you could solve this grounding problem by adding an Oneac or some sort of transformered power conditioning. A transformer, through its windings, effectively isolates the incoming power and creates a new 'service' of sorts on its secondary set of windings. You can 'bond' your gear on the secondary side through a post on the chassis.

I think that a lot of people on these forums are unaware of the 'ribbon' technology becoming rather 'modern' in its scope. The fragile nature of early ribbon mics is simply not the case (for the most part) though as with any recording equipment some care has to be taken to preserve and maintain it to operating levels.

The Cascade ribbons, Avantones, even the MXL ribbon mics are budget level and sound decent. Certainly worth the money. However, in that bunch, the Avantone seems to stand out to my ears in that it has much clearer detail and doesnt exhibit that 'dark' almost muddy sound that other cheap ribbons have. But it isnt a 'hyped' response at all.

Staying on that subject, the new R-101 Royer ribbon mic is priced well within your budget and is a fantastic mic for all things recordable. The Blue Woodpecker is another mic in this genre that you should test. You'll need to buy used there, I think, to straddle your limit.

About 'dark' sounding mics.
I own an older U87 that would be considered 'dark'. Meaning to say, its NOT HYPED but rather it exhibits all the frequencies at a fairly level output. This sort of response is the very thing that enables a mic to 'take EQ well'. So, 'dark' is not necessarily bad and in your case would be the first mic I'd put up.
 
cavedog101 said:
I think you could solve this grounding problem by adding an Oneac or some sort of transformered power conditioning. A transformer, through its windings, effectively isolates the incoming power and creates a new 'service' of sorts on its secondary set of windings. You can 'bond' your gear on the secondary side through a post on the chassis.

I think that a lot of people on these forums are unaware of the 'ribbon' technology becoming rather 'modern' in its scope. The fragile nature of early ribbon mics is simply not the case (for the most part) though as with any recording equipment some care has to be taken to preserve and maintain it to operating levels.

The Cascade ribbons, Avantones, even the MXL ribbon mics are budget level and sound decent. Certainly worth the money. However, in that bunch, the Avantone seems to stand out to my ears in that it has much clearer detail and doesnt exhibit that 'dark' almost muddy sound that other cheap ribbons have. But it isnt a 'hyped' response at all.

Staying on that subject, the new R-101 Royer ribbon mic is priced well within your budget and is a fantastic mic for all things recordable. The Blue Woodpecker is another mic in this genre that you should test. You'll need to buy used there, I think, to straddle your limit.

About 'dark' sounding mics.
I own an older U87 that would be considered 'dark'. Meaning to say, its NOT HYPED but rather it exhibits all the frequencies at a fairly level output. This sort of response is the very thing that enables a mic to 'take EQ well'. So, 'dark' is not necessarily bad and in your case would be the first mic I'd put up.
Click to expand...
Hi cavedog101,
Thanks for taking the time to continue talking about this.

And thanks, too, for your recommendations.

I would love to have a U87 to put up, but those days are a bit far off, I'm afraid.

Also, I'm not sure that I want to get into transformers, but will consider this as a possibility, especially now that I'm considering some mics. with power supplies.

Thanks for the point you made about 'dark' sounding mics. having level outputs that make the mics. 'take EQ well'.

All the best,
GVDV.
 
An Oneac simply plugs in like any appliance. at least the portable ones do.
 
gvdv said:
...If I could EQ the humble old SM 57 to have clear, warm, highs, my problems would be solved, as the mids. on that mic. are great for my voice (and it would be an incredibly cheap solution, too). But, alas, I can't get the kinds of highs that I want out of the 57. ..
Click to expand...
Question to stir the pot- How close do you work the 57, vs the others (condensors)?
Some of what you're hearing clould be proximity -not just the low/mid boost but position as it efffect what part of the voice the mic sees.
If so that changes the hunt; A mic you can work closer, 5-6k peak and an extended top.

Hmm. PR22?
 
mixsit said:
Question to stir the pot- How close do you work the 57, vs the others (condensors)?
Some of what you're hearing clould be proximity -not just the low/mid boost but position as it efffect what part of the voice the mic sees.
If so that changes the hunt; A mic you can work closer, 5-6k peak and an extended top.

Hmm. PR22?
Click to expand...

Hi mixsit,
Feel free to stir/mix the pot!

I would say that when I did the comparison the other day between my friend's SM 57 and his Studio Projects C1, I was singing 8 - 10" away from each microphone. We did have to increase the gain for the SM 57 (in comparison to the C1) to get a good level, but that's what I would have expected.

Can't see the proximity effect coming into play there.

In addition to my own SM 58, I have an Audio Technica ATM 27HE which I (stupidly and completely unusually) impulse bought several years ago when the guy in the music store told me that it had similar characteristics to the SM 57. I have found the mic. to be so dark/flat that it is virtually lifeless, so don't really use it.

GVDV.
 
I would definitely consider a ribbon. I haven't done much vocal work lately, but when I did, I used to really like a Nady RSM-2 ribbon mic (long ribbon motor) modded with a Lundahl transformer for thickening up male vocals. YMMV, of course. Be sure to factor in the cost of clean preamplification, depending on what sort of gear you are currently using.
 
Hi dgatwood,
Nice to hear from you.

And thanks for the Nady RSM-2 recommendation.
 
Changing Pop Shield on SM7b?

Today I rented a Rode K2 and a Shure SM7b to start mic. testing.

I'm embarrassed to say that I can't change the pop filter on the SM7b, despite trying to follow the instructions in the 'User Guide' (http://www.fermata.biz/Shure_SM7b_Microphone.pdf)

Is there some kind of special technique to this?

I hope that my next question/post will be more substantial.

Thanks,
GVDV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top