I am on the lookout for a pair of condenser microphones. I have owned a few over the years (most were sold for reasons related to redundancy) so I would prefer ones which are similar.
GT33 - I had a matched pair and I thought they were excellent, especially on acoustic.
AKG C2000B - I had one of these and I felt it was quite similar to the GT33.
Obvious contenders are the new C2000, AKG Perception 150/170, Rode NT5 / NT1-A, and more of the usual suspects.
Any comments would be welcome. It's for acoustic guitar, vocals and realistically any sound source out there (within reason).
I don't want to spend a ridiculous amount (by the way) so recommendations for a pair of AKG C414s will be ignored

--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.

Edited by BigAl (24/09/12 12:18 PM)

The more I use my NT5s (matched pair) the more I like them... used them slightly experimentally in A/B on Saturday night to record a choir/organ/string quartet combination. Results are excellent. The NT1As have a very low inherent noise figure, but I've never used them.

As long as you'll never be seeking to record quiet sources at a distance, you might like the Audio Technica AT2020. A good general purpose mic for vocs and acoustic guitar plus other sources too.

In passing, both the AKG 2000 and the Perceptions don't have particularly good self-noise figs either.

Cheers Mike. The noise figures, probably won't be an issue as it's mostly fairly close up stuff.
The NT1A gets good reviews, although I always thought the Rode mics were supposed to be quite sibilant. Never used one myself. The NT5s may do the trick.
I'm maybe considering spending more money than I originally thought, but still not sure.
Any experience of the SE range?

--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.

While I'm on about pairs of mics, has anyone ever used a couple of half decent mics with a Focusrite ISA Two?
For general stereo recording or for acoustic guitar?
Or even lead vocals for that matter?

--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.

If you can run to a pair of NT55s you get the excellent omni caps and pad/filter switches. I don't know that I'd particularly want to rely on NT5/55 for vocals, but you could do worse.

--------------------
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

beyer mc930 pair. I bought mine from digital village. In my opinion quite an improvement over my Rode NT5 pair. Great for stereo acoustic guitar and drum overheads. Very natural sound.

Quote BigAl:

---

While I'm on about pairs of mics, has anyone ever used a couple of half decent mics with a Focusrite ISA Two?
For general stereo recording or for acoustic guitar?
Or even lead vocals for that matter?

---

Don't do it! (And read this/listen to the samples if you don't believe me http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=1009249& ;page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=365&fpart=2#Post1009862#1009249) Spend the money would have spent on a Focusrite preamp on a decent pair of microphones instead. I'd second the beyer MC930s...very neutral and if you did use them on vocals they take EQ well.

Let's not forget that for stereo recording in particular, a 'good' preamp like the ISA Two is well worth having, if only just for the ability to precisely match gains on the two channels (plus all the other nice features it has). I have an ISA 828 and wouldn't be without it -- not so much for its sound as for its usability.

Cheers guys. I probably wouldn't use small diaphragm mics on vocals.
My recording in general for vox is a GT55 through an MP20 and I get great results.
I would like something at least as good.

--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.

I see Audient do a two channel preamp. Anyone used it (or the eight channel version) ?

Decent price at around 400 quid (actually cheaper than what I paid for my MP20 at the time).

--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.

I just listened to some samples or acoustic using the MC930, NT5 and an Oktava. Beyer sounded best to me. Not the most scientific test, but there you go.
I'm a great believer in using the tools you have, regardless, so I'll use any mic really and just get on with it - but I'd rather pay extra to get something a bit better.
I'm sure they would be excellent through my MP20.

--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.

Quote:

---

I just listened to some samples or acoustic using the MC930, NT5 and an Oktava. Beyer sounded best to me. Not the most scientific test, but there you go.

---

I have recently done the same, although I also listened to the AKG C451B, Neuman KM184 and NT55. As you say, not the most scientific test but helpful nonetheless
I found the NT5 a little 'tinny' .. maybe not the best word but certainly the high frequencies were there to be heard. A nice clear sound though and a very respectable price
The Neuman was nice and clean but at a price that was would be difficult to justify for me
The AKG was nice and clean too but again, more than twice the price of the NT5
I too liked the Beyer, but wondered if it sounded a little 'muffled? ... again maybe not the best word to describe what I mean' ... but it certainly was a little more mellow than the NT5. Once again, does the difference merit the price jump?
And I don't think the NT55 was worth the extra hike in price either
At the end of the day I am trying to decide between the Beyer, the AKG and the NT5 ... is there anything that I am likely to use these mikes for that would be greatly improved by the expenditure of an extra £300 or £400 or so on the Beyer or the AKG (or any of the other more expensive ones mentioned)?????
Do you know ... I very much doubt it
Common sense should make me go for the NT5 ....

--------------------
Sam

A while back I took part in a fairly extensive comparison of small-diaphragm capacitor mics. The ones that impressed us were the Neumann KM184 and 84 (which sounded very similar, contrary to popular opinion), the Audix SCX1, the Audio-Technica 4053 and the SE Electronics SE4, which we all thought was the best of the budget options.

Quote whis4ey:

---

And I don't think the NT55 was worth the extra hike in price either
At the end of the day I am trying to decide between the Beyer, the AKG and the NT5 ... is there anything that I am likely to use these mikes for that would be greatly improved by the expenditure of an extra £300 or £400 or so on the Beyer or the AKG (or any of the other more expensive ones mentioned)?????

---

I wouldn't dismiss the additional outlay for the NT55s. Once I heard the omni caps on acoustic guitar I knew I *had* to have them. I now have two clients that insist on me using them for their (very desirable) guitars - these mic's literally bring in the money!

The pads on the NT55 make them more suitable for overheads/hat/ride too.

If you've tried them and weren't impressed, then fair enough, but it's unusual to hear of anyone who doesn't love those omnis.

--------------------
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Quote Sam Inglis:

---

The ones that impressed us were the Neumann KM184 and 84 (which sounded very similar, contrary to popular opinion)

---

I've found the same, having had 184/84 on the same session, but you can't tell people. They *want* to believe that the older mic's sound better.

Neumann aren't stupid - they've constantly improved their mic's over the years, but to read some reports you'd think they achieved perfection back in the 60s and are on a mission to spoil their mic's further with each new model!

--------------------
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Yes, the whole craze for 'vintage' can be a bit odd. I do love my KM84s but there's no way I'd pay the current going rate for them.

Funnily enough the Rode NT5 was one of the mics that didn't really shine in our comparisons, although we only tried the cardioid capsules.

When did common sense ever come into it? ;-)

I doubt there would be little difference either. There are many things you have to get right to get a good recording (good idea / song, good arrangement, good orchestration, good delivery, good dynamics, etc....) Get that right and the recording part is easy.

One thing about buying AKGs or Beyers is they may hold their value better if you had to sell them in the future.
Then again, I've sold a few items over the years and you never get what you think you should, unless you have something in high demand.

For the price of a pair of MC930s, you can get TWO pairs of NT5s, and still enough cash for a few beers and a curry for four.

--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.

My point on the NT55 was that if I was going to spend £450 I would probably be more inclined to spend £550 and get the AKG ... and then I would toss and turn in bed to try to make up my mind whether or not to spend the further £75 on the Beyer ..... problem being it is a never ending dilemma

--------------------
Sam

Quote The Elf:

---

Quote Sam Inglis:

---

The ones that impressed us were the Neumann KM184 and 84 (which sounded very similar, contrary to popular opinion)

---

I've found the same, having had 184/84 on the same session, but you can't tell people. They *want* to believe that the older mic's sound better.
Neumann aren't stupid - they've constantly improved their mic's over the years, but to read some reports you'd think they achieved perfection back in the 60s and are on a mission to spoil their mic's further with each new model!

---

I agree. I can't believe the number of Gearslutz posts where people say 'Neumann now make crap mics', lol. But as for KM84 vs 184, I thought the 184s did have a considerably bigger HF boost? The freq response diagrams to both mics are on the Neumann website.

Quote whis4ey:

---

Quote:

---

I just listened to some samples or acoustic using the MC930, NT5 and an Oktava. Beyer sounded best to me. Not the most scientific test, but there you go.

---

I have recently done the same, although I also listened to the AKG C451B, Neuman KM184 and NT55. As you say, not the most scientific test but helpful nonetheless
I found the NT5 a little 'tinny' .. maybe not the best word but certainly the high frequencies were there to be heard. A nice clear sound though and a very respectable price
The Neuman was nice and clean but at a price that was would be difficult to justify for me
The AKG was nice and clean too but again, more than twice the price of the NT5
I too liked the Beyer, but wondered if it sounded a little 'muffled? ... again maybe not the best word to describe what I mean' ... but it certainly was a little more mellow than the NT5.

---

I love the beyers but I would confess that occasionally I've found them to be a tiny bit muddy. Mostly when used as a main pair on a classical ensemble, though it might have been down to room acoustics too. I'm not saying they lack HF detail though, and it's nothing that couldn't be sorted out by a gentle EQ dip in the lower mids.

Also, they're not entirely immune to mobile phone interference, which has caused me problems on a couple of live recordings in smaller spaces. The Neumann KM series on the other hand are completely shielded so I guess this is where you'd be spending the extra money.

Quote mjfe2:

---

as for KM84 vs 184, I thought the 184s did have a considerably bigger HF boost?

---

I recall reading that Neumann said they introduced a slight lift around 9kHz in the 184, but it is extremely subtle in my experience. All I could hear was a tiny bit more air - like the mic had become more 'open'. This is similar to the difference I hear between the U87 and U87Ai.

--------------------
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Maybe some of you guys know .... am I right in thinking that with the AKG you have optional omni capsules available?

--------------------
Sam

Quote whis4ey:

---

Maybe some of you guys know .... am I right in thinking that with the AKG you have optional omni capsules available?

---

Off the top of my head, no, I don't think they do. They're fixed aren't they? I think they're a reissue of a famous AKG mic body + capsule that was originally modular, but the cardioid capsule was so popular they turned it into a fixed mic. Most people on Gearslutz seem to find the AKGs too bright (they'd probably work well in the diffuse field though) and I usually see them used as hi-hat spots and things like that. I think you'll find the beyer 930s far more versatile, with a better low-end response. They come up second hand from time to time...

The current C451B is as far as I know a completely different mic from the original C451 -- the original was a modular true condenser mic, the new one is a fixed-capsule electret.

I've owned a 451B and a C34 (the stereo version of the original 451) and frankly didn't like either of them much. They are so very very bright...

Thanks peeps .... I am taking notice

--------------------
Sam

Unfortunately, the price keeps going up......
I was going to ask about the AT4051B (had a few AT mics over the years, and still have some dynamics). It's even more expensive.
The joys of shopping...

--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.

Quote BigAl:

---

I see Audient do a two channel preamp. Anyone used it (or the eight channel version) ?

Decent price at around 400 quid (actually cheaper than what I paid for my MP20 at the time).

---

Hi BigAl!

If you're referring to the Mico (dual-channel version) I've got one and am very pleased with it, as are quite a few other people here.

For me it provided a clean, transparent sound with the option of creative tweaking courtesy of its HMX (harmonics) control on oen channel and the Variphase on the other, but the deal clincher was the built-in A/D converter.

Oh, and a quick Google of "mico sound" on the SOS forums proves how many other threads hae discussed this product:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site%3Asoundonsound.com%2Fforum+mico#hl= en&sclient=psy-ab&q=site:soundonsound.com%2Fforum+mico+sound&oq=site:soundonsound.com%2Ffo rum+mico+sound&gs_l=serp.3...2597.4756.3.5527.4.4.0.0.0.0.220.549.0j3j1.4.0.les%3B..0.0... 1c.1.ot6ymK1H29o&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=9fd619bb931d9b31&biw=1920&bih=992

Nice one!


Martin

--------------------
YewTreeMagic

Quote Sam Inglis:

---

A while back I took part in a fairly extensive comparison of small-diaphragm capacitor mics. The ones that impressed us were the Neumann KM184 and 84 (which sounded very similar, contrary to popular opinion)...

---

Would you say the comparison between these two is similar to the U87/TLM103 debate? I've read Hugh's review of the 103 a couple of times and feel like it's a no brainer if you want a cardioid U87....but then I get put off by all those people on Gearslutz who bash the 103 as an 'awful' mic, 'far too bright' etc. How can this be so if it's modelled so closely on the 87?!

Quote mjfe2:

---

I get put off by all those people on Gearslutz who bash the 103 as an 'awful' mic, 'far too bright' etc. How can this be so if it's modelled so closely on the 87?!

---

Typically because one person on GS, who can't afford a 103/87, satisfies himself by telling everyone how rubbish they are - then the others, who have never even been in the same room as a 103/87, all agree with him (especially if he has a high posting count) to 'pal up' and make themselves seem knowledgeable. Eventually it becomes 'common knowledge' and dissenters are aggressively put down by the mob of wannabees.

Unfortunately this happens all the time over there and is very tiresome. Don't forget that GS is where much of the hysteria over pre's comes from...

--------------------
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Quote mjfe2:

---

Quote Sam Inglis:

---

A while back I took part in a fairly extensive comparison of small-diaphragm capacitor mics. The ones that impressed us were the Neumann KM184 and 84 (which sounded very similar, contrary to popular opinion)...

---

Would you say the comparison between these two is similar to the U87/TLM103 debate? I've read Hugh's review of the 103 a couple of times and feel like it's a no brainer if you want a cardioid U87....but then I get put off by all those people on Gearslutz who bash the 103 as an 'awful' mic, 'far too bright' etc. How can this be so if it's modelled so closely on the 87?!

---

The KM84 and 184 are pretty similar, though the 184 is brighter and quite a few people like the old but not the new. Those people tend to like the Gefell M300 (made in the original Neumann factory).

The TLM 103 originally used the same capsule as the U87 (I'm not sure if it still does), but it was used differently. The TLM 103 is quieter than the U87 and does not have a transformer. The new TLM 102 is quite different and uses a totally new capsule. The original Neumann capsule is the M7 which is used in the Gefell UMT70S and MT71S - unlike the U87 / TLM 103, the only difference between the UMT and MT is the fact that the MT is cardioid only.

--------------------
John - Sound-Link ProAudio
President - Federation Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

Quote The Elf:

---

Quote mjfe2:

---

I get put off by all those people on Gearslutz who bash the 103 as an 'awful' mic, 'far too bright' etc. How can this be so if it's modelled so closely on the 87?!

---

Typically because one person on GS, who can't afford a 103/87, satisfies himself by telling everyone how rubbish they are - then the others, who have never even been in the same room as a 103/87, all agree with him (especially if he has a high posting count) to 'pal up' and make themselves seem knowledgeable. Eventually it becomes 'common knowledge' and dissenters are aggressively put down by the mob of wannabees.

Unfortunately this happens all the time over there and is very tiresome. Don't forget that GS is where much of the hysteria over pre's comes from...

---

Too true !

--------------------
John - Sound-Link ProAudio
President - Federation Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

I've never used a TLM103, but I suspect that as John says, there is more of a difference between that and a U87 than there is between the KM84 and the KM184. Incidentally, I'm not saying the difference between the 84 and the 184 is negligible, simply that it didn't show up very strongly in one particular comparison we did. I can well imagine that it would be the sort of thing that creeps up on you and begins to annoy you with repeated use, if you see what I mean.

Martin,
I'm going to hold back just now on another preamp until I'm absolutely sure I'll use it. I got rid of a load of gear a few years ago when I lost my job, and I'm trying to build it back up again. This time I'll buy less gear and stuff that I'll use. Hopefully decent quality.
I may get a TC Electronic interface to faff around with on the PC before deciding on PC recording, then I may get something like the Audient or equivalent (the TC unit has adat and only two preamps and a line IN - and I can get it through a friend at massive discount).
I'm still dithering between NT5s and MC903s or to wait and add one LDC first on the microphone front. Again, don't want to jump in and buy anything, although I'm a great believer than using whatever tool you have at your disposal at the time rather than moaning about the pros and cons of various bits of gear.

--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.

I'm a big fan of Rhode and Blue personally. I always got really nice tones on acoustic from my Rhode and used the Blue primarily for vocals. Of course it's a very subjective matter of taste and trial/error.

--------------------
-Mike
My Domain Hosting site

Quote soulsearcher:

---

I'm a big fan of Rhode and Blue personally.

---

What's "Rhode"? - or do you mean "Røde"?

--------------------
John - Sound-Link ProAudio
President - Federation Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

Yes Rode, sorry always mix up the spelling with Rhode Island.

Ah, interesting re 103 vs 87. I assumed they were very similar, given Hugh's review. How does the 102 compare to the 103 sonically?

Quote mjfe2:

---

Ah, interesting re 103 vs 87. I assumed they were very similar, given Hugh's review. How does the 102 compare to the 103 sonically?

---

Totally different.

They are very different microphones - people who don't like the 103 often like the 102.

The 102 has a new capsule, developed specially for it.

--------------------
John - Sound-Link ProAudio
President - Federation Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

NT2-A's are very good for the money (of course not quite as true as 414s), with the benefit of lots of polar patterns. I picked up a pair for £450

How does this work?......

A pair of MC930s is around 600 quid. One MC930 is 350 quid (and sometimes higher)!
A pair of AKG C214s is 500 quid.
A pair of ribbons from SE plus an ISA two (b stock) is 800 quid.
Where do you start?


--------------------
Jack of all trades, master of some.

Quote BigAl:

---

How does this work?......

A pair of MC930s is around 600 quid. One MC930 is 350 quid (and sometimes higher)!
A pair of AKG C214s is 500 quid.
A pair of ribbons from SE plus an ISA two (b stock) is 800 quid.
Where do you start?

---

Well you can buy a single MC930 on Thomann for c. £320, if you really don't want the pair (which are properly matched, not just bundled into pairs of consecutive serial numbers ). Or you could buy a pair then sell one on. I don't know if I'd bother with the sE ribbon because in an SOS shootout they consistently found it underwhelming compared to the other ribbons (though I'd like to see more blind shootouts within certain mic classes!). As for the AKGs I don't know much about them but I'm not sure a stereo pair of large diaphragm mics is the most versatile thing in the world (given the off-axis response will be far more coloured than on the beyers, which are voiced really very smoothly -- Hugh often raves about them).