Mic Comparison

[Drew Stephenson]

In isolation there were three that I thought were the nicest but when fitted into the rest of the track there was definitely one that seemed to work better than the others (to my inexperienced ears).

[Dave B]

OK chaps, so I'll stick up the list of "which mic is which file" tomorrow evening. Last chance for anyone who wants to do a blind test.

If anyone fancies sticking their head above the parapet, the files are mica.wav -> mich.wav and I'd be interested in what people think of each. Or which they like. Or which they think will slot in the track. Or whatever ..

[Dave B]

So the results are :

• micA.wav : Aston Origin (£200)
• micB.wav : Audio Technica AT2020 (£100)
• micC.wav : Behringer B2 (£250 - see note 1 below)
• micD.wav : AKG D224e (see note 2 below)
• micE.wav : Groove tubes GT55 (£349)
• micF.wav : Groove tubes GT67 in cardioid pattern (£749)
• micG.wav : Groove tubes GT67 in omni pattern (£749)
• micH.wav : Neumann TLM201 (£560)

Notes :

1. The B2 was the _original_ B2 which was launched around 2000ish (give or take a year) and I _think_ that the price was 250. We aren't sure if the current B2 Pro model is the same as it has definitely been changed cosmetically over the years.
2. The D224e is an old mic and we aren't sure what the price was or even when it was built. But it's one of the rare dual capsule dynamics (and Wonks had it handy) so we threw that in to see what it was like
3. All prices are based on the original launch RRP - the GTs are discontinued but equivalents can be bought in the USA. But the GTs crop up on eBay regularly.

This all started with "Let's try out this Aston that people are saying is 'as good as a u87'". Not that we have a U87 handy .. but it's interesting to see what how it stacked up against similar priced mics (either new or s/h - expect the TLM which is twice the price).

Any surprises here?

Also, as Wonks has been pointing out, we do tend to recommend the AT2020 as 'my first mic'. So it's good to see if people can see the improvement that spending a bit more can bring.

If anyone knows a good vocalist (who is bored), we can try doing another, more comprehensive, test sometime and I'll get a few more options across the price scale for that.

Anyway, it was a bit of fun. Hope it was useful.

[Wonks]

That last one should read 'TLM102' (not 201), Dave!

Some of my thoughts.

We both thought that the AT2020 sounded particularly nasty in comparison to all the other condensers, at least on Dave's voice. The pronounced LF roll-off, starting at 300Hz (compared to a typical 150Hz on the other mics) did mean that you'd have to get in really close, a lot closer than is normally recommended, to add in some bass end and which could lead to

As a first condenser mic, the Aston is £110 more expensive than the AT2020, but is far nicer sounding and is a mic that you would happily keep in the mic cupboard, whereas for me the AT2020 would be going on eBay as soon as I had a better mic. There may be some applications where the 2020 would sound OK, but as an all-rounder, I'd look elsewhere.

Obviously there are a whole raft of other condenser mics in the £100 to £200 area which we didn't have access to, many of which would probably out-perform the AT2020, but to me it does show that if you are prepared to spend a bit more, you can get something that you'll be happy to use for a long time (at least until you stock up your mic cupboard with some nice valve and FET U47s, U87s, C12s etc.)

The AKG D224E doesn't have any proximity bass effect, so naturally has a thinner sound.

We both thought that the Neumann TLM102 over-emphasised the sibilance region on vocals, so would take a lot more work in the de-essing department. Apart from that, we both felt there was a nice overall feel to the sound, but probably best used on instruments if other decent vocal mics were available.

[ConcertinaChap]

Very interesting. In order to save clicking around I did this:-

dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19663416/Chris/for_sos/mic_test.wav

Which goes through the 8 mics in turn, slightly tweaked to give equivalent volumes only. Bit relieved to find the Berry wasn't my favourite mic

CC

[Wonks]

I'm only getting the one example in that, Chris.

[Wonks]

Unless you did a line in the verse for each mic?

[ConcertinaChap]

Exactly! I divided the regions into 8, then left one segment of each mic and slightly tweaked the volume where there was a volume jump between segments.

The result is instructive to me because in a few cases you can hear the mic character change but in most cases it's not so clear.

CC

[Wonks]

Maybe one without the backing as that does tend to mask some of the bass end?

We found that the second line was best for comparing sibilance, as it has the most esses in.

[Dave B]

Sounds like a clever thing to Chris. We did start down that route originally (tweaking the faderd to get the same level) but some of the differences were a bit radical and it was more convenient to normalise. We knew it wasn't perfect but it got into the ballpark and also showed up any noise that excessive gain boost would reveal.

[Dave B]

Bit relieved to find the Berry wasn't my favourite mic

This is a funny one actually. For a cheap Chinese mic, it did a lot better than we'd expected it to. Plus mine is over 15 years old now and hasn't been used for a very long time. That mic is multi-pattern as well. For the money, it didn't do too badly I thought. But the big question is whether my old version is the same spec as the more modern one. It's cheaper nowadays, so if it is the same, then I think I'd probably recommend that as a 'my first mic'..

[ConcertinaChap]

Maybe one without the backing as that does tend to mask some of the bass end?

Your wish is my command.

CC

[Wonks]

Thanks, Chris.

[Drew Stephenson]

Well that's a bit disappointing. I was really hoping there was going to be a great budget alternative but my favourite was the bloomin' Neuman. How very stereotypical of me.
The three I preferred were numbers 1, 5 and 8, but in the mix the Neuman seemed to sit best.
Oh well, at least it removes temptation

[Dave B]

blinddrew - re the TLM : keep an eye out on fleaBay then. I don't think I paid more than 350 for mine and that was when they were still relatively new. The current price I saw at Andertons was 420, and the don't seem to sell on the 'bay if people list them too high..

I also liked the GT55 - I picked mine up dirt cheap and I think that it's just a case of people not knowing how good they are. (There's one which is currently at 30quid with a 150 buy it now... )

I do like the GT67 though but that might be my love of the valve-ness of it clouding my judgement.

[Wonks]

I paid £49 for my last GT55.

[Drew Stephenson]

All my kit purchases are going to be on hold for a while. The better half is starting a phd soon which means much reduced income.
Fortunately even the cheap bits of kit that I have are all still plenty good enough for me and I suspect I will remain the weakest link in the recording chain for at least 5 years

[ManFromGlass]

Mic test is all well and good but I have heard from a reliable source that a properly tightened mankini works wonders on vocal quality and range . . . . . .

[Ariosto]

To be honest, and this is obviously my own opinion and experience, but I think mic comparison tests can only tell you a limited amount.

A great singer with a great voice will sound wonderful on any reasonable mic and this is the same with instruments as well, although some instruments need better quality mic's to cope with the overtones and extended range, and the pianoforte is an example of the need for a very good mic.

Most people (general public) are not interested or aware of what mic's are used on a CD, and there are many wonderful recordings from the 1940's to the 1970's where mic technology might have been rather primitive compared with today, but these performers sound quite wonderful even with the old recording technology.

So the mic, although important, is only a small part of the equation, in my opinion.

[Hugh Robjohns]

So the mic, although important, is only a small part of the equation, in my opinion.

Absolutely!

The pecking order of importance, to my mind at least, is:

1. Material
2. Performance
3. Environment
4. Mic Position
5. Mic Choice
6. Preamp (mainly to optimise noise and headroom)
7. Everything else...

[Aural Reject]

The pecking order of importance, to my mind at least, is:

Surely you missed

0. Directional mains cables

[Hugh Robjohns]

Ah yes... thought that was a given!

That and the balanced mains supply...

H

[Wonks]

I'd also agree, once you get beyond a certain basic level. A great performance on a badly distorting, bandwidth limited £5 Karaoke mic from eBay simply won't let the performance come through (though obviously it could be used as an 'effect' mic).

I've just thrown away an MXL V69 Mogami Edition tube mic because it was just a bad mike and far too noisy - even with a good replacement tube in it. An eBay experiment which failed.

We were trying to see where the price vs performance curve's slope started levelling off and started becoming asymptotic. Hence we were basically looking at the £89 AT2020 against the £199 Aston Origin and then dragged in some other mics we had available.

I know this is where it gets partly subjective but the differences between the AT2020 and Origin did sound much more marked on Dave's AE22s than back home on my Genelec M040s. And both of us felt that the AT2020 was just that bit too thin sounding and with a nasty mid-peak to be a decent good all-round first mic. The Aston Origin did sound a lot better. But if the Behringer B2 Pro sounds like the older B2 does, then we'd certainly suggest that over the AT2020 as a first condenser mic (and the B2 pro gives you an omni mode as well). The SoS review of the B2 Pro mentioned a pronounced presence peak, but it certainly wasn't as great as that of the TLM102.

So, a great performance into an average mic is always going to sound better that an average performance into a great mic, but given the choice, I'd really prefer to hear that great performance sung into a great mic.

[Tim Gillett]

To be honest, and this is obviously my own opinion and experience, but I think mic comparison tests can only tell you a limited amount.

A great singer with a great voice will sound wonderful on any reasonable mic and this is the same with instruments as well, although some instruments need better quality mic's to cope with the overtones and extended range, and the pianoforte is an example of the need for a very good mic.

Most people (general public) are not interested or aware of what mic's are used on a CD, and there are many wonderful recordings from the 1940's to the 1970's where mic technology might have been rather primitive compared with today, but these performers sound quite wonderful even with the old recording technology.

So the mic, although important, is only a small part of the equation, in my opinion.

I agree also. I'm impressed with your experience and balanced view on this. I think novices can so easily become bamboozled with all the various "personal recommendations" and the intricate details about different mic types. It could be made simpler for them in their situation IMO.

Tim

[The Elf]

I've just thrown away an MXL V69 Mogami Edition tube mic because it was just a bad mike and far too noisy - even with a good replacement tube in it. An eBay experiment which failed.

I also ditched my V69ME, in part because of the noise.

But...

...if you liked the tone of the V69 (and I did), then see if you can land an MXL V6 'Silicon Valve'. This is a very, very good mic - all the good bits of the V69, but without any of its bad bits. Some of my vocal clients now insist on using my V6. I really should look for another myself!