Must have microphones?

[John Willett]

I'm also in the "just started mic'ing up" stage, .....

My approach has been to mostly find mics that can do several things well, making sure that I've got enough to have something adequate for everything, and buying them all used. At this point, the only mics I bought new were the pair of LA120s. I've got the backup of my friend with a bigger locker, that if there's something I need for a bit, like LDCs for vocal overdubs, I can borrow it.

Sounds like a pretty sensible way to start to me.

Just remember that a microphone is mature technology and good ones last for decades - so buy wisely and spend the maximum yo can afford on mics - that way you won't have to keep buying again.

[Hugh Robjohns]

You mean a copy - a clone is exactly the same as the original, a copy isn't.

I'm not convinced the definition of those terms is that exact (if you'll pardon the pun)... The Oxford English dictionary defines Clone as: A person or thing regarded as an exact copy of another and Copy as: A thing made to be similar or identical to another...

So a Clone is an exact Copy... and a Copy could be identical like a Clone

The point is that people use the terms interchangeably and context is crucial as either could mean an exact, identical device or something that barely resembles the original but shares some desirable key characteristics. For example, people talk about 'Hammond Clones' all the time, yet the clones all use entirely different technology and few even look vaguely similar!

H

[Albatross]

Hugh, what's your desert island mic? I mean if you could only have just one microphone, which would you choose?

[Hugh Robjohns]

Hmmm... that would be a tough call.

A Shure Beta57 can do pretty much everything tolerably well, doesn't need phantom power, and would survive desert island conditions...

But if I had phantom power available it would be a toss-up between a Neumann KM84 and (slightly cheating here because it's a stereo mic) a Neumann SM69FET.

...But then I also really love my Royer active ribbons, and my Sennheiser MKH, and my Gefell M930s, and my Soundfield ST450-2, and my DPA 4060Cores, and... and...

[ore_terra]

To be fair, since you’re imaging that there’s electrical power in that desert island, I dont see why we shouldnt be considering phantom as well

[John Willett]

You mean a copy - a clone is exactly the same as the original, a copy isn't.

I'm not convinced the definition of those terms is that exact (if you'll pardon the pun)... The Oxford English dictionary defines Clone as: A person or thing regarded as an exact copy of another and Copy as: A thing made to be similar or identical to another...

So a Clone is an exact Copy... and a Copy could be identical like a Clone

The point is that people use the terms interchangeably and context is crucial as either could mean an exact, identical device or something that barely resembles the original but shares some desirable key characteristics. For example, people talk about 'Hammond Clones' all the time, yet the clones all use entirely different technology and few even look vaguely similar!

H

I know that people do seem to use the two interchangeably - but saying "close" does seem to imply a product equal to the original, and very few "clones" seem to be fully equal.

That's why I prefer to say "copy".

There are a very few companies that try to make exact copies of discontinued mics - FLEA for example - and I am happy with using "clone" for these types as they are very close to the original - and you pay the price for the quality.

[Hugh Robjohns]

That's why I prefer to say "copy".

Hang on -- you're confusing me now. I can't cope with this stress on a Sunday afternoon!

...a clone is exactly the same as the original, a copy isn't.

...very few "clones" seem to be fully equal

[John Willett]

I can't cope with this stress on a Sunday afternoon!

All I was really trying to say was that I am very weary of the word "clone", as it implies that the copy is fully equal to the original - whereas, in most cases, it isn't.

That's all.

[Wonks]

[Hugh Robjohns]

And the Sharks with the frickin lasers....

[Aled Hughes]

Hmmm... that would be a tough call.

A Shure Beta57 can do pretty much everything tolerably well, doesn't need phantom power, and would survive desert island conditions...

This is interesting. You'd take it over dynamics like a Beyer M201 or M88, or a Sennheiser MD421 / 441, for instance? I've never used the Beta57 much, only on a few live gigs, and never given it much consideration... but now I'm intrigued!

[Hugh Robjohns]

The M201 is a fabulous mic indeed,, but I'd be upset by seeing it get scratched and ruined by the sand, and the MD421 is a great mic ruined by a stupid clamp that annoys and frustrates me every time I use it! I just think the 57 (orig or beta) would cope better, and I'd be less upset if it got damaged!

[John Willett]

... the MD421 is a great mic ruined by a stupid clamp that annoys and frustrates me every time I use it!

Actually I LIKE the clamp on the MD 421.

It locks in and holds the mic. safely in any position - if the mic. is hand-held there are no protruding bits. It's a much more elegant solution than having a big fat traditional type of clip that would not hold the mic. safely when pointing downwards (eg: for a saxophone).

It's easy to put on and remove and I like the design very much.

But my mic. body and clip do come from the 1970s (or 80s) and they may have made them better back then.

[twotoedsloth]

I'm really surprised that you like the mount for the MD421.

We have four MD421s and I rarely used them because I would get frustrated with the mount, so I'd go and grab something else, usually a Beta57 (for drums) or a 441 (for trumpet or trombone).

We got some new Rycote mounts, and I've rediscovered the MD421s, I use them on most of my Jazz recordings these days.

Back on point, my must have microphones would probably include an AKG c422, or pairs of DPA 4006s and Neumann TLM 193s.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Actually I LIKE the clamp on the MD 421.

I knew somebody must!

It locks in...

...and most struggle to figure out how to release it!

if the mic. is hand-held there are no protruding bits.

There aren't on any other handheld mic either.

It's a much more elegant solution than having a big fat traditional type of clip...

I get what they were trying to do, but the fact that no other manufacturer adopted a similar idea suggests it wasn't really that elegant or practical...

...that would not hold the mic. safely when pointing downwards (eg: for a saxophone).

I've used lots of other mics on saxophones, and can't think of any that have fallen out of their clip! I take the point in principle, but I've never found it a sufficient problem to make me wish every mic had a 421-style clip! Quite the reverse in fact...

I like the design very much.

That balances my loathing of it nicely, then!

[John Willett]

[
...and most struggle to figure out how to release it!

Really? I'm very surprised ???

The first time I used it (back in the 1970s) I found it very easy to clip in and remove.

Removing is a doddle - press the button with your thumb and slide the mic. up with your fingers.

I got it instinctively the first time I used it and thought it a great idea then.

But - remember - this was invented in the days before Hytrel and mic clips were stiff plastic and did not grip the mic. at all. So - when it was invented - it was actually an excellent way of securely holding a mic.

The original clip for the MD 441 also had a sliding button to hold the mic. in so it would not fall out when pointing down.

When Hytrel came along manufacturers redesigned their clips with Hytrel so they hold the mic. tight at any angle. Shure redesigned all their clips and I do not think that any are now supplied with the hard plastic clip that were supplied when they first came out - horrible clips that did not hold the mic. firmly enough and could scratch the mic. with use.

Nowadays mics come with Hytrel clips - even the MD 441 now has a Hytrel clip. It was only the design of the MD 421 that made a large Hytrel clip a bit unsightly (though I think one is available now).

When it was invented, the 421 clip was actually an excellent idea and certainly worked very well originally - but the original 421 clips were made of metal and were better than the modern ones made of plastic.

[Wonks]

I find it all too easy to knock the clip button on my 421s and the mic fall downwards when they've been set up for miking toms.

[ore_terra]

It looks like there’s a market for NOS or reissue MD421 metal clips

[Wonks]

Or a better locking version.

[twotoedsloth]

The Rycote Invision mount works great with the MD421. In fact, it is probably superior to the stock mount as it is not as prone to vibration and you can use the mount on other microphones if you're not using the 421.