Topic: AKG 460 shootout - stock vs JW mods

[alpine85]

I finally had the opportunity to run a direct comparison of modded vs unmodded a couple weeks back (I've had both sets of bodies for a while, but never had 4 identical caps before until picking up a 2nd pair of CK1's recently)

So... here are the details:

Both mic pairs are using CK1 caps (w/ adapter rings), Mogami XLRs, and going into an Oade Concert Mod R-44

Config is 25cm at 90 degrees

DFC, ~16 ft from stage, ~9ft high, one pair mounted ~16 inches in front of the other

8 files total (Four 2-minute clips, somewhat randomly picked, 2 from the 1st set and 2 from the 2nd)

Recorded at 44.1/24-bit, FLACs are the same

Levels matched to within 0.5 dB or so RMS in Sound Forge 9, and 1/2 second fades added (No EQ or any other edits)

http://soundcloud.com/talanwright/sets/2012-05-25-akg460-comp/

NOTE:  SoundCloud encodes MP3 at 128kbps, so just listening to the stream is not going to be a good representation... Please download the 24-bit FLACs

Oh - the show is Steve Kimock at the Ritz Ybor in Tampa 5/25


EDIT: added some more detail (lineage, etc)

[newplanet7]

Thanks for the clips. I will offer my guess.
Mic 1 is brighter and more harsh on the highs. I like mic 2 and think it is the stock 460's.
I used to run 460/a60m/ck1 also. Loved them!!!!!!

[justink]

Thanks for the clips. I will offer my guess.
Mic 1 is brighter and more harsh on the highs. I like mic 2 and think it is the stock 460's.
I used to run 460/a60m/ck1 also. Loved them!!!!!!

i say Mic 1 is brighter and more "lively" on the highs (in a good way).  i like Mic 1 and think it's the jw's.

[cashandkerouac]

my 1st reaction is this: i'd be happy with either the stock or modded versions.  they are both pleasing to my ears.  but something doesn't seem right to me.  mics 1 and 2 do not sound consistently the same in the samples.  however, the voting options indicate that mic 1 is the same in all the samples (and same for mic 2).  voting options aside, this is how my ears hear it:

Sample A (set 1) - mic 1 with mod, mic 2 stock
Sample B (set 1) - mic 1 stock, mic 2 with mod
Sample A (set 2) - mic 1 stock, mic 2 with mod
Sample B (set 2) - mic 1 with mod, mic 2 stock

looking at the sound waves for all the samples, they also indicate that some of the samples are flipped.  kinda weird 

[alpine85]

Thanks for the feedback guys.  I'm not going to offer up any clues or opinions myself until we get some more input from others.

I will say, though, that Mic 1 is definitely the same in all samples (and so is Mic 2)... no trickery going on here.

I'm quite obsessive/compulsive when it comes to this stuff, so unless I really fucked it up somehow, everything should be pretty straightforward.

Also... Not sure what you mean by "samples are flipped" exactly... you mean like "phase-reversed"  Maybe you're zooming in far enough on the waveform that you're seeing the delay between the 2 pairs?  (like i said, they were about 16" apart)

LMK and I'll clarify if I can...

[cashandkerouac]

you've answered my question.  thanks. 

by "flipped" i just meant that i was unsure if mic 1 was always the same mic in all the samples (same with mic 2).  that's why i listed each sample and stated how my ears heard it (mod or no mod).  in some samples, it was mic 1 that sounded like the mod... in other samples it was mic 2 that sounded like the mod.  i think both sound great. many thanks for doing the comp and sharing it with us. 

[acidjack]

2 feels a bit on the brighter side to me. I feel like in a short listening session it is preferable because it seems a bit more "detailed" due to that brightness.  But the slightly more roundness and fatter bass of 1 would make it the better choice for long-term listening.  2 started to fatigue me a bit.

I don't know much about the intent of the mod, but since it costs extra I guess I hope it's 1

[hi and lo]

I'd recommend zipping up the flacs and making them more easily downloadable. I just spent no less than 10 minutes trying to figure out how I was supposed to be able to download these (realized it's the very small down-arrow on the right hand side) and apparently I have to download each one individually.

Will give my thoughts once I listen.

[Gutbucket]

Thread mark to check this out when I get a chance.

[alpine85]

I'd recommend zipping up the flacs and making them more easily downloadable. I just spent no less than 10 minutes trying to figure out how I was supposed to be able to download these (realized it's the very small down-arrow on the right hand side) and apparently I have to download each one individually.

Will give my thoughts once I listen.

Sorry bout that... I should have mentioned that the way to download is via that tiny little "arrow pointing down" button. 

I have zipped the FLACs and I'm uploading to RapidShare now... will post a link in a while

[alpine85]

OK, here's all 8 files zipped:

https://rapidshare.com/files/796361626/samples_flac.zip

[hi and lo]

Woohoo.. you are awesome! Since I only grabbed 4 tracks earlier, I will conveniently grab the rest now.

[alpine85]

I took these 2-minute clips and made new files that switch from source to source every 15 seconds. 

https://rapidshare.com/files/3400715095/samples2_flac.zip

All 4 files follow this pattern:

0:00-0:15 Mic 1
0:15-0:30 Mic 2
0:30-0:45 Mic 1
0:45-1:00 Mic 2
1:00-1:15 Mic 1
1:15-1:30 Mic 2
1:30-1:45 Mic 1
1:45-2:00 Mic 2

I cut and pasted all the sections in Sound Forge using "snap to zero crossings", but on some of the transitions you can still hear slight glitches (and VERY slight level differences) where the sources switch. 

[cashandkerouac]

Alpine:  any more info about the shootout?  inquiring minds want to know.  thanks.   

[Hypnocracy]

Alpine thank you for the second set of Switch files...but for me I'd not bother with the Mod...I don't hear it...

[thekittycatt]

Both mic pairs are using CK1 caps (w/ adapter rings), Mogami XLRs, and going into an Oade Concert Mod R-44

I do not know if this is a fair comp.  I bought an OCM R-44 when they first came out.  Before I bought it I emailed Doug a few times.  I do not remember if Doug told me this or I read it here, but his mods on the R-44 do not put the same pre-amp on all four channels.  With the R-44 being so small, there is not enough room inside on channels 1,2 to put the same pre-amps that are on 3,4.  Someone might want to email Doug to see.

[acidjack]

Both mic pairs are using CK1 caps (w/ adapter rings), Mogami XLRs, and going into an Oade Concert Mod R-44

I do not know if this is a fair comp.  I bought an OCM R-44 when they first came out.  Before I bought it I emailed Doug a few times.  I do not remember if Doug told me this or I read it here, but his mods on the R-44 do not put the same pre-amp on all four channels.  With the R-44 being so small, there is not enough room inside on channels 1,2 to put the same pre-amps that are on 3,4.  Someone might want to email Doug to see.

Really?  I had not heard that before.

Doug's page certainly doesn't say so:

The Roland R44 Concert upgrade rebuilds the mic preamps using high speed, low noise and very low distortion op amps that dramatically improve fine detail and clarity. Components are selected by ear to optimize detail and imaging for recording amplified music. Improvements are also made to reduce the audible digital noise that contaminates the analog signal path with noise generated by the display.

[Todd R]

I can't recall specifically, but when I got my R44 Oade-modded, Doug included a page saying something on the order of what kitty said -- something that due to X (board layout maybe?) that though all 4 channels were modded, it was best to use channels 3-4 (maybe 1-2, can't recall) for lower level signals (e.g., mic in directly) and channels 1-2 for higher level signals like line-in from a soundboard or external mic preamp.

Sorry, not much help, I can't really recall the specifics much, but I think kittycatt is right. Best to contact Doug for details.

Acidjack -- did you buy your R44 used, or did you get it new from Doug?  Curious whether he is still providing this information to the latest folks getting mods.

[acidjack]

I can't recall specifically, but when I got my R44 Oade-modded, Doug included a page saying something on the order of what kitty said -- something that due to X (board layout maybe?) that though all 4 channels were modded, it was best to use channels 3-4 (maybe 1-2, can't recall) for lower level signals (e.g., mic in directly) and channels 1-2 for higher level signals like line-in from a soundboard or external mic preamp.

Sorry, not much help, I can't really recall the specifics much, but I think kittycatt is right. Best to contact Doug for details.

Acidjack -- did you buy your R44 used, or did you get it new from Doug?  Curious whether he is still providing this information to the latest folks getting mods.

I actually bought my R-44 new but not from Doug and had it modded after the fact.  I don't recall him giving me much if any info on the mod.

[cashandkerouac]

I can't recall specifically, but when I got my R44 Oade-modded, Doug included a page saying something on the order of what kitty said -- something that due to X (board layout maybe?) that though all 4 channels were modded, it was best to use channels 3-4 (maybe 1-2, can't recall) for lower level signals (e.g., mic in directly) and channels 1-2 for higher level signals like line-in from a soundboard or external mic preamp.

Sorry, not much help, I can't really recall the specifics much, but I think kittycatt is right. Best to contact Doug for details.

Acidjack -- did you buy your R44 used, or did you get it new from Doug?  Curious whether he is still providing this information to the latest folks getting mods.

I actually bought my R-44 new but not from Doug and had it modded after the fact.  I don't recall him giving me much if any info on the mod.

I bought my OCM R-44 directly from Doug and received no info saying the mod was different on any of the 4 channels.  I'm sure someone is going to email Doug to get clarification.  If not, I'll be happy to do so.

Regardless of the R-44 variable in this mic shoot out, the mics sound pretty darn close to my ears.  I'd be happy with either set of mics.

[acidjack]

I can't recall specifically, but when I got my R44 Oade-modded, Doug included a page saying something on the order of what kitty said -- something that due to X (board layout maybe?) that though all 4 channels were modded, it was best to use channels 3-4 (maybe 1-2, can't recall) for lower level signals (e.g., mic in directly) and channels 1-2 for higher level signals like line-in from a soundboard or external mic preamp.

Sorry, not much help, I can't really recall the specifics much, but I think kittycatt is right. Best to contact Doug for details.

Acidjack -- did you buy your R44 used, or did you get it new from Doug?  Curious whether he is still providing this information to the latest folks getting mods.

I actually bought my R-44 new but not from Doug and had it modded after the fact.  I don't recall him giving me much if any info on the mod.

I bought my OCM R-44 directly from Doug and received no info saying the mod was different on any of the 4 channels.  I'm sure someone is going to email Doug to get clarification.  If not, I'll be happy to do so.

Regardless of the R-44 variable in this mic shoot out, the mics sound pretty darn close to my ears.  I'd be happy with either set of mics.

Agree, but don't you think one set sounds a hair brighter?  Am I hearing things?

FWIW Doug's mod generally, according to him, brightens the sound a bit. 

[cashandkerouac]

I can't recall specifically, but when I got my R44 Oade-modded, Doug included a page saying something on the order of what kitty said -- something that due to X (board layout maybe?) that though all 4 channels were modded, it was best to use channels 3-4 (maybe 1-2, can't recall) for lower level signals (e.g., mic in directly) and channels 1-2 for higher level signals like line-in from a soundboard or external mic preamp.

Sorry, not much help, I can't really recall the specifics much, but I think kittycatt is right. Best to contact Doug for details.

Acidjack -- did you buy your R44 used, or did you get it new from Doug?  Curious whether he is still providing this information to the latest folks getting mods.

I actually bought my R-44 new but not from Doug and had it modded after the fact.  I don't recall him giving me much if any info on the mod.

I bought my OCM R-44 directly from Doug and received no info saying the mod was different on any of the 4 channels.  I'm sure someone is going to email Doug to get clarification.  If not, I'll be happy to do so.

Regardless of the R-44 variable in this mic shoot out, the mics sound pretty darn close to my ears.  I'd be happy with either set of mics.

Agree, but don't you think one set sounds a hair brighter?  Am I hearing things?

FWIW Doug's mod generally, according to him, brightens the sound a bit.

when the files were originally posted i thought i could hear some additional brightness in some samples versus the others.  when the samples were re-posted so that mic 1 and mic 2 switched every 15 seconds it became much harder to discern any difference.  and if there is a noticeable different it is very slight at best.  after almost 30 years of going to rock concerts i'm sure my ears aren't as good as they used to be. 

[newplanet7]

ok. It's been 12 days, what are the results?

EDIT: I also thought there was more of a difference in the first round of files.
The second, not really.

[Todd R]

I bought my OCM R-44 directly from Doug and received no info saying the mod was different on any of the 4 channels.  I'm sure someone is going to email Doug to get clarification.  If not, I'll be happy to do so.

Regardless of the R-44 variable in this mic shoot out, the mics sound pretty darn close to my ears.  I'd be happy with either set of mics.

To be clear, Doug did not say there was any difference in the mod, what I received with my mod indicated that the performance of the R44 was better in 2 of the channels (performance probably in terms of noise, though the note did not specify or I'm not remembering).  The mod was the same on all 4 channels, and the difference in performance if I understood it correctly at the time, would be the same whether the R44 was modded or not.  As I said above, I thought it had to do with the layout of the circuit board, allowing slightly more noise in one pair of channels than the other.

Referencing this might jog Doug's memory, but as far as I know the mod is the same in both sets of channels, so if you ask whether he used a different mod on the different channel pairs, my guess is he would say no.

[Gutbucket]

Doug did not say there was any difference in the mod, what I received with my mod indicated that the performance of the R44 was better in 2 of the channels (performance probably in terms of noise, though the note did not specify or I'm not remembering).  The mod was the same on all 4 channels, and the difference in performance if I understood it correctly at the time, would be the same whether the R44 was modded or not.  As I said above, I thought it had to do with the layout of the circuit board, allowing slightly more noise in one pair of channels than the other.

Though memory fades, and Doug didn't mention it when I bought mine, that was my understanding as well.  In use i've never noticed a difference between the channels of my OCM R44, but then I've never gone out of my way to look for one either.  Might have to do with the screen being closer to some circuitry or something, but that's just speculation.

I prefered mic 2 in the 15 sec switching file sets, and agree that the differences seemed a good bit more subtle than when listening to the individual files a week previous.  In the 15 sec sets, neither seemed as bright as I remember on pair being previously. Back then I prefered the 'less bright' sounding files, which also seemed to have cleaner low mids and better controlled bass.. now I'm unsure which pair that actually was and half-wonder if I'm mixing them up or changed preference!  I'll relisten to the originals tonight maybe.  The thought in my mind at at the time was that the less bright version addressed what I sometimes hear as an accentuated resonance in the high end of some AKGs.  Could be me propagandizing myself. The most telling thing here may be the subjectiveness of hearing subtle differences in the swtich comps files and more substantial ones in the the unswitched files!

[edit- FWIW I went back to listen again and prefer mic 2 in all samples- smoother highs, cleaner mids, more controlled bass.. whatever all that means]

[alpine85]

Thanks for all the feedback, guys! This thread has definitely taken an interesting turn...

I will email Doug and ask him about the R-44 thing... I bought my mod directly from him (2 years ago, I think?) and don't recall him saying anything about differences between 1/2 and 3/4.  IIRC, he didn't send any info or anything at all except the manual and original packaging.

As far as the results go, I don't want to say anything yet.  I'd like to get a few more votes and/or comments in from "blind" testers before I spill the beans.  In fact, I'm going to post something in the AKG team thread in case anyone over there hasn't seen this yet.   I should have done that in the first place.  I also should have added 2 more options to the poll:   "I like A, but have no idea if it's the mod" and "I like B, but have no idea..."   

I guess I was originally targeting this towards people who were either users of these mics or very familiar with their sound, and thought folks might have fun guessing.

I will say this...

The comps have sort of reinforced my preconceptions I had, but to a much lesser extent than what I thought would happen.   If that makes any sense at all ; )

I had a quote somewhere from Jim Williams, explaining exactly what he thought he had accomplished with the mod sound-wise, but I can't seem to find it in my files anywhere. 

Of course, he's no longer doing mic mods, but I did find this from a Wayback machine search of his web site:

AUDIO UPGRADES PRICE LIST:
typical modifications include replace op-amps, E.Q. caps, coupling caps, direct-couple audio path, install feedback caps and more.
(snip)
AKG 460B $175.00

The stock has a transformer, the mod does not.

[alpine85]

Oh - and like a lot of you guys, I was really surprised at how similar they sounded, ESPECIALLY on the 15-second "switch" files

[acidjack]

Oh - and like a lot of you guys, I was really surprised at how similar they sounded, ESPECIALLY on the 15-second "switch" files

I'm not surprised that the differences are subtle - a lot of the differences folks seem to prize in gear are.  Especially when you're talking about recording a PA system, I think it's harder to spot differences in fairly similar items.

[hi and lo]

One thing that's not subtle... the price JW was charging for the mod!

[cashandkerouac]

after hearing the 15 second back to back samples i've lost interest in knowing which is the stock mic and which is the modded mic.  the mics sound so similar, it doesn't really matter which one is modded.  the mod seems like a lot of money for for not a lot of benefit (if any).  i think you should just spill the beans.  it's been 2 weeks.   

[spyder9]

after hearing the 15 second back to back samples i've lost interest in knowing which is the stock mic and which is the modded mic.  the mics sound so similar, it doesn't really matter which one is modded.  the mod seems like a lot of money for for not a lot of benefit (if any).  i think you should just spill the beans.  it's been 2 weeks.   

I can't agree with you Trent.  ck1's cannibalize the bodies when it comes to sound.  You probably won't hear the difference.  ck1's are amazingly underrated caps.
 

That said, check out this shootout done by Matt (thegreatgumbino) from 6 years ago.   He used ck61 & ck63 caps.   There is definitely a difference between a modded and unmodded 460 bodies.  And 480's for that matter.

http://archive.org/details/akg_480-460-JW460_comparison

original TS threads on the comp

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=52183.msg679735#msg679735

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=48167.0



Tim, please upload your comp to LMA like Matt did.  It would be great for future reference, since your's are with the ck1's.  Greatly appreciate your time for doing this comp. 

[alpine85]

I emailed Doug Oade and got this reply:

Hi Tim, some of that is possibly a hold over from the original Edirol 4 channel box, the R4*. In the R44, there is a tiny bit of digital display noise that is a bit stronger in channels 1&2 than in 3&4 but it's not significant or even audible with high output mics recording a PA system. There is no doubt in my  mind the test is a valid one and the results will be the same were you to switch the channels used for the mic comparison.
BTW, thanks for the positive feedback !
I hope this helps....Doug

.

* here is that info on the R4:
Due to the circuit board layout the R4 Concert upgrade is optimized for microphones on channels 3 and 4 while 1 and 2 are tweaked for a line level (recording console or soundboard) source or a secondary mic pair (4 mic mix). A 4 microphone recording works best with the primary coincident directional mic pair( i.e. 90° X-Y hypercardioids) on channels 3 and 4 with a secondary or flanking pair of omnidirectional mics on channels 1 and 2. 4 directional mic mixes are not recommended. 3 microphone mixes should use channels 3 and 4 as a primary pair and channel 1 or 2 as the center mic. The use of an omni center channel, aligned with the coincident primary pair typically produces the best results for 3 mic mixes.

So there ya go!  Sounds like there was an issue with the inputs being different on the R-4, but on the R-44 it's negligible. 

I'm thinking if there was any unfairness to this comp, it may have been one of these factors:

1) The 16" distance between the mic pairs.   I'm starting to think the "rear" mics picked up slightly more of the PA and room sound and may have actually benefited from that

2) The "within ~0.5 dB" difference in levels.  I thought that would be a close enough tolerance, but now I'm wondering if that's just enough level difference to give a perceptible boost to one over the other, and we all know that louder is better when it comes to comps, right?

[alpine85]

after hearing the 15 second back to back samples i've lost interest in knowing which is the stock mic and which is the modded mic.  the mics sound so similar, it doesn't really matter which one is modded.  the mod seems like a lot of money for for not a lot of benefit (if any).  i think you should just spill the beans.  it's been 2 weeks.   

I can't agree with you Trent.  ck1's cannibalize the bodies when it comes to sound.  You probably won't hear the difference.  ck1's are amazingly underrated caps.
 

That said, check out this shootout done by Matt (thegreatgumbino) from 6 years ago.   He used ck61 & ck63 caps.   There is definitely a difference between a modded and unmodded 460 bodies.  And 480's for that matter.

http://archive.org/details/akg_480-460-JW460_comparison

original TS threads on the comp

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=52183.msg679735#msg679735

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=48167.0



Tim, please upload your comp to LMA like Matt did.  It would be great for future reference, since your's are with the ck1's.  Greatly appreciate your time for doing this comp.

Thanks Dan.  Interesting thoughts on the CK1 caps!

I checked out that comp by thegreatgumbino with great interest back when I was starting out in "Team AKG".   It's useful to a point, but I was never really able to draw any conclusions from it... maybe because it's recording a studio track on a home stereo.  I dunno...  all I know is that personally I learned more by just listening to shows on LMA. 

Good idea about uploading to LMA!

[alpine85]

Speaking of comps and hypers...

Does anyone remember the AKG/Gefell hypercard comp that was done a few years back?  It was from a YMSB show. 

I listened to those on a few different systems, took some notes, etc, but I don't remember the results ever being posted.

Anyone know if they were?

[Gutbucket]

I emailed Doug Oade and got this reply:

[snip] A 4 microphone recording works best with the primary coincident directional mic pair( i.e. 90° X-Y hypercardioids) on channels 3 and 4 with a secondary or flanking pair of omnidirectional mics on channels 1 and 2. 4 directional mic mixes are not recommended. 3 microphone mixes should use channels 3 and 4 as a primary pair and channel 1 or 2 as the center mic. The use of an omni center channel, aligned with the coincident primary pair typically produces the best results for 3 mic mixes.

OT, but I totally agree with Doug there!  Should've been included in the recent 4 channels? thread discussing 3 & 4 channel setups.  Maybe I should re-post that quote over there.

[cashandkerouac]

after hearing the 15 second back to back samples i've lost interest in knowing which is the stock mic and which is the modded mic.  the mics sound so similar, it doesn't really matter which one is modded.  the mod seems like a lot of money for for not a lot of benefit (if any).  i think you should just spill the beans.  it's been 2 weeks.   

I can't agree with you Trent.  ck1's cannibalize the bodies when it comes to sound.  You probably won't hear the difference.  ck1's are amazingly underrated caps.
 

That said, check out this shootout done by Matt (thegreatgumbino) from 6 years ago.   He used ck61 & ck63 caps.   There is definitely a difference between a modded and unmodded 460 bodies.  And 480's for that matter.

http://archive.org/details/akg_480-460-JW460_comparison

original TS threads on the comp

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=52183.msg679735#msg679735

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=48167.0



Tim, please upload your comp to LMA like Matt did.  It would be great for future reference, since your's are with the ck1's.  Greatly appreciate your time for doing this comp.

many thanks for the info.  i'd be curious to check out that comparison with the ck61 & ck63 caps. 

and i actually am interested to know the results of this current 460 shootout.  i'm just not on the edge of my seat after hearing the 15-second back-to-back clips.  when alpine decides to let us know the results i'll be back to read about it.  thanks.   

[Todd R]

Speaking of comps and hypers...

Does anyone remember the AKG/Gefell hypercard comp that was done a few years back?  It was from a YMSB show. 

I listened to those on a few different systems, took some notes, etc, but I don't remember the results ever being posted.

Anyone know if they were?

I think that was my comp you're talking about.  I'm pretty sure I at least replied privately to folks that posted their impressions or pm'd me (I usually do), but don't know that I publicly revealed the results.  I'd have to check on my home computer whether I have any info left on that comp.

[alpine85]

Speaking of comps and hypers...

Does anyone remember the AKG/Gefell hypercard comp that was done a few years back?  It was from a YMSB show. 

I listened to those on a few different systems, took some notes, etc, but I don't remember the results ever being posted.

Anyone know if they were?

I think that was my comp you're talking about.  I'm pretty sure I at least replied privately to folks that posted their impressions or pm'd me (I usually do), but don't know that I publicly revealed the results.  I'd have to check on my home computer whether I have any info left on that comp.

Cool... thanks Todd!  If you can find those results I'd love to see 'em.  I'll search for my notes too.

[cashandkerouac]

it's been more than a month since this shootout was posted.  sure would be nice to see some discussion about the results.

[newplanet7]

ck1's are amazingly underrated caps.

Paired with the a60m/460's  these are one of my favorite card mics.

That said, check out this shootout done by Matt (thegreatgumbino) from 6 years ago.   He used ck61 & ck63 caps.   There is definitely a difference between a modded and unmodded 460 bodies.  And 480's for that matter.
http://archive.org/details/akg_480-460-JW460_comparison

There IS/WAS also  comp done on tapers.org that was just like this.
Anyone know if it's the same one? I haven't visited that site in forever though.

it's been more than a month since this shootout was posted.  sure would be nice to see some discussion about the results.

I agree. SPILL IT HOMESLICE!!! 

[Gutbucket]

good thing I posted, I've forgotten which i prefered and needed reminding!

[alpine85]

OK fellas...

Spoiler alert:  if you haven't listened or voted yet, stop reading now...

(scroll down)

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

(keep scrolling)

|

|

|

|

|

Mic 1 is the JW Mod 460

Mic 2 is the Stock 460


discuss...

[newplanet7]

OK fellas...
Mic 1 is the JW Mod 460

Mic 2 is the Stock 460
discuss...

++++++++++

Thanks for the clips. I will offer my guess.
Mic 1 is brighter and more harsh on the highs. I like mic 2 and think it is the stock 460's.
I used to run 460/a60m/ck1 also. Loved them!!!!!!

Word to the mutha effin' herd!!!!!!!!!!
Kinda proud of myself. Ran the 460/a60m/ck1's for 3+yrs.

[cashandkerouac]

this was a tough one to figure out.  i was totally stumped and like the sound of the stock and modded 460.  both recordings sound very similar to my ears.  as stated by someone else (spyder i believe), there may have been a more noticable contrast between mod and stock 460 using different caps, but with the CK1 caps i didn't hear much of a difference.   

[alpine85]

Word to the mutha effin' herd!!!!!!!!!!
Kinda proud of myself. Ran the 460/a60m/ck1's for 3+yrs.

Ha!  Good ears!  I guess that sound from that combo made quite an impression  : )

Thanks for the clips. I will offer my guess.
Mic 1 is brighter and more harsh on the highs.  I like mic 2 and think it is the stock 460's.

I was really impressed by the sound of the Stock 460s in this comp.   Like I said before, it was really surprising how similar they sounded.  I really expected there to be more of a dramatic difference.   Interesting that the majority preferred #2 AND the majority also thought #2 was the mod!

I still prefer the mods, not necessarily based on this test, but based on a LOT of listening to shows on the Archive before I decided to do the mod, and based on my experience with both versions since.

Overall, I would describe the 2 this way: 

MODS: 
PROS: Slightly more detail and transparency (if you listen closely you can hear this in the decay in cymbals & toms,  punchier bass, pluck of strings, and just in the overall "air")
CONS:  Can sound overly bright sometimes, slight harshness in mids & highs, especially on certain playback systems


STOCK:
PROS:  Nice overall tone, silky smoothness and nice fat, round bass, while still providing a nice amount of detail.  A slightly colored sound, but in a good way
CONS:  Not quite as much detail  (example: cymbals can sound kind of "squishy", bass can sound a little loose and boomy)

Overall, to oversimplify I would say the stock 460s have more of a "classic" sound (probably due to the transformer mostly?), while the mods have more of a "modern" transparent sound.  YMMV, of course (and obviously it does!)

Here are a few things I took away from this comp:

- The playback system made a big difference when comparing these mics.  When I listened on my near field monitors (Alesis Monitor One Mk2 - very detailed & bright sounding), I actually preferred the Stock, mostly just based on the overall tone (some unpleasant harshness in the modded ones, while the stock sounded real smooth).  When I listened with the diffuse-field headphones (AKG 240DF) or on my main playback system (Yamaha integrated amp w/ PSB Speakers) which are a bit mellower and have MUCH better imaging, I preferred the Mods.  (side note:  Aside from just subjective personal preferences, I'm thinking maybe that's why some people describe the highs in the Mods as "harsh" or "brittle", while others describe them as "detailed" or "lively")

- The Oade R-44 might be a better match for less bright sounding mics.   I had never heard until now that the Oade mod might add some brightness - I've always thought it was just designed to add transparency and detail, and lower the noise, but some of you have suggested that there is a brightness factor as well.   I had never really considered this, because I've always been pretty happy with my OCM R-44 recordings,  but it might be a factor and may be why the Mods had some extra brightness and why so many preferred the Stock.  Something to think about.   It would be interesting to see this comp repeated with a stock R-44 or 744 or something.

I used to run 460/a60m/ck1 also. Loved them!!!!!!

I remember listening to a LOT of your 460/ck1 recordings... they definitely helped sway me when I made the decision to go the AKG route. 

[F.O.Bean]

So, the MAJORITY preferred the stock 460's, ehh? Crazy. I always thought the modded 460s were a tad too bright!

[newplanet7]

I used to run 460/a60m/ck1 also. Loved them!!!!!!

I remember listening to a LOT of your 460/ck1 recordings... they definitely helped sway me when I made the decision to go the AKG route.

Thanks brother! I think I had maybe one subpar tape from those mics.
The fact that you can still get a set of these for semi-cheap is a bonus.
Once agin, appreciate the kind words.