Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: CA14 vs AT853 vs AT943 (comp)  (Read 15093 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Javier Cinakowski

  • !! Downhill From Here !!
  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4325
  • Gender: Male
Re: CA14 vs AT853 vs AT943 (comp)
« Reply #60 on: January 12, 2009, 11:35:20 AM »
That sucks, I almost bought a pair of those when Sound Pro's first put them on sale....
Neumann KM185mp OR DPA ST2015-> Grace Design Lunatec V2-> Tascam DR-100mkIII

nameloc01

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: CA14 vs AT853 vs AT943 (comp)
« Reply #61 on: January 12, 2009, 11:43:09 AM »
That's the only reason I bought them...they got marked down from like $180.00 each to $55.00 each.

Offline sunjan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Gender: Male
  • Taping since 1988, 28 years of fine recordings...
    • Just a handful of stuff I put on etree
Re: CA14 vs AT853 vs AT943 (comp)
« Reply #62 on: January 13, 2009, 04:59:41 PM »
Am I the only one getting confused when reading the last posts?

My understanding until now was that the AT "flat boxes" (AT8531/8532, called "PHANTOM POWER/BATTERY BELT PACK" on the SoundPro site) are lousy.

But the barrel shaped AT8533/8538 ("PHANTOM POWER ADAPTER") are supposed to be just as good as any third party phantom adapters - Samsom PM6, Nady-CBM-40T or the others listed here: http://www.soundprofessionals.com/cgi-bin/gold/category/560


Mics: A-51s LE, CK 930, Line Audo CM3, AT853Rx (hc,c,sc),  ECM 121, ECM 909A
Pres: Tinybox, CA-9100, UA5 wmod
Recorders: M10, H116 (CF mod), H340, NJB3
Gearbag: High Sierra Corkscrew
MD transfers: MZ-RH1. Tape transfers: Nak DR-1
Photo rig: Nikon D70, 18-70mm/3.5-4.5, SB-800

nameloc01

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: CA14 vs AT853 vs AT943 (comp)
« Reply #63 on: January 13, 2009, 06:52:57 PM »
I was referring to the 8532 boxes/belt packs/phantom power modules (they can also be used as an adaptor to an outside phantom source,I have not used them this way yet) ...yes, those specific boxes sound like *crap*. I don't own,nor ever have used the in-line adaptors.
I did say the Nadys sound MUCH,MUCH,MUCH better.
Someone else (Mr.Driver?) have the in-line style? I'm kinda curious about them myself.

Offline mpmks

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 234
  • Gender: Male
Re: CA14 vs AT853 vs AT943 (comp)
« Reply #64 on: January 13, 2009, 08:04:17 PM »
Am I the only one getting confused when reading the last posts?

My understanding until now was that the AT "flat boxes" (AT8531/8532, called "PHANTOM POWER/BATTERY BELT PACK" on the SoundPro site) are lousy.

But the barrel shaped AT8533/8538 ("PHANTOM POWER ADAPTER") are supposed to be just as good as any third party phantom adapters - Samsom PM6, Nady-CBM-40T or the others listed here: http://www.soundprofessionals.com/cgi-bin/gold/category/560


i use my at853 > at8531 > r09 with good results
never a quality issue
but i have seen numerous posts when discussing teh at853 mics that end up
knocking the at8531 battery packs, i have never agreed with any of them based
upon my own results

Offline Sunday Driver

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 312
  • Gender: Male
Re: CA14 vs AT853 vs AT943 (comp)
« Reply #65 on: January 13, 2009, 11:23:41 PM »
Someone else (Mr.Driver?) have the in-line style? I'm kinda curious about them myself.

No, I use the Nady CBM-40T too. There's a picture over at thetradersden.org And in fact, I have no problem with the results I'm getting with them. The tapes sound crisp and clean. The only thing I really need is a preamp, as the PS-2 doesn't cut it when going line in on my Edirol for quieter stuff (I max out typically at -12db). No surprise there though.
You either record it or it's gone forever.
My Tapes

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.057 seconds with 34 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF