Topic: Shure MX-183/184/185, alternative to AT853. Are they any better?

[poorlyconditioned]

Is anyone out there using Shure MX-183 (omni), 185 (card), 184 (supercard) mics?  These seem like good stealth mics, an alternative to AT853 or similar.  They are approx. the same size, about 12mm in diameter.  Note that Shure appears to make the same units as both lav. and overhead (choir) mics (with a gooseneck mount).

The prices are comparable to AT853, but the interesting thing is you can buy them without the power module for around $100 each (the "wireless verson, with a 4' cable and TA4F mini XLR connector), which is pretty nice.  Then you can build your own battery box.  Capsules are approx $50 each.

Oh yeah, the SNR on the Omnis seems to be alot better than the cards for some reason.  Something like 74dB compared to 66/67dB for the card/supercards.  I'm not sure why.

Finally, I believe Soundprofessionals are selling these, although they don't say the exact model #.

  Richard

[MaggiesBrother]

I've used the MX-185 with phantom power and found them to be very, very good, better then the SP CMC-8.  In fact, the only reason I don't use them anymore is that I upgraded to DPA 4022.  But I was very happy with the shows I did with them.

[spyder9]

The AT853RX (30-20K) have a better frequency response than the Shures (50-17k) and a way better SPL max.  Most important, you can get the AT853RX on eBay for $159 a piece as opposed to $219 for the Shure on other sites.  Below is the pdf files on both mics. 

AT853RX

http://www.audio-technica.com/prodpro/addinfo/AT853Rx.pdf

Shure MX-183x

http://www.shure.com/pdf/specsheets/spec_microflex/mx183_mx184_mx185.pdf     


Hope this helps.

[thierryhenry]

I've used the MX-185 with phantom power and found them to be very, very good, better then the SP CMC-8.  In fact, the only reason I don't use them anymore is that I upgraded to DPA 4022.  But I was very happy with the shows I did with them.

Good to know, thanks.

[ashevillain]

Edit: Audix is now making mics like these too: .pdf files attached

The ADX40 has similar specs to the AT853...

[leegeddy]

Edit: Audix is now making mics like these too: .pdf files attached

The ADX40 has similar specs to the AT853...

very cool. the ADX40 looks promising for stealth situatations.

marc

[thierryhenry]

Indeed it does, do you think it would cost a little more since Audix is manufacturing it?

[johnw]

I would consider dynamic range. The AT does 30-20K, the Audix does 40-20 and the Shure does 50-17K. Seems like the AT would be the winner on paper. Not saying they sound better, but 50-17 is pretty skimpy.

[noahbickart]

I would consider dynamic range. The AT does 30-20K, the Audix does 40-20 and the Shure does 50-17K. Seems like the AT would be the winner on paper. Not saying they sound better, but 50-17 is pretty skimpy.

That would be *Frequency response,* not dynamic range. Dynamic range is measured in db and represents the range between the loudest and softest signal.

-Noah

[thierryhenry]

They sound like solid mics still.

[John Kelly]

I would consider dynamic range. The AT does 30-20K, the Audix does 40-20 and the Shure does 50-17K. Seems like the AT would be the winner on paper. Not saying they sound better, but 50-17 is pretty skimpy.

I have no problem with my 1290s that range from 40-20k. 

[Steelcorner27]

As owner of Audix m1290's and AT853's I'm here to tell you that it is not even close The Audix are in a whole other class from the AT's it is not unlike when I made the jump from CSB's to 4061's  everything is cleaner high's lows you name it. As for the ADX20's i just picked up a set of those also yet to try them but Ill giv a review soon. As to the 20hz-20khz vs 40hz-20khz that is not something to even worry about in my opinion everything below 40hz is unwanted anyway.
Brad

[dklein]

The AT does 30-20K, the Audix does 40-20 and the Shure does 50-17K. Seems like the AT would be the winner on paper. Not saying they sound better, but 50-17 is pretty skimpy.

I would actually consider these differences totally insignificant (and we're missing the tolerance spec on those freq responses).

[leegeddy]

As owner of Audix m1290's and AT853's I'm here to tell you that it is not even close The Audix are in a whole other class from the AT's it is not unlike when I made the jump from CSB's to 4061's  everything is cleaner high's lows you name it. As for the ADX20's i just picked up a set of those also yet to try them but Ill giv a review soon. As to the 20hz-20khz vs 40hz-20khz that is not something to even worry about in my opinion everything below 40hz is unwanted anyway.
Brad

brad;

i've heard quite a few recordings made with the Audix m1290. while they are good mics for their price and performance, i would say that your perception of "whole other class" is far stretched and over hyped.  then again, i have no idea what your listening environment is, so i'll reserve my judgements. 

no offense to Audix users, but i gotta stick up for Team AT here.

marc

[John Kelly]

As owner of Audix m1290's and AT853's I'm here to tell you that it is not even close The Audix are in a whole other class from the AT's it is not unlike when I made the jump from CSB's to 4061's  everything is cleaner high's lows you name it. As for the ADX20's i just picked up a set of those also yet to try them but Ill giv a review soon. As to the 20hz-20khz vs 40hz-20khz that is not something to even worry about in my opinion everything below 40hz is unwanted anyway.
Brad

brad;

i've heard quite a few recordings made with the Audix m1290. while they are good mics for their price and performance, i would say that your perception of "whole other class" is far stretched and over hyped.  then again, i have no idea what your listening environment is, so i'll reserve my judgements. 

no offense to Audix users, but i gotta stick up for Team AT here.

marc

None taken.   I think Team AT is a fine team, and in fact I used to be on it.  However I do think the m1290s are a step above the 853s.  Maybe not a giant leap, but at least a step.