Topic: Which Do You Prefer And Why?

[TNJazz]

So I ran a little mic comp this evening.  Totally unscientific, in that I didn't do anything to the files except dither with MBIT+.  So there may be volume discrepancies, slight angle variation, etc.

Both mics were running subcard patterns.  Both mics were run into the same preamp.  Both mics went through the same A/D converters.  Both were running approximately the same pattern (DIN-ish) and one set was about 3 inches above the other and about 3 inches forward.

Which of these two do you prefer, and why?

Mics to be named later...

Click on the following link to download the file --->   http://www.bigpurpledog.com/audio/subs_comp.zip

[stantheman1976]

I like #1 best.  #2 is a little too bright for me.  #1 has a good overall range and feels more comfortable to listen to.

[boojum]

Dirk, I can express a preference, but cannot offer an opinion over which is the better mic.  #1 has a tilt toward the bottom end and #2 a tilt toward the top end.  I found #1 a little dark and #2 a little bright.  #1 lacked the highs; #2 lacked the lows.  I ran them through foobar2000's ABX comparator so the volumes were set equal.

Cheers

[TNJazz]

81 views and only 3 votes??

 

[JD]

I find sample two to be too bright.

Sample one sounds fuller, but could use a little more in the highs.

Between the two I prefer sample one.

[Mike R.]

number 2 is much brighter than 1 that's the immediate reaction.  Switching back and forth the high hat is either more lively or way too much sizzle.  With a little more listening, I think 1 is more natural.

a spectrum analysis was interesting...

[TNJazz]

a spectrum analysis was interesting...

Any chance you could post that?  I'd love to see it.

Thanks!

[grtphl]

#1 has a tilt toward the bottom end and #2 a tilt toward the top end.  I found #1 a little dark and #2 a little bright.  #1 lacked the highs; #2 lacked the lows. 

Edit: I'd listen to #2, EQ some of the higher frequencies down a bit, and turn up the volume a notch.

[Craig T]

agreed.  I didn't really like either.  I'd probably like 2 if it had a bit more weight in the low end.  It just sounded too thin, especially compared to the overly bloated low end of 1.  listen for the cymbal decay - nonexistant on 1, sizzles on 2. 

#1 has a tilt toward the bottom end and #2 a tilt toward the top end.  I found #1 a little dark and #2 a little bright.  #1 lacked the highs; #2 lacked the lows. 

[reba_103194]

#2 is very bright but was an easy decision for me once I did some EQ with my playback system.  Ideally I would like a recording which split the difference between the 2 sources.  #1 is just too muffled for my taste.

[boojum]

Is there a chance these are the same mics?

And if I had both tracks on my machine I would mix the two as the previous poster has suggested.

[TNJazz]

No, they are not the same mics.  I've just found out there may be a problem with the mic pair used in sample 2 though, so this little comp is null and void.

For those of you who are interested:

sample 1 is Neumann U89i
sample 2 is JZ BT-201

Both were run into an AETA Mix2000, then into an Oade CM R44.

[reba_103194]

Which pickup pattern was used for the u89's?

[boojum]

No, they are not the same mics.  I've just found out there may be a problem with the mic pair used in sample 2 though, so this little comp is null and void.

For those of you who are interested:

sample 1 is Neumann U89i
sample 2 is JZ BT-201

Both were run into an AETA Mix2000, then into an Oade CM R44.

Dirk, I am happy to hear that the comp was not a good one.  I heard your JZ's in an earlier pull and they sounded pretty darned good.  They sure did not in this one, though.  Try it again, eh.

[TNJazz]

Which pickup pattern was used for the u89's?

subcards were used for both mic sets.  In hindsight, due to the sound that night and the room I should probably have gone with cards.

[BitRater]

Both are very good mics.

Sample One sounds very natural - as you listen, you can picture yourself actually sitting close to the stage in a smoky bar. In other words, this mic replicates natural ambience perfectly. A live band should sound as 'live' in a recording as it does in real life, anyway. If I were doing the engineering for a live album, this is the mic I would use.

Sample Two is very bright, although it somehow sounds (to my tin ears anyway) cleaner. This would be a good mic to use if recording in a studio, with EQ used to tame the highs a bit and clean up the midrange. The only downside with this mic is that vocals aren't articulated as clearly as with mic one.

If I only had one mic to choose from, I'd go with number one.

Anyway, I'm not a professional engineer, don't play one on TV either and that's my take on things.