Topic: Recommendations for replacing Beyer MC930s?

[datbrad]

Chiming in on the KM184 debate.

I'd suggest that possibly the statement that got some folks churned up is 'new KM-184s sound like ass'.

OK, beauty is in the ear of the beholder and everyone is entitled to their opinion, but let's face it, KM184s have their own character and flavor which appeals to alot of people because they're very popular mics...so to those people they don't sound like ass.

Secondly, I think that the reason you see a fair number of 184s for sale used is that there are lots of 184s in the marketplace, just as there are lots of 460/480s out there.  But seeing used mics for sale is hardly proof that they're not good sounding mics. 

In fact, I was the person that recommended KM184s as an option to consider to the OP and I stand by that recommendation.  I think they're fantastic sounding mics...but I respect if someone else doesn't.  That doesn't make them wrong and me right, or vice versa!

The bottom line is that, as always, posts like this generate different opinions for the OP to consider and the best thing is to take those opinions as input for reasearching the archive so taht they can come up with their own preferences.

Steve, I have to say that considering the fact that Phil runs a professional recording studio in Nashville that uses all sorts of mics in a controlled studio setting on a daily basis, he would have a very informed opinion of various mic brands/models. Unlike tapers like us that usually champion one particular brand/model because that is the only pair of mics in our arsenal at any given point in time, Phil has an extensive mic locker that covers a big range of mic brands and models we all know and use, so he is naturally going to fluff a mic, or be critical of one, based on objective positions. There is nothing like a completely objective opinion to ruffle some feathers, that is for sure.

This is not the first time I have heard of a studio recording professional voicing an opinion that branded mics carrying the same model number don't sound the same as representative units made during another era in their total production history. As a long time AKG user, I understand that the earliest versions of AKG 414s used the same diaphragm as the C12, and subsequent models made under the 414 model number did not and did not sound as good. There was also talk of there being differences between all AKG mics made before and after Harmon bought them out. Lets not even get started on the 460/JW460/480 debate, but you see where I am going.

As far as Neumann, I know that the KM84 has transformers, and the 184 does not, and that is the primary difference between the sound of the two. Also, I have heard that the earlier 184s used all FET chips, and the newer versions have some bipolar transistors in the preamp path, and that might explain differences in sound between old and new 184s, but this was just something I heard and cannot confirm.

So a couple of dudes get offended by Phil's comment, but how about these nuggets from the same thread that none of my fellow AKG users felt a need to respond to:

AKG483/463 sound like they've got more detail, but listen closely (distortion) before making the jump.  I still prefer the Beyerdynamic if given the choice.

And:

I like detail too, but I'm pretty sensitive to "edginess", which *may* be due to distortion.  I don't know.  Anyway, I would rate the AKG 460/480 and the Geffel as both being "detailed", but I find the AKG a little edgy compared to the Geffel.

[stevetoney]

Steve, I have to say that considering the fact that Phil runs a professional recording studio in Nashville that uses all sorts of mics in a controlled studio setting on a daily basis, he would have a very informed opinion of various mic brands/models.

I really don't care if Phil's opinion on KM-184s was sent from God in a message of the burning bush...I still like the sound of Neumann KM184s!    

Phil's qualifications (or Gods) has no bearing on what satisfies me and my taste in sound!  That's why I suggested to the OP that he should listen to all suggestions and make up his own mind...and not necessarily dismiss KM184's automatically as sounding like ass!

[illconditioned]

Chiming in on the KM184 debate.

I'd suggest that possibly the statement that got some folks churned up is 'new KM-184s sound like ass'.

OK, beauty is in the ear of the beholder and everyone is entitled to their opinion, but let's face it, KM184s have their own character and flavor which appeals to alot of people because they're very popular mics...so to those people they don't sound like ass.

Secondly, I think that the reason you see a fair number of 184s for sale used is that there are lots of 184s in the marketplace, just as there are lots of 460/480s out there.  But seeing used mics for sale is hardly proof that they're not good sounding mics. 

In fact, I was the person that recommended KM184s as an option to consider to the OP and I stand by that recommendation.  I think they're fantastic sounding mics...but I respect if someone else doesn't.  That doesn't make them wrong and me right, or vice versa!

The bottom line is that, as always, posts like this generate different opinions for the OP to consider and the best thing is to take those opinions as input for reasearching the archive so taht they can come up with their own preferences.

Steve, I have to say that considering the fact that Phil runs a professional recording studio in Nashville that uses all sorts of mics in a controlled studio setting on a daily basis, he would have a very informed opinion of various mic brands/models. Unlike tapers like us that usually champion one particular brand/model because that is the only pair of mics in our arsenal at any given point in time, Phil has an extensive mic locker that covers a big range of mic brands and models we all know and use, so he is naturally going to fluff a mic, or be critical of one, based on objective positions. There is nothing like a completely objective opinion to ruffle some feathers, that is for sure.

This is not the first time I have heard of a studio recording professional voicing an opinion that branded mics carrying the same model number don't sound the same as representative units made during another era in their total production history. As a long time AKG user, I understand that the earliest versions of AKG 414s used the same diaphragm as the C12, and subsequent models made under the 414 model number did not and did not sound as good. There was also talk of there being differences between all AKG mics made before and after Harmon bought them out. Lets not even get started on the 460/JW460/480 debate, but you see where I am going.

As far as Neumann, I know that the KM84 has transformers, and the 184 does not, and that is the primary difference between the sound of the two. Also, I have heard that the earlier 184s used all FET chips, and the newer versions have some bipolar transistors in the preamp path, and that might explain differences in sound between old and new 184s, but this was just something I heard and cannot confirm.

So a couple of dudes get offended by Phil's comment, but how about these nuggets from the same thread that none of my fellow AKG users felt a need to respond to:

AKG483/463 sound like they've got more detail, but listen closely (distortion) before making the jump.  I still prefer the Beyerdynamic if given the choice.

And:

I like detail too, but I'm pretty sensitive to "edginess", which *may* be due to distortion.  I don't know.  Anyway, I would rate the AKG 460/480 and the Geffel as both being "detailed", but I find the AKG a little edgy compared to the Geffel.

I agree everyone has their own preferences/sensitivities.  I've certainly expressed some above .

By the way, I'm currently running Beyerdynamic MC930, AKG 463, and SP C4... and omni (lavalier) mics, too numerous to mention.  I prefer MC930 over the AKG 463.  The 463's have more detail, but I find them just a bit "edgy" compared to the MC930.  To me, it is a distortion issue.  I may get more detail from the AKG, but as soon as something is not right, it jumps right out at me, so I revert back to the MC930.  But I much prefer the 463 over the 483.  I guess the transformers really improve the AKG sound IMO.

  Richard

[spyder9]

Keep the MC930's.  You'll regret selling them.  Happens around here all the time, when its comes to gear.  Your call.  My 2 cents. 

[datbrad]

Steve, I have to say that considering the fact that Phil runs a professional recording studio in Nashville that uses all sorts of mics in a controlled studio setting on a daily basis, he would have a very informed opinion of various mic brands/models.

I really don't care if Phil's opinion on KM-184s was sent from God in a message of the burning bush...I still like the sound of Neumann KM184s!    

Phil's qualifications (or Gods) has no bearing on what satisfies me and my taste in sound!  That's why I suggested to the OP that he should listen to all suggestions and make up his own mind...and not necessarily dismiss KM184's automatically as sounding like ass!

Steve, How about responding to the meat of my post? You have scolded people on this forum countless times for failing to discuss issues objectively and taking portions of posts out of context, and these folks were essentially making statements just like you did here. Speaking strictly to the facts is a quality that your fellow Republicans claim to own, and here you are betraying your kind with behavior like this. Your reply seems to imply that you either did not read my comment about the AKG 414, or you chose to not engage me on it because it was a point of discussion that adds support to Phil's position that you really cannot refute.

Phil never said 184s sound like ass, he said he thought "new" 184s do. Maybe "ass" is a bit strong, but if in controlled studio recording done in pin-drop quiet sound proof booths, he can hear differences in sound quality between say a 1997 KM184 and a 2009 KM184, I would tend to believe it.

I think the advice that can be culled from Phil's statement is to seek an older version of KM184 on the used market, rather than buying a new pair of 184s from the current production lots. What he did not say, is exactly when the change occured in terms of model year. That would be really good info.

[stevetoney]

I've never scolded anyone about anything on ts.com...ever.  I state my opinion.  If people read more into it than they should, that's their problem.

As regards this thread, the only thing I've provided comments on are related to Phils suggestions that the KM-184 is a bad sounding microphone.  I never debated that an old KM184 might sound better than a new one...but his statement is that new KM184 sounds like ass...but I just disagree.

If you want to talk to people about matters related of historical evolution of the KM-184, then be my guest! 

Why blow me shit if that's not what I feel like talking about, when I never even entered that portion of the discussion?

[kbergend]

So a couple of dudes get offended by Phil's comment, but how about these nuggets from the same thread that none of my fellow AKG users felt a need to respond to:

AKG483/463 sound like they've got more detail, but listen closely (distortion) before making the jump.  I still prefer the Beyerdynamic if given the choice.

And:

I like detail too, but I'm pretty sensitive to "edginess", which *may* be due to distortion.  I don't know.  Anyway, I would rate the AKG 460/480 and the Geffel as both being "detailed", but I find the AKG a little edgy compared to the Geffel.

*shrug*  Hey, at least Richard used the word "may"!  I think that's showing a shitload of restraint in this forum! 

First of all -- they're microphones, not penises.  And AKGs are a little edgy compared to MG200s, IMO -- the Gefells retain the detail and that sunny character I like and still manage to soften any edges (without throwing a layer of gauze over the sound, which is what Schoeps often sound like to me), and I really hope to own a pair someday.  But to me the Beyers sound a little darker than real life (Senn 8040s have a similar character, to my ears) and in most situations I would definitely prefer the AKG "zing" myself, whether it's attributable to distortion or not.

As far as the various types of AKG mics in common use here, I could probably tell a 414 recording from one of the SD condensers, but I sincerely doubt I could distinguish a 460 stock or modded from a 480 in a blind test.  They all sound good to me!  Obviously however there are many people who can.

Bottom line is, you gotta listen for yourself and see what sounds good to you.  The only reason I suggested 480s as a reasonable candidate is cuz terabyte23 said the Beyers are too dark sounding for him.

[PH]

Cool discussion! I should apologize for saying any mics sound like ass. That was too strong, but hey....I love to speak my mind.
I could have said the same thing more eloquently, like I did in later posts.

My point got a bit clouded in the strong language, which was about the newer ones not sounding as good as the older ones I had used.
The older ones have a nice natural tone that was very musical and essentially neutral to slightly brighter than real life.
I feel the "new"ones that I have used were abrasive sounding and just not pleasant to my ears. Overly bright and a bit scooped sounding.

What got me started on this topic was a trip to a friend's new studio here in Nashville last year. We were doing shootouts of a bunch of gear we had both just purchased. He had just bought 4 "new" KM184's to be the main workhorses around his studio. He already had two that he had bought ten years earlier that were some of his favorite mics. The first thing we noticed was the 4 he had bought last year all essentially sounded the same, and the other two sounded WAY better.

So, I started asking around and doing some research about it. Couldn't really find out too much, but other engineers had noticed it as well. The consensus was that new KM184's don't sound as good as their older counterparts.
Neumann may claim they haven't made any changes, but if people are noticing differences in the way their favorite mics sound, then somewhere there is an issue.

So, that is why my advice was to avoid "new" KM184's since there are so many other great mics out there that sound better in my opinion.  Even Beyer's 

My original suggestion was AKG. I think they are the best mics in that price range.
Fantastic detail and that "zing" someone else mentioned.

[Todd R]

Neumanns blah blah blah

Beyers blah blah blah

AKGs blah blah blah


Forget the discussions and just get some Milabs. 

[ArchivalAudio]

Neumanns blah blah blah

Beyers blah blah blah

AKGs blah blah blah


Forget the discussions and just get some Milabs. 

yep!

I love  the sound of SKM 140's - one of my favorite  sounding mics!
I almost went for some KM184's
but
then Todd's Milab comments caught my eye

I got some Milab VM44-links for like $1280 from full compass
I am super happy I did

they fit my bill, "active" aka remote caps
and small
very clean sound!

check some out

you might like them

eveyone has there own ears
and their own opinion as to what sounds good to them
listen on Archive
and sample some comps

I know I am super pleased with the VM-44 Links

peace
out
-- Ian
-- Ian

[stirinthesauce]

dare to be different folks.  Try different mics (other than the standard "taper mics")

and try the mics with different pre's.  Don't buy into what others tell you.  If I want to hear schoeps>sd (or neumann>grace or akg>oade) I can stay at home and dl 10 of the same source from every big show.  Be different folks.  Makes it fun    Isn't that what it's about?

[Roving Sign]

dare to be different folks.  Try different mics (other than the standard "taper mics")

and try the mics with different pre's.  Don't buy into what others tell you.  If I want to hear schoeps>sd (or neumann>grace or akg>oade) I can stay at home and dl 10 of the same source from every big show.  Be different folks.  Makes it fun    Isn't that what it's about?

AMEN to that!

[jim1274]

Try a Violet Design Black Finger


seriously.  what you're describing is exactly what they deliver, and they're pretty cheap.  A brand new pair is in the same price range as used MC930's.

They're pretty hefty though, compared to the beyers.

Disclaimer:  yes I am a Violet dealer, but I do try to stay out of discussions like this for the most part.  In this case though, it seems like a no-brainer to me.  If you (or anyone else) would like a 2 week demo pair, drop me a line.

If I had seen this post two days sooner, I could have done an A/B of the MC930's and Violet Fingers at a live gig Thursday night and provided a sample.  I ALMOST took the Violets with and ran them right above or below the Beyers for comparison, but since this was a new venue to me, I decided to play it safe and keep it simple and run the lighter and more compact MC930's.  Sadly, the Violets are still untested new-in-box or I'd at least throw my 2 cents worth in on how they compare to my ears.  I'm anxious to compare the two myself....  (I may do the same venue/artist this next Thursday if the Violet Fingers are still on your radar screen--will definitely throw them up on the stand with the Beyers this time around.)

[jim1274]

Try a Violet Design Black Finger


seriously.  what you're describing is exactly what they deliver, and they're pretty cheap.  A brand new pair is in the same price range as used MC930's.

They're pretty hefty though, compared to the beyers.

Disclaimer:  yes I am a Violet dealer, but I do try to stay out of discussions like this for the most part.  In this case though, it seems like a no-brainer to me.  If you (or anyone else) would like a 2 week demo pair, drop me a line.

If I had seen this post two days sooner, I could have done an A/B of the MC930's and Violet Fingers at a live gig Thursday night and provided a sample.  I ALMOST took the Violets with and ran them right above or below the Beyers for comparison, but since this was a new venue to me, I decided to play it safe and keep it simple and run the lighter and more compact MC930's.  Sadly, the Violets are still untested new-in-box or I'd at least throw my 2 cents worth in on how they compare to my ears.  I'm anxious to compare the two myself....  (I may do the same venue/artist this next Thursday if the Violet Fingers are still on your radar screen--will definitely throw them up on the stand with the Beyers this time around.)

I finally got a chance to run my new Violet Fingers next to my Beyer MC930's at a bar gig Thursday night.  The MC930's were my primary mic until now--the Violet Fingers will now be the set that goes up if I am only running one.  The Beyers are good mics, but the Violets are more detailed and truer to the original performance IMHO.  The Violets seem very well made, sound neutral to my ears, and are the best value I've found so far in any recording gear I have purchased.  (Disclaimer:I am a not a veteran to taping and my comments are based on experience with very limited number of mics and recording sessions) 

[Kindguy]

The past 3 show's I've recorded I used a shure Vp88 MS on channel 3 & 4. I have to say my recordings sound great.

The shure is a little fatiging with little low end on it's own. Mixed with the 930's it sounds great. Soundstage & detail.