Topic: Recommendations for replacing Beyer MC930s?

[terabyte23]

Hi folks,

I've taped a few shows now with my Beyerdynamic MC930 mics and I find them too warm/muddy-sounding for my ears.  I like the bass response overall, but I am looking for something with more detail and less mud.  I mostly tape loud rock/metal shows in small and medium-size clubs.  What cardioid mics would be good replacements for the MC930s?  I want something that has good bass response but more detail than the MC930s.  I don't see much in the same price range as the MC930s - is there anything near that price that might fit the bill?

If I decide to go up in price (yikes) the Gefell M300 looks like a good contender, but I wonder if it would be too "bright" and not have enough low end (saw a few posts to that effect).  The Senn MKH8040 and AKG C480B both look nice too.

I know it's subjective...thanks for any opinions/advice!

[illconditioned]

Hi folks,

I've taped a few shows now with my Beyerdynamic MC930 mics and I find them too warm/muddy-sounding for my ears.  I like the bass response overall, but I am looking for something with more detail and less mud.  I mostly tape loud rock/metal shows in small and medium-size clubs.  What cardioid mics would be good replacements for the MC930s?  I want something that has good bass response but more detail than the MC930s.  I don't see much in the same price range as the MC930s - is there anything near that price that might fit the bill?

If I decide to go up in price (yikes) the Gefell M300 looks like a good contender, but I wonder if it would be too "bright" and not have enough low end (saw a few posts to that effect).  The Senn MKH8040 and AKG C480B both look nice too.

I know it's subjective...thanks for any opinions/advice!

You'll have to pay quite a bit more money to get something sounding nicer than these.

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.

The obvious choice to me is Geffel M200 series, but you'll pay a lot more for those.  I have not listened closely to the M300.

  Richard

[dmonkey]

What about Milab VM-44 Links? To my ears, they sound like they have a nice bottom end with very well detailed mids/highs.

[stevetoney]

I'd consider Neumann KM184, AKG-480 > CK63 combo, or the MBHO-600a > kc200 actives which are listed in the yard sale right now.  All of these would be around $1k used.

[PH]

I've noticed the same thing about those Beyers, huge sounding but not very much detail.
That can be great for certain situations or instruments, but I have noticed that muddy effect on
several of the recordings done with those.

If you want more detail, certainly look at the AKG line. I actually prefer the sound of the 460's
to the 480's. They have the same detail as their newer brothers but a bit more sheen on the top end.
They are certainly alot cheaper on the used market. Plus you have the various capulse options to choose from, which the Beyers can't touch.

Schoeps give the most detail, but come with the highest premium. I like what I've heard from the Milabs.
Nice size factor too on those.

I would stay away from the KM184's. Many of the newer ones sounds like ass. The older ones are much better but
it's hard to know what to look for when buying those.

I think the Peluso's are a great buy and terrific option, certainly the best in that price range.
You get some fantastic detail, but they can be a bit fatiguing to my ears. Not sure why that is.

If you can't afford Schoeps, I would go with AKG 460's and several sets of caps.

[ArchivalAudio]

I'd say Milab VM-44 Links

check this thread out for some comps and other fun info
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,112988.0.html
and team milab
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,114343.0.html
and
under appreciated european mics
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,85379.0.html
I really like mine
it is all subjective
listen in LMA
peace
-- Ian

[stirinthesauce]

I went from beyers to milabs and now back to beyers.  Try a different pre in front of the beyers.  Plenty of detail, just never a fan of these mics with an oade mod (I originally ran mine in 06 into a w+mod and I see you running a cm mod r-44).  These mics really (REALLY) shine with an apogee pre and or a/d after them.

[PH]

When I think of that Apogee sound, I think HUGE sound but not much in the way of added detail.
I think the Apogee is a much better pre than what OP has and I agree it would make the Beyer's sound
better. I'm just not personally into that BIG hyped sound, I would rather have added detail.
The AKG Schoeps DPA Grace school of thought. Transparency, but to each his/her own.

I think the best approach is try to some find some different sources out there using Grace preamps paired with the mics you are interested in.
The Grace pres are going to have the least amount of coloration of the source mics. Try multiple sources in different rooms.
I think you will hone in on a preference for style of mics pretty quickly.

Cheers, Phil

[illconditioned]

When I think of that Apogee sound, I think HUGE sound but not much in the way of added detail.
I think the Apogee is a much better pre than what OP has and I agree it would make the Beyer's sound
better. I'm just not personally into that BIG hyped sound, I would rather have added detail.
The AKG Schoeps DPA Grace school of thought. Transparency, but to each his/her own.

I think the best approach is try to some find some different sources out there using Grace preamps paired with the mics you are interested in.
The Grace pres are going to have the least amount of coloration of the source mics. Try multiple sources in different rooms.
I think you will hone in on a preference for style of mics pretty quickly.

Cheers, Phil

I think I've had this discussion before.

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 haven't formed an opinion of the DPA yet, but I certainly find their lav mics 406x to be edgy.  402x I'm not sure yet.

  Richard

[PH]

Sorry if I offended any Beyer owners out there. Just commenting on preference not quality.
Something I have noticed about HUGE sounding setups like the Beyer>Apogee (or similar) is that it sounds killer right away. It doesn't require much eq or compression.
I think you sacrifice some detail by going that route, but it would probably sound better out of the box than an AKG>Grace (or similar) setup.
With the transparent recordings, they usually need some gentle massaging to get a bigger sound. I think that is the reason I lean that way, with a little tweak here or there I feel you can achieve the best of both worlds.

[hammerhorror]

I would try out a pair of the JW Mod AKG 460's.

When I owned a pair, I thought they really shined on the louder rock and metal shows I taped.

[ghellquist]

I would stay away from the KM184's. Many of the newer ones sounds like ass. The older ones are much better but
it's hard to know what to look for when buying those.

Sorry, but this statement is pure disinformation. Unless you have personal experience with different series numbers of the Neumann KM184, please stay away from making this kind of comments as it will confuse people.

You might not like the sound of the KM184 which is a quite different thing.

// Gunnar

[su6oxone]

Sorry, but this statement is pure disinformation. Unless you have personal experience with different series numbers of the Neumann KM184, please stay away from making this kind of comments as it will confuse people.

You might not like the sound of the KM184 which is a quite different thing.

Completely agree.  If you're going to post s*** like that, back it up with some A-B comparisons of the different sounding serials.   

[bgalizio]

Definitely look at the Peluso CEMC6's. The subcard caps are great.

[grider]

460 would be my suggestion, or perhaps 480; the 460 will be warmer and more forgiving with less bass, the 480 is very detailed and very bassy but very unforgiving in a bad sounding room

[terabyte23]

Thanks for all the replies, you have given me a lot to chew on!

Although I would dearly love to get a Grace preamp, I am stuck using the internal R-44 preamps for now.  (Edit: I see there are some reasonably-prices Apogee units around...might try that).

I also ran my small AT943s > R-09HR at that show.  The AT943s were on the stand in nearly the same position as the MC930s.  The AT943 source lacks the low end response of the MC930s (unsurprisingly) but it is very nicely detailed.  When I mix the two sources in Wavelab it sounds great!  I was already on the fence about the MC930s, but this experiment really convinced me that the MC930s are not detailed enough for me.

I suppose one option is to keep the MC930s and just always run both sets of mics and mix them later 

[JasonSobel]

another option to try is some minor EQ.  the "lack of detail" that you think you hear on the mc930's might just be that some (lower) frequencies are being emphasized, while some other frequencies (mids/mid-highs) are quieter in your recording.  By balancing the frequency response, you might find that the mc930's already have enough "detail" in the recordings, but it's just being overpowered by the lower frequencies.  Just an idea to try out before spending cash on new mics.

[PH]

Many of the new KM184's sound like ass. That is my professional opinion. I have used at least ten different ones in various studios plus
I have owned a pair. The KM84's are WAY smoother and more musical sounding to my ears.

The new 184's are being made by Sennheiser and they aren't being made in Germany like they had for decades before that.
I'm sorry you are offended by my opinion, but I wouldn't buy a pair.
There are so many better mics out there for less money.

[illconditioned]

Thanks for all the replies, you have given me a lot to chew on!

Although I would dearly love to get a Grace preamp, I am stuck using the internal R-44 preamps for now.  (Edit: I see there are some reasonably-prices Apogee units around...might try that).

I also ran my small AT943s > R-09HR at that show.  The AT943s were on the stand in nearly the same position as the MC930s.  The AT943 source lacks the low end response of the MC930s (unsurprisingly) but it is very nicely detailed.  When I mix the two sources in Wavelab it sounds great!  I was already on the fence about the MC930s, but this experiment really convinced me that the MC930s are not detailed enough for me.

I suppose one option is to keep the MC930s and just always run both sets of mics and mix them later 

Hmm.  I used to like the AT853/943 a lot more than I do now.  I suggest listening to the sources for longer periods and see which one you like better.  As a test, I wonder if you could take two songs and EQ them so they have the same average spectrum.  That may isolate the quality (IMO) of the Beyerdynamic source .  As far as general EQ goes, I rarely adjust this, except in extreme cases (eg., omnis way close to the stage picking up too much bass, or very bass-lacking mics, like Sennheiser MKE40, where I may add *a bit* of bass).  The rule of EQ though, is to make minimal changes.  It is easy to overdo it.

  Richard

[illconditioned]

Many of the new KM184's sound like ass. That is my professional opinion. I have used at least ten different ones in various studios plus
I have owned a pair. The KM84's are WAY smoother and more musical sounding to my ears.

The new 184's are being made by Sennheiser and they aren't being made in Germany like they had for decades before that.
I'm sorry you are offended by my opinion, but I wouldn't buy a pair.
There are so many better mics out there for less money.

I have not heard the KM84, but they are supposed to be much nicer than the 184's.  A collectors' item too, apparantly.

So, where are the 184's made then?  China?  Japan?  I knew they were Sennheiser-made, but I thought that was still Germany.

  Richard

[PH]

Many of the new KM184's sound like ass. That is my professional opinion. I have used at least ten different ones in various studios plus
I have owned a pair. The KM84's are WAY smoother and more musical sounding to my ears.

The new 184's are being made by Sennheiser and they aren't being made in Germany like they had for decades before that.
I'm sorry you are offended by my opinion, but I wouldn't buy a pair.
There are so many better mics out there for less money.

I have not heard the KM84, but they are supposed to be much nicer than the 184's.  A collectors' item too, apparantly.

So, where are the 184's made then?  China?  Japan?  I knew they were Sennheiser-made, but I thought that was still Germany.

  Richard

I'm not 100% sure where they are being made since Neumann has been rather secretive about that info.
I think they are still being assembled in Germany by Sennheiser, but some or many of the parts are coming from various cheap mic centers like China.
There certainly isn'tthe quality control of the older neumanns or even the ones from say 7 or 8 years ago when it was still all done in house.
I'm sure DSatz could shed some light on this subject.

Many of the new ones I have used were brittle and hyped sounding. I say some, not all.

[sam]

I'd consider Neumann KM184, AKG-480 > CK63 combo, or the MBHO-600a > kc200 actives which are listed in the yard sale right now.  All of these would be around $1k used.

I loved the sound of the MBHO kc500 but I felt the kc200s were dull, my opinion. So far I have been really happy with the 480's

[PH]

another option to try is some minor EQ.  the "lack of detail" that you think you hear on the mc930's might just be that some (lower) frequencies are being emphasized, while some other frequencies (mids/mid-highs) are quieter in your recording.  By balancing the frequency response, you might find that the mc930's already have enough "detail" in the recordings, but it's just being overpowered by the lower frequencies.  Just an idea to try out before spending cash on new mics.

I have to agree with Jason here in theory. While the Beyers may or may not have the detail the OP desires, running a High Pass Filter on the low end will seriously help with almost
any recording. Usually there is so much low frequency energy being recorded, that it clouds or overwhelms many of the higher frequencies tied to that root frequency.

For example, if you are looking for more high end clarity or detail, you could use additive EQ and bump the 4K region. Or you could use (preferred) subtractive EQ and pull back the 500hz region a bit, which will actually enhance all of the higher frequencies related to that root. 1K, 2K, 4K, 8K, 16K....    If you want to really accentuate the better frequencies of your recording, try rolling off below 40hz and pull out a few db in the 125hz-500hz range, it will open the top end dramatically.

[TNJazz]

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.

[momule]

Im gonna favor the Peluso But some 460's would prolly fit your needs.

[ghellquist]

Many of the new KM184's sound like ass. That is my professional opinion. I have used at least ten different ones in various studios plus
I have owned a pair. The KM84's are WAY smoother and more musical sounding to my ears.

The new 184's are being made by Sennheiser and they aren't being made in Germany like they had for decades before that.
I'm sorry you are offended by my opinion, but I wouldn't buy a pair.
There are so many better mics out there for less money.

Now even more disinformation.
Neumann KM184-s are and have always been made by Neumann.
A fact though is that Neumann is owned by Sennheiser. Sennheiser is a German company as well.
I believe you are making a great disservice to this board by putting out this disinformation.
It might be that you are confusing the KM184 with the KM84. These are quite different microphones although they share the same capsule design.

The same capsule is also found in the KM140 (which is actually two parts, the amplifier KM100 and the capsule). These all sound slightly (or more) different from each others. As has been mentioned the KM84 is a searched for "vintage" mic nowadays.

I still respect your opinion for not liking the KM184.

// Gunnar

[PH]

Many of the new KM184's sound like ass. That is my professional opinion. I have used at least ten different ones in various studios plus
I have owned a pair. The KM84's are WAY smoother and more musical sounding to my ears.

The new 184's are being made by Sennheiser and they aren't being made in Germany like they had for decades before that.
I'm sorry you are offended by my opinion, but I wouldn't buy a pair.
There are so many better mics out there for less money.

Now even more disinformation.
Neumann KM184-s are and have always been made by Neumann.
A fact though is that Neumann is owned by Sennheiser. Sennheiser is a German company as well.
I believe you are making a great disservice to this board by putting out this disinformation.
It might be that you are confusing the KM184 with the KM84. These are quite different microphones although they share the same capsule design.

The same capsule is also found in the KM140 (which is actually two parts, the amplifier KM100 and the capsule). These all sound slightly (or more) different from each others. As has been mentioned the KM84 is a searched for "vintage" mic nowadays.

I still respect your opinion for not liking the KM184.

// Gunnar

As I said, Neumann is now owned and operated by Sennheiser. Do a little research on your own about how much they share, where many of the parts and assembly takes place for the company. Sennheiser bought Neumann, not the other way around. I'm not suggesting the company makes crap at all, I'm commenting one particular microphone. The KM184.

I'm not confused about any of these mics, having mentioned them both specifically in previous posts. I have owned a pair of newer KM184's and I currently own a pair of 1970's vintage KM84's, along with about 30 other microphones of all sorts. I have used plenty of KM184's in all kinds of applications, both in the studio and in live setings. They are obviously a very common mic.

To my ears, there is clearly a sonic difference between new (meaning the last 7 years or so) KM184's and older ones (meaning since it was introduced until about 7 years ago) I have heard it plus I have talked with other engineers about it.

Something bothered me about one of the posts yesterday, where the poster demanded I create a comp of different mic serial ranges of KM184's just to be qualified to have an opinion about whether I like them or not. Seriously?   To me, that's the main problem with a lot of gear discussions like this, people aren't actually listening with their ears, they would rather examine specs and charts and waveforms. I personally don't need any of that to tell me if a mic has value to me. It either sounds good to my ears, or it doesn't.

If you respect my opinion, then why is it doing a "great disservice" for me to express it?
It is in fact, doing the opposite. I am voiceing my opinion and creating a discussion about the mics in question. What is the problem with that?

And really, who cares anyway. You either like the way a mic sounds or you don't. There are so many great mics out there, the combinations are endless and there is a flavor for everyone to enjoy.

[Roving Sign]

Many of the new KM184's sound like ass. That is my professional opinion. I have used at least ten different ones in various studios plus
I have owned a pair. The KM84's are WAY smoother and more musical sounding to my ears.

The new 184's are being made by Sennheiser and they aren't being made in Germany like they had for decades before that.
I'm sorry you are offended by my opinion, but I wouldn't buy a pair.
There are so many better mics out there for less money.

Now even more disinformation.
Neumann KM184-s are and have always been made by Neumann.
A fact though is that Neumann is owned by Sennheiser. Sennheiser is a German company as well.
I believe you are making a great disservice to this board by putting out this disinformation.
It might be that you are confusing the KM184 with the KM84. These are quite different microphones although they share the same capsule design.

The same capsule is also found in the KM140 (which is actually two parts, the amplifier KM100 and the capsule). These all sound slightly (or more) different from each others. As has been mentioned the KM84 is a searched for "vintage" mic nowadays.

I still respect your opinion for not liking the KM184.

// Gunnar

Something bothered me about one of the posts yesterday, where the poster demanded I create a comp of different mic serial ranges of KM184's just to be qualified to have an opinion about whether I like them or not. Seriously?   To me, that's the main problem with a lot of gear discussions like this, people aren't actually listening with their ears, they would rather examine specs and charts and waveforms. I personally don't need any of that to tell me if a mic has value to me. It either sounds good to my ears, or it doesn't.

So, the newer KM184's DO NOT sound good to my ears. If you respect my opinion, then why is it doing a "great disservice" for me to express it?

You sure do see a lot of 184 sets on ebay...like people got 'em, and then decided "not quite..."

I'm going with the guy with the Grammy...!

[kbergend]

I would advise you to spend as much time as you can listening to recordings on the archive to see which of the mics you're considering most appeals to you.  If you're looking for a brighter sound, I will say I've been extremely satisfied with my 480s and after 2+ years they're still my mics of choice for most situations -- the only SD condensers I've listened to that I like more are MG200s, which are rather pricey.  MBHOs are a little brighter still.  Pelusos are downright glaring and can sound a little harsh IMO, especially on vocals.  I have nothing to say about Neumanns, lol.

I agree to go light on the EQ.  You can definitely bring out detail by suppressing lower frequency ranges, but it's also easy to make a very unnatural-sounding recording in the process.  Certain bass-related issues (like an overpowering kick drum) are often better solved with a multi-band compressor.

I'm always amazed by how natural my little AT943s sound, although they don't have the presence on the low and high ends nor the dynamic range of a full-sized phantom-powered condenser.

[stevetoney]

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.

[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.

 

[dactylus]

another option to try is some minor EQ.  the "lack of detail" that you think you hear on the mc930's might just be that some (lower) frequencies are being emphasized, while some other frequencies (mids/mid-highs) are quieter in your recording.  By balancing the frequency response, you might find that the mc930's already have enough "detail" in the recordings, but it's just being overpowered by the lower frequencies.  Just an idea to try out before spending cash on new mics.

I have to agree with Jason here in theory. While the Beyers may or may not have the detail the OP desires, running a High Pass Filter on the low end will seriously help with almost
any recording. Usually there is so much low frequency energy being recorded, that it clouds or overwhelms many of the higher frequencies tied to that root frequency.

For example, if you are looking for more high end clarity or detail, you could use additive EQ and bump the 4K region. Or you could use (preferred) subtractive EQ and pull back the 500hz region a bit, which will actually enhance all of the higher frequencies related to that root. 1K, 2K, 4K, 8K, 16K....    If you want to really accentuate the better frequencies of your recording, try rolling off below 40hz and pull out a few db in the 125hz-500hz range, it will open the top end dramatically.

Thank you very much for the "subtractive EQ" advice nashphil!!     Very much appreciated

[J.T.L]

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!

[Massive Dynamic]

In the past I ran the SP LSD2 and was really happy with the results. However, I began to think I was missing out on running near-coincident configs. So I sold it and bought the mc930s, but none of the recordings I made with the mc930s (ORTF)> FR2-le had any zing - they all sounded duller than what I preferred. Maybe if I had run them XY, they would have sounded crisper and less muddy, but then I would be right back to a coincident config. I sold them and went back to the LSD2. No regrets.

Edit to add: Peluso, MBHO, and Audix are too bright in my recording experience, so I don't have any real recommendation for a SD mic pair. I've never used the AKG models that are often mentioned as having a brighter sound. Ever consider the THE microphones?