Topic: Mic upgrade help

[Rob D.]

I've been running MBHO 603s since Oct 2000 and (obviously) have been satisfied with the reuslts. But I'm itchin' to run something else now. Would going from the 603s to the MG 200/210s be enough of an upgrade? (before all you Gefell fluffers hit me with DUH!, please tell why you think that). Although I don't care about active cables I'm even looking at the Schoeps CMC6 but by the time I purchased bodies, cards and hyper caps, wouldn't that be around 4k?. And if I spent that much, I might as well go all the way and get the Neumann TL-170s!   
I've considered the KM140 but haven't been thrilled with the recordings I've heard from the hypercard (take no offense KM150 owners, I know they are GREAT mics).

I'm no gear slut which is why I'm basically looking for feedback before buying anything on impulse. I've heard all the mics listed above but with all the variables that go into recording (venue, external amps, positions, locations, etc...), I've not been able to hear a true test comparison. Thanks in advance for all who reply!

[Tim]

The MG's are a great value...

you are right on with the price of the schempz... and I say go u89 before you go tlm170

have you thought about the akg 480 series at all?

I don't want to get into what mics are upgrades from others but sometimes just a little change in the sound is nice. Is there anything specific you feel is lacking from your current tapes or are you more just looking for a change of flavor?

[creekfreak]

agreed Tim, I call it a change over an upgrade since what mic sounds better is all in the eye (ear?) of the beholder.

I guess if you are looking to change, what is it you are looking for...warmer sound? better highs? (not that it gets much better than the highs the MBHO's give you) Tighter low end? fatter low end? More neutral sound? Want to try LD mics? stick with smaller one's.

Ask your self those questions. The mics you are running are damn good and I would only change if you are looking for a different sound that the MBHO's aren't giving you.

[Rob D.]

Thanks for your helpful suggestions Tim & Creek. You've helped me understand that for better or for worse, I'm looking for change. I've been faithful to the MBHOs for 4 years so I'm coming to terms with my microphone-mid-life-crisis   

Also, I forgot to add the AKG 480s to my list of potetials as I've always liked those as well. As far as what sound I'm looking for for, I've never favored heavy bass but prefer a tighter, compact low end as opposed to a fat, loose bottom end.

[momule]

I would have to vote AKG too. and not just being Prejudice cause that what I run.
I dont think for the price VS sound quality,  they can be beat.
 you can get a whole set of caps and 480 bodies for the price of a CMC6 body..

 heck you could have a full set of caps with a active JK labs setup and still be under the Neumann /Schloppy price tag..

Just my $0.02
Nick

[Brian Skalinder]

I see you're running a V3 - oughta be easy to find some sources out there with different mics.  Listen around and see what you like.

Definitely some AKG > V3 sources out there - d/l a few tracks and see if you like the sound.  I'm not an AKG 48x fan, myself, but maybe you are.

May be a bit tougher to find MG > V3 sources, but I bet they're out there on the Archive.  I love the MG sound but haven't heard many MG > V3 combos.

I also love the KM140 > V3 sound, but like you am not a huge fan of the AK50 hypers.  Perhaps consider how often you would want to run hypers.  If the answer is not very often, just go for the 140s and skip the AK50 caps.

I know there are plenty of Schoeps > V3 recordings out there, so decide if you like the sound.  Though they don't pop up used all that often, if they do they won't completely break the bank - unless someone is basing their used pricing on the new pricing since the dollar dropped, but hopefully if you decide to go that route someone will sell for used pricing relative to what they paid when they bought them.

[marc0789]

not sure anything out there is a real *upgrade*, just different. it sounds like you're used to the *understated* tight bass of the mbhos and a nice high end. so I would think you'd be happy with km140>v3, which to me, is about the only >v3 combination that I can tolerate, other than Schoeps. Also think that ADK TL's are warm enough to sound good with the v3, and I would guess, though I've not heard any, that mg200/210 would also be nice. Isn't that what Nick runs?

[creekfreak]

TL's sound great with the V3, but if he isn't looking for phat bass going the LD route might not work well for him because going from mk41's to the TL's, especially on the omni pattern took some getting use to.

[wboswell]

I'm really liking the 480>v3 sound right now.  Gordon W. and (believe it or not) J. Frank have been really successful (to my ears).  The combo matches up really well and having the flexibility to run cards, hypers, and omnis is a real plus.  If you are used to running full bodies, I think its a no brainer...

[F.O.Bean]

I'm really liking the 480>v3 sound right now. Gordon W. and (believe it or not) J. Frank have been really successful (to my ears). The combo matches up really well and having the flexibility to run cards, hypers, and omnis is a real plus. If you are used to running full bodies, I think its a no brainer...

not just cause thats what i run, ive heard MANY mic>v3 tapes, and overall, none have been as consistent as the 480/414>v3 tapesIMO,YMMV

[Rob D.]

Below is one of Doug Oade's responses to a "should I buy Neumann or MBHO" questions. I do value Doug's opinion but I don't necessarily agree with the poor midrange comment. However, his 'etched sound' comment has had me pondering the meaning ever since I read it:

"I strongly suggest you listen to MBHO tapes before you buy the mics. To my ears the Neumann mics are a at least an order of magnitude better than MBHOs. MBHO mics have a very etched sound, that is transients are fairly accurately captured but all other aspects of the sound are inferior. Poor midrange is the number one problem, especially at higher SPLs. The only application I have used them for and they did a good job was audience response for classical concerts where they do a good job with the transient heavy nature of hand claps. Neumann mics are very musical with very good detail that is sure to please many more listeners, two thumbs up ! If you want an alternative to MBHOs consider DPAs. They do what MBHOs do well only better and deliver a musical sound that can satisfy the most demanding ear. my 2 cents worth...Doug"

[wboswell]

I'm really liking the 480>v3 sound right now. Gordon W. and (believe it or not) J. Frank have been really successful (to my ears). The combo matches up really well and having the flexibility to run cards, hypers, and omnis is a real plus. If you are used to running full bodies, I think its a no brainer...

not just cause thats what i run, ive heard MANY mic>v3 tapes, and overall, none have been as consistent as the 480/414>v3 tapesIMO,YMMV

I'm of the opinion that the constant usually found in a good recording is location.  There are variables, but by and large, the tapes I like are not microphone dependent but rather location dependent.

[Tim]

I'm really liking the 480>v3 sound right now. Gordon W. and (believe it or not) J. Frank have been really successful (to my ears). The combo matches up really well and having the flexibility to run cards, hypers, and omnis is a real plus. If you are used to running full bodies, I think its a no brainer...

not just cause thats what i run, ive heard MANY mic>v3 tapes, and overall, none have been as consistent as the 480/414>v3 tapesIMO,YMMV

I'm of the opinion that the constant usually found in a good recording is location. There are variables, but by and large, the tapes I like are not microphone dependent but rather location dependent.

agreed.

[marc0789]

Below is one of Doug Oade's responses to a "should I buy Neumann or MBHO" questions. I do value Doug's opinion but I don't necessarily agree with the poor midrange comment. However, his 'etched sound' comment has had me pondering the meaning ever since I read it:

"I strongly suggest you listen to MBHO tapes before you buy the mics. To my ears the Neumann mics are a at least an order of magnitude better than MBHOs. MBHO mics have a very etched sound, that is transients are fairly accurately captured but all other aspects of the sound are inferior. Poor midrange is the number one problem, especially at higher SPLs. The only application I have used them for and they did a good job was audience response for classical concerts where they do a good job with the transient heavy nature of hand claps. Neumann mics are very musical with very good detail that is sure to please many more listeners, two thumbs up ! If you want an alternative to MBHOs consider DPAs. They do what MBHOs do well only better and deliver a musical sound that can satisfy the most demanding ear. my 2 cents worth...Doug"

having run mbhos and dpas a lot, I pretty much agree with that. the mbho highs are really nice, but the rest can suffer, particularly when things get LOUD.

[F.O.Bean]

I'm really liking the 480>v3 sound right now. Gordon W. and (believe it or not) J. Frank have been really successful (to my ears). The combo matches up really well and having the flexibility to run cards, hypers, and omnis is a real plus. If you are used to running full bodies, I think its a no brainer...

not just cause thats what i run, ive heard MANY mic>v3 tapes, and overall, none have been as consistent as the 480/414>v3 tapesIMO,YMMV

I'm of the opinion that the constant usually found in a good recording is location. There are variables, but by and large, the tapes I like are not microphone dependent but rather location dependent.

true that, the grestest mics ever would still sound crappy inm a  crappy position

[nickgregory]

Yep, I run the MG 200s, and have done so with a handful of configurations and love them....no more mic changes for me, except for getting the JK Labs active setup. 

First, my description of the MG20s, without comparing them to other mics (dont want to offend anyone).  They have a very flat response to me across the spectrum until you get to the upper end, which is slightly emphasized.  The mids are fantastic and detailed, and the low end is very accurate.  The highs are detailed as well, but are emphasized slightly in the mix.  This makes the MG20s damn near perfect for recording rock shows, and really any other show that has significant low end in the mix...the upper end emphasis helps to balance out the lows.  For acoustic shows, I have found that depending on what is paired with the MGs that the upper end can be a bit fatiguing.  I ran the MG20s with the MP2->Mod SBM1 and a V3.

For the MP2->Mod SBM1, I found that the acoustic type shows sounded solid, not fatiguing, but had an exaggerated low end, which while pleasing to the ear, were not accurate to what the show sounded like.  On the flip side, for rock shows I found the MP2->Mod SBM1 fantastic...nice fat, warm sound, very easy on the ears.  Only problem was that for a show like mule in a boomy venue, the MP2->Mod SBM1 was too much for most playback systems.

The V3 coupled with the MG20s gave me a very detailed recording....I dont know how else to describe it, other than to say that I feel like I heard each individual note defined vs a combination of the whole (dumb description I know).  Made for really fantastic recordings of my first handful of shows with it, which happened to be rock shows, which didnt need the bass emphasized like the MP2->Mod SBM1 combo can do.  However, for acoustic shows, the V3 coupled with the MG20s could produce some tapes that were so detailed that they wer hard to listen to...given that the music was mostly from the upper end of the spectrum.  This is what I defined as fatiguing.  Given that I did make a fantastic acoustic MG20->V3 tape (tres tangled truckers) that didnt exhibit the "brittleness" so to speak, so the fatiguing effect could actually be coming from the way the engineer ran the PA for acoustic shows.

I have since sold everything except the mics and am waiting for delivery of my 722, so more tests to follow....initial view of the sound after one show with a buddies 722, the MGs coupled with it created a tape that was somewhere in between the MP2->Mod SBM1 combo and the V3...more detail than the former, but warmer than the latter...

hope this helps...

oh yeah, here are some tapes on the archive with MG20->V3

http://www.archive.org/audio/etree-details-db.php?id=20988

http://www.archive.org/audio/etree-details-db.php?id=20989

I also have a mule show made with it I would be happy to send to you if interested...let me know.

Nick

[jnorman34]

i've owned schoeps cmc64s, DPA 4011s, km184s, gefell m300s, rode NT5s, c391b's, r-121s, and many others, and i can honestly say the AKG C480/ck61 is by far the best quality for the money you can get (IMO).  the c481s are wonderfully neutral and transparent, and nearly interchangeable with my 4011s in sonic character.  i use the 481s on nearly everything in my studio, and they are a near perfect ORTF pair for remote work.  i dont think you can do much better no matter how much you spend.

[marc0789]

i've owned schoeps cmc64s, DPA 4011s, km184s, gefell m300s, rode NT5s, c391b's, r-121s, and many others, and i can honestly say the AKG C480/ck61 is by far the best quality for the money you can get (IMO).  the c481s are wonderfully neutral and transparent, and nearly interchangeable with my 4011s in sonic character.  i use the 481s on nearly everything in my studio, and they are a near perfect ORTF pair for remote work.  i dont think you can do much better no matter how much you spend.

nearly interchangeable with 4011....mebbe, other than the midrange. world of difference imo.

[creekfreak]

get a pair of these...





http://www.gefell-mics.com/grp_1_prod_1.htm

[dklein]

If you like the KM140s and don't need an active setup, then the KM-184s are worth a look.  Same mic, fixed capsule.  Very reasonably priced given the other stuff you're looking at.  I've been very pleased with mine, especially since feeding them into a Grace pre.  I won't bother describing the sound - there's lots of samples out there and I find that even when we're all listening to the same comparison we can't seem to agree on which source is 'darker' or 'muddy' or 'etched' or whatever words people like to use.

As far as tonal characteristics go, I use eq whenever I think it will increase my enjoyment.  I think that trying to find a mic that sounds right for different bands, venues, sound guys and p.a. systems is an exercise in futility...if that's what you record.  Studio work is a whole other game.

If you tried a used pair of 184s I'm sure you could flip them for even money.  But hell, a used pair of Schoeps turned out to be a great investment over the last few years.  The used set I saw for $1700 a year and a half ago will fetch $2500 today!  Stupid market forces 

[jeromejello]

I prefer a tighter, compact low end as opposed to a fat, loose bottom end.

who doesn't 

sorry i am no help...