Topic: 460 vs jw mod 460? anyone have something handy?

[mblindsey]

I just bought some 460's and I am considering the mod.  My searches fail a true comp.  I'm hasty, as I know one will surface soon.  Do you have one to share?

--Michael

[thegreatgumbino]

Head over to www.tapers.org & us FTP to grab the AKG-460-mod460-480-comp.flac16/ from Drive 1.

[mblindsey]

Head over to www.tapers.org & us FTP to grab the AKG-460-mod460-480-comp.flac16/ from Drive 1.

perfect!...d/l'ing now...thanks!

[datbrad]

Head over to www.tapers.org & us FTP to grab the AKG-460-mod460-480-comp.flac16/ from Drive 1.

What's your consensus of this comp?

[jkbyram]

i personally prefer the stock 460 to the modded 460. just my .02 though

[SmokinJoe]

Interesting timing.  Ted did a comp Wednesday night with stock 460's and JWmod 460s.  He forgot to write down which mics were going into which channels on the R4, so he doesn't know which is which.  I haven't heard the tape, but I asked "isn't it really obvious?"   The simple answer is "no, it's not really obvious".

[newplanet7]

Interesting timing.  Ted did a comp Wednesday night with stock 460's and JWmod 460s.  He forgot to write down which mics were going into which channels on the R4, so he doesn't know which is which.  I haven't heard the tape, but I asked "isn't it really obvious?"   The simple answer is "no, it's not really obvious".

Nice!

Still waiting for ted to do a 480/460 comparison. 

[stevetoney]

Comps are totally subjective anyway, but I'm gonna give you my totally subjective conclusions from my own ownership and comparison of all of the products.

First, IMHO the 460s are a totally different mic with the actives and CK1x setup than they are with the CK61 and CK63.  IMHO, I thought the 460's sounded better than either the JWMod 460 or the 480s, but ONLY when connected through the stock active cables and CK1x capsule (which are darn near impossible to find).  I can't comment about the CK3x capsule because I never owned them.

If you put CK61/CK63 directly onto the bodies, I thought the both the 480s and JWMod 460's sounded fuller, with a better soundstage when connected directly to CK61s and CK63s than the 460s...pretty marked difference to my ears when I ran the comp.

I thought the JWMod 460's sounded damn near identical to 480s in every sound comparison test that I did between these two, with a nod going to the JWMod 460s for a teensy tiny boost in fullness and soundstage...although if you like presence the nod goes to the 480s...having said this I'd be hard pressed not to conclude that these two mics really don't sound identical.

My opinions...nothing scientific.

[mblindsey]

I have access to a pair of JW Mod 460's here locally (KCMoeJoe), and we plan to run a comp sometime soon.  I'll update this thread with yet another opinion in a bit.

--Michael

EDIT to add:

Head over to www.tapers.org & us FTP to grab the AKG-460-mod460-480-comp.flac16/ from Drive 1.

My ears aren't good enough to tell the difference.  I was hoping that there would be an obvious difference in flavor, but I can't hear it.

[Chuck]

Head over to www.tapers.org & us FTP to grab the AKG-460-mod460-480-comp.flac16/ from Drive 1.

^^^ That comparison really helped me when I got into the AKGs. Don't do the comparison if you are in a huge hurry. Take a while to really listen...

I prefer the C-480's to either the JWMod C-460's or the stock C-460's.
I can see why some like the JWMod C-460's over the stock C-460's, but I just prefer the stock C-460's.

[Chuck]

I have access to a pair of JW Mod 460's here locally (KCMoeJoe), and we plan to run a comp sometime soon.  I'll update this thread with yet another opinion in a bit.

--Michael

EDIT to add:

Head over to www.tapers.org & us FTP to grab the AKG-460-mod460-480-comp.flac16/ from Drive 1.

My ears aren't good enough to tell the difference.  I was hoping that there would be an obvious difference in flavor, but I can't hear it.

There really is a difference. Not like the difference between AKG C-480's and, for example, Church STC-11's... (...not to dog the Church mics...) I owned a pair of the STC-11's. They just sound very different than the AKG's.

Anyway, the difference is not dramatic but it is there. Stick with the stock C-460's then, as they are the least expensive of the bunch.

[terrapinj]

i think it also depends what you plan to run behind them

i personally think the mod460s are a little too bright with the v2/v3 - but the stock 460s don't sound as harsh with the v3

i haven't heard too noticeable of a difference but I recall that Jim Williams stated the frequency response on the mod460s goes lower than either stock 460 or 480 but i assumed that this was offset by the limitations of the cap freqeuncy response

can't really go wrong with any of the 3 options IMO

[PH]

I've owned several of Jim's mods and I must say that I have not been impressed at all. I had a pair of 414's that sounded just awful, so I sent them back to Jim and he called and said they were in perfect condition and sounded the way they were supposed to. Stunned, I asked him how he tested them....he snapped backthat he listened to them. When pressed, he admitted he hadn't tested their freq spectrum or even opened them up to inspect them.
In his defense, he didn't charge me for the inspection but I was baffled to hear him say they were exactly how he had intended. I sold them and the next buyer felt the same way and I think Jim wound up buying them from him when he sent them back again.

I certainly don't see enough of a "positive" impovement to warrant the price he charges to rip the transformers out of your mics.
To my ears, they sound worse for it. YMMV

[mblindsey]

Interesting timing.  Ted did a comp Wednesday night with stock 460's and JWmod 460s.  He forgot to write down which mics were going into which channels on the R4, so he doesn't know which is which.  I haven't heard the tape, but I asked "isn't it really obvious?"   The simple answer is "no, it's not really obvious".

I bought one of Ted's 3 pairs from the YS, and noticed he picked up the modded 460's 

I've listened to the tapers.org comp on my cheap PC speakers, and Sennheiser HD 280 Pro headphones since my last post...and, I still can't hear the difference.  Not that there isn't one, because I admittedly can't here a lot of things others can.  My play back system is off for repair, so I'll try a third system when it returns.  Plus, there is always that comp I mentioned I plan to do myself earlier.  For a $175/mic upgrade, I expect at least "different" if not "better"...but I don't hear "different" yet (says the guy with bad ears).

--Michael

[newplanet7]

I bought one of Ted's 3 pairs from the YS, and noticed he picked up the modded 460's 
--Michael

That doesn't mean anything.
Ted is a whore!

If he ran them both and couldn't tell a difference, which should be semi obvious IMO, well..
FWIW, I didn't hear any difference to the comparison on tapers.org either, so I am with you on that.

[datbrad]

I've owned several of Jim's mods and I must say that I have not been impressed at all. I had a pair of 414's that sounded just awful, so I sent them back to Jim and he called and said they were in perfect condition and sounded the way they were supposed to. Stunned, I asked him how he tested them....he snapped backthat he listened to them. When pressed, he admitted he hadn't tested their freq spectrum or even opened them up to inspect them.
In his defense, he didn't charge me for the inspection but I was baffled to hear him say they were exactly how he had intended. I sold them and the next buyer felt the same way and I think Jim wound up buying them from him when he sent them back again.

I certainly don't see enough of a "positive" impovement to warrant the price he charges to rip the transformers out of your mics.
To my ears, they sound worse for it. YMMV

I agree with Phil. I toyed with the idea of sending Jim my 460s a few years ago, even had discussed it with him via email and was about to pull the trigger. Then, I listened to some JW mod sources of shows I recorded with my stock set and while the tighter and deeper bass was a positive, the high end sounded strange to me, and the warmth of the transformers in the midrange was noticably absent. Some JW mod sources I listened to were a tiny bit harsh sounding to me, actually. Glad I kept them stock.

[DSatz]

> I had a pair of 414's that sounded just awful, so I sent them back to Jim and he called and said they were in perfect condition and sounded the way they were supposed to.

There have been a dozen or more different types of AKG condenser microphone with "414" in their names. They've all been rather different from one another, so for the past 25 years or so it's been impossible to tell what that number is even supposed to mean other than "buy me."

Those dozen or more models have used two different capsule types. One is a poor imitation of the company's own CK 12 capsule from the 1950s; they cunningly refer to this imitation as a "CK 12" even though absolutely no one outside of the company thinks that it sounds like the original. It has an intentional high-frequency coloration for close-up vocal recording, while the capsule used in the other "414" microphones has basically flat frequency response (e.g. the C 414 B - ULS) and is not widely used in U.S. studios.

If you were trying to use a pair of AKG mikes from the first category (e.g. the C 414 B - TL II) for the kind of moderately-distant two-mike stereo recording that people here mainly do, your recordings would probably sound pretty bad most of the time, and what Jim told you would be spot on.

So, which specific model of "414" have you got?

--best regards

[PH]

I had the B-ULS version and I was using them for studio applications, acoustic bass, guitar cab, etc....

Not everyone at taperssection uses their mics for distant recording.
I also know the difference between a crappy 414 and a good one having used many of the different models including the Silver EB, which was the best of the bunch to my ears.
None of that has anything to do with the discussion at hand.

Point is that I just don't think having JW mod your mics is a worthwhile investment or a sonic improvement.

[DSatz]

nashphil, very well. A few years ago on something of a whim, I decided to make a little study of microphone modifications, and I ended up sending microphones to Stephen Paul, Klaus Heyne and Jim Williams for them each to "do their thing" (a single U 87, a pair of KM 84s, and a pair of C 414-B ULS respectively).

Jim converted the AKGs into transformerless microphones which in the end, had 4 dB lower equivalent noise than the stock model; their high-frequency response also increased by a dB or two. The "down side" was that the mikes were far less resistant to RFI--probably because he removed one layer of screening from around the capsule in the name of increasing their "openness."

I don't accept Jim's views on "micro-overtones" or indeed, the whole notion of choosing substitute components on the basis of having a much faster rise time than should ever be needed in a low-level audio-frequency circuit. But it was evident that he knew the microphones very well. He was able to make impressive objective improvements in their performance, and beyond that, he was utterly unpretentious (I never heard a single word of self-promotional bullshit from him) and eager to take part in the whole experiment. I appreciated all that.

--best regards

[PH]

As I said in my OP, Jim didn't charge me and I appreciated that. My point was that his opinion differed dramatically from mine, which I found very unusual. While I understand that Jim's approach is certainly unique, I don't buy into the idea of removing perfectly good circuitry and transformers to clean up the signal path and thus achieve a "better" or "cleaner" sound with a Microphone. I don't doubt his skills one bit, but maybe his philosophy a little. It's subjective, so I suppose it's a matter of taste.