Topic: Best budget/mid cardioid mic/mics for use with PCM-M10?

[philgp]

Hi guys, I'm a newbie here, and I hope to take full advantage of the "newbies welcome" claim! So please be patient with me.

I used to do some taping with the cheapest stereo Sony cardio mic and my MD player. I moved from MD to mp3 for my music listening, and abandoned it for recording too. I didn't replace it with anything for recording for years.

Recently I got a PCM-M10 because of the good things I'd been hearing about it (actually, I went into the electronics mall in Beijing looking for a Zoom H2 or an Edirol E-09R, but nowhere had either of those and the Sony was everywhere, so I did some quick research using a store-owner's laptop on this new machine and decided to drop the cash, firstly because I had no choice, secondly because, fortunately, it seemed like it was as good, maybe even a step better, than the aforementioned two). As an introduction, I tried taping using the internal omni mics. It came out so-so. I'm hoping to use my PCM-M10 with external mics from now on.

My questions:
1. Anyone have any recommendations for a stealth stereo mic/mics, probably cardioid? My budget is a couple hundred dollars so probably no Shures! Are there any good ones that run off the ~2.5V plug-in power? That would be ideal. However, if there are any that require more voltage that are still cheap, but significantly better, I would also consider (see separate question about battery boxes below).
2. Cardioids are more suitable for recording rock/metal shows, right? Am I right in saying cardioids are uni directional, whereas omni stands for omnidirectional?
3. Since I was using the omni internal mics, would it have been better to stand nearer the stage instead of in the middle of the venue as I did? There wasn't much stereo separation on my recording. I'd imagine standing further back would be better for cardioids pointed the right angle apart from further back?
4. Is a battery box like a tiny powered amplifier that takes mic signal and converts to line-out? What is bass roll-off? Any recommendations (again, to a tight budget)?
5. If I get two mono mics, can I hook them up to one "battery box"? Does it depend on the maker/model of battery box?

Basically, can someone recommend me either a standalone mic that runs off 2.5V, or a particularly successful setup inc. battery box for quite cheap?

As I mentioned, I am a newbie, but fairly technically minded (I do DSLR photography) so I will be able to grasp some technical concepts. I just don't know much about audio equipment.

Thanks,
Phil

[yates7592]

Just a quick repsonse to the main thrust of your questions.
For a budget cardioid i wouldn't hesitate to recommend the Church Audio CA-14 cards. You will be well within your budget. These mics are better sound quality than a lot of mics for double the price. They will work off plug-in power but you won't be getting the maximum SPL without clipping. So as long as you're not recording really loud stuff you would be ok. A battery box or preamp would power the mics to realise their full potential. You could probably get a BB/preamp and the mics for close to your limit from Church Audio. You can find Chris Church in the 'Retail Yard' section of this site with his latest offers.
Hope this helps, Paul

[nicegrin]

Hi!

Some quick answers to your questions below...

1. Good low budget cards:

*Chris Church CA-11 or CA-14
*Microphone Madness MM HLSC-1
*Sound Professionals  SP CMC-4 or SP CMC-8
*Audix 1280 Cardiod caps + Chris Church active cables

2. Cards are more of an allround mic. Omnis work better close to PA and outdoors and when you don´t have too much crowdnoise near you.
Omnis used far back in an arena sound more distant than a card in that position + picks up more of the "room".

3. You´d probably get a better recording infront of PA that way, given that the internals don´t overload due to high SPL (sound preasure level) .

4. Batteryboxes power your external mics. If you also need to amplify signal you need a pre-amp! Bass-roll off is basically killing or lowering low frequency signals. Will make your recordings sound less muffled sometimes but also thinner. Bass roll off can be done in post so not really crucial to use in your recording.  Sound professionals or Chris church has lots of small and cheap batteryboxes.

5. Yes it depends!   But I suggest you get one of the stereo mics mentioned above and a small 9v batterybox and you are set to go!

Good luck!

Regards,
Nicegrin

Hi guys, I'm a newbie here, and I hope to take full advantage of the "newbies welcome" claim! So please be patient with me.

I used to do some taping with the cheapest stereo Sony cardio mic and my MD player. I moved from MD to mp3 for my music listening, and abandoned it for recording too. I didn't replace it with anything for recording for years.

Recently I got a PCM-M10 because of the good things I'd been hearing about it (actually, I went into the electronics mall in Beijing looking for a Zoom H2 or an Edirol E-09R, but nowhere had either of those and the Sony was everywhere, so I did some quick research using a store-owner's laptop on this new machine and decided to drop the cash, firstly because I had no choice, secondly because, fortunately, it seemed like it was as good, maybe even a step better, than the aforementioned two). As an introduction, I tried taping using the internal omni mics. It came out so-so. I'm hoping to use my PCM-M10 with external mics from now on.

My questions:
1. Anyone have any recommendations for a stealth stereo mic/mics, probably cardioid? My budget is a couple hundred dollars so probably no Shures! Are there any good ones that run off the ~2.5V plug-in power? That would be ideal. However, if there are any that require more voltage that are still cheap, but significantly better, I would also consider (see separate question about battery boxes below).
2. Cardioids are more suitable for recording rock/metal shows, right? Am I right in saying cardioids are uni directional, whereas omni stands for omnidirectional?
3. Since I was using the omni internal mics, would it have been better to stand nearer the stage instead of in the middle of the venue as I did? There wasn't much stereo separation on my recording. I'd imagine standing further back would be better for cardioids pointed the right angle apart from further back?
4. Is a battery box like a tiny powered amplifier that takes mic signal and converts to line-out? What is bass roll-off? Any recommendations (again, to a tight budget)?
5. If I get two mono mics, can I hook them up to one "battery box"? Does it depend on the maker/model of battery box?

Basically, can someone recommend me either a standalone mic that runs off 2.5V, or a particularly successful setup inc. battery box for quite cheap?

As I mentioned, I am a newbie, but fairly technically minded (I do DSLR photography) so I will be able to grasp some technical concepts. I just don't know much about audio equipment.

Thanks,
Phil

[acidjack]

Nicegrin is spot-on.

FWIW, I use the Audix as my "stealth"/small rig, and they are pretty amazing.  $65 for Church cables, $50-70 for a power supply, and another $240 for the caps.

Pretty close to your range, and IMHO, the Audix smoke anything in that range other than maybe an AKG ck9x active setup, which is bigger, harder to deal with, etc.

The Audix>battery box>M10 combo rocks every time.

[nicegrin]

I deliberately excluded the AKG ck9x (x=1 omni, x= cardiod, x=3 hypercardiod, x=4 figure 8?) setup as I´d say that will be your cheapest option when upgrading from low budget mics.
The AKG ck9x setup will set you back atleast $500 as you need 2xcaps ($200 each from full compass for example) + hardwire cables to the capsules + add a preamp (~$100). So this setup will probably go for $500-$700.

This might however be the only reasonable "small" cardiod setup between the low budget mics and the active setups (that all start on $1K new atleast).

regards
N.

[acidjack]

Yeah, ck91 = card, ck92 = omni, ck93 = hyper. 

The ck9x setup is overall better sounding than the Audix but takes a TON more work to deal with, as you point out, not least of which, having someone modify the caps and do the wiring properly.  I guess if you buy the actual active cables that AKG makes, you avoid some of the issues, but raise the cost.

To the extent the OP doesn't find the Audix to be too much of a stretch financially, I'd go that route.  I like the sound a ton better than any other small cards, and they are even acceptable as an open rig.  I've never seen an A/B done with the bodies vs. using the Church cables, but I'd be curious...

[DSatz]

philgp, welcome. You're getting some good practical advice so I just want to answer your "theoretical" question about pickup patterns. Basically you've got it right--"omni" is short for "omnidirectional" although in reality, such microphones aren't usually omnidirectional at high frequencies, so they still have to be aimed deliberately.

And "cardioid" is indeed the same pattern that Sony and some other microphone manufacturers have called "unidirectional," but that is an almost complete misnomer. It's nothing like a flashlight beam, let alone a laser beam (which would truly deserve the name "unidirectional"). Cardioid is a rather broad pickup pattern; all that it really excludes is sound coming from directly, or very nearly directly, behind the mikes. Cardioids pick up plenty of sound from the sides as well as above and beneath. They even pick up a fair amount from the 50% of the universe that's not in front of them--as you can easily hear if you hold one in your hands and slowly rotate it away from you while speaking into it.

Omni and cardioid are just two points on a spectrum of microphone pickup patterns. Omni is one end and cardioid is in the middle. Any pattern between omni and cardioid is possible (e.g. so-called "wide cardioids" exist, and some people like them a lot, including me). Also, on the other side of the spectrum past cardioid there are such things as supercardioid and hypercardioid; that side of the spectrum ends in a pure bidirectional pattern ("figure-8"). So a cardioid is midway between an omni and ... that.

The thing is, when you're recording in stereo with two or more microphones, a whole other set of phenomena become involved: the way people's ears and brains interpret stereophonic sound. To some extent each stereo pickup technique has its own characteristics that aren't entirely obvious just from knowing about the individual microphones. It's kind of like the way water doesn't resemble either hydrogen or oxygen. So while it's definitely worth learning about the characteristics of individual microphones, there's also a whole layer of discussion about stereo recording techniques specifically, and sometimes the results can be quite surprising.

Again, welcome, and I hope you have lots of good times both here and recording your favorite sounds.

[mr qpl]

I've heard a few sets with the Audix rig and they sound nice. I looked for some on line and couldn't find the 1280C. Whereabouts does one purchase these?

[Neilyboy]

I've heard a few sets with the Audix rig and they sound nice. I looked for some on line and couldn't find the 1280C. Whereabouts does one purchase these?

if i remember right i think they are special order from most places look up fullcompass or call their support. I think they were around 115 a cap..

neil

[su6oxone]

Yep, Full Compass can order these for you.  The quote I remember was close to what was mentioned above.

[hi and lo]

The ck9x setup is overall better sounding than the Audix but takes a TON more work to deal with...

I have a friend who sometimes runs AKG ck93 hyper-cardioid capsules (mod) > RM 3-wire battery box > iRiver H120. He purchased the setup from someone on this board.

As nicely as I can put it... the tapes made with this rig are not good. After many attempts I would say they are barely listen-able. He's since switched to an MM-HLSC II rig which is giving much better results.

I would love to hear favorable samples from anyone else with this rig. I think many are facinated by the thought of using ck9x caps, but personal experience leads me to believe it's a wasted effort. Would also like to hear some Audix samples.

[fmaderjr]

The ck9x setup is overall better sounding than the Audix but takes a TON more work to deal with...

I have a friend who sometimes runs AKG ck93 hyper-cardioid capsules (mod) > RM 3-wire battery box > iRiver H120. He purchased the setup from someone on this board.

As nicely as I can put it... the tapes made with this rig are not good. After many attempts I would say they are barely listen-able. He's since switched to an MM-HLSC II rig which is giving much better results.

I would love to hear favorable samples from anyone else with this rig. I think many are facinated by the thought of using ck9x caps, but personal experience leads me to believe it's a wasted effort. Would also like to hear some Audix samples.

I don't know about the AKG ck93 caps, but nobody else on this board has said they don't sound good and many, like acidjack, say they sound great.

I do know that the MM-HLSC mics are very sensitive and the H120 adds a lot of noise to recordings if you have to set the gain above 24 (some say even lower). I would guess that the problem with your friend's AKG recordings are that they are not very sensitve and he needs a preamplifier instead of just a battery box. If the AKG's are in fact low sensitivity they would sound much worse going into a H120 than would the high sensitivity MM-HLSC's unless what he was recording was very loud.

In short, though the MM-HLSC's are good mics, I suspect the reason you think they sound so much better than the AKG's is because your friend is using a H120 (which is noisy at high gain settings) as his recorder and the MM-HLSC's don't need as much gain.

[hi and lo]

Unfortunately, the music he was taping was extremely loud. Has nothing to do with the iriver and he now uses an m10. After about 30 tapes I just gave up ever thinking those mics could sound good. Cool rig, but it just didn't make the tapes one would hope for.

[illconditioned]

The ck9x setup is overall better sounding than the Audix but takes a TON more work to deal with...

I have a friend who sometimes runs AKG ck93 hyper-cardioid capsules (mod) > RM 3-wire battery box > iRiver H120. He purchased the setup from someone on this board.

As nicely as I can put it... the tapes made with this rig are not good. After many attempts I would say they are barely listen-able. He's since switched to an MM-HLSC II rig which is giving much better results.

I would love to hear favorable samples from anyone else with this rig. I think many are facinated by the thought of using ck9x caps, but personal experience leads me to believe it's a wasted effort. Would also like to hear some Audix samples.

I don't know about the AKG ck93 caps, but nobody else on this board has said they don't sound good and many, like acidjack, say they sound great.

I do know that the MM-HLSC mics are very sensitive and the H120 adds a lot of noise to recordings if you have to set the gain above 24 (some say even lower). I would guess that the problem with your friend's AKG recordings are that they are not very sensitve and he needs a preamplifier instead of just a battery box. If the AKG's are in fact low sensitivity they would sound much worse going into a H120 than would the high sensitivity MM-HLSC's unless what he was recording was very loud.

In short, though the MM-HLSC's are good mics, I suspect the reason you think they sound so much better than the AKG's is because your friend is using a H120 (which is noisy at high gain settings) as his recorder and the MM-HLSC's don't need as much gain.

I have mentioned the limitations of CK93 a few times.  They have smooth response, low noise, and have a stable polar pattern, but they lack the detail of other mics.  If self-noise is not an issue (eg., amplified music), I like the Sennheiser MKE40 a lot.

[acidjack]

I think the 93s are good *for the price* and *compared to what else is out there at that price* - same as with the Audix.

Unless you're talking small omni mics, where there is a wealth of well-regarded tiny mics (DPA 406x, Countryman B3, Nevatons, etc. etc.), I don't know of any truly small and inexpensive cardiod that is *great* sounding.  The Audix are on the thinner side (look at the freq charts - big boost above 3dB) and the ck9x are on the warmer side.  I agree with Richard that they absolutely lack some of the detail of better quality mics - that are also more expensive - and some of the less-expensive but easier to engineer (AFAIK) omni options.   

You can hear samples of what I did if you Google "acidjack" "nyctaper" and the then type of mic.  I've posted a few things I did with both the ck91 and ck93 on the site, as well as several shows with the Audix. I preferred the warmer-but-less-detailed sound of the ck9x, but I feel like the preference these days with a lot of folks (at least all these people who keep telling everyone to buy CA-11s) is for mics with less bass response and more high freq clarity.  I thought the Audix performed nicely outside at the Pavement shows I just did, partially because the boost to the mids/highs compensated for the outdoor environment (at least, I think that's what they were doing... in any event, the pulls sounded way better than what I get with them indoors).

I wouldn't say my pulls with the ck9x were "bad" - some of them I actually like as well as what I've gotten with 4021s, or at least close.  I bought them after I heard some really nice samples. So I wouldn't say that what Richard says of them is *wrong* - but I would say, "show me a small cardiod solution in that price range that is better".  I think that is a tougher assignment, esp depending on your definition of "small."  The Audix are truly small - smaller than 402x or Schoeps and the same as CA-11s - and therefore, to me, made the most sense to keep as a "backup"/smallest rig. 

I may go out with the Audix this w/e for a lark and run a 4ch rig with the mk41s on two channels and the Audix on the other. The venue sounds awful so the 4021s won't be ideal anyway, and I am curious how the Audix will respond, having such less flat response.