Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jules]

Well?

I'll be fukked if I can find a pair to try out so I think I will just bite the bullet and get a new pair. I'm hoping to use em for overheads.

[carne_de_res]

in my VERY humble opinion

-you can do no wrong with a 160 for overdrive/crunch
guitar sounds (if the amp is _very_ loud you're probably not going to get good results).

-strings (viola,violin,cello) and horns (sax,trumpet and the like) come out good with a 160.

-when used as a drum overhead the 160 can get a very smooth tone,
sweetening the harshness of some cymbals freqs (2khz,3khz,7 khz,11 khz).you know the sound of a 451B  used as an overhead? well,think of the exact opposite!

-personally i found it very good on some vocals (slow tempo ballads where the singer gets "intimate").i wouldn't recommend it on fast tempo songs.

it is the only ribbon i own,but it has marked a huge improvement in my small mic collection.

[carne_de_res]

oh,i forgot to tell you the 160 is great for jazz guitar.

[chickenbop]

 I think m-160's suck and are overpriced as overheads.It seems I'm the only one who thinks so though.The fact that they're hypercardoid made me hope that they would be great in x/y pretty close.You know-so I could get a wider image out of x/y while also getting more separation than usual.But the proximity on the m-160's is super nasty.I've heard people say they use a m-160 as a hat mic also but I tried that with no success.I had the mic like a foot above the hat and at first I thought I'd blown a ribbon.The bottom end was terrible.So for me,any supposed benefit of the hypercardoid pattern is cancelled out by the fact that you can't use the mic up close. The frequency graph of a m-160 is based on being 1 meter(about 3 feet) from the object.So,if you're miking about a foot away it's like plus 10db down under.
I recently got some groove tube gt-44's that are incredible as overheads.They smooth out the harshness of cymbals the way I've heard PEOPLE SAY the m-160's do.JULES-DON'T BUY THE M-160's!

[slicraider]

 

Jules,

I use them on 95% of the guitars I record. They sound great much fuller than sticking a 57 on the grill. I use them about 6" away from the grill. I once got booked by an A&R guy for a guitar session and he booked six hours for the tune. We had a great player with a great rig all I did was run the 160 into a 1073 and in three hours he was telling me how much he liked it over beers.

Rick

[Fletcher]

I love the things for guitars [though not quite as much as an R-121 as it's a bit less variable in tonal nature with positioning changes] and congas.  I have never found a better conga mic!!

I kinda have to agree with the bro that doesn't dig them for overheads and H/H... I really haven't had a whole lot of luck with them in either for those applications... nor have I had many great experiences with GT-44's for overheads [and yes, I do have a pair!!].  I quite like the GT-44's for acoustic instruments, including double bass... they're not bad "room" mics... and they're the tits for 'incidental percussion'... I like that you can change the capsules around... I like the overall tone of the mic... but I'm not wild about them for overheads.

As always... YMMV.

[Jules]

hehe

Keep em coming!

Diggin the opinions so far.

I predict I will like it and my junior engineers will not! (but will settle into using it)

See I like super hyped cymbals but live in fear of hihat sizzle all over the place...

I have found that EQed ribbon mics can get me there

[covert]

chickenbop wrote on Wed, 05 May 2004 22:53

I think m-160's suck and are overpriced as overheads.It seems I'm the only one who thinks so though.The fact that they're hypercardoid made me hope that they would be great in x/y pretty close.You know-so I could get a wider image out of x/y while also getting more separation than usual.But the proximity on the m-160's is super nasty.I've heard people say they use a m-160 as a hat mic also but I tried that with no success.I had the mic like a foot above the hat and at first I thought I'd blown a ribbon.The bottom end was terrible.So for me,any supposed benefit of the hypercardoid pattern is cancelled out by the fact that you can't use the mic up close. The frequency graph of a m-160 is based on being 1 meter(about 3 feet) from the object.So,if you're miking about a foot away it's like plus 10db down under. I recently got some groove tube gt-44's that are incredible as overheads.They smooth out the harshness of cymbals the way I've heard PEOPLE SAY the m-160's do.They only cost me $399 a piece from banjo mart. JULES-DON'T BUY THE M-160's!

Okay, do you hate them on everything or just OH?  I'm also looking for a pair, and if don't like yours, we could discuss a sale

[chickenbop]

I already sold them.I liked them on guitar cabinet alright but you definately don't want to stick one right up on the grill.Unless you want to cut a ton of weird bass out.

[(Brian) Frost]

I dont like mine on Overhead duties,  because most of the drummers I work with play delicate cymbols with nice smooth tones.  I prefer a good neumann LD for my OH duties.  Havent tried it on hat but could see how that could work if you like using a hat mic.  I prefer 2 LD OH mics and a kick and condenser snare to capture the whole kit.  

I do use the 160 all the time for trumpet and bone.  Fantastic for eihter of these.  Sometimes I add a touch of high end to the bone.  The mic takes EQ nicely as others have suggested.  

I also like the 160 on electric guitar  (agree 6" off the grill works great).  I often add a room mic (neumann 563 with pressure omni) to get  a big but thick electric sound.  

160 on individual strings sounds great.  I can EQ and effect that to sound like it was recorded in a big space.  If I have the big space, I prefer a LD 10 feet away to close micing.  160 is nice because we dont always have a concert hall.  

You should check with stephen sank tho.  I have the old 160.  I also have a new 260 which appearantly has a poopy transformer in it that cuts bass at 100.  I dont know if the new 160 has this same problem.  Fixing it is gonna cost me $50.

Frost

[Dan-O]

I have no experience with the M160, but own 4 M260's. 2 matched and 2 Sank modded. A bit cheaper than the M160 too. They are my goto for OH's. The poster who said they keep the highs from getting brittle is dead on. They provide a tonal balance right off the bat and the pattern keeps things tight. I also don't find the slight bump in the lows a problem and actually find it quite useful depending. Funny enough the Sank mods have greater extension in the low-end but I prefer the oem's for OH duties. (The Sank's kill on acoustic stringed instruments though.) Depending on the kit and the project usually I run them though a Pendulum MDP-1a or Phoenix DRS-2. In my room this combination has always delivered.

[Jules]

Dig it!

Dig it!