Topic: Best Vocal Mic for $1000 ? (Read 12328 times)

Ryan Leigh Patterson · « **on:** February 08, 2005, 05:51:22 PM »

Okay, so today I picked up my first batch of essential mics.

KM184 (pair)
MD421
57x3
D112
C451
Rode NT5 (pair)
Rode NT1000
Studio Projects C1

Now, I'm also looking at getting a couple older AKG C414 EBs repaired in the near future, and modifying an MXL 2001 with the Royer tube kit, but I've yet to aquire a decent vocal mic. I grabbed an NT1000 and a SP C1 because they were cheap, and for the price of both, I couldn't get one great mic. I got the NT5 pair for live stereo recording and other sources I wouldn't want to stick my 184s (like rack toms !!, which they sound great on, IMO).

I need to grab a decent vocal mic, preferably tube, for around $1000, give or take. Any ideas?? Or should I wait until I can afford a Brauner etc..

hargerst · « **Reply #1 on:** February 08, 2005, 11:56:55 PM »

Is this for general studio use, or just for 1 specific singer? Some tube mics to consider:

The MXL V69ME
The MXL V77
The Studio Projects T3

Some other good vocal mics in that price range:

The Coles 4038 Ribbon
The AEA R84 Ribbon
The Shure SM7 Dynamic.
The Neumann TLM 103

And for under $100, pick up an MXL V67 to keep around.

Some of the above mics will be spectacular on some voices, less so on others.

James Duncan · « **Reply #2 on:** February 09, 2005, 08:42:38 AM »

For under US$1,000, you could also consider the Rode K2. I have an older NTK, which I love, but I hear the newer K2 is a bith smoother, less sibilant, and obviously has the multi-patterns.

hargerst · « **Reply #3 on:** February 09, 2005, 09:36:31 AM »

Yes, I've been hearing some good things about the newer Rode mics, but I haven't had a chance to actually hear any of them.

japhy4529 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 09, 2005, 12:53:15 PM »

I would have to also recommend the Rode K2 tube mic. We had a session last year where the Producer brought one of these in (fresh of the truck from sweetwater) and it sounded fantastic on Electric Guitar & Vox.

hasbeen · « **Reply #5 on:** February 16, 2005, 10:52:22 PM »

Try an AT4060 tube mic, and don't forget the Shure KSM44, a real versatile workhorse of a mic...

brandondrury · « **Reply #6 on:** February 22, 2005, 01:03:55 PM »

For some reason I always thought the Marshall V69 was $700. It turns out that it is $300. I picked one up last week. I hope to pick up a second one very very soon.

This mic blew me away. I own a C414, AT4050, AT4033, etc. They all have something I don't like about the lower mids on just about every recording I've done. The V69 actually sounds right. It sounds modern and the vocal sits in the mix without any eq or effects. Granted, this was just for one singer, but I could hear so many of the problems I've had in the past solve themselves.

I highly recommend it. It's been great for me anyway.

Brandon

hargerst · « **Reply #7 on:** February 22, 2005, 01:38:44 PM »

Brandon,

You were probably fooled by the looks - it happens to look like it should cost around a $1,000.

compasspnt · « **Reply #8 on:** February 22, 2005, 07:49:00 PM »

I will have to second the selection of the R

exit 2 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 23, 2005, 12:57:34 PM »

in my humble opinion, the CAD VSM-1 (recently discontinued, so you can pick them up for less if you look around) blows most of these other mics away in the sub $1k category. Definitely a sleeper mic.

Ken · « **Reply #10 on:** February 23, 2005, 08:57:37 PM »

I really like the AT4060.

I have a Lawson L251 that I won in an AES drawing (see? real people actually win these drawing sometimes) which I absolutely love, but that's over twice your budget. But I mention this because I figure if this Lawson is this good, some of their L47s which are a lot lower in price might be really great mics to look into. Plus the Lawsons are really nice people...

Ken / Blueberry Buddha Studio

brandondrury · « **Reply #11 on:** February 24, 2005, 12:19:52 AM »

Hey Ken,

How does the AT4060 compare with your Lawson 251? Do you use them 50/50? Is one obviously superior in most cases?

I've been tempted to snag a big boy condenser, but I'm just not sure where to put my pennies for maximum impact on my mixes.

Also, how does the AT4060 compare to an AT4050 or 4033? I have both and they don't excite me, but the only mic that has excited me thus far as the Marshall V69 I got last week.

Yes, the V69 did look expensive. They should have made it look like a piece of shit so I would have bought it 2 years ago.

Brandon

AnthonyV · « **Reply #12 on:** February 24, 2005, 03:15:37 PM »

Add these to the list:

Microtech Geffel M930
Lawson L47FET

peace,
-ants

AnthonyV · « **Reply #13 on:** February 24, 2005, 03:17:09 PM »

oh wait, you asked for tube Rolling Eyes

Ken · « **Reply #14 on:** February 24, 2005, 03:47:12 PM »

Brandondrury,

In comparing the AT4060 to the L251, the short answer is, of course, it depends. I prefer the AT4060 for more sibilant vocals and guitar cabinets. I prefer the L251 for most vocals and room mic. I haven't compared them to other things. The L251 is more flexible because of the infinitely variable polar patterns. The AT4060 is a fixed cardioid mic. The L251 is about twice as much as the AT4060, but you know, they're both nice mics. The L251 has that wonderful top end, whereas the L251 is very neutral sounding, and that's one of the reasons why I prefer the L251 for vocals in general, but again, there are applications when pulling out the AT4060 is better. If I had to own only one, I would choose the L251. I can't begin to tell you how lucky I feel that I own both of them.

I think that the AT4060 sounds nicer than the AT4033. It sounds fuller, and there's something about the midrange that sounds more pleasing to me, but I'm not sure what since I've never done any head-to-head comparisons. The AT4060 isn't what I would call an "exciting" sounding mic. It's very smooth and neutral sounding, and doesn't sound like what people associate with a tube mic (whatever that is). It's quiet, smooth, and neutral.

Norwood · « **Reply #15 on:** February 25, 2005, 03:20:46 PM »

I'd definitely put the 4060 in the pot the pick from. Also the Rode NTK, I bought a MXL v67 just for percussion and electric guitar and I use it more than any other mic i have. I've used it on almost everything from snare to banjo and a couple of times even on a bgv. It's like a freakin swiss army knife, and only cost like $89.

Ken · « **Reply #16 on:** February 26, 2005, 10:04:30 AM »

How does the MXL V67 compare in terms of sound quality to the NTK or the AT4060? Thanks!

Norwood · « **Reply #17 on:** February 27, 2005, 01:40:04 AM »

The V67 is a little more neutral, the others kind of color the sound (favorably) adding their valve, tube"ness", the V67 is pretty flat with a nice boost in the top end. I am always surprised how well this mic does next to mics costing 10 or 15 time more. I use it in places I used to use my AKG414(hardly ever use it anymore) Its a great mic, the only drawback is it is only cardioid, of course so are the other two. If you want a variable pattern mic check out the Rode K2. Another great mic. For the gear sluts that might read this, I'm not saying its the best mic ever, its just a great all around utility mic, that can be used and sound more than acceptable on a wide variety of sources... think of it as the 57 of condensers Razz

Ken · « **Reply #18 on:** February 27, 2005, 10:25:52 AM »

I'm a little surprised that it might be even more neutral than the AT4060, which strikes me as a neutral sounding mic that doesn't sound "tubey" in the stereotypical sense of the word (realizing that tube mics or tube anything don't necessarily have what we equate with a "tube"-saturated sound). I'm not arguing, just expressing a little surprise. But then again, I haven't heard it either! <g>

Norwood · « **Reply #19 on:** February 27, 2005, 10:17:47 PM »

Ken wrote on Sun, 27 February 2005 07:25

I'm a little surprised that it might be even more neutral than the AT4060, which strikes me as a neutral sounding mic that doesn't sound "tubey" in the stereotypical sense of the word (realizing that tube mics or tube anything don't necessarily have what we equate with a "tube"-saturated sound). I'm not arguing, just expressing a little surprise. But then again, I haven't heard it either! <g>

Yeah on its own I would say that it is a fairly neutral mic, but if you compare it to its brothers the 4040 or 4050, it IMO does have some tube coloration, nothing like a M149 or rode classic but its definitely there.

James Duncan · « **Reply #20 on:** February 28, 2005, 06:50:11 AM »

Has anyone tried the SoundDeluxe U195 for about that price??? (Cardiod only)

standupbass · « **Reply #21 on:** February 28, 2005, 02:26:17 PM »

I like the U195. For most voices I try it on (part-time, casual) it is often better than a TLM 103 or BLUE baby bottle. Great on kick and standup bass, as well. I haven't heard the Rode or AT mics mentioned in this thread, though. For a baritone I used it for an entire CD, trying the other condensors as well as a Beyer ribbon, PL20, Senn 421 and Oktava/Lomo as well.

daQuad · « **Reply #22 on:** March 07, 2005, 01:14:08 PM »

in that $1k range, used Beyer MC740s come up, they list at over 2 grand, are multi-pattern LDC, extremely neutral while still sounding "big"

CF

Don S · « **Reply #23 on:** March 30, 2005, 01:25:05 PM »

One vote for the audio technica 4047!

LawrenceF · « **Reply #24 on:** April 05, 2005, 08:33:34 PM »

I'll have to vote for the MXL V69 also. This was undoubtedly the biggest surprise in a mic purchase I've ever made. When you spend $750 (AT4050) you have certain expectations. When I bought my NTK I had certain expectations, which it delivered.

For $300 I expected "good" I had no idea I'd get "great".

Lawrence

beauarts · « **Reply #25 on:** May 06, 2005, 10:57:24 AM »

Shure SM7
Gefell 930
RCA BK11 can be very cool but maybe you'd want to try the AEA 84 or 92 ribbon

R/E/P Community

Author Topic: Best Vocal Mic for $1000 ? (Read 12328 times)