Post by: Revolution on October 03, 2005, 02:49:40 AM
I am curious to find feedback from anyone who has used Rode microphones and their opinions of them.
I myself own a K2 and Classic and find them to be very good although I once owned a NT1 which I thought sounded useless.
I have noticed Terry Mannings website has a good rave on them so was wondering what others had to say.
Post by: Jeff4h on October 03, 2005, 10:15:12 AM
Post by: Frob on October 03, 2005, 03:11:06 PM
Post by: James Duncan on October 03, 2005, 03:19:54 PM
I still have a pair of the NT5's, which see pretty limited use, but I will occassionally drag them out as a ride cymbal or a hat mic.
Their newer mics like the K2, the NT2A and the NT2000 are supposed to be much better however.
Post by: Revolution on October 03, 2005, 06:17:54 PM
It seems this post has been relocated here from Klaus Heynes forum which to me appears like Microphone snobbery.
I would much rather an opinion from Klaus than just a removal so I guess maybe he just hasn,t either
1)tried the K2 or Classic
2)dosn't respect Terry Mannings opinion
3)or just hates these mics .
Explanation ??
If it matters I own a U87
David Wilson
-------------
Post by: Ryan Leigh Patterson on October 03, 2005, 06:43:52 PM
I own an NT1000 and a pair of NT5s...both bought new (ouch!!)
Not the smartest thing I've ever wasted my money on....
They are better than alot of other cheap mics out there, but not really useable in the pro world. The brittle top end and rather boring mid range are, well, brittle and boring.
My NT5s occasionally see use as talkback mics, additional snare mics, ride cymbal mics.... basically whenever I run out of my choice SDCs and LDCs. My NT1000 sees occasionaly duty on background vocals, floor tom, knee level kick, second kick, or distant room mic.
Wish I'd never bought them, wish I'd saved my money for a Coles 4038...
Oh well, I'll keep them cus they aint worth selling and I'll stick em where I'd never stick good mics, plus the NT5 case works well for my KM184s...
Post by: Revolution on October 03, 2005, 07:06:12 PM
Yes I remember trying a NT5 compared to a Neumann KM184 and thought the NT5 extremely disappointing (even for the price).
The Classic is very good though except for a spike in the top end which the K2 doesn't have (the K2 is a little boring though as you have suggested).
The Classic to me sounds great on a bass amp or outside a kick drum also had good results on acoustic guitar and room mic for drums and has out performed my U87 at these tasks.
David Wilson
-------------
Post by: Ryan Leigh Patterson on October 03, 2005, 07:21:45 PM
Post by: Revolution on October 03, 2005, 10:15:30 PM
David Wilson
--------------
Post by: Trumpetman2 on October 04, 2005, 08:01:22 AM
Post by: Tim Halligan on October 04, 2005, 10:16:53 AM
I want to support the local guy - even if he does come across like a used-car salesman - but the product sucks IMHO.
Cheers,
Tim
Post by: hargerst on October 04, 2005, 11:18:47 AM
I guess Klause feels that some products are inappropriate for his forum, whereas I am curious about everything, especially cheap stuff. But then, that should come as no surprise, since I started out my new life in the recording industry as a "bottom-feeder".
Post by: Tomas Danko on October 04, 2005, 01:45:14 PM
I'd rather use the K2 than, say, a Neumann M147, most of the time.
Post by: Greg Youngman on October 04, 2005, 03:36:16 PM
Post by: Chad Sims on October 04, 2005, 04:46:06 PM
Post by: Phil on October 04, 2005, 05:36:49 PM
| hargerst wrote on Tue, 04 October 2005 08:18 |
I guess Klause feels that some products are inappropriate for his forum, whereas I am curious about everything, especially cheap stuff. But then, that should come as no surprise, since I started out my new life in the recording industry as a "bottom-feeder". |
Interesting to read the comments about Klaus' forum, since I get the feeling that I have just shown up at a Porsche Rally in a Honda, when I go there (which is infrequently). I can understand the "high-end only" attitude from a business standpoint -- more income for the least effort -- but I can't help but want to see a little of the hotrod approach. That is, take something somewhat ordinary and turn it into something quite extraordinary -- like a sixty-something Camaro that boasts about 900 horsepower. Surely there must exist a bargain mic that, with a tweak here and there, can deliver a no-excuses pro performance.
Post by: Malcolm Boyce on October 04, 2005, 09:57:31 PM
| Chad Sims wrote on Tue, 04 October 2005 17:46 |
Anybody still owning an NT1a should try it on bass cab. |
I have a couple of NT1a... I will try that for sure. I've had great luck with the NT1a on percussion instruments such as marimba and other mallet instruments, and also on some stringed acoustic instruments, and even grand piano.
The NT3 has become my new fav mic for hi-hats... Works super in live settings as an all purpose condenser for things like banjo, dobro, fiddle, accordion, etc. I need a few more of them.
I love my Rode mics. Look forward to more. I think my next will be an NT1000... or two!
Cheers,
Malcolm
Post by: Frob on October 05, 2005, 12:43:03 AM
Post by: Trumpetman2 on October 05, 2005, 09:04:13 AM
| Phil wrote on Tue, 04 October 2005 16:36 |
Interesting to read the comments about Klaus' forum, since I get the feeling that I have just shown up at a Porsche Rally in a Honda, when I go there (which is infrequently). I can understand the "high-end only" attitude from a business standpoint -- more income for the least effort -- but I can't help but want to see a little of the hotrod approach. That is, take something somewhat ordinary and turn it into something quite extraordinary -- like a sixty-something Camaro that boasts about 900 horsepower. Surely there must exist a bargain mic that, with a tweak here and there, can deliver a no-excuses pro performance. |
There is, it is the Oktava MK-319 with the "plastic resonator" removed!! I did this and truly believe that the mic is now amonst the best sounding LDCs!!!!
Post by: Mark Gensman on October 13, 2005, 04:14:39 AM
It is too bright for most vocals, sax, micing a guitar amp, etc. but as a room mic for the drums it works quite well.
I frequently use an NT2 in the bluegrass world for bands that insist on using only one large diaphragm condenser on state and it works better than the AT 4033 that is a sort of standard for that use.
Post by: Mark Gensman on October 13, 2005, 04:16:31 AM
Post by: Hallams on October 19, 2005, 01:31:06 AM
I now use the K2 , NTV and a pair of NT5's.Th K2 is great and does not have the rise in the top end that the NTV has. I dont own the Neuman pencil mics but do compare the NT5's with a pair of AKG 415's that i have.I find the nt5's useable but different to the 451's.The AKG's have a harder sound but more detailed.So i often go for the NT5's for drum OH for a softer sound. I also use them on the neck of a double bass with a ribbon on the body.
Post by: Soundog on October 26, 2005, 01:37:50 AM
When I came back to the NTK, I tried a number of different tubes in it just to see what affect it had but still thought it too sibilant. I ended up putting the original JAN phillips tube back in.
After upgrading other parts of my signal chain, I picked up the NTK after a couple of years and found it to be a wonderful mic. I am now using a top flight pre-amp and cables, and all traces of spitty sibilance have gone. I still think it's very bright, but it is also very smooth and natural sounding - and has low noise which is critical for a capella vocal detail.
Although it is not my current favourite, I've kept it and will not sell it because it gives me detailed and particularly rich male bass vocals.
By contrast, I don't like my K2 as much. I guess I like bright mics, but the K2 is too flat for my taste. It sounds like it has too much top end lopped off it, but in a shootout with my E47, I preferred the K2 ( for choral music ) which had more detail and resolution in the upper mid range.
I've noticed this with a couple of my mics - that after ageing them for a while ( over a year or two ), the sibilance seems to reduce noticeably and the mics sound better.
I'm pretty sure this is not my imagination because I have the recordings to listen to, but I am curious about the sonic physics of ageing capsules. I don't think it's dust either because I store my mics meticulously. Anyone else have an opinion on this ?
Post by: Revolution on October 31, 2005, 12:10:11 AM
Sounds very nice with more character than before.
Like it better than my U87 at the moment.
Post by: z on November 12, 2005, 01:36:14 PM
I must say I was disappointed at first as I was actually looking for an switchable omni tube with heaps of character for vocal, upright bass and kit overhead and for me it's too neutral.
I had been using a CMV563 bottle with M7 capsule via Gefell adapter at the studio I was working at and absolutely loved the super top end and excellent detail in the upper mids which worked wonders for room miking, overheads and vocals...Possibly the most sensational female vocal sound I've ever heard!
I did have problems with it's reliability and crackles and always needed to boost the bottom end or slightly reduce the sibilant frequencies occasionally and It was noisy but I still love those babies.
Last week I started recording an album for a well know singer with an awesomely dynamic voice with beautiful air and we both agreed that the K2 is the best sounding mic I have for her voice and she preferred it to the Manley Gold reference she'd be used to...which is really something...Very detailed, fantastic dynamic range due to non-existent self noise, smooth top without being nasty and just the right amount of mid and bottom needing only compression (I like the LA2A sound too for may voice, slowish attack and fast release) to sit perfectly in the mix of drums, noisy guitars, cello and upright bass.
Definitely beat the Neumann TLM 103 and Audio Technica 4050 in this particular use...we didn't even listen to more than a few words of them before deciding without any doubt on the K2.
We did like the Ribbon and decided to use it for it's darkness and bottom end later but never did...
I also used it on the upright bass player in combination with a Nady RSM-2 ribbon mic (actually it's a Thomann RB500 which is actually what the Nady is! but that's a whole other story) in omni about 1 foot away from the bridge and she and I both were floored by the sound of the K2 alone. It was sooooo good that she quickly booked me to record her solo bass album which she is doing for her masters in music (she is a pro orchestral and popular bass player here in Berlin).
The story does not end there...the k2 has now ousted my ribbons as my favourite drum overhead mic (I'm a self recording drummer who plays on almost everything I record too) and sounds monstrous on a bass cab! Sounds great on solo snare played with brushes and ok on acoustic guitar although I prefer fet mics for acoustic guitar for a little more attack and crispness.
The variable pattern is superb for recording slightly different sounds when multitracking voice too...I tend to prefer more of a figure 8 pattern for voice (2pm on the k2's dial).
What I really wanted/want was/Is a Wagner U47 (4,500 EURO!!)for it's special character (and I must admit prestige!)and the k2 is not that but what it is is a ridiculously quiet and superbly made piece of audio recording gear that has many uses and sounds exceptionally good most of the time and forgettably neutral the rest. I am loving loving not having to EQ anything recorded with it when mixing...it just works superbly full stop.
A bargain that my future child will probably cherish just like the PZMs and Akg D200S I got from my dad way back when..
Buy it and use it for a while in a real mix situation and I'm sure you won't be unhappy. After all, mics are for capturing the sound as efficiently as possible and the K2 does that with leaps and bounds...
simon
======================================
Bit of background. Been recording using my dad's gear first (from the age of 6 helped him setup his mics, plug-in his leads etc...He was a very good jazz and orchestral engineer who built his own gear in the 70's) and since 19 as professional engineer for both bands and film sound and since the age of 21 as self recording session and touring drummer having played on dozens of albums and film soundtracks. (now i'm 34).
Now live in Berlin, germany after re-locating from Australia 5 years ago and work daily as musician engineer with own mobile and home based studio with Creamware SCOPE DSP system KRK V8, KROK passive monitors, analog 2" and 24bit RME and computer MAC based gear. I have around 35 microphones including large and small diaphrgms and dynamics from my father's and my own 60 odd years of combined collecting from Sanken, AKG, Gefell, Neumann, Audio Technica, Shure, Beyer, obscure RFT East German stuff and 2 of the possibly first, original Rode Nt1s sold in Australia . Which look like pieces of rubbish but are very good for kick drum, snare and toms and acoustic guitar...yes really!
Post by: davidelkinsrice on January 18, 2006, 07:02:48 PM
Would you mind giving some more detail of the changes that you made to your K2. I'd like to add better components to my K2. I just added a Amperex Tube and it has made a big difference. Thanks for your help. Would you recommend changing to better resistor as well. I'm completely new to this idea of modifying a microphone. I've read a bit about how Klaus Heyne has done so and made a living at it. Thanks for any help.
David Rice
Post by: compasspnt on January 18, 2006, 07:53:52 PM
Post by: smorgdonkey on January 18, 2006, 11:22:03 PM
Post by: Revolution on January 19, 2006, 12:18:12 AM
Took out the Hitano electrolitic caps and replaced with panasonic.There were two caps under the PCB that I replaced with Wimma polyprop (kept all values the same).
I don't have a stock K2 to test side by side but am enjoying using it a little more.It's a little hard to describe what I feel the difference is (probbly a little less bland).
Post by: wavdoctor on January 19, 2006, 08:56:29 AM
HB
Post by: James Duncan on January 19, 2006, 09:20:01 AM
Post by: compasspnt on January 19, 2006, 09:37:05 AM
It comes with an NOS JAN tube (same tube used by ELA-M 251) and Jensen output transformer.
I always put the II up against my U-48, M49, ELUX-251, U-87, Gefell UM-92s, or other similar mic when auditioning for lead vocals. The II wins as often as any of the others.
It can be used on almost anything.
Also, just recently I used the 2000 for the first time. I second the comments above concerning this mic.
Post by: George_ on January 19, 2006, 09:41:06 AM
| Quote: |
I have noticed Terry Mannings website has a good rave on them so was wondering what others had to say. |
I am so sorry terry.. any chance you are near switzerland in the next few month? will spend you some beers for bringin up this topic.
do you get any money from them now because of the selfgoing marketing?
cheers
Post by: compasspnt on January 19, 2006, 11:21:56 AM
I would love to see you, should I get near Switzerland...by the way, that's a beautiful place! But I do not drink beer, so you'll have to buy me a Perrier or two.
No, I do not ever get any money from Rode, and never have. I just "accidentally" discovered that their microphones were good, professional products, despite the preconceptions that I had always had about them, so I posted the "apology."
I still proudly use my Neumann, AKG, Sennheiser, Soundelux, Gefell, Beyer and other microphones on almost all sessions.
As I have stated before, I was allowed to purchase some Rode products directly, for less thsn retail or street price, so I must let that fact be known in the interest of fairness. But I would not buy something I didn't like at any price.
EDIT:
Let me elucidate further for the purposes of clarification. I am tiring of posts regarding Rode microphones, and of being associated with being a "mouthpiece" for them. But it is important that my words explain the enormity of the awakening I had regarding the brand.
Before December of 2004, I hated Rode mics (not having ever used one of course). I had no idea at all where they were made, what the people involved were like, or what their goals were. I had publicly derided Rode in the same breath as several other "non-standard" microphone brands.
I was virtually forced against my will and better judgement to use MANY of their mics on a project while tracking in Australia, and I was completely taken by surprise when they worked just fine at a professional level. That actually made me feel bad about how I had previously felt, and what I had previously said. That is why I made the post on the Compass Point Studios website.
While on that same Australian four month trip, and after successfully using the microphones and commenting about them to the studio owner and manager, Rode invited me to visit their factory. I had not even known that the mics were made there...that's how oblivious I was to the brand. I made that factory trip, and met the people involved. I was very impressed. This was not a company outsourcing products from China or other places, just marketing someone else's product under their brand name. This was a dedicated group of music loving (and playing, in many cases) people who genuinely cared about music and their product's quality. Vintage Neumann and AKG mics were sitting in their test room for comparison. They wanted to know exactly what I thought about their mics, both good and bad, in the hopes of continually improving them. The factory was state of the art, and had cost well over $25 million to build. They made their own capsules (I saw it), made their own bodies, electronics, grilles, everything. Their goal was to make the very best product at any price, but to also make it in quantities which made the cost of the final product as affordable as possible. This is a new business model borne of the computer revolution's opening up of the marketplace into the home and garage. This attempt at pricing structure was never possible before. But the goal was, and is, to make the best product they possibly could to serve the music. And of course, at the end of the day, to make money with a successful business. Why else would they invest so much to begin with?
Now Peter Freedman, the owner of the company, is a friend, so my words must be taken with that in mind. But if I find a bad product they make, I will post that too!
Hopefully this has explained my posts. As I said, I have many other mic brands which I love and use daily. I just include Rode in that group now.
OK. Enough of all of this.
Best regards,
T
Post by: smorgdonkey on January 19, 2006, 02:36:34 PM
Post by: cdr-1 on January 19, 2006, 02:48:55 PM
I was really getting into the bit about modding rode mics.
I was wandering if anybody else has had any experience upgrading the components in these.
I've got an NTK and I really like, but like most people, find it to be a much more syllabiant (sp?) than I like.
anybody?
thanks,
Adam
CDR
Post by: Revolution on January 19, 2006, 08:09:44 PM
The components in the Classic are much better than the K2 (the K2 has a lot of surfface mount components).
But apart from all of this their customer service is outstanding.Have herd many positive comments reguarding this.
Post by: Patrik T on January 20, 2006, 03:15:16 AM
The string were all undamped by pressing down the pedal.
And I said: Why not try those NT 5's.
For this kind of sharp attacks and long decays I found that they worked very well in a X/Y, some twoo-three feet above the top and centre of the piano.
I found no reasons to get into any eq-business to make it fit and glue later in the mix. Still it was standing out.
Some people say that the NT 5 has a poor top-end. I would rather say that it has got an own and very useful characteristic if you are enough open-minded to realize that. I think it is kind of silly to kick this microphones ass by saying it doesn't stand up to a "similar" Neumann or whatever.
They are not similar and I guess I wouldn't be happy if I had put two Neumanns over my piano in this case, when recording to digital.
I like the NT 5. It can handle complex sounds without problems. It doesn't have any bloody harshness to it. It is neutral and, perhaps, a little sweet. There is nothing wrong with the NT 5. It has got its own face, and I wish more people could realize that before saying "this mic suck compared to this and that".
The NT 5 is kind of a pencil ribbon-like microphone which can become very useful when recording at macro-distances or when one doesn't want to have things overly "airy".
Post by: Joe Black on January 20, 2006, 10:43:20 AM
edit:wrong thread.
Post by: davidelkinsrice on January 20, 2006, 03:27:18 PM
David
Post by: wavdoctor on January 24, 2006, 12:16:58 PM
no eq on backups,slight high end roll off on main voc.
enjoy..song is called kristina,you may recognize from the 80's.
Harry
http://s60.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=0SG45OF9TVV2024OVQD16GOHZ 0
Post by: smorgdonkey on January 24, 2006, 12:25:48 PM
How much does a 'Great River' pre sell for and is it a particular model #?
Also...do you use an 'expander' to help with making the 'in-betweens' more 'quiet'?
Post by: wavdoctor on January 24, 2006, 01:04:29 PM
| smorgdonkey wrote on Tue, 24 January 2006 17:25 |
Wow...sounds really good!! How much does a 'Great River' pre sell for and is it a particular model #? Also...do you use an 'expander' to help with making the 'in-betweens' more 'quiet'? |
Thanks,
this particular pre is the MP2nv two channel..around $2100.
they have a single unit also..for about half that..
But I have gotten similiar results with lesser pre's.
the nt2000 is an all around nice/versatile vocal mic.
No expander..I believe in the "less is more" theory..I did clean up the main vocal by comping and trimming.
HB
Post by: Ryan Leigh Patterson on January 24, 2006, 04:00:27 PM
Post by: smorgdonkey on January 24, 2006, 07:55:15 PM
| Ryan Leigh Patterson wrote on Tue, 24 January 2006 14:00 |
I've also found suitable voice to use the NT1000 on, but I'm still "searching" with this one... |
Yeah...that's the one I use on just about everything...
Post by: rankus on January 25, 2006, 01:46:27 PM
I was going to add an "nt" to the text on my RODE mic so that it says "RODENT" for a fun joke... but then realized it already WAS/// (RODENT 2000) .... Now that is a company with a sense of humor!
Post by: compasspnt on January 26, 2006, 01:15:46 AM
| rankus wrote on Wed, 25 January 2006 13:46 |
I was going to add an "nt" to the text on my RODE mic so that it says "RODENT" for a fun joke... but then realized it already WAS/// (RODENT 2000) .... Now that is a company with a sense of humor! |
They did do that on purpose. That's great!
And the windscreen for their shotgun mics is named the "Dead Cat."
Post by: rwj1313 on January 26, 2006, 11:12:28 AM
| hargerst wrote on Tue, 04 October 2005 10:18 |
I guess Klause feels that some products are inappropriate for his forum, |
I posted a question about a broken RE-20 and it was booted within a few minutes. He reminds me of the soup Nazi on the Seinfield show. "400.00 microphone....................NO ANSWER for You!!!!"
Rick
Post by: Primear on January 31, 2006, 06:32:53 PM
| Revolution wrote on Mon, 03 October 2005 18:17 |
Hmmmm It seems this post has been relocated here from Klaus Heynes forum which to me appears like Microphone snobbery. I would much rather an opinion from Klaus than just a removal so I guess maybe he just hasn,t either 1)tried the K2 or Classic 2)dosn't respect Terry Mannings opinion 3)or just hates these mics . Explanation ?? If it matters I own a U87 David Wilson ------------- |
Not sure why it was moved but... FWIW I dig my NT1. Ive used it alot on vox/cabs. Mine is an original though so maybe thats the difference?
Post by: Revolution on February 02, 2006, 08:07:45 PM
Im over it now.
Post by: Ryan Leigh Patterson on February 07, 2006, 09:40:55 PM
Post by: organica on February 11, 2006, 02:27:50 PM
| Primear wrote on Tue, 31 January 2006 23:32 |
FWIW I dig my NT1. Ive used it alot on vox/cabs. Mine is an original though so maybe thats the difference? |
I'm not sure what happened to my NTI , but I sent it in to Rhode be tested . They replaced the capsule with a stock NT1-A one . I now like it for some vox/bass . .. customer service was way good to me .... much better than say... MOTU
a
Post by: Bubblepuppy on February 13, 2006, 08:01:39 PM
The NT2 I own does not seem to like my ISA220,x81,x73 mic pres.
Oh it does like my V77 pair of pres.
Post by: Revolution on February 13, 2006, 08:33:39 PM
| Bubblepuppy wrote on Tue, 14 February 2006 12:01 |
The NT2 I own does not seem to like my ISA220,x81,x73 mic pres. . |
No Microphone I own liked the ISA pre's I tried and sent back.
Post by: flipper on February 15, 2006, 12:59:20 AM
| compasspnt wrote on Thu, 26 January 2006 01:15 | ||
They did do that on purpose. That's great! And the windscreen for their shotgun mics is named the "Dead Cat." |
Certainly did do it on purpose,
i beleive he was haveing some serious "rodent" problems at his house or wharehouse..
It was originally rodent mics but thought it to be a bit risky and opted to split the word all through the models....
At the factory office he has a monsterous big Rat stuffed, on the entrance wall....
Anyway i pick my NTK toomorrow which was on special, and initially after reading the start of this thread i was a little worried but it seems with most things audio perserverance is the key....
Matt
Post by: rankus on February 16, 2006, 03:53:32 PM
I have had my NT 2000 for about a month now (bought new). And I'm loving it. Awesome mic for the price indeed.
Great on:
Front Of Kit , Over Head, Vocals (male only so far), Bass cab, Djembe, .... Did NOT like it on guitar amps so far (rock music)...
Post by: compasspnt on February 16, 2006, 06:41:24 PM
| rankus wrote on Thu, 16 February 2006 15:53 |
I have had my NT 2000 for about a month now (bought new). And I'm loving it. Awesome mic for the price indeed. Great on: Front Of Kit , Over Head, Vocals (male only so far), Bass cab, Djembe, .... Did NOT like it on guitar amps so far (rock music)... |
I agree Rick. I've used my new ones for two sessions now, and they are quite nice. I wouldn't use them on loud guitars, though. For DR OH's they were great, also good on BGV. At first I didn't like the look at all, with the three controls so prominent, but I've decided, "So what" about that. I do like the control and convenience, though. And they are big!
Post by: rankus on February 17, 2006, 02:21:03 PM
Hi Terry, I know what you mean about the "gimmick" knobs on them. But, like you, I have actually found them quite useful once the "eek" factor wears of. It's nice to be able to vary the pattern between cardioid and omni... you can dial in a little more room, or a lot depending on how far you dial the pattern knob...It's almost like having reverb built into the mic.. Cool!
I have not given up on her for guitars cabs, yet. You never know...
I am planning to buy a second one for stereo use.. and will looking hard at the RODE line next time I'm looking for mics....
Thanks for your input Terry.. It was due to this thread and your comments that I decided to try one.. now I will be spreading the word as well...
Cheers
Rick
PS: Not only is it "big" but it's danged heavy as well... and a awesome shock mount!
Post by: compasspnt on February 17, 2006, 04:16:04 PM
And it's big, to boot!
Check out the NT-6 with the optional awesome little gooseneck extensions. Also I hear there will be an omni screw-in capsule coming for those.
Post by: rankus on February 17, 2006, 06:59:36 PM
| compasspnt wrote on Fri, 17 February 2006 13:16 |
Check out the NT-6 with the optional awesome little gooseneck extensions. |
Thanks Terry,
How would you compare the NT-6 to the Sure SM81 sonically?
My fellow Clark Drive Studios engineer Doug Fury is planning to buy an SM 81 and I would like to try the NT-6 .... (we share a mic cabinet, so we have a small say in what the other buys)
His argument is that the Sure will hold value for resale, but the RODE is an unknown....
MY argument is that if we have all the gear that everybody else has, then we risk becoming "generic" in our sound.... (Something that I find distasteful) (We all need to try to develop our own sound... IMO)
Post by: compasspnt on February 18, 2006, 12:35:26 AM
| rankus wrote on Fri, 17 February 2006 18:59 |
Terry, How would you compare the NT-6 to the Sure [sic] SM81 sonically? ...His argument is that the Sure [sic] will hold value for resale, but the RODE is an unknown.... |
Well, I have not made a direct comparison between the two mics, so what I say will be from general impressions, over periods of time somewhat distant from each other, but...
I like both microphones; I own both microphones.
Featurewise, they both have bass rolloff (although the Shure is two positions, while the R
Post by: rankus on February 18, 2006, 01:52:05 PM
Thanks sooo much for your time Terry. It's is very highly appreciated...
Hopefully we will have a report/review to add to this thread in a few weeks.
Nice re-direct on the "Piano in a field" thread by the way .. true genius!
Post by: bilco on February 18, 2006, 04:24:58 PM
I bought this mic...... For a mic that won the Electronic Musician 2004 Editors Choice Award, I can't find any positive feedback about this mic as a vocal mic, other than from the people who bought it from the direct web purchase music sites.....
What I need to know:
My ears are too far gone and I am too tired at 51 to learn to be a great mixer. My focus needs to get back to what I think I am good at, which is writing. If I ever get to a stopping point on a homegrown CD, I will be asking and paying for someone else to mix. I already have this mic; it sounds good to me, at least less midrangy than my SM57 and SM58. If I am careful with the placement and record vocals with no EQ going in, can the pros among you work with this mic when mixing down? Here is a sample of the style of music I am recording, acoustic based instruments on top of electric bass and drums, probably with fiddle, dobro or acoustic guitar as the finishing touches.
No Sign of Our Love
http://home.mindspring.com/~billcolbert/calichemusic/
I think I recorded with it about 6" from my mouth at my forehead aiming down toward my mouth, into the mic pres of my Digi001. The same mic was used on all of the vocal tracks. The room stinks and the mix stinks, I just want to know whether this mic can work for my voice or if you think I need to spend yet more $$.
I have realized that the gear pursuit is wasting my time that could be better spent writing and practicing. I need to know if this mic can be worked with or around or if I need to ditch it. To be honest, I probably don't have the hearing left to tell the difference.
Thanks for your time,
bilco
Post by: compasspnt on February 18, 2006, 10:38:18 PM
Hey Bill; man, you're just full of positives!
I've never used or heard the exact mic you mention, but I see no reason that it would not work for you. It's certainly not the weak link in your chain. All mics, of course, will work better and sound better through a better mic pre, and with better A>D conversion. But a lot of people have recorded some good sounding stuff with what you have.
Just be careful about sibilance (too much "ssss"); once it's recorded, it's hard to get it out.
Also, keep your recorded levels reasonably low. No need to get too close to the red on any track!
If you haven't read it, check out this thread:
http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/4918/6490/?SQ=1 04a59a8c184e4203aa47ad706cf3bff
It's long, but full of information.
Good luck.
Post by: Tidewater on February 19, 2006, 03:19:30 AM
M
Post by: bilco on February 19, 2006, 04:03:24 AM
| compasspnt wrote on Sat, 18 February 2006 21:38 |
Just be careful about sibilance (too much "ssss"); once it's recorded, it's hard to get it out. Also, keep your recorded levels reasonably low. No need to get too close to the red on any track! If you haven't read it, check out this thread: http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/4918/6490/?SQ=1 04a59a8c184e4203aa47ad706cf3bff It's long, but full of information. Good luck. |
Terry,
Sorry about the negative attitude..... no excuse....
I read 6 pages of the thread.... at first I thought you had sent me on a snipe hunt!! Then I found this:
"My firm belief is that if users of Protools, and the other DAW systems, would do the following, then MANY of the "digital" or "in the box" audio problems would vanish:
Post by: compasspnt on February 19, 2006, 04:30:34 PM
All good, Bill.
No, the DAW & Desks Thread is certainly no Snipe hunt. The first few pages are a bit much, but really, the last 10 or 12 are absolutely crucial to recording better in today's DAW domain. Especially be sure to read Paul Frindle's posts.
And I didn't notice sibilance in your mp3. Actually, I almost never listen to songs posted, for various reasons,. I was just 'talking' in general. Many of the LDC mics are purposely equalised with a boost in the high end. This was, at least in part, originally because such mics were planned for distant use, and that helped to bring the tonal balance into line. But when people get very close (sometimes to take advantage of proximity effect also), and sing loudly, there is often a sibilance problem. I fight it every day, with many brands of mics, from Neumann to Soundelex to Rode to AKG... It's just a part of the whole thing.
You'll get it!
Best regards.
Post by: Tidewater on February 20, 2006, 01:44:11 AM
Apologies for the advice, without a qualifier, or a context.
M
Post by: tall_phill on February 22, 2006, 02:11:39 AM
I am content with the sound quality, and very impressed with Rode's customer service (re: repairs).
No one I've seen has raised my three issues with the microphone (which aren't significant) they are:
1] Its output is really frickin hot (upto 13.9 dBu). Ive had to pad down the input when recording piano & cello duos! This has caught me out once or twice in live recordings - whilst that is undoubtably my fault, I feel the output level is a bit impracticle.
2] The model and serial number markings on the microphone are printed on some sort of tape that is glued to the microphone. These are peeling off mine. I wish they had just spent the extra dollars to engrave/stamp this stuff.
3] The case they provide the microphone in is nice and sturdy, but its ridiclously large for a pair of pencil consendors. If I had the foam cut I could fit another half dozen mics in there. This doesnt matter for studio work, but for live or field work the case is impracticle - which is also when it could be most useful.
None of these problems is a deal breaker by any means, but they irk me from time to time.
Phillip
Post by: Guest on March 05, 2006, 02:37:38 AM
MAWD