#16
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I'd be interested in knowing which microphone was which (in particular, which was the very expensive one)! Not long ago there was a post in another thread by Doug Young (I think) talking about how recording engineers rank the importance of different factors in determining the final sound. As I recall, the top factors, in this order, were the guitar player (I think maybe this one was listed twice, in both first and second position!), then the guitar, and then things like the recording space and the sound engineer came in next (not sure of the order of these two). The microphones/equipment used were way down on the list as I recall. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
When you get your MK012s at home, be sure to set up a level matched same performance double blind comparison with your other condenser mics and confirm that you can actually hear a difference. Fran
__________________
E ho`okani pila kakou ma Kaleponi Slack Key in California - www.kaleponi.com My YouTube clips The Homebrewed Music Blog |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
If you really want to understand the difference between mics, you need to pull a couple of these clips into an ABX tool and confirm that you really can hear a difference. Even after doing this for a number of years I'm still surprised at how small the differences become when the labels are hidden. Fran
__________________
E ho`okani pila kakou ma Kaleponi Slack Key in California - www.kaleponi.com My YouTube clips The Homebrewed Music Blog |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks Fran. Very interesting. I have read glowing reviews (here on AGF) of the very expensive Schoeps CMC64 mic. Based on those reviews, and some sample recordings that were posted as part of those reviews, I really expected this one would really shine out from the pack. It is really interesting that to my ears anyway, none of these mics you tested really shine out from the rest in any major way.
What is an ABX tool, by the way? |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Put An Ear On It LIVE!
Aloha,
Online comparisons & tests are all well & good, & can give you a small part of the picture when judging mic's. However, I have found that the only way to make choices on mic's is to go put an ear on it - LIVE. Go try out mic's in different price ranges in person to be sure of the differences. Your ears might surprise you as to how different they can be. And not always that subtle. LIVE is the only way you can tell how: - a mic feels - a mic sounds - a mic responds (speed) - it picks up details - it handles transients - its coloration - its off-axis clarity & response time - it behaves alone, w/ phantom & w/ other parts of a chain (preamp?) - much it weighs, - its proximity "squeal point" - wide it's pattern(s) are - feedback resistant it is - it sounds (full sound in a room in real time!) with air around - it sounds in different sized spaces or types (wet vs. dry) - it sounds in stereo - its features work or feel or look (like recessed roll-off switches) - it sounds in a treated studio - noisy it is (self-noise) - it holds its own in the mix - it handles EQ & plug-in's - how it sounds on your voice (that's huge for vocal mic's) - & how it works with you, your guitars, your rig & your music. You can't tell that about a mic from online samples, tests or shoot-outs, friends. You have to experience the sound through a mic live to get the full picture, even if you want to keep it simple. I go a step further. I absolutely want to take my time putting mic's through their paces. So I rent them & try 'em out on my home rig, which I know well. That way, the store guy won't hurry you along in your assessment or push you towards what he wants to sell you, or distract your ears from the task at hand. It's so worth it to me to try out mic's that way. Never trust what you hear online. These digital formats are simply not that good to be able to tell you where to spend your money & what's right for your ears. It's NOT good enough to demonstrate all the differences among mic's at this point, especially the subtleties & the elements I listed above. Go all the way with your research of mic's because they are the most important, critical first piece of gear in your signal chain. Go listen to mic's LIVE. Let your ears decide, beyond online samples & tests. alohachris PS: When you try them out live, you will CLEARLY be able to hear the differences between a KSM 44 & a CMC641. Both are great mic's - for different applications. You will see how very different they are from one another when you put them through their paces as above - LIVE. -alohachris- Last edited by alohachris; 03-04-2012 at 02:21 PM. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
ABX is a procedure for comparing things to determine if we can discriminate between them. An ABX tester presents you with two labeled samples (A and B) and lets you listen to them at will, then listen to an unlabeled sample (X) and lets you attempt to identify it between the two. The tool I use on a PC is an ABX comparator plugin for Foobar2000. http://www.foobar2000.org/download Note that you need to grab the ABX tool from the official components page: http://www.foobar2000.org/components/author/Peter as well. This tool will present the files, let you choose different starting points for the comparison, maintains a record of your selections, and computes the statistical results. One can never prove that there are no audible differences, of course. But if I spend an hour of concentrated and focused listening and am unable to reliably identify the clips, I would conclude that the differences cannot affect the emotional impact of the recording and I need to worry more about practicing than buying mics. There are things about audio that can be demonstrated and reproduced and confirmed, and there's a vast sea of hand waving and metaphor and confirmation bias and "magic." If you dig into the subject, you'll find that ABX tends to make the "magic" disappear. So if the magic is gone when the label is removed, was it ever there in the first place? Fran
__________________
E ho`okani pila kakou ma Kaleponi Slack Key in California - www.kaleponi.com My YouTube clips The Homebrewed Music Blog |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
If the goal is recording, live behavior isn't a good test...what you hear "live" is a blend of the equipment and the direct sound from the instruments/performers. That is unavoidable and will throw off your test results. Fran has it exactly right. |
|
Tags |
acoustic guitar, condenser, mic |
|