Rode NT1a vs ADK A6

[Fran Guidry]

**** Please join the discussion in the thread that follows this post. Share your impressions, observations, opinions. But for your own benefit, download and listen to the clips before reading the discussion. Your opinions might be swayed by what you read, and that reduces the value of the experiment. ***

Just for jokes, do a search here or on Gearslutz or some other acoustic guitar or recording forum, and see what folks have to say about the Rode NT1a and the ADK A6. It seems to me that there are commonly many negative comments on the Rode (even on all Rode mics, actually) and many positives on the A6 (and on all ADKs, perhaps).

Judging by these comments I would expect that these two mics would sound night and day different when used to record the same source at the same time with careful level matching. So when I stumbled over a couple of these mics on Ebay at a pretty decent price I just couldn't resist grabbing them.

Here's a brief post at Homebrewed Music describing the process: http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2013/...k-a6-plus-two/ I thought I would add a bit of interest to the comparison with two additional mics. The Schoeps MK4 cardioid capsule is an industry standard for uncolored capture, I used a CMC5 Collette body with this cap. And for something a little different I added a dynamic mic, a vintage ElectroVoice RE15.

Here are the clips, they're uncompressed WAV so they won't stream. To listen properly you should download the clips and pull them into a comparison tool like Foobar2000 with its ABX utility.

r.wav
s.wav
t.wav
u.wav

I'll provide the key in a PM or email if you request it. Please keep the key confidential, this comparison loses a lot of its value if its not double-blinded.

Fran

[Scott Whigham]

PM'ed - fun stuff. Thanks for posting this.

[KenW]

I did not hear any perceivable difference between r and s. t opened up a bit, and u opened up a bit more, and the harmonics jumped out a bit more than the rest on u. I liked u. Thanks for keeping us honest.

[moon]

I spent five minutes listening carefully and I think I know what they are. I'll check again later though - I'm one of the pro ADK/Schoeps & anti NT1A/dynamic guys so it would be embarrassing to get this wrong

[Scott Whigham]

I love this - thanks again for posting these, Fran, and for taking the time. This is nerdy, musician-cum-engineer type stuff and I love it. I can imagine it took a long time to get this setup so "clinically".

I listened back to them today at 60-65db for the first two passes then made some notes. I then listened back at around 70-75db for another two passes and made notes. I found that I'd forgotten enough from yesterday so that I couldn't remember my choices by letter (so it was like starting over). I was glad to see that I'd picked the same mics this morning that I picked yesterday afternoon.

[Fran Guidry]

I've sent the key to Scott and KenW.

Fran

[Scott Whigham]

Will you share the results in an anonymous fashion, sort of like an aggregate? I don't want to bias the thread/results in any way so I'm hesitating with posting any thoughts about this or that, but I would like to see what sort of breakdown you get in terms "correctly picking out the $1500 mic" in particular. It would be quite useful to correlate "listening environment" and right/wrong. So nerdy - I love it! Hell, we need a database. And a spreadsheet! And quick - someone get a line chart going stat!

[Bob1131]

Interesting exercise, Fran.

I liked "U" the best and "S" the least. "t" and "r" were both good sounding, but I liked "t" just a little better than "r".

My preferences were the same when I compared them in headphones and on monitor speakers.

[moon]

Better not say which you think is best because that could sway other people's decisions.

[Steve Berger]

I wasn't able to listen 'properly' so as a result, they all sounded fairly close.
Having said that . . I though 'u' was a little 'more defined' and my slight preference. I have no idea which was which. Nice playing Fran. PM previously sent!

[mesa]

I liked *u* then *r*, *t*, and *s* Please PM the key, Fran. Thanks!

[Doug Young]

I often find that cutting back and forth between two sounds is a better way to hear differences than ABXing, just for seeing how much of a difference there is. Less time for the memory to fade, I guess. If you can't hear a change between two sounds when you abruptly cut between them, well...

So with that in mind, I took Fran's 4 files, sync'd them up in Logic on 4 tracks, and then semi-randomly cut between them. So you hear a few seconds or so of one, then suddenly cut to another, on and on. Here's the results. There are 13 cuts back and forth between the files, see how many you can spot. I didn't even bother to try to make the cuts between notes, most are probably in the middle of notes. I have these saved, so if anyone wants to guess where the cuts are (in seconds from the beginning), I can verify. For bonus points, guess which mics are which, between the cuts?! Incidentally, there is a spot where the cuts should be especially obvious - hard to miss, actually, which I find pretty fascinating. Not too surprising, but interesting to hear. This is a wav file, unmodified from Fran's, other than the cuts

Fran's demo, swapping back and forth

[redavide]

To me, they all sounded very good -- but not being very much of a microphone expert, guessing which was which would pretty much be just random guessing. To my ears, "t" is the most pleasing and I thought "r" is probably the dynamic mic . . .

Recently, at the Oxford and Cambridge Blind Wine Tasting Competition, the competitors had to identify 12 unmarked wines by grape, country of origin, region, subregion, vintage and taste characteristics. It was fairly incredible how accurate some of the tasters were, so it would be interesting to see if mic experts have the same degree of refinement when it comes to listening . . .

[Scott Whigham]

Interesting, Doug - thanks for sharing. I like to compare the same passages - we all "consume" stuff like this different though I guess. Yours reminded me of that eye test where you look at a white screen and press the buzzer when something changes. Fun

I have thoughts... I would like to share and discuss. Should we create a new thread or discuss here? I'm scared to really share anything lest I accidentally influence someone some how in some way!

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by Scott Whigham

Interesting, Doug - thanks for sharing. I like to compare the same passages - we all "consume" stuff like this different though I guess.

Yeah, the ABX has that covered, tho. This is just a different way to hear it. I look at it like this: I know if I even get up and move between takes, the odds of being able to record again and edit in a change are greatly reduced. I'll hear even the tiniest change in position at the edit point. So the question is: is the difference between these mics greater or less than that? If you listen to the tail, you can get a pretty clear picture of one way these mics differ