Audio Technica AE5100 large diaphragm pencil mic

[lkingston]

I was looking for a mic that sounds like a large diaphragm condenser (to bring out the thumb bass in my finger style guitar), but with the form factor of a pencil mic for convenience since I also want a large diaphragm mic on my vocals.

The Audio Technica AT5100 advertises itself as exactly this. I looked on YouTube and found this video:

https://youtu.be/9teo5hXD8Qo

The sound he is getting on this video is exactly what I was after. I just ordered a used one off Reverb.com. I will report back after I get it and run it through it’s paces.

[Rudy4]

Originally Posted by lkingston

I was looking for a mic that sounds like a large diaphragm condenser (to bring out the thumb bass in my finger style guitar), but with the form factor of a pencil mic for convenience since I also want a large diaphragm mic on my vocals.

The Audio Technica AT5100 advertises itself as exactly this. I looked on YouTube and found this video:

https://youtu.be/9teo5hXD8Qo

The sound he is getting on this video is exactly what I was after. I just ordered a used one off Reverb.com. I will report back after I get it and run it through it’s paces.

AE5100.

Although the AE5100 is advertised as a large diaphragm the barrel diameter is 1". Most microphone manufacturers refer to "large diaphragm elements" generally in the 1" or slightly larger dimension, although AT takes liberties with their sizing conventions. What they can stuff inside the 1" O.D. barrel would place the AE5100 firmly in the mid-size catagory by most conventions.

That doesn't make it a bad mic, I'd just like to see a bit more transparency in their labeling.

It is also specified as a permanantly charged "back electret" capsule, so the self-noise might end up being somewhat higher than their true condenser options.

"Understanding back electret capsule technology" from Neumann

Do post a review, it's always nice to have first-hand information relayed about products.

[Glennwillow]

That does sound very good! I'll be interested in your thoughts when you receive yours!

- Glenn

[lkingston]

I like buying this sort of mic used. It isn’t popular enough to counterfeit, and I f I don’t like it, I can sell it and get my money back.

I agree that calling it a “large diaphragm condenser” is a bit of a stretch, but then again, a lot of inexpensive LDCs have about that sized diaphragms.

Electret condensers have their limitations, but I am mostly interested in relatively high quality location recording where there is already plenty of background noise, so this should be great in that context.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by lkingston

I like buying this sort of mic used. It isn’t popular enough to counterfeit, and I f I don’t like it, I can sell it and get my money back.

I just took a look on Reverb and Ebay... the used prices are pretty close to the new price. There's not much savings to be had buying this used unless you have other sources offering better prices.

[Rudy4]

Since the 5100 has been offered for something like 20 years I'd be particularly leery of a mic if it wasn't fairly new, since the earlier back charged electrets were known to lose their charge over time.

It might not be an issue with this mic, but it would be something to consider when evaluating used vs. new pricing. Microphones are one of those things that can experience unseen damage from a single drop, so there's that to factor in, too.

[lkingston]

I got the mic. The finish looks like it is a few years old, but there are no dings or scratches. The sound is very good: full in the low frequencies and clear in the highs. It also is good enough at rejecting handling noise that I could use it without a shock mount. I would say that it sounds like a large diaphragm mic.

I haven’t used it for anything yet. Just a quick test to make sure that I didn’t need to return it.

[runamuck]

Originally Posted by lkingston

I got the mic. The finish looks like it is a few years old, but there are no dings or scratches. The sound is very good: full in the low frequencies and clear in the highs. It also is good enough at rejecting handling noise that I could use it without a shock mount. I would say that it sounds like a large diaphragm mic.

I haven’t used it for anything yet. Just a quick test to make sure that I didn’t need to return it.

You'll get more low end no matter what kind of mic you use by pointing it closer to the sound hole like the guy does in the video you posted. It's not my experience that a large diaphram mic gives you more low end than a small; it really has more to do with how close a mic is to the source and where its pointed.

[Fran Guidry]

A large diaphragm does not result in greater bass response. Tiny measurement mics have LF response down to 0 hz.

The extra low end we associate with LD mics is actually a function of the dual diaphragm construction that is so common with these mics. This configuration results in a low frequency response that is more omni-like and omni mics have extended bass response. This omni-ness also reduces the susceptibility to breath noises. These characteristics combined with proximity effects in the 250-400 hz region, the 5-7 khz presence peak and roll-off above 10 khz make for a very effective studio vocal mic.

At least that's what the engineers at Shure and Schoeps say.

Fran

[rockabilly69]

Originally Posted by Fran Guidry

... "This configuration results in a low frequency response that is more omni-like and omni mics have extended bass response.
Fran"

Fran, in my experience, omni LDC mics have less bass response than cardoid mics. As a matter of fact that's why I alway roll over a few notches towards the omni pattern on my multi pattern LDC mics (U87ai, U89i, Lawson L47MP, etc) when recording acoustic guitars, to clean up the bottom.

[Fran Guidry]

Originally Posted by rockabilly69

Fran, in my experience, omni LDC mics have less bass response than cardoid mics. As a matter of fact that's why I alway roll over a few notches towards the omni pattern on my multi pattern LDC mics (U87ai, U89i, Lawson L47MP, etc) when recording acoustic guitars, to clean up the bottom.

The difference between the lows in cardioid and the lows in omni are due to proximity, right? In cardioid there's a rolloff, probably starting around 70-100 hz, but proximity boosts the range between 100 hz and maybe 300 hz, the "mud" region.

Here's the Shure paper that describes the difference between single and dual diaphragm cardioid function: https://content-files.shure.com/Pubs...hragm_mics.pdf

Of course as in all recording issues, all that really matters is what it sounds like and how one gets the desired result. But the idea that diaphragm size defines low frequency response just ain't so. I refer again to the FR of measurement mics which are very small diaphragm devices, trading self-noise for extended flat HF response but which also can be flat to 0 hz (although for practical reasons they often roll off a bit before 0).

Fran

[DupleMeter]

Originally Posted by rockabilly69

Fran, in my experience, omni LDC mics have less bass response than cardoid mics. As a matter of fact that's why I alway roll over a few notches towards the omni pattern on my multi pattern LDC mics (U87ai, U89i, Lawson L47MP, etc) when recording acoustic guitars, to clean up the bottom.

You're perceiving the proximity effect of the cardioid pattern as extended low end. Omnis are not subject to proximity effect. Their low end stays consistent regardless of how close you get to them, which is why a lot of studio guys like to use omnis to close mic things in a good sounding room.

Proximity effect is one of those things that makes those classic mics such great vocal mics (like the u47, u67, u87, c12 ela m251). It brings out the "chest" of the voice...and good singers learned to use it to their advantage to get just the right amount of low end bloom.