Video Demo: Comparing 5 Condenser mics

[AcousticDreams]

Between the CAD & the AT2020, which do you believe gives the most accurate representation of how your guitar actually sounds Doug?

Currently the AT2020 is on sale for $79, brand new until the 27th.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by AcousticDreams

Between the CAD & the AT2020, which do you believe gives the most accurate representation of how your guitar actually sounds Doug?

Currently the AT2020 is on sale for $79, brand new until the 27th.

Oh, I'd vote for the 2020s. I got mine on sale for $60 long ago,. Of course it comes down to whether you even need any extra mics, but for me, that seemed like a no-brainer. I'd feel fine lending them to my son's punk band, if nothing else. But they're adequate mics. They sounded thinner on this demo, which is also how they come across if you visit AT's demo booth with all the models lined up, but that can be dealt with.

The CAD's can be found used for like $30, which is tempting, too, of course, with the same logic. But they appeared to have a very steep rolloff above about 10K - which again can sound fine (Barry was looking for "warm" mics here recently), but I think the 2020s are a bit closer to reality and give you more to work with. (The CAD's are cute, tho. The video doesn't really show how tiny and weightless they are...). If one wanted a small mic for tight spaces, it might be more appealing.

[lppier]

All I can hear is the exquisite playing Doug, you made all of the mics sound good!

If anything , the schoeps had a slight bit more dimensionality to it than the rest. The cad felt a bit “flat”. But still, I’m just nitpicking. They all sound good.

[phcorrigan]

Slightly off-topic, but how much of the differences in these mics could be compensated for with decent EQ? What can't?

I ask this because Julian Krause posted a video where he used EQ to make a Behringer XM8500 sound like a Shure SM7B. He also did the same using an SM57.

I realize it's always best to start with the best recording possible, but for those who can't afford $1,000+ mics (I count myself in that category), is EQ an option?

[runamuck]

Originally Posted by phcorrigan

Slightly off-topic, but how much of the differences in these mics could be compensated for with decent EQ? What can't?

I ask this because Julian Krause posted a video where he used EQ to make a Behringer XM8500 sound like a Shure SM7B. He also did the same using an SM57.

I realize it's always best to start with the best recording possible, but for those who can't afford $1,000+ mics (I count myself in that category), is EQ an option?

As far as recording an instrument in a mix goes I think very close. And I increasing have discovered that the difference between many mics, inexpensive compared to very expensive, are not as significant as some people claim. I have yet to see someone able to identify a particular mic when not A/Bed.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by phcorrigan

Slightly off-topic, but how much of the differences in these mics could be compensated for with decent EQ? What can't?

yes, no, and does it matter? :-) The differences between mics isn't just an EQ curve - think of guitars, can you EQ an OM to sound like a Dread? Sort of, but that won't capture every aspect. But the differences between mics is much smaller than between an OM and a Dread. I have used EQ match software to match 2 different mics, more just to quantify what the differences were than to actually EQ. It sort of works. There are also modeling mics, like the Townsend/UA Sphere mic, which is quite impressive, that manages to emulate not only the EQ curve, but polar patterns, phase relationships, proximity effect and more of lots of different mics. They're basically "correcting" the hardware mic to sound like the others, and it does a pretty amazing job.

But really, I don't think this is very important. I did do the 2nd half of the video with EQ'd versions. But I wasn't trying to make them all sound the same. I suppose that would be an interesting exercise. But instead, I just mixed each one on it's own, according to whatever sounded good to me at the time. Again, a bit like different guitars - you play a tune on one guitar, and it sounds good. Play it on another, and it's different, but also good. Maybe you decide you like one guitar better than the other, but if you didn't compare, either would be good.

I had to ask myself while in the middle of making this video why I was bothering? I think I could record something with any of these mics, and if you weren't comparing, the results would sound fine, regardless of what mic I used, as long as I played ok.

The guitar, room acoustics, and mic placement end up mattering much more than mic choice - and you can also "EQ" with mic placement. What I've tended to notice over time is that the "better" mics may be more forgiving of mic placement - basically, tho you can still find the sweet spot, they sound good pretty much wherever you put them. Room acoustics are kind of like that too. In a poor room with a poor mic, you may have to work hard to get a decent sound. Good room, good quality mic, good-sounding guitar, and it's easier to get a good sound no matter where you put the mics.

[phcorrigan]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

yes, no, and does it matter? :-) The differences between mics isn't just an EQ curve - think of guitars, can you EQ an OM to sound like a Dread? Sort of, but that won't capture every aspect. But the differences between mics is much smaller than between an OM and a Dread. I have used EQ match software to match 2 different mics, more just to quantify what the differences were than to actually EQ. It sort of works. There are also modeling mics, like the Townsend/UA Sphere mic, which is quite impressive, that manages to emulate not only the EQ curve, but polar patterns, phase relationships, proximity effect and more of lots of different mics. They're basically "correcting" the hardware mic to sound like the others, and it does a pretty amazing job.

But really, I don't think this is very important. I did do the 2nd half of the video with EQ'd versions. But I wasn't trying to make them all sound the same. I suppose that would be an interesting exercise. But instead, I just mixed each one on it's own, according to whatever sounded good to me at the time. Again, a bit like different guitars - you play a tune on one guitar, and it sounds good. Play it on another, and it's different, but also good. Maybe you decide you like one guitar better than the other, but if you didn't compare, either would be good.

I had to ask myself while in the middle of making this video why I was bothering? I think I could record something with any of these mics, and if you weren't comparing, the results would sound fine, regardless of what mic I used, as long as I played ok.

The guitar, room acoustics, and mic placement end up mattering much more than mic choice - and you can also "EQ" with mic placement. What I've tended to notice over time is that the "better" mics may be more forgiving of mic placement - basically, tho you can still find the sweet spot, they sound good pretty much wherever you put them. Room acoustics are kind of like that too. In a poor room with a poor mic, you may have to work hard to get a decent sound. Good room, good quality mic, good-sounding guitar, and it's easier to get a good sound no matter where you put the mics.

Thanks, Doug.

[anton]

What a great video Doug, thanks so much for doing this. It is a great resource for the rest of us home recording folks and mic nerds out there.

There are obvious differences between all the mics, and my preference is towards the more expensive end of the spectrum. But I don't think any single pair of mics sounded particularly bad. I could probably listen to an album recorded with one of the less expensive pairs and not think twice about it, assuming the playing/execution are on point. I think many of the seminal fingerstyle guitar albums from the 60's and 70's have less than ideal recorded tone, and that doesn't stop me from enjoying the music.

I would have enjoyed hearing your Gefell M300 pair in the mix as well, but you already had enough mic options to keep organized.

[phcorrigan]

Originally Posted by anton

I could probably listen to an album recorded with one of the less expensive pairs and not think twice about it...

Before I went down the rabbit hole of home recording I NEVER thought about the mics being used on any recording, and I still don't except for my own.

I think that sometimes we obsess over things that only make a marginal difference that only an audio professional might be able to discern.

Having said that, I'd still use the best mic(s) I could afford!

[Brent Hahn]

I "grew up" in an old-school pro studio setting where they were partial to doing more of what you might call a "stress test" on things like condenser mics, and preamps, and anything incorporating gain stages. Seeing how the mic or the circuit reacts to things like jangling keys, or a mark tree, or a french horn, or a harmon-mute trumpet. At the time, we were also testing tape machines and tape with those sources. With sources like those, you can really dig deep into the vulnerabilities of the thing you're testing.

[b1j]

After paying close attention to comparisons like Doug’s fine video and sound samples Sweetwater put out a couple of years ago, I’ve decided that I will have, and record with, only two mic types: the Rode NT-1A LDC for vocals and such, and sE8 SDC for acoustic guitar — one pair of each.

I bought a single Rode NT-1A years ago based on little else than its low self noise. The second one came my way before my brother got into recording. He couldn’t use his for open mics, so he gave it to me.

I’ve since learned the NT-1A has an unenviable frequency curve (unlike the NT-1), so my plan is to help it out a little with EQ in the mix — not to buy better mics.

The sE8, I’ve come to see, stands up well enough for my humble purposes to the big names, at cents on the dollar. Sign me up. Picked up a pair last year, and even before room treatment, I’m getting tracks that sound to me like I want my guitars to sound. That’s my benchmark. Maybe it’ll become a moving target; we’ll see.

It’s looking like most of my recordings will have 3, 4, or more tracks including bass, percussion, keyboards, and vocals surrounding acoustic guitar track(s). Under the circumstances, whatever super top end quality I’m missing out on without $3,000 mics will go unnoticed, as long as I get clean tracks without noise.

In light of all this, I’ve stepped away from mic shopping and moved on to absorption panels. Living the adage that I’d rather record in a good room with good enough mics than in a problematic room with the best mics money can buy.

So let’s see. Guitars: set. Mics: set. Interface upgrade: set (Motu M6). Panels: made, need to perfect the arrangement.

Now all I need to do is play better.

[phcorrigan]

Originally Posted by b1j

I’ve stepped away from mic shopping and moved on to absorption panels. Living the adage that I’d rather record in a good room with good enough mics than in a problematic room with the best mics money can buy.

Now all I need to do is play better.

I've stopped mic shopping, but I could follow the rest of your advice!