Studio Projects C4/Oktava MK012

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Ty Ford wrote:

> On Wed, 4 May 2005 12:02:24 -0400, Bob Savage wrote
> (in article <km6ee.1054$eU.830@fed1read07>):
>
>
>>"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
>>news:d5aov7$maf$1@panix2.panix.com...
>>
>>>Both of them are sufficiently inconsistent that comparisons might not be
>>>very useful unless they are comparing the exact microphones you are
>>
>>looking
>>
>>>at.
>>
>>And I'm guessing the MXL Marshall 991 is a total pile, considering the
>>price? Yeah, I'm looking to get out as cheaply as possible, at least for
>>now, but without dealing with dung for quality.
>>
>>
>
>
> AT 2020
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
>
> -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
> stuff are at www.tyford.com
>

Ty have you had a chance to try the AT 2020 on acoustic guitar? I was
thinking that may be a decent mic on acoustic.

Jim



--
it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your
mouth and remove all doubt....

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 4 May 2005 22:09:18 -0400, LJM wrote
(in article <iffee.5833$GQ5.3196@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>):
> Ty have you had a chance to try the AT 2020 on acoustic guitar? I was
> thinking that may be a decent mic on acoustic.
>
> Jim

Hi Jim,

I have. the capsule is .66 inches, and the tone mildly aggressive. I wouldn't
go to it for a pure sound, but for something with a little bite......

I keep thinking, "If I had $99 to blow would it be on an SM58 or an AT 2020?"
For me the latter, unless I was road dogging.

Regards,

Ty





-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 4 May 2005 22:46:46 -0400, Bob Savage wrote
(in article <oOfee.1130$eU.413@fed1read07>):

> "Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:m_6dna9d1YPy5OTfRVn-3A@comcast.com...
>> AT 2020
>
> Ty,
>
> Between the AT 2020 and the MK020, which would you use for overheads if the
> price were the same?
>
>

Very different sounds from those two. Tough call based on that and what your
drums and room sound like and what you expect from the sound.

I would expect the AT 2020 to sound brighter, less muddy, but I haven't done
the math.

The AT 2020 has been tuned to not respond as much to proximity, btw.

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Bob Savage <bsavage@blacoxbla.net> wrote:
>"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
>> People should spend more time going out and listening to mikes. If you
>> like what it sounds like, buy it. If you don't, go on to the next one.
>> Time spent listening is never wasted.
>
>This brings up another question. How do you go about testing a mic in the
>store? Even if I brought it home, I don't have a drum kit to test with, and
>not being one who's ever spent time listening to and comparing mics, what do
>I need to be listening for?

Well, in a perfect world, you can put mikes up on a drum kit in the store,
record them, and take the tape home to listen to.

In an imperfect world, you can at least jingle your keys into the mikes
and listen to whether they sound smeary or not.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news:d5dd01$66e$1@panix2.panix.com...

> In an imperfect world, you can at least jingle your keys into the mikes
> and listen to whether they sound smeary or not.

That makes sense, thanks again for the input, Scott.

--
http/www.bobsavage.net

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"hefalump" <hefalumpikWYTNIJ@TOo2.pl> wrote in message
news:d5bkbu$aoi$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl...
>

> * Well - im recording drums using SP C4, and these are very fine mics.
Used
> with
> ORTF technique on the rock drum kit gives me very decent rock sound. I
> think -
> without testing it, its very difficult to find the right one. BUT - you
cant
> go wrong with
> a (checked earlier) C4 or 012. I would go with the C4. Used on the
accoustic
> guitar,
> electric, bass and vocals - nice effects.
>
> keep on rockin'


I agree 100%.

My C4's get used all the time (I don't know how inconsistent they are in
comparison to other C4's, but my pair seem nicely matched.)

They arent scratchy or edgy, the sound is full and detailed, and I use them
on acoustic instruments, overheads, and have even recorded vocals with them.

I love them on Drums as overheads. (The DW kit here sounds awesome with just
2 C4s' and a kick mic -usually my Audix D6.)

I reckon they are pretty darn good value, and a good place to start.

Good luck!!!

Geoff

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 5 May 2005 00:51:14 -0400, Geoff Duncan wrote
(in article <4279a57c@clear.net.nz>):

>
> "hefalump" <hefalumpikWYTNIJ@TOo2.pl> wrote in message
> news:d5bkbu$aoi$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl...
>>
>
>> * Well - im recording drums using SP C4, and these are very fine mics.
> Used
>> with
>> ORTF technique on the rock drum kit gives me very decent rock sound. I
>> think -
>> without testing it, its very difficult to find the right one. BUT - you
> cant
>> go wrong with
>> a (checked earlier) C4 or 012. I would go with the C4. Used on the
> accoustic
>> guitar,
>> electric, bass and vocals - nice effects.
>>
>> keep on rockin'
>
>
> I agree 100%.
>
> My C4's get used all the time (I don't know how inconsistent they are in
> comparison to other C4's, but my pair seem nicely matched.)
>
> They arent scratchy or edgy, the sound is full and detailed, and I use them
> on acoustic instruments, overheads, and have even recorded vocals with them.
>
> I love them on Drums as overheads. (The DW kit here sounds awesome with just
> 2 C4s' and a kick mic -usually my Audix D6.)
>
> I reckon they are pretty darn good value, and a good place to start.
>
> Good luck!!!
>
> Geoff
>
>

Then there's Rode Nt4 or a pair of NT5.

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I have recently been listening to some SP C4 vs Rode NT4 comparison
recordings of a brass band. A/Bing the recordings, I have found that the SP
C4's have the wow factor, not becuase they are overly bright, but because
you can hear "everything". There is a clarity and detail from the C4's that
just adds dimention to the recording and puts you right at the scene. Also,
the omni caps on the C4's sound spectacular - open, flat, excellent
transient response, good low end extension for a spall diaphragm, etc.

I have a pair of Rode NT5's (same capsual as the NT4). My next purchase is
going to have to be the SP C4's. I thought the hype surrounding these mics
was just the usual enthusiest excitement about the latest cheap toy, but
these things really do shine.

Bill Ruys.

"Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:5uCdnVxZWPU5Y-TfRVn-pQ@comcast.com...
> On Thu, 5 May 2005 00:51:14 -0400, Geoff Duncan wrote
> (in article <4279a57c@clear.net.nz>):
>
>>
>> "hefalump" <hefalumpikWYTNIJ@TOo2.pl> wrote in message
>> news:d5bkbu$aoi$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl...
>>>
>>
>>> * Well - im recording drums using SP C4, and these are very fine mics.
>> Used
>>> with
>>> ORTF technique on the rock drum kit gives me very decent rock sound. I
>>> think -
>>> without testing it, its very difficult to find the right one. BUT - you
>> cant
>>> go wrong with
>>> a (checked earlier) C4 or 012. I would go with the C4. Used on the
>> accoustic
>>> guitar,
>>> electric, bass and vocals - nice effects.
>>>
>>> keep on rockin'
>>
>>
>> I agree 100%.
>>
>> My C4's get used all the time (I don't know how inconsistent they are in
>> comparison to other C4's, but my pair seem nicely matched.)
>>
>> They arent scratchy or edgy, the sound is full and detailed, and I use
>> them
>> on acoustic instruments, overheads, and have even recorded vocals with
>> them.
>>
>> I love them on Drums as overheads. (The DW kit here sounds awesome with
>> just
>> 2 C4s' and a kick mic -usually my Audix D6.)
>>
>> I reckon they are pretty darn good value, and a good place to start.
>>
>> Good luck!!!
>>
>> Geoff
>>
>>
>
> Then there's Rode Nt4 or a pair of NT5.
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
> -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other
> audiocentric
> stuff are at www.tyford.com
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 5 May 2005 18:17:11 -0400, Bill Ruys wrote
(in article <HXwee.4089$Od6.560901@news.xtra.co.nz>):

> I have recently been listening to some SP C4 vs Rode NT4 comparison
> recordings of a brass band. A/Bing the recordings, I have found that the SP
> C4's have the wow factor, not becuase they are overly bright, but because
> you can hear "everything". There is a clarity and detail from the C4's that
> just adds dimention to the recording and puts you right at the scene. Also,
> the omni caps on the C4's sound spectacular - open, flat, excellent
> transient response, good low end extension for a spall diaphragm, etc.
>
> I have a pair of Rode NT5's (same capsual as the NT4). My next purchase is
> going to have to be the SP C4's. I thought the hype surrounding these mics
> was just the usual enthusiest excitement about the latest cheap toy, but
> these things really do shine.
>
> Bill Ruys.

Well if you really want a "wow factor" omni, get a gefell m296. You can use
the C4 as a door prop.

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Bill Ruys" <bill.ruys@nospam.siliconaudio.co.nz> writes:

> I have recently been listening to some SP C4 vs Rode NT4 comparison
> recordings of a brass band. A/Bing the recordings, I have found that the SP
> C4's have the wow factor, not becuase they are overly bright, but because
> you can hear "everything". There is a clarity and detail from the C4's that
> just adds dimention to the recording and puts you right at the scene. Also,
> the omni caps on the C4's sound spectacular - open, flat, excellent
> transient response, good low end extension for a spall diaphragm, etc.
>
> I have a pair of Rode NT5's (same capsual as the NT4). My next purchase is
> going to have to be the SP C4's. I thought the hype surrounding these mics
> was just the usual enthusiest excitement about the latest cheap toy, but
> these things really do shine.
>
> Bill Ruys.
>
> "Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:5uCdnVxZWPU5Y-TfRVn-pQ@comcast.com...
> > On Thu, 5 May 2005 00:51:14 -0400, Geoff Duncan wrote
> > (in article <4279a57c@clear.net.nz>):
> >
> >>
> >> "hefalump" <hefalumpikWYTNIJ@TOo2.pl> wrote in message
> >> news:d5bkbu$aoi$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl...
> >>>
> >>
> >>> * Well - im recording drums using SP C4, and these are very fine mics.
> >> Used
> >>> with
> >>> ORTF technique on the rock drum kit gives me very decent rock sound. I
> >>> think -
> >>> without testing it, its very difficult to find the right one. BUT - you
> >> cant
> >>> go wrong with
> >>> a (checked earlier) C4 or 012. I would go with the C4. Used on the
> >> accoustic
> >>> guitar,
> >>> electric, bass and vocals - nice effects.
> >>>
> >>> keep on rockin'
> >>
> >>
> >> I agree 100%.
> >>
> >> My C4's get used all the time (I don't know how inconsistent they are in
> >> comparison to other C4's, but my pair seem nicely matched.)
> >>
> >> They arent scratchy or edgy, the sound is full and detailed, and I use
> >> them
> >> on acoustic instruments, overheads, and have even recorded vocals with
> >> them.
> >>
> >> I love them on Drums as overheads. (The DW kit here sounds awesome with
> >> just
> >> 2 C4s' and a kick mic -usually my Audix D6.)
> >>
> >> I reckon they are pretty darn good value, and a good place to start.
> >>
> >> Good luck!!!
> >>
> >> Geoff
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Then there's Rode Nt4 or a pair of NT5.
> >
> > Ty Ford
> >
> >
> > -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other
> > audiocentric
> > stuff are at www.tyford.com
> >

Thanks for the info.

Does anyone have an opinion of the AKG 391/2/3 vs the C4s? My application is
location recording (folk/rock music). I'm considering the C4s as well, but
the AKG are supposed to be good too.

Thanks,
Richard

 

[Brent]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hey Ty, I ran across some of your reviews while wrapping catfish the
other night.

Brent Casey
PMI Audio Group (Studio Projects)
877-563-6335

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mannr@uwaterloo.ca wrote:

> Does anyone have an opinion of the AKG 391/2/3 vs the C4s? My application is
> location recording (folk/rock music). I'm considering the C4s as well, but
> the AKG are supposed to be good too.

I prefer the C4's. IMO they have an open sound with a smooth top end response with
the Omni capsule on them. And if you attenuate the bass they sound great down to
80Hz or so..perhaps a bit accentuated...but they sound great.

And IMO the AKG 391's are way too bright for my purposes.

A matched pair of C4's is only $300 or so these days. The AKG's are around $500
each with some extra cost attached to get a matched pair. If you have the budget
for both, then I would rent or borrow a pair of each and try them out to see what
*you* think.

PapaNate

 

[Brent]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mr. Schultz, just so you know, I wasn't really wrapping catfish the
other night with Ty's reviews and didn't post that with any malice - I
tend not to use the little smileys. I've been taking breaks from my
bench work throughout the afternoon, awaiting Ty's reply, which I
figured would be a zinger.
As far as I know, Ty hasn't heard the C4's. I would think that I'd have
gotten an earful by now about how the mics fared on his Martin, etc.
I'm sorry to have insulted you.

Sincerely,

Brent Casey
PMI Audio Group
877-563-6335

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<Brent@pmiaudio.com> wrote in message
news:1115399993.193489.94230@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Hey Ty, I ran across some of your reviews while wrapping catfish the
> other night.
>
> Brent Casey
> PMI Audio Group (Studio Projects)
> 877-563-6335



Hm, a company rep responds to negative feedback from a user with
insults. How will said rep respond if I have concerns about a product I
buy from that company?

Hm again, I've tried a bunch of microphones, read Ty's reviews of those
mics, and found his observations to be fairly consistent with my own.
That leads me to think that his perceptions of these mics may be similar
to what I would have heard if I had spent much time listening to them.
A rep for the company that "makes" the mic about which Ty has commented
responds with an insult. Ipso facto, he insults me too, without even
knowing it.

Hm yet again, a rep for a company that makes mics comes onto a pro audio
newsgroup and hurls insults where anyone in its target demographic can
read them. What does that tell me about that person's judgement? If
that person has poor judgement, and that person is responsible for that
product, what does that suggest about the product?

Not that I'm drawing any definitive conclusions or insinuating anything,
it just makes me wonder, that's all.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hey Ty, have you taken a listen to these mics? If you've previously been
put off by the distorted high end of the C1, don't be put off. The C4 is a
different animal, and in a differenct class IMO.

Bill.

"Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ub2dnSqKyozP6ObfRVn-tg@comcast.com...
> On Thu, 5 May 2005 18:17:11 -0400, Bill Ruys wrote
> (in article <HXwee.4089$Od6.560901@news.xtra.co.nz>):
>
>> I have recently been listening to some SP C4 vs Rode NT4 comparison
>> recordings of a brass band. A/Bing the recordings, I have found that the
>> SP
>> C4's have the wow factor, not becuase they are overly bright, but because
>> you can hear "everything". There is a clarity and detail from the C4's
>> that
>> just adds dimention to the recording and puts you right at the scene.
>> Also,
>> the omni caps on the C4's sound spectacular - open, flat, excellent
>> transient response, good low end extension for a spall diaphragm, etc.
>>
>> I have a pair of Rode NT5's (same capsual as the NT4). My next purchase
>> is
>> going to have to be the SP C4's. I thought the hype surrounding these
>> mics
>> was just the usual enthusiest excitement about the latest cheap toy, but
>> these things really do shine.
>>
>> Bill Ruys.
>
> Well if you really want a "wow factor" omni, get a gefell m296. You can
> use
> the C4 as a door prop.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
> -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other
> audiocentric
> stuff are at www.tyford.com
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Bill Ruys wrote:

> If you've previously been
> put off by the distorted high end of the C1, don't be put off.

I think you may have a bad mic or a mismatch on your mic pre if you hear the top
end of the C1 distorting.

PapaNate

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

It was actually a number of posts from Ty himself over the years that
mentioned that the high-end of the C1 was distorted. Just do a google group
search on "c1" and "ty".

Bill.

"Papanate" <nospamagain@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:427C4545.3DB1C4A0@nc.rr.com...
> Bill Ruys wrote:
>
>> If you've previously been
>> put off by the distorted high end of the C1, don't be put off.
>
> I think you may have a bad mic or a mismatch on your mic pre if you hear
> the top
> end of the C1 distorting.
>
> PapaNate
>

 

[David]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1115427535.130167.100800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
<Brent@pmiaudio.com> wrote:

> Mr. Schultz, just so you know, I wasn't really wrapping catfish the
> other night with Ty's reviews and didn't post that with any malice - I
> tend not to use the little smileys. I've been taking breaks from my
> bench work throughout the afternoon, awaiting Ty's reply, which I
> figured would be a zinger.
> As far as I know, Ty hasn't heard the C4's. I would think that I'd have
> gotten an earful by now about how the mics fared on his Martin, etc.
> I'm sorry to have insulted you.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Brent Casey
> PMI Audio Group
> 877-563-6335



I'm glad you were called on it. Obviously, you the person you were
insulting was Ty. Not that there's anything wrong with an good insult
between friends.

I needle Ty myself. But he knows where I'm coming from. Perhaps he
knows where you're coming from too.

To the rest of us, it read as a fish slap to da face.




David Correia
Celebration Sound
Warren, Rhode Island

CelebrationSound@aol.com
www.CelebrationSound.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 7 May 2005 07:37:40 -0400, Bill Ruys wrote
(in article <9M1fe.4562$Od6.627089@news.xtra.co.nz>):

> It was actually a number of posts from Ty himself over the years that
> mentioned that the high-end of the C1 was distorted. Just do a google group
> search on "c1" and "ty".
>
> Bill.
>
> "Papanate" <nospamagain@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:427C4545.3DB1C4A0@nc.rr.com...
>> Bill Ruys wrote:
>>
>>> If you've previously been
>>> put off by the distorted high end of the C1, don't be put off.
>>
>> I think you may have a bad mic or a mismatch on your mic pre if you hear
>> the top
>> end of the C1 distorting.
>>
>> PapaNate

Gentlemen (and Ladies),

Let's make it real simple. Send me a C4 and I'll try to get a m296 back here
to do a real comparison.

Of the C1, C3, T3 mics sent me some years back. The C1 appealed to me more.
All were slightly edgy and more noisy than I like. I spoke about it to the
folks at SP back then.

Mr. Casey and I have spoken on several occasions. It was he who suggested
that his company was putting pressure on the Chinese to manufacture mics
without these flaws and I wished him good luck. I also urged him to continue
hammering the Chinese for the benefit of us all.

I greatly appreciate the attentions drawn to Mr. Casey's comment. He has
stepped over the line before and has apologized. I took it openly and write
his comments off to him having a bad day and seeing my post didn't help.

Having said that, the (more expensie) m296 Gefell omni may be the most
stunning omni I have heard in an end address. Through my GML preamps, I was
not prepared for the purity of this mic.

There is no review of the m296 on my site, either because I couldn't get a
commission to write it, or by accident. I'll have to look into it.
Regardless, for those of you who have found the Schoeps cmc641 as "right
sounding" as I have, the M296 will not disappoint.

Regards,

Ty Ford





-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1115399993.193489.94230@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Brent@pmiaudio.com writes:

> Hey Ty, I ran across some of your reviews while wrapping catfish the
> other night.

You wrap fish in Pro Audio Review? The ink comes off that slick paper
on to the fish!


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo