MXL Mics...

[Emmett1057]

Emmett..We're not using the SOLO610 but the discontinued (it figures) M610

http://www.uaudio.com/_works/images/products/analog/m610-medium-front.jpg

As it happens we run the 960 mic at the 2.0 Lo-Z position and the high boost switch IS up..unlike the above picture, the Lo-Cut switch is OFF.

Yeah as usual you're correct about the preamp making a HUGE difference in the way ANY mic sounds..but as usual the mic needs to do it's part as well..In this case I don't know how the company can make such a good sounding unit at that price point (even with my 60.00 NOS tube) My remaainning question is reliability, and ability to CONSISTANTLY perform this well..

Ahh yes...That works too...Same impedence, just a different layout. The 960 should run in the 2.0 position, while the TLM 49 should be optimal at the 50 position.

In my experience, the less expensive mics generally have transformer problems, over time. Of course, cheaper components are to be expected. The tube, for instance, is an easy replacement. If you're brave, you could try a transformer swap. Right now, there seems to be a lot of transformer-based inexpensive mics. Transformerless mics (i.e. anything in Neumann's TLM series) are generally much more consistant, clean and quiet than transformer-coupled mics. Except in cases where high-end transformers are used. Unfortunately, high-end transformers can be very expensive.

More expensive mics are built on years of R&D, and use higher quality components. The cheaper mics use cheaper materials and components, and the housing design (which makes some difference) is usually built for looks, rather than use.

On the other hand, these cheaper materials ARE available now, where they weren't just a few years ago. And there have been enough companies doing R&D for the cheap manufacturers to copy basic designs to some degree of accuracy.

One reason that MXL gets so much less respect than, say Studio Projects, is simply the design aspect. Studio Projects has its own look and feel. They have a set of model numbers and they stick to them and continue to develop and improve them. MXL is ALWAYS releasing new mics and it becomes very hard to choose a favorite, especially when so many of the designs sound the same. Do you see what I'm getting at? MXL has not developed its own brand...They are largely clones of other mics. The MXL 990 and the V69 seem to be the only original designs that really please people. MXL should focus on building a few great models and let the others go. They're just trying to be everything to everyone, and they're losing respect in the process.

Even though Studio Projects uses 797 Audio (Chinese company), they still have a personality that they own. The B1 and C1 have been around for over five years and have gained a reputation. They've been improved and they have a distinct "sound" that is very Neumann-like in timbre, but it's a sound that the entire Studio Projects line has. Audio-Technica, AKG, Neumann, Shure...They all have a "sound" that spans the whole family of mics. MXL does not.

Anyhow, I'm off topic. The original point is that it isn't all about sound. Behringer preamps don't sound terrible, but they are horrid quality. A lot of it comes from the components used, the design (or lack there of) and the workmanship. Those are the things that determine price...Oh, and name. The Neumann name is going to add at least $300 to the price of any mic. The Neumann BCM dynamic mic sells for around $700, I think. The capsule is identical (I think) to the Sennheiser MD421 (about $350). The big difference? One is silver, looks cool and says Neumann on it.

Emmett

 

[jefflaurence]

That's the issue..can these stand up to the test of time. I may take one completely apart and do some tranformer swappin' but as you said that is expensive (for good ones) and it would be not-so-cost effective..I am most interested in not worriying so much about "name brand" as nobody sees what I use anyway.

The TLM49 started sounding a little harsh compared to the MXL this morning..impedences set as reccommended in this sample:

www.jefflaurence.com/audio/tlm49_mxl960_AB.wav

 

[Emmett1057]

Jeff,

Maybe it's my monitors, but the Neumann sounds HUGE compared to the MXL. The MXL doesn't sound bad to me, but it doesn't have the big, full, creamy sound of the Neumann.

On the other hand, there's something very flattering going on in the upper midrange or highs with the MXL. Almost a breathy quality, which I like. A tad bit too much sibilance for my taste, but otherwise, a pleasing sound. The 960 also seems to have a considerably lower noise floor, which I find very surprising.

I dunno, I think I'm sticking with the Neumann. I don't hear anything that sound "harsh" to me. I think, at least for this read and your voice, it is my favorite.

Emmett

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I don't know if I would have called the difference "HUGE" but I agree that the Neumann did sound 'bigger'. I pulled the file up in my editor and saw that the peaks were at least 1 db lower on the MXL part of the file. I edited the file to raise the electrical qualities to be more in line with each other and then the difference then was far from "HUGE".

Since the beginning of radio there has been this concept that a good voice is a big bassy voice and those who feel that way run from anything sounding a bit thinner. I don't know if I thought the MXL was thinner, or using the terms and concepts of the wine tasting world.... was richer and a bit more flavorful.

Oh, drat. If I keep reading here I am going to have to upgrade my mic and get rid of the one that came with my Radio Shack cassette recorder. :-o

 

[Emmett1057]

I should have noted that before I did any testing, I averaged an RMS value for both, to make it a fair test.

The Neumann is simply denser within the fundamental frequency range, which is what makes it sound so huge. And by huge, I'm speaking in terms of minute differences between one condenser and another.

The Neumann dips at 10kHz, where the 960 peaks, which is where the breathy quality comes from. The Neumann peaks at 400Hz, which is where a lot of that body comes from, while the 960 dips there, giving it a cutting sound.

Below 100Hz, the Neumann has considerably better response (about 8dB from 40-100Hz).

Overall, the response on your voice is pretty steady from one to the next. Most of the difference is coming from the fact that the Neumann is simply more dense sounding, which comes back to the character of the mic family.

Listening again after a long break, the MXL just sounds filtered to me. It sounds like an effect that you might use in an edgier promo...The Neumann sounds dry and untouched.

Emmett

P.S. The thing that's really bothering me is how much higher the noise floor of the Neumann is...Any reason you can think of for that, Jeff?

 

[jefflaurence]

Man Emmett I don't know but you're right..it does sound noisier..same preamp..although I did change the impedances like you pointed out. The only thing might have been that the track was recorded and saved originally as a 256 MP3 then converted..this one was a WAV from the beginning

TLM49 fist..MXL960 second

www.jefflaurence.com/audio/tlm49_mxl960_vers2.wav


The Neumann IS bigger..but the price difference is big as well..I may want to mess around with EQ a little..but then we get into a grey area..I will most likely just use the MXL as a good backup..

What about these new AKG C414 XLII mics..anybody like them?

 

[menotti1]

Jeff, are you using the aircorp with this file or just the 610? 960 has lots of sibilance.Mic needs to be tamed some,but overall pretty darn good for the price..

 

[Chuck]

One reason that MXL gets so much less respect than, say Studio Projects, is simply the design aspect. Studio Projects has its own look and feel. They have a set of model numbers and they stick to them and continue to develop and improve them. MXL is ALWAYS releasing new mics and it becomes very hard to choose a favorite, especially when so many of the designs sound the same. Do you see what I'm getting at? MXL has not developed its own brand...They are largely clones of other mics. The MXL 990 and the V69 seem to be the only original designs that really please people. MXL should focus on building a few great models and let the others go. They're just trying to be everything to everyone, and they're losing respect in the process.

I think MXL has a billion different models because of the way they choose to market their products. While they are very much a quality oriented company (better than a lot) they are driven by numbers, just like radio.

Rather than being a boutique company, they have chosen to market their products primarily through large mass merchandisers like Guitar Center and their mail order division Musicians Friend, Sam Ash Music, B&H, Sweetwater, BSW, etc. It’s simply a bigger market which means more money. They also have lots of small to mid size regional dealers. None of these people like going head to head on price for the same mic. The simple solution is an exclusive private model for each dealer. By changing the model number, varying the included accessories and changing the retail packaging, your can arrange things so not two dealers have exactly the same product. The reason for doing this is to make price comparisons more difficult for the consumer, thus preserving profit margins, which are very low in the audio biz.

Before returning to my radio addiction, I spent a long time in the pro-audio business. Even for a smaller company like mine, we had our own private label mics from a variety of well known suppliers. It was a very effective sales tool. By including these private label mics in bids and specifications, it was impossible for another dealer in the area to offer exactly the same product at the same price.

Please don't misunderstand that these private models were somehow inferior to the better known models. They weren't. In many cases, they were exactly the same, with features like a switch (or lack of one), a 20 foot cord, as opposed to a 15 foot cord, or no cord. Maybe a nice pouch was provided with the regular retail version and not with the private version. With large diaphragm condensers, the differences were frequently the shock mount or just a fixed mount, and most popularly was a nifty "road case" for the mic as opposed to a cardboard box.

Most of the large diaphragm mics originate from Beijing 797 Audio or Sound King in Shanghai. Both are capable of making very high quality products. A manufacturer can also purchase individual component parts for any of these mics, and mix and match in your own factory. That allows you to hand select (and reject) capsules which greatly improves quality control. Another boutique fix for many of these mics is simply replacing their Chinese FET pre amp boards with one of your own design and manufacture. That’s not too hard to do. A few years ago, fellow named Scott Dorsey wrote an article in a recording magazine which included a description of a simple but improved circuit that can be retrofitted in many of these mics. http://www.pfarrell.com/music/shanghaimic.html I think Scott still sells a PC board and a kit of parts for the project. He can be reached at http://www.kludgeaudio.com It can make a big difference.

 

[Lee_Sackett]

Listening again after a long break, the MXL just sounds filtered to me. It sounds like an effect that you might use in an edgier promo...The Neumann sounds dry and untouched.

I like the "grind" of the 960; It fits your style, Jeff, and I'm sure it cuts really well on TV. (Well actually, the "style" you're using here; I was the imaging guy at 100.7 in Pittsburgh in the Nineties when you were the image voice, and you were pretty laid back in that context).

 

[jefflaurence]

Hi Lee that was "The Point", and the style was a little less edgy then..production quality at that station was great. Was that a Terry Patrick station? I don't remember.

The audio sample does not have anything but a DynaMite on it (for slight expansion) along with the M610's "sound" The AirCorp is in the RV and at the Atlanta studio..I might try using it on this mic, and notch out a little of the upper end..although I like it on air. I have heard a few spots on TV and they do cut through with a nice subtle edge..Maybe a de-esser..

Maybe I need new teeth, and a re-tonguing

Maybe I should just stop all this foolishness..and stick with the mic that brought me to the dance.

 

[Hart]

Maybe I need new teeth, and a re-tonguing

Ha! sign me up.

 

[Emmett1057]

Man Emmett I don't know but you're right..it does sound noisier..same preamp..although I did change the impedances like you pointed out. The only thing might have been that the track was recorded and saved originally as a 256 MP3 then converted..this one was a WAV from the beginning

TLM49 fist..MXL960 second

www.jefflaurence.com/audio/tlm49_mxl960_vers2.wav


The Neumann IS bigger..but the price difference is big as well..I may want to mess around with EQ a little..but then we get into a grey area..I will most likely just use the MXL as a good backup..

What about these new AKG C414 XLII mics..anybody like them?

Oh, absolutely the price difference is big. It's never really fair to compare a cheap mic with an expensive one...The expensive one will (almost) always win that race. And that's to be expected. I'd like to see someone shoot out a bunch of cheapies and see which ones come out on top, straight from the factory (no mods). Let's be honest, it isn't fair to compare an MXL to a Neumann. It is, however, fair to compare an MXL to a R0DE NT1-A or Studio Projects C1. It's no secret that the Studio Projects line impresses the hell out of me. I'm also impressed with the R0DE NT1-A and Audio-Technica AT2020. In the "cheap" range, they stand out the most, to me.

As for the newer AKG's, I have no interest. I hate every incarnation of the 414 I've ever heard. I just don't like them on voice, at all. The only time I ever hear them sound good, is when they're in a whisper booth, and they are placed off-axis, about 18" away. Then they sound pretty sweet.

Emmett

 

[Lee_Sackett]

Hi Lee that was "The Point", and the style was a little less edgy then..production quality at that station was great. Was that a Terry Patrick station? I don't remember.

Ha! A sixteen track MCI, 2 Studer two tracks, a Wheatstone production console with two sends, two keyboards and a rack full of goodies that we could patch in. We were also using a Roland DM80 - great for editing, but no plug ins: we had to lay effects to separate tracks in real time.

That was EZ Communications, but I can't really remember the cast of characters.

Maybe I should just stop all this foolishness..and stick with the mic that brought me to the dance.

Have fun: variety is the spice of life. (note that I didn't say, "more variety and less talk.")

 

[menotti1]

Jeff, i think if you use the aircorp along with the 610 pre, you might find it vastly improves the 960 performance. Just a good hunch.Give it go and post it.

 

[Chuck]

Well not bad..not bad at all. Got an MXL 960 from Musicians Friend, and immediately liked it's build (149 bucks!!)

It's a beefy mic, and initially sounded really pretty good..THEN I put a NOS Telefunken ECC81 (12AT7) into it..and let it sit for a few hours this morning. This is a raw topical news promo track, and nothing on it, but a little expansion. The producer said it really cut through the music track.

www.audiolocker.net/young_knoxville/wate0803a1.mp3


...pretty cool. I like it better than the TLM49's today..and my God! 149 bucks??? Jeesh

My MXL 960 arrived while I was away at the Texas Association of Broadcasters Convention. It was a great surprise when I returned home. What a bargain! It sounds great (or as good as it can, considering the input source - me). Thanks for the recommendation!

 

[Chuck]

Today, I did a couple of spots for a friend's station. I do that a lot. Other people help me, and I try to return the favor, especially to other noncom stations. Favors seem to be a way of life, and Jeff has been one of those people who’s lend a hand to my station. Since his recommendation, I've been using the $150 MXL tube mic. Shortly after emailing the spots, the phone rang in just a few minutes.

"What kind of mic were you using? It sounds great." were the first words out of my friend's mouth. I told him what it was. Considering the source (me) I was fairly happy with my "one take wonder" spots. So was my friend. I assure you that I am not God's gift to the voice over world.

IMHO, lots of cheap Chinese condenser mics have a very usable "sweet spot." It can take a little experimenting to get good results. This thing is easy. The "sweet spot" is huge. For the price, it is truly remarkable. It's not a Neumann U-87, but is really good for $150.

 

[jefflaurence]

Naw Chuck your voice is just fine..you sound great. That crazy mic is truly nuts. The build quality on it surpasses many of the current MXL offerings I don't care where it was made. It is solid, and well wired with Mogami cabling and a solid PSU. Plus the cables and the case for A HUNDRED AND FIFTY BUCKS??? Not to be believed! Chuck when you get a second noodle around with replacing the stock tube with a Telefunken or Mullard ECC81. It will transform that mic!

An interesting note is that a lot of the Chinese mic companies have several older gents on staff that actually worked at the Georg Neumann plants in Berlin Germany and in Gefell East Germany and learned the art of capsule fabrication as young men. They know how to make a great capsule if they want. They just do it cheaper. Dollar for dollar this is a great deal, and they won't keep selling them for much longer.

 

[Chuck]

Naw Chuck your voice is just fine..you sound great. That crazy mic is truly nuts. The build quality on it surpasses many of the current MXL offerings I don't care where it was made. It is solid, and well wired with Mogami cabling and a solid PSU. Plus the cables and the case for A HUNDRED AND FIFTY BUCKS??? Not to be believed! Chuck when you get a second noodle around with replacing the stock tube with a Telefunken or Mullard ECC81. It will transform that mic!

An interesting note is that a lot of the Chinese mic companies have several older gents on staff that actually worked at the Georg Neumann plants in Berlin Germany and in Gefell East Germany and learned the art of capsule fabrication as young men. They know how to make a great capsule if they want. They just do it cheaper. Dollar for dollar this is a great deal, and they won't keep selling them for much longer.

Back when I used to sell pro audio equipment, we briefly toyed with selling Monster Cables. It wasn't because they were particularly good (they aren't IMHO) but because there was a lot of money to be made, and people actually came in the shop wanting to buy them. They actually had a mic cord that sold for more than this mic. The unbelievable part was people actually bought them.

This mic comes with two cables. One is the multi-pin for the tube, but the other is a nice Mogami cable with standard 3 pin Neutric connectors. At least, that is a good quality cable. You can just look at it as purchasing a $150 mic cord, and getting a nice mic, foam wind screen and a small metal briefcase for free. What a deal...

 

[Emmett1057]

Back when I used to sell pro audio equipment, we briefly toyed with selling Monster Cables. It wasn't because they were particularly good (they aren't IMHO) but because there was a lot of money to be made, and people actually came in the shop wanting to buy them.

Normally, I believe you get what you pay for. With Monster cables, I'm with you...Well, sorta. I don't think Monster makes bad cables. I like them and I think they're very good. But I also think they're a complete rip-off. I can't find any good reason to pay for them. Sure, they're well made and they use quality connectors, but so do cables that cost $25. I do like the Monster 100 series. They have a solid quality and use Neutrik connectors, and they don't really cost any more than other comparable cables.

I suppose if you were in a perfectly treated studio, running 48 tracks, using the higher end cables throughout might make some sort of minute difference in the noise floor. With a single mic and cable, I can't imagine any audible or measurable difference at all.

Emmett

 

[Chuck]

Back when I used to sell pro audio equipment, we briefly toyed with selling Monster Cables. It wasn't because they were particularly good (they aren't IMHO) but because there was a lot of money to be made, and people actually came in the shop wanting to buy them.

Normally, I believe you get what you pay for. With Monster cables, I'm with you...Well, sorta. I don't think Monster makes bad cables. I like them and I think they're very good. But I also think they're a complete rip-off. I can't find any good reason to pay for them. Sure, they're well made and they use quality connectors, but so do cables that cost $25. I do like the Monster 100 series. They have a solid quality and use Neutrik connectors, and they don't really cost any more than other comparable cables.

I suppose if you were in a perfectly treated studio, running 48 tracks, using the higher end cables throughout might make some sort of minute difference in the noise floor. With a single mic and cable, I can't imagine any audible or measurable difference at all.

Emmett

Well, now that you mention it, the really expensive Monster Cable mic cord, which is fairly large is diameter - maybe 3.8" or so, was the worst. Maybe we got a bad batch, but when phantom power was applied they became microphonic. That's not an exactly desirable trait in a $100+ mic cord.

We also got a lot of the RCA cables back for a variety of reasons. The most popular reason was the plugs were too large in diameter to fit beside each other in some equipment. Further, the Monster Cables were large enough and heavy enough that they delivered a lot of leverage on the flimsy RCA jacks found on some equipment. When forced to mate with the female connector, the customer frequently broke the panel mounted receptacle. Does that make happy customers? You bet.

Their speaker cables also had some problems. The wire is OK, but the banana connectors usually fell off or came lose and shorted things out. When you have a design problem like that, it doesn't matter if it is gold plated or not.

I'm a fan of Belden or Canare cable. Both are quality products at median prices. There are plenty of mid priced mic cords that work just fine. Unless the shield is deficient (as it is in some really cheap cords) you will never hear the difference. Steve Lampen from Belden, writes articles about wire that sometimes appear in Radio World. They pretty well reflect my nearly 45 years of real world experiences dealing with audio cables. His stuff is well worth a read.

For connectors, give me either Switchcraft or Neutric. There are other's that are OK too, but I've never had many problems with either of those two suppliers.

On a side note, as I was walking around in my local Wal-Mart today, I noticed they were selling XLR type mic cords from Rapco. To be fair, Rapco has been around a long time and will make whatever level quality you want. They are actually made in the USA, although I doubt the connectors are. At one time my old company sold some of their stuff. It wasn’t bad, and decent value for the money. We switched to another supplier who private labeled cords for us that were made to our specifications. But the 20’ cord at Wal-Mart was only $9.95. I’m sure they would be fine for most PA purposes.

Over the years, I've decided that cheap is not always the way to go, but reliable certainly is. The best mic cord is a WORKING mic cord, whoever made it.