I posted a link to yesterday’s blog post at a couple of recording forums and one guitar site. I started threads at the Reaper Forum, on Gearslutz, and at the Acoustic Guitar Forum. It’s been interesting reading people’s reactions.
As I expected, some folks reject the validity of these controlled tests, stating that different mics respond to different positioning in different ways, and their performance in their optimal position is the important issue. I can only suggest that they try some controlled testing in those different positions. After all, if the difference really exists, it should be apparent when levels and positions are matched, right?
And as I expected, some people pointed out that mics with different patterns and mics with very different transducer technology, like ribbon mics, sound different from the cardioid condensers I used. I absolutely agree.
Also as I expected, some people suggested that my use of a single source, the acoustic guitar, is preventing me from hearing the differences, which show themselves on cymbals and vocals. As Dirty Harry was wont to say, “A man’s gotta know his limitations.” I don’t record those sources so I don’t use them for testing .
One comment that has come up a couple of times is that the mics I chose were too similar, all large diaphragm mics from the low end of the spectrum. So I pulled out my highest priced mic, a Schoeps CMC64 small diaphragm condenser, and stuck it in the array.
Variety is the Spice of Mics?
For a little more variety, I replaced the Rode and AT mics with the Shure KSM141 and KSM44. So this set of clips includes two large diaphragm mics and two SD mics, and the price spread ranges from under $200 to over $1500.
I followed the same procedure I illustrated in yesterday’s post, aligning mic diaphragms by eye, playing a test tone through a small speaker about 1 foot from the mics, then adjusting gain on the M-Audio Profire 2626 to match their levels as well as possible in Reaper. Then I recorded the test tone followed by the acoustic guitar clip.
Mics and Clips
So here are the mics:
CAD M179
Schoeps CMC64
Shure KSM44
Shure KSM141
and here are the clips:
download 20090626-F.wav
download 20090626-G.wav
download 20090626-H.wav
download 20090626-I.wav
As before, I’ll post the key to the clip identities in a future blog entry. Or if you post your opinion and preference in a comment here or on one of the forums I visit I’ll email or PM the information to you.
Philosophical Musing
Please let me take a moment to wax philosophical here. No one has reported doing double blind ABX comparisons on the clips so far. Several posters have offered opinions on the sonic qualities of the clips, but no one has confirmed that they can actually hear a difference! This seems to be human nature, but I think that skipping the double blind check is missing a really valuable learning experience.
June 27th, 2009 - 11:10 am
Thanks for the shootout. I’ve been wondering how the KSM141s compare to Schoeps.
June 27th, 2009 - 2:03 pm
I do not know who is who but I prefer I.
June 28th, 2009 - 1:28 am
thanks. I like 1 and very much. Think no. 1 is the schoeps. Could you let me know the order of mics for this test? Thanks. Aaron
June 28th, 2009 - 8:12 am
Thanks for the comments, folks. Russ, do you have a guess at the identities of the clips, or a preference?
Didier and Aaron, I’ll email you the key.
Fran
June 30th, 2009 - 11:11 am
Thanks for the clips. I like the first sample the best (CMC64?) and the third sample the least (KSM44?). Could you please email me the Key?
July 1st, 2009 - 3:38 am
Thanks for the clips! By itself, as a solo guitar recording, I liked them in that order (from most to least): I, F, G, H. But I guess all of them are usable. H seems to be quite “cutting”, especially noticable in the squeaky string noise, but then again G or H might cut through a mix with other instruments really well, where more subtle presence might get lost… Please mail me the results, I’m curious!
July 9th, 2009 - 10:54 pm
I can’t tell the difference really, but, if I were to have to guess, I’d say I like F the least. The rest all sound the same to me. I am listening on some crappy headphones due to the hour, but it’s enough to tell me that I’d never spend $1500 on a mic.
July 29th, 2009 - 7:52 pm
The cad m179 has a clear pristine sound. You can really hear the details on the high end. No emphasis on the low end, but a fair presence. At what it does, it does it the best.
This mic is amazing on acoustic instruments, sweet vocals, as you can hear the texture, and specially for female background vocals, to get clear Ahhh!, Ohhh!.
At $150, this mic is a steal! I have one and would be ready to pay $600 for it. But I guess people would only be ready to pay that much if it would be called sm179!?
August 5th, 2009 - 5:59 am
I prefer F and H is my least favourite,but they are all pretty good to my ears!You can,t beat the old guitar!
October 1st, 2009 - 6:25 am
I liked the harmonics of the first two (F & G), but they seemed to have a bottom end that was muted, lacking resonance.
There was more attack on the lows with H, but the upper harmonics were not as detailed as the first two clips.
Out of the four, only the “I” clip covered the spectrum of the instrument for my ears, and this is the one I would prefer to use.
October 1st, 2009 - 12:14 pm
Bill, thanks a lot for commenting. I’ll email you the key to the clips.
Fran
October 13th, 2009 - 12:20 am
F ksm44
G CAd
H Schoeps
I 141
October 13th, 2009 - 12:20 am
plz send me the answers
October 18th, 2009 - 12:30 pm
Personally, “I” sounded the most pleasing to me. Can’t identify which mic is which; totally lacking experience in that area. The clips are very much appreciated Fran. Your method of comparison is solid.
November 3rd, 2009 - 10:23 am
I prefer Mic I.
November 3rd, 2009 - 4:17 pm
Thanks to everyone for your comments. I believe I’ve sent the key to everyone who commented.
Fran
November 3rd, 2009 - 6:04 pm
I liked G the best, most musical and most dynamically correct to my ears. H had too much string and fret sounds, but I liked the over all sound. F sounded ok, a bit like G. I didn’t like I, too nasal and constipated. Knowing my cheap taste I guess I is Schoeps. It’s great with blind tests, you really have to listen hard to form an opinion. Please mail me the answers.
Charley
December 9th, 2009 - 7:03 pm
I think F sounds better, then I, G, and H. NOw, what´s the answer?
I´ll be reading this blog.
January 14th, 2010 - 3:35 am
I like F the best for the detailed high end and neutrality color wise, but the bass is a bit loose, and I then like I for a tighter bass, more compressed colored sound (shure141 I think) and more even frequency response. If there was less color in my chain, I would go for I as it sounds the most ready, while if I wanted to add color with a nice tube pre etc, I would go for F. These are the only 2 I really like.
and I would love to get the answers
piscaerm@yahoo.com
Thanks!
January 21st, 2010 - 1:38 pm
I think I and then F for me…..I really hope I is the KSM141s or cheaper……
February 3rd, 2010 - 8:40 am
I like I, F, G, and H last. I and F both have better balance (more low end) and both sound good to me. G and H both seem a bit thin with a clear loss of detail in H. F is just a little harder than I in the upper-mids so I give I the nod. Other than H, it’s surprising how close to each other (and good!) they all sound.
I know nothing about any of these mics so I’d appreciate knowing the rough retail prices of each along with the key. Thanks!