Stellar CM-6 Vs Mojave MA-200

[Halloween]

Recorded Through

Vintech 473 Pre's - Level balanced the output
Lynx Aurora Converters

Mojave MA-200 - $1,095.00USD
Stellar CM-6 - $374.00USD

So take your Pick.

[Joekkel]

thanks for this shootout,

mic 1 is more midforward and smoother sounding, vintage voicing

mic 2 is clearer sounding, tighter lowend, more highs

prefered mic 1 on guitar, mic 2 on voc (put a desser on it and get a nice and shiny voice without too harsh esses). i guess, that some would decide the opposite way.
this mics complement each other quite well. no real idea which is which tho. i've read (only read!) that the mojave is quite bright sounding. and the stellar is a dark voiced mic. so my guess: mic1 stellar, mic2 mojave

cheers

[binarymilton]

I preferred mic 2 in all the samples.

Guitar strum 1, I thought sounded OK, but on the dull-sounding side.
Guitar strum 2 was like lifting a curtain. (Not a thick, heavy curtain, you understand - I thought Guitar strum1 sounded OK - more a medium-light curtain)

I thought exactly the same about the finger-picking, although to me that was more a matter of taste, as you might favour a darker, more fellow fingerstyle playing (depending on what voice, if any, it might accompany) over one that was a bit more transient-rich.

Essentially, mic 1 wasn't grabbing those transients on the guitars. But I could live with either of those mics on the guitar. For a straight, non-EQd, mono take, from a cardioid mic on an acoustic guitar, both are pretty good. Where were they positioned? In the same place? I imagine I could get a brighter version of Mic 1 by positioning it further down the neck, or pointing at the bridge. Likewise a darker Mic 2 by moving closer to the soundhole (not that I'd want to - impressed by Mic 2 on the guitar).

Vocals are harder to comment on, as the singer has quite a middy voice to begin with, verging on the harsh. I don't think either mic especially suits him. I'd probably use a 4047 on him, or one of the brighter ribbon mics.

But anyway, Mic 1 audibly distorts on the "F" of "Find yourself". The "wor" of "worries" sounds a bit distorty and harsh, as does the "my yo" of "my yoke"

All of that is less pronounced in Mic 2. Mic 2 is airier and smoother.

For me, mic 2 takes the cake, while not exactly blowing me away. If that's the Stellar, I'd contemplate dropping that money on it. If it's the Mojave, I don't think it's quite worth $1000.

EDIT: re-listened to the vocals, and the overall difference between the mics doesn't seem as great as the first listen. Both sound better than I remembered, and would fit a busy rock or pop mix, though I'm not sure either would be all that suited to an acoustic song.

[always_ending]

Originally Posted by binarymilton

I preferred mic 2 in all the samples.

Guitar strum 1, I thought sounded OK, but on the dull-sounding side.
Guitar strum 2 was like lifting a curtain. (Not a thick, heavy curtain, you understand - I thought Guitar strum1 sounded OK - more a medium-light curtain)

I thought exactly the same about the finger-picking, although to me that was more a matter of taste, as you might favour a darker, more fellow fingerstyle playing (depending on what voice, if any, it might accompany) over one that was a bit more transient-rich.

Essentially, mic 1 wasn't grabbing those transients on the guitars. But I could live with either of those mics on the guitar. For a straight, non-EQd, mono take, from a cardioid mic on an acoustic guitar, both are pretty good. Where were they positioned? In the same place? I imagine I could get a brighter version of Mic 1 by positioning it further down the neck, or pointing at the bridge. Likewise a darker Mic 2 by moving closer to the soundhole (not that I'd want to - impressed by Mic 2 on the guitar).

Vocals are harder to comment on, as the singer has quite a middy voice to begin with, verging on the harsh. I don't think either mic especially suits him. I'd probably use a 4047 on him, or one of the brighter ribbon mics.

But anyway, Mic 1 audibly distorts on the "F" of "Find yourself". The "wor" of "worries" sounds a bit distorty and harsh, as does the "my yo" of "my yoke"

All of that is less pronounced in Mic 2. Mic 2 is airier and smoother.

For me, mic 2 takes the cake, while not exactly blowing me away. If that's the Stellar, I'd contemplate dropping that money on it. If it's the Mojave, I don't think it's quite worth $1000.

EDIT: re-listened to the vocals, and the overall difference between the mics doesn't seem as great as the first listen. Both sound better than I remembered, and would fit a busy rock or pop mix, though I'm not sure either would be all that suited to an acoustic song.

To answer your questions on mic placement...


Both Mics we're placed side by side, facing both right where the neck of the guitar meets the sound hole on acoustics.

Mic #1 was positioned to the side closer to the sound hole, by about an inch or two.

Both of the mics were aimed with the capsules right to the same position of the guitar as to try and mitigate any difference in where they were aiming... they were at slight angles in other words, neither facing "straight" at the guitar, probably around 80-70 degree angles.



About the singer's voice...


It would've been much "better" on his voice inflection/tone/etc, but we didn't move the mics at all from where we recorded the guitars, so he simply sat in the chair with the setup as it was exactly during acoustic recording and sang towards the top of the mics.

He was slouching somewhat in doing so, which coupled with him being sick! (still, thanks for singing Halloween... my voice is HORRID!) lead to the "middy" sounding voice you hear.

Of course, no shootouts are every "perfect", changing mic locations best suited for each mic, etc, etc will always have a much better result in using said mic on any source..... but alas, that's not the way to conduct a "blind shootout" test IMVHO

Keep the comments coming guys, I'm very interested in what you guys think about this.... I think it's pretty awesome that the previous posters both seemed to like both mics and think both are useable mics (the same sentiments were shared by Halloween and myself).

Which to me, speaks pretty d@mn good about the Stellar mic considering it's price, and the fact that it's also a multi-pattern mic, allowing a multitude of applications with it. The Mojave MA-200 is cardioid only.

Ahhh..... I love being a slut

[binarymilton]

just to make it clear, I'm not dissing the guy's voice! It's much appreciated!

I didn't know the CM6 was multi-pattern.

[always_ending]

Originally Posted by binarymilton

just to make it clear, I'm not dissing the guy's voice! It's much appreciated!

I didn't know the CM6 was multi-pattern.

I know you weren't my man

He was actually diss-ing himself before the shootout, asking me if I thought he should even sing due to his congestion, etc..... and of course I told him "you SURE as hell don't want MY voice being what people judge anything by"


Yeah, the CM-6 is multi-pattern, from omni to figure 8, with 9 total settings!

[Whistlin' Pete]

I preferred 2 on both guitar tracks, but 1 on the vocal.

Just a guess, but I'm thinking 1 is the CM6 and 2 is the MA-200.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by always_ending

Keep the comments coming guys, I

Always Ending - I didn't vote, but I'll leave my comments here. First., thanks to you and Halloween for putting them up.

On both Ac Gtr clips, mic 2 was painfully zingy (in a Chinesey way) on my laptop and with K240 phones. Unuseably for MY purposes. On studio monitors they were closer, but having done this awhile, I'm confident that mic #2 will not take EQ or compression as well as mic #1. I'll say right now I have a bias against tube LDC's on Acoustic Guitar. I'll generally reach for a SDC, Ribbon, LDC FET, or Dynamic (in that order) before putting up a tube LDC for recording Ac Gtr. Mic #2 would not fit in my mixes well. Mic 1 would need some pretty serious EQ, but is more neutral sounding.

From your description of mic positions, I would have suggested one mic over the top of the other. An "inch or two" closer to the sound hole can make a HUGE difference for this type of recording and completely skew perception.

--

On vocals, first, Mic #2 is almost 3dB (2.8 to be exact) louder than Mic #1 - negating the possibility of a fair judgement listening from a browser, so I downloaded and drug them into my DAW. I'm surprised no one has commented on this. Unfortunately, again perhaps from your mic positioning, I didn't find either acceptable for me. But hey, I don't know either mic, and I don't know the singer, so its not really an educated comment. If I had to choose one and start recording NOW, I'd probably opt for #1 again. I could make it work.

Thanks again. Watch those levels - with them so far off, it obliterates objectivity. (People choose the loud mic almost always).

[kidvybes]

...since I already own and use both mics, the differences are obvious to me, but I'll keep my opinions on the downlow until you reveal the results...

[always_ending]

Originally Posted by drBill

Always Ending - I didn't vote, but I'll leave my comments here. First., thanks to you and Halloween for putting them up.

On both Ac Gtr clips, mic 2 was painfully zingy (in a Chinesey way) on my laptop and with K240 phones. Unuseably for MY purposes. On studio monitors they were closer, but having done this awhile, I'm confident that mic #2 will not take EQ or compression as well as mic #1. I'll say right now I have a bias against tube LDC's on Acoustic Guitar. I'll generally reach for a SDC, Ribbon, LDC FET, or Dynamic (in that order) before putting up a tube LDC for recording Ac Gtr. Mic #2 would not fit in my mixes well. Mic 1 would need some pretty serious EQ, but is more neutral sounding.

From your description of mic positions, I would have suggested one mic over the top of the other. An "inch or two" closer to the sound hole can make a HUGE difference for this type of recording and completely skew perception.

--

On vocals, first, Mic #2 is almost 3dB (2.8 to be exact) louder than Mic #1 - negating the possibility of a fair judgement listening from a browser, so I downloaded and drug them into my DAW. I'm surprised no one has commented on this. Unfortunately, again perhaps from your mic positioning, I didn't find either acceptable for me. But hey, I don't know either mic, and I don't know the singer, so its not really an educated comment. If I had to choose one and start recording NOW, I'd probably opt for #1 again. I could make it work.

Thanks again. Watch those levels - with them so far off, it obliterates objectivity. (People choose the loud mic almost always).

yeah, this was our 1st shootout we've ever done, but I think that you're right, and placing one "on top" of the other would probably fair better results....esp since if one is closer to the strings and the other is closer to the sound hole, they'll both accentuate those sources primarily!

The gtr is a bright mofo to me on both! lol.... Its a Taylor acoustic of Halloweens. I like Taylor's playability (feels real nice to play), but I think I favor darker sounding acoustics more myself, like his Martin.

What do you usually track acoustics with drBill? I've been seeing that some guys have terrific results using some earthwork SDC's on them, but I've never tried any SDC's on acoustics that I can think of... so suggestions on things like that are always welcome to me!

as for the db levels, they were both showing -10db on the DAW (Logic) coming in, and both of them were bounced straight out with no comp, eq, limiting, etc. done at all...... perhaps the transients were causing a 3db level increase that you're seeing in your DAW on one mic?

I personally don't like the db meters of Logic, of course I've been using Cubase for my entire time in recording (we were @ Halloween's studio) so it's probably some of my error as I don't know how to view the db levels in Logic besides to watch the channels post-fader responses on them, which I'm sure is not the 100% most accurate way.

Of course, I really wish I had your pick of the Joly mics to run against both of these, perhaps the OktavaMod'd Apex 460?

but we couldn't use you as a reference as to which sounded "better", as you're more than partial to the Joly mics, I'm sure through years of usage/friendship with the builder/etc.

That ultimately doesn't matter to me, only the sound of each and the applications that I can use with it.

Speaking of, is that Apex 460 multi-pattern?

[Halloween]

I dont know if me being conjested is such a good excuse I've been this way my whole life Haha. Thx for the feed back so far and thank you for the tips on becoming more neutral with Mic placement. Will def top and bottom in the future. It never crossed my mind.

[always_ending]

Originally Posted by Halloween

I dont know if me being conjested is such a good excuse I've been this way my whole life Haha. Thx for the feed back so far and thank you for the tips on becoming more neutral with Mic placement. Will def top and bottom in the future. It never crossed my mind.

don't be fooled...

I've always loved the sound of your voice DW, obviously, so did the record label that gave you a deal

But you and I know it's much easier to sing when you're standing up at the mic and not bent over yourself

[drBill]

Originally Posted by always_ending

yeah, this was our 1st shootout we've ever done, but I think that you're right, and placing one "on top" of the other would probably fair better results....

Live and learn. In reality, there's no "best" way. They are all flawed to some degree. I've gotten blasted for my protocol on every shootout I've ever done. There are ALWAYS compromises.

Originally Posted by always_ending

The gtr is a bright mofo to me on both! lol.... Its a Taylor acoustic of Halloweens. I like Taylor's playability (feels real nice to play), but I think I favor darker sounding acoustics more myself, like his Martin.

Not a fan of taylor's myself. My favorite RECORDING guitars are (mostly) older (30-40+ years) small body martin's. 018's, 0018's?

Originally Posted by always_ending

What do you usually track acoustics with drBill? I've been seeing that some guys have terrific results using some earthwork SDC's on them, but I've never tried any SDC's on acoustics that I can think of... so suggestions on things like that are always welcome to me!

My long time "go to" are KM84's. It's rare that they won't work fantastic. I've also been using the Joly modded 012's and AT TIMES (not always) they are indistinguishable from 84's. For a softer, smoother sound, as of recent, I've been absolutely loving the Joly modded 205 ribbons - very open on the top, and beautifully smooth and warm. None of the hype of a tube LDC. Kind of the "Anti-Tube-LDC" if you will. (Especially for finger picked quiet parts, you'll need a high quality - high gain pre, or better yet a high gain pre and a FETHead.) Also, with a great pre, I've been digging a Sennheiser 421, especially on nylon. And the 441 is always a great call too. Too many choices.....

Originally Posted by always_ending

perhaps the transients were causing a 3db level increase that you're seeing in your DAW on one mic?

Nope. I dont' think so. RMS levels are significantly hotter on the vocal clips on Mic #2. I don't use DAW metering to figure this out. I use a static based plug to measure peaks or RMS. It's too easy to be tricked by different levels when auditioning mics.

Originally Posted by always_ending

Of course, I really wish I had your pick of the Joly mics to run against both of these, perhaps the OktavaMod'd Apex 460?

As we always say, more mics is good mics. But for the record, I don't own the modded 460. I prefer Michael's 1050 mod. Personal preference. Same or very similar circuitry, same capsule, different headbasket, which IMO made a huge difference for me when auditioning the both of them.

Originally Posted by always_ending

but we couldn't use you as a reference as to which sounded "better", as you're more than partial to the Joly mics, I'm sure through years of usage/friendship with the builder/etc.

Sure you could. That's an unfair statement. I always give my honest opinion. Period. End of story. I'm about MICS, not MJ Mics. Im not an employee of his company, never have been. I'm just as huge an advocate of vintage Neumann's, Gefell's, Sennheisers and others if you look at my longtime Mic posts. I'm just tired of seeing one-sided MJ slandering by his competitors and their shills in an abusive way. Too much of this BS going on in GS, but it's a hopeless loosing battle around here, and one that fueled by both sides. (In all fairness, he's also said some very blatent things that caused him to be banned....) So I (and not just me, there are many) speak their piece to balance the hype of the "dark side". The guy makes amazing mics, and since his personal esthetic matches mine, it's an easy almost always. But NOT every time. When I don't like one of his mics, I've been vocal about it as well. If you don't prefer his esthetic, chances are you will not like ANY of his mics - don't bother, as they hold consistent to his vision. He's very consistently focused on building mics with the same flavor. But hey, that's what makes the world go round. Not one size fits all. And it's why I cannot ONLY have his mics. And although I like them, and they fit my esthetic, I need all different voicings of mics, not just his detailed mid-voiced/focused ones.

Originally Posted by always_ending

Speaking of, is that Apex 460 multi-pattern?

Yes it is, but again, I don't own that mic.


---


But back to the topic of your thread. Based on the unending cm6 praise around here, and based on some negative things I've heard about the Mojave, I'd have to guess that #1 is the cm6, and #2 is the mojave. I could be wrong though, as there's no touchstone for me in this test, and other clips of the cm6 that I've heard have been pretty "zingy".

Cheers,

bp

[always_ending]

Originally Posted by drBill

Not a fan of taylor's myself. My favorite RECORDING guitars are (mostly) older (30-40+ years) small body martin's. 018's, 0018's?
bp

Indeed, I love those older Martins on tracks recorded that I'm aware they used them on.... a purchase I definitely need to get on (if I can ever stop the lust of all other gear, which atm is mics )

I'll have to check out those KM84's.... but do these make those anymore, or just the KM184s? If only the 184s... what's the difference in sound?

Off topic we'll go it seems here! I'm guilty of messing with my own shootout

I've heard fantastic things on the Coles 4038s, and I've definitely been getting more and more into the ribbons for usage, esp since many future bands that I'll be recording want an older, vintage sound... mostly blues, blues/rock, jazz music down here.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by always_ending

Indeed, I love those older Martins on tracks recorded that I'm aware they used them on.... a purchase I definitely need to get on (if I can ever stop the lust of all other gear, which atm is mics )

I'll have to check out those KM84's.... but do these make those anymore, or just the KM184s? If only the 184s... what's the difference in sound?

Off topic we'll go it seems here! I'm guilty of messing with my own shootout

I've heard fantastic things on the Coles 4038s, and I've definitely been getting more and more into the ribbons for usage, esp since many future bands that I'll be recording want an older, vintage sound... mostly blues, blues/rock, jazz music down here.

Since you sidetracked first.......

The 184's are not 84's. Not very close. They are "OK" pulled way back on some things, but too bright up close IMO. Most don't care too much for them. But the KM84 may go down as the most loved SDC of all time.

4038's are cool. The modded 205's are 1/4 the price, more open up top and bigger sounding overall, but very similar sounding. I choose them over the 4038's often. You can check em out here : Ribbon Madness....Some Comparisons Best of all worlds - I'd own both. On a ribbon budget, I'm completely happy with only the 205's. Extra money.....i'd get some 4038's as well.

[timlloyd]

Originally Posted by drBill

Watch those levels - with them so far off, it obliterates objectivity.

You beat me to it!

After level matching ...

Plucking - prefer #1
Strumming - don't like either of them but #2 has much worse highs imo (like a little HF resonance ... same with the plucking clip but it's not as relentless with the plucking)
Vox - think I prefer #2 marginally

... so on balance, I'm going with #1 This could be interesting; I've been thinking about buying an MA200!

[dopeboi]

This should be interesting...I have heard the ma-200 at a local studio before and always thought of picking one up but never got the spunk to....
I definitely preferred 1 ( 2 would do fine also) on the guitars, and 2 on the vocals but if i had to choose between the 2 i would go with #2

[Lights]

God it's hard to tell which is better when you level-match. They both sound great. The votes are heavily weighted to #2, but it's louder and sounds bigger maybe because of that. Just the fact that I had trouble deciding says volumes about the CM-6, which is so much less expensive than the well-respected Mojave.

EDIT: when will you post the results?

[Halloween]

Originally Posted by Lights

God it's hard to tell which is better when you level-match. They both sound great. The votes are heavily weighted to #2, but it's louder and sounds bigger maybe because of that. Just the fact that I had trouble deciding says volumes about the CM-6, which is so much less expensive than the well-respected Mojave.

EDIT: when will you post the results?

I'll be posting them soon, I'm not one to drag this shit out for weeks.

Also if you would be so kind, would you be able to post #1 and #2 Level matched? If its too much to ask I understand, I'm honetly just as curious as you.

[Lights]

I just used my ear and turned up the volume on #1 But perhaps others did more scientific level matching in an audio editor.

I'm going to guess #2 is the CM-6. I've never recorded with a Mojave mic, but I recently bought a CM-6 and it sounds really, really big to me. #2 sounds closer, so I'm going with that.

[tfunster]

Results?

[dmb10]

i wish #1 was a $300 mic. I havn't heard one yet sound like that.

[Halloween]

Seems like the interest has peaked in this shoot out.

RESULTS:

#1 Mojave MA-200
#2 Stellar CM-6

Thank you for the input the majority of you just saved yourself a ton of money.

[drBill]

Thanks for the results Halloween!

I have to say that I'm disappointed though. With all the CM6 love flowing around these parts, I was sure it would not be #2. But I should have guessed as many of the other clips I've heard on that mic have sounded "zingy" to me as well. Still, I've heard the same of the Mojave..... Ha! Funny to me how so many preferred the cm6. Different strokes as they say.

So you did save me some money - $374 to be exact.

Good shootout, much appreciated.

bp

[timlloyd]

Originally Posted by Halloween

RESULTS:

#1 Mojave MA-200
#2 Stellar CM-6

Cool! I would have been very surprised if it was the other way around.

[binarymilton]

Originally Posted by drBill

Thanks for the results Halloween!

I have to say that I'm disappointed though. With all the CM6 love flowing around these parts, I was sure it would not be #2. But I should have guessed as many of the other clips I've heard on that mic have sounded "zingy" to me as well. Still, I've heard the same of the Mojave..... Ha! Funny to me how so many preferred the cm6. Different strokes as they say.

So you did save me some money - $374 to be exact.

Good shootout, much appreciated.

bp

Funny, I feel the opposite: to me that goes a long way to explaining the CM6 love.

What you hear as "zinginess", I hear as "detail". If that guitar is a Taylor then frankly Mic 1 is simply not capturing the sound of that guitar.
I've never heard a Taylor sound like Mic 1.

And I say that as a card-carrying ribbon-mic-lover who generally prefers things to sound darker: on this site I've heard way, way "zingier" guitars and vocals recorded through much more expensive mics than either of those.

I mean, if I were to use Mic 1 on my big old Macaferri D-hole jazz guitar, I suspect the bottom end would be a boomy mess, while all the biting cutting Django-style top-end would be absent.

By the way, I take it the CM6 was in Cardioid mode, right?
I'd love to hear it on a vocal in Omni: I suspect it would sound a little more open and smoother.

[always_ending]

Originally Posted by binarymilton

Funny, I feel the opposite: to me that goes a long way to explaining the CM6 love.

What you hear as "zinginess", I hear as "detail". If that guitar is a Taylor then frankly Mic 1 is simply not capturing the sound of that guitar.
I've never heard a Taylor sound like Mic 1.

And I say that as a card-carrying ribbon-mic-lover who generally prefers things to sound darker: on this site I've heard way, way "zingier" guitars and vocals recorded through much more expensive mics than either of those.

I mean, if I were to use Mic 1 on my big old Macaferri D-hole jazz guitar, I suspect the bottom end would be a boomy mess, while all the biting cutting Django-style top-end would be absent.

By the way, I take it the CM6 was in Cardioid mode, right?
I'd love to hear it on a vocal in Omni: I suspect it would sound a little more open and smoother.

yeah, CM-6 was in Cardioid to match up with the MA-200's polar pattern.

I feel the same way, I'm a huge ribbon mic fan after buying a Royer R-121 and really love the darker, warmer sounds of them....

but for Vox, I much prefer the CM-6 style, open, airy highs, solid low end.

I'm guessing that drBill's not a fan of those type inflections, and thus isn't a fan of the AKG C-12 or ELAM style mics either? Their highs sound even MORE hyped than the Stellar from files I've listened too... really wish I could get my hands on those mics and audition them side/side

At any rate, I'm extremely happy with my < $400 purchase in a tube mic, and find no other company coming close to that price point with that solid of tone.... does anyone else know of $400 tube mics that have multi patterns? I'd love to grab a few of them and try them all out... but Oktavamod, AA, and any other company that I've heard of has theirs priced double the cost of this Stellar.

As my friend Halloween says:"

"Write a good song and you wont need to worry about what you record it with. Write a bad song and it wont matter what you record it with."

If you can't record a good song with this CM-6 and the "skill level" of a beginner, perhaps it's not the mic that's the problem

[kidvybes]

Originally Posted by drBill

I have to say that I'm disappointed though. With all the CM6 love flowing around these parts, I was sure it would not be #2. But I should have guessed as many of the other clips I've heard on that mic have sounded "zingy" to me as well. Still, I've heard the same of the Mojave..... Ha! Funny to me how so many preferred the cm6. Different strokes as they say.

Originally Posted by binarymilton

Funny, I feel the opposite: to me that goes a long way to explaining the CM6 love.

What you hear as "zinginess", I hear as "detail". If that guitar is a Taylor then frankly Mic 1 is simply not capturing the sound of that guitar.
I've never heard a Taylor sound like Mic 1.

And I say that as a card-carrying ribbon-mic-lover who generally prefers things to sound darker: on this site I've heard way, way "zingier" guitars and vocals recorded through much more expensive mics than either of those.

...well said!

Originally Posted by always_ending

but for Vox, I much prefer the CM-6 style, open, airy highs, solid low end.

I'm guessing that drBill's not a fan of those type inflections, and thus isn't a fan of the AKG C-12 or ELAM style mics either? Their highs sound even MORE hyped than the Stellar from files I've listened too...

...I'm not sure soundfiles have a whole lot to do with his remarks...I think drBill's impressions are clouded by his never-ending "conspiracy theory"...

[drBill]

Originally Posted by always_ending

I'm guessing that drBill's not a fan of those type inflections, and thus isn't a fan of the AKG C-12 or ELAM style mics either?

No, I love C12's. They have "air" not "zing". At least to my ears.

Have you used C12's or just repeating the jargon? The C12's I've used sound nothing like the CM6. They are voiced completely differently. IMO there is a difference between hi-fi detail and chinese bright, although some might hear it the same.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by kidvybes

I think drBill's impressions are clouded by his never-ending "conspiracy theory"...

I fail to see what flying saucers or the way the government handled the Gibson situation has to do with this......

Seriously, it was blind test. The CM6 was 2.8dB louder (significant). I posted my thoughts well in advance of any ground swell. The votes were all leading towards the CM6. How is it again that I"m clouded? Maybe re-read my initial thoughts on both mics before any reveal. I know it's hard for you to believe, but maybe some people just don't LIKE the way the cm6 sounds. I know, heretical.

Some folks like bright mics. That's cool with me. Hopefully I don't have to listen to their records. The marketplace is replete with overly bright painful recordings. If you go back 20+ years you just don't hear that. That's where us old guys like to look for superior sonics - not the latest Kanye record. Different strokes for different folks. I'll keep my eyes open for another shootout with the CM6 involved and give it another chance though.

Keep drinking the koolaid kid.

PS - where can I get me some of those tin foil hats again????