MXL Mics - Which models are good?

[kidvybes]

Originally Posted by bawingi

First of all, so there is no confusion, I work for MXL. Interesting that you recommend the CV4024 as a replacement in the V69, that is the tube we currently fit to our Genesis mic. I source them directly from a company in the UK with whom I have been doing business for many years. There are a lot of Mullard "copies" coming out of Russia which need to be avoided. They are Mullards only by the painting on the glass. The new V69XM will be available very soon indeed. The planned MAP price is $399.00.

Roy

...that's funny you mention that particular tube...back when the V76t was first being manufactured by MXL, I had a lengthy conversation with Scott (at MXL) about the possibility of re-issuing the V77s in a limited edition run...I explained to Scott that the improvement of replacing the Chinese tube with a vintage NOS was quite audible, but the newer version V77 would need a tube socket that would allow easy access to swapping tubes (rather than the soldered/fixed tube mount in the original version)...when he asked what tube I'd recommend, I told him the only NOS tube that might be worth using, AND was still available from the UK in large enough quantities was the Mullard CV4024 (vastly superior to the newer Chinese/Russian counterparts)...Cascade was using them at that time in their V55 Valve microphone (manufactured by Se in China)...the best choice, but no longer available in large enough quantities to be used in MXL factory runs was the GE 6072A (12AY7 military grade) tubes...the CV2024 (12AT7WA) are still readily available and are now a favorite of the "cryo-treated" tube resellers...original and cryogenic versions can be found on eBay as well as direct from the distributors...

[bawingi]

We chose the CV4024 after extensive listening tests. After numerous tests over several days, the CV4024 was the best sounding tube we tested. I haven't tried any of the cryogenically treated tubes, but I am sure someone will eventually.

The transformer is the most significant contributing factor in the change of frequency response in the V69XM, however, the circuitry is not identical to the V69M either. It is a new and different mic. Forgive me if I do not go into the technical intricacies of the mic designs, but I am a recording engineer, not an electronic engineer. Some things are best left to those who know what they are talking about. I merely know enough to get myself in trouble!

[MadGuitrst]

Mike, thanks for the kinds words .

Roy, I wish I could take credit for knowing the Mullard was "the" tube to get for the V69ME. I searched a lot about the *best* sounding 12AT7s (not necessarily for mics) and the Mullard CV4024 came up often. So, I bought bunches of 12?7 tubes for my guitar amps and mics and I liked the 4024 best for the V69ME AND for some guitar preamp sections (including the THD Univalve and Epiphone Valve Jr) as a replacement for 12aX7s in some spots .

Originally Posted by kidvybes

...that's funny you mention that particular tube...back when the V76t was first being manufactured by MXL, I had a lengthy conversation with Scott (at MXL) about the possibility of re-issuing the V77s in a limited edition run...snip...

I believe it might have been Scott who said the mic in the Marshall line the M3 sounded most like was the V77......hhhmmmm.....

[fiddler59]

Originally Posted by bawingi

We chose the CV4024 after extensive listening tests. After numerous tests over several days, the CV4024 was the best sounding tube we tested. I haven't tried any of the cryogenically treated tubes, but I am sure someone will eventually.

The transformer is the most significant contributing factor in the change of frequency response in the V69XM, however, the circuitry is not identical to the V69M either. It is a new and different mic. Forgive me if I do not go into the technical intricacies of the mic designs, but I am a recording engineer, not an electronic engineer. Some things are best left to those who know what they are talking about. I merely know enough to get myself in trouble!

How would you describe the V69xm compared to the Genesis...the response curves look somewhat similar ?? (I know response curves dont tell the complete picture of a mics sound)

David B

[kojak]

I just picked up an old V77 that the store I worked at had had for like 4 years, so they dropped the price dramatically to get rid of it...put it in a shootout with a couple of Rode NT2s and it very much held its own. Definitely not a top of the line world class mic or anything, but very usable and definitely worth it if you can pick one up for say 4 bills or less (they're usually less these days).

[Michael_Joly]

Earlier in this thread I mentioned my regard for the MXL V67g. Now my modifcation R&D work on this mic is complete and I can reveal the following about my suite of upgrades:

Headbasket Upgrade - OktavaMod clients have mentioned their strong preference for the clarity and detail offered by a single mesh layer headbasket. Converting a mulit-layer headbasket to a single layer increases the open area percentage of the grille and reduces internal reflections that cause standing wave coloration. So both frequency (more top end sparkle) and time domain (more precise transient response) improvements will be heard. This was the headbasket design pioneered in the AKG C 12 and has subsequently been adopted by the $5000 Manley Gold Reference mic.

Capsule-to-FET Wiring Upgrade - Evidence Audio LYRIC HG solid copper wire is used exclusively in all OktavaMod LDC mic upgrades. I was a skeptic at first, but about two years ago a "golden-eared" client of mine insisted LYRIC HG wire be installed his microphones. The difference was amazing - there is a subjective impression of tighter time alignment of harmonics to fundamentals, a more musical and precise sound in other words.

Input Coupling Capacitor Upgrade - The entire low level signal from the microphone's capsule passes through this one part - it has a critical impact on the sound of the mic! It is incredible that thousands of Chinese mics have been, and are still being shipped with grainy, rough and edgy-sounding ceramic input coupling capacitors that cost less than 1 cent. Without revealing proprietary information, the stock ceramic cap will be replaced with a high quality, very stable, low distortion capacitor from one particular manufacturer that costs over 200 times what the Chinese vendor spent to install a cheap ceramic cap in this critical location. Not only will signal purity be improved but frequency response extension as well.

FET Upgrade - Did you know that almost every Chinese-made microphone uses the same FET? It is true that the 2SK170 FET used in all these mics is a very low noise device, however it delivers less impactful transient response than the FET used in these upgrade. I'm not alone in my preference for an alternative to the 2SK170 - Jim Williams of Audio Upgrades is a strong proponent of the very fast J305 FET as an alternative. I agree with Jim's thinking, but I have a slight sonic perference for a different device. The FET in your mic will be upgraded (including re-biasing - biasing error is a major cause of distortion in the stock mics) with a faster device from one particular manufacture that has the best specs of any FET of its type to deliver more precise transients and better low level resolution.

Signal Path Capacitors Upgraded - Bass response extension of the circuit will be improved by over an octave through value changes to signal path capacitors while distortion will be reduced through the subsitution of non-polar types for polarized electrolytic caps.

All in all, this is a complete front-to-back upgrade of the V67g designed to deliver lower distortion, tighter bass and a smoother sibilance-free top end with greater midrange resolution, detail and punch.

[Paj]

BTW, for anyone interested in the V67G, the MXL 9090 is a V67i (a V67 with a second "bright" capsule) without the gold&green cosmetics, comes with a case instead of a box, and is often on sale for $20 less than the V67g and $90-100 less than its pretty V67i twin.

Paj
8^)

[dickiefunk]

Originally Posted by Michael_Joly

Earlier in this thread I mentioned my regard for the MXL V67g. Now my modifcation R&D work on this mic is complete and I can reveal the following about my suite of upgrades:

Headbasket Upgrade - OktavaMod clients have mentioned their strong preference for the clarity and detail offered by a single mesh layer headbasket. Converting a mulit-layer headbasket to a single layer increases the open area percentage of the grille and reduces internal reflections that cause standing wave coloration. So both frequency (more top end sparkle) and time domain (more precise transient response) improvements will be heard. This was the headbasket design pioneered in the AKG C 12 and has subsequently been adopted by the $5000 Manley Gold Reference mic.

Capsule-to-FET Wiring Upgrade - Evidence Audio LYRIC HG solid copper wire is used exclusively in all OktavaMod LDC mic upgrades. I was a skeptic at first, but about two years ago a "golden-eared" client of mine insisted LYRIC HG wire be installed his microphones. The difference was amazing - there is a subjective impression of tighter time alignment of harmonics to fundamentals, a more musical and precise sound in other words.

Input Coupling Capacitor Upgrade - The entire low level signal from the microphone's capsule passes through this one part - it has a critical impact on the sound of the mic! It is incredible that thousands of Chinese mics have been, and are still being shipped with grainy, rough and edgy-sounding ceramic input coupling capacitors that cost less than 1 cent. Without revealing proprietary information, the stock ceramic cap will be replaced with a high quality, very stable, low distortion capacitor from one particular manufacturer that costs over 200 times what the Chinese vendor spent to install a cheap ceramic cap in this critical location. Not only will signal purity be improved but frequency response extension as well.

FET Upgrade - Did you know that almost every Chinese-made microphone uses the same FET? It is true that the 2SK170 FET used in all these mics is a very low noise device, however it delivers less impactful transient response than the FET used in these upgrade. I'm not alone in my preference for an alternative to the 2SK170 - Jim Williams of Audio Upgrades is a strong proponent of the very fast J305 FET as an alternative. I agree with Jim's thinking, but I have a slight sonic perference for a different device. The FET in your mic will be upgraded (including re-biasing) with a faster device from one particular manufacture that has the best specs of any FET of its type to deliver more precise transients and better low level resolution.

Signal Path Capacitors Upgraded - Bass response extension of the circuit will be improved by over an octave through value changes to signal path capacitors while high frequency linearity will be improved through the subsitution of non-polar types for polarized electrolytic caps.

Peluso Output Transformer Upgrade - Finally, reaching the output stage, the distortion-prone Chinese transformer that contributes to the smeared "S" sound ("eshshshh") will be upgraded to a Peluso transformer specially designed for use in lower voltage swing circuits like FET microphones.

All in all, this is a complete front-to-back upgrade of the V67g designed to deliver lower distortion, tighter bass and a smoother sibilance-free top end with greater midrange resolution and detail.

How does the sound of the MXL v67g mod and Oktava MK319 mod compare?

[Michael_Joly]

Originally Posted by dickiefunk

How does the sound of the MXL V67g mod and Oktava MK319 mod compare?

Good question. I haven't run a series of A/B tests on those two. I'll get to it though.

My focus has been on evaluating the Peluso P47, PK67, CEK67, CEK12 and CEK89 capsules in various mics, with my four standard sources - voice, jingle bells, Udu and acoustic guitar. The permutations of source, capsule and mic are staggering.

I made 31 audio test files two days ago that I'm still slogging my way through - edit, normalize, copy/paste/assemble, compare A/B subjects on the same source material from the same take (mic capsules one-over-other, 24" distance to source) and notate results. One finding that is emerging is the potential use of the Peluso PK47 as a universal Chinese mic problem solver. Let's step back a second...

While I have not seen every low-cost Chinese mic ever made, I have seen many of the most popular models. With the exception of the edge-terminated capsule mics, every other mic I've seen so far uses a copy of the Neumann K67 capsule. This capsule has a built in high frequency boost that was compensated for in the circuitry of the U 67 microphone. Because the Chinese copies of the K67 capsule are not exact, the high frequency boost not well controlled, and the compensatory circuit missing or not exact, most Chinese mics using copies of the K67 capsule are excessively bright and harsh. Enter the Peluso PK47...

The Peluso PK47 is a careful re-creation of the Neumann K47 capsule which uses a different backplate design than the K67 capsule and does not have the HF rise found in the later. So just by swapping in a Peluso PK47 for a stock mic's K67-style capsule the top end peak and harshness is removed. However, because the implementation of the K67-style capsule in some Chinese mics is better than others, I've yet to determine if the installation of a Peluso PK47 in these mics makes sense. My tests have been proceeding on the theory that some Chinese mics have a stock capsule worth saving (the MXL 2003, Sterling Audio ST51, Behringer B2 Pro, MXL V67g...) and thus offer an attractive price / performance ratio when other mods are made.

With the exception of the output line driving stage (dual transistor or transformer-coupled) the basic circuit in most of the low cost Chinese mics is identical. For example, one of my recent discoveries is the CAD GXL3000 ($100) and CAD Trion 6000 ($200), both 3-pattern FET / transformer-coupled mics, are exactly the same mic on the inside (frame, circuit boards & transformer) - just a different headbasket assembly, capsule and body style. This means the GXL3000 has terrific price / performance potential with mods because of the low initial cost for the 3-pattern / FET / transformer platform.

Given that the basic circuit stays the same in almost all of the low-cost Chinese mics, the variables then are: headbasket, capsule and output stage. My goal is to offer a line of Chinese mic mods at various price points that are an excellent value at each point. A new capsule can be installed in any of the mics I'm working on, but I tried to find some models in which the stock capsule is decent enough to be used and thereby hold down the cost of modification. In terms of cost, keeping the stock capsule and concentrating on headbasket and electronic upgrades is going to be the least expensive. Next level up would be a headbasket, capsule and electronics upgrade. The level up from that would be to do a headbasket, capsule, electronics & transformer upgrade.

Folks have learned from my work with the Oktava MK-219, MK-319 and MK-012 that I am very sensitive to price / performance issues. I'm not going to price my new Chinese mic mods "a la carte" style, but rather will offer fixed price point suites of mods that are best-values at their level.

A thought about Peluso capsules - I don't judge the cost of these capsule relative to the microphones they are going into. I judge them based on the performance they deliver for their price relative to Josephson, Neumann, AKG and MBHO capsule which cost $400-$600 or more (but are not readily available singly to DIYers or aftermarket guys like me). Looking at Peluso capsules from this perspective I believe they are an incredible value.

So, how does the V67g mod compare to my OktavaMod MK-319? Thanks for reminding me, I'll add that to a list of a hundred other tests in the works ; )

[Bobalou]

havent seen any discussion in this thread regarding the MCA SP1 as is or even modded? any thoiughts on this one?

MXL SP1 Condenser Studio Microphone With Clip*-* Large Diaphragm Condenser Mics*-* Studio Mics*-* Microphones*-* Pro Audio Accessories*-* Accessories*-* PSSL.com

[kidvybes]

Originally Posted by kojak

I just picked up an old V77 that the store I worked at had had for like 4 years, so they dropped the price dramatically to get rid of it...put it in a shootout with a couple of Rode NT2s and it very much held its own. Definitely not a top of the line world class mic or anything, but very usable and definitely worth it if you can pick one up for say 4 bills or less (they're usually less these days).

...consider modding that V77 with a proper tube socket and a NOS GE/RCA 6072/6072A tube and you'll make the best of one of MXL's finest mics...I have 2 such modded V77s and they readily "eat" my NT2, no problem...actually hold up well against my Mojave MA200, a very respected tube LDC...simple solder skills are all that's required...

9 Pin Tube Socket with Shield (toss the sheild)
RCA 6072 RADIO TUBE IN ORIGINAL BOX - eBay (item 150315379595 end time Feb-08-09 18:00:00 PST)
or cheaper alternative (good not great):
Electro-Harmonix 12AY7 EH / 6072A

[Michael_Joly]

Originally Posted by Bobalou

havent seen any discussion in this thread regarding the MCA SP1 as is or even modded? any thoiughts on this one?

This mic (and others like it) uses a capsule design copied from the Neumann KM-84 small diaphragm mic. There's some debate around how accurate a copy it is, but the SP-1 is a very nice-sounding small diaphragm mic hiding in a LDC-style body. It has been, and is a fine target for modification to the headbasket, circuit and capsule.

[Tomer1]

Michael,
You should also contact Ben Sneesby regarding capsules,
I believe Dave Pearlman is now using his capsules in this TM1&TM2 mics.
Their (Dave and laos Ben's) mics sound excelent and I rekcon the hand made capsules are a big part of it.


A question to Ben:
Ben, Do you offer DIYers the option to order individual capsules from you?

[BudgetMC]

I'd be very interested in getting a "nutshell guide" to the sound properties of the various Peluso and Sneesby capsules... I've given a lot of thought to modding a number of my mics with capsules from these manufacturers.

[Bobalou]

Originally Posted by Michael_Joly

This mic (and others like it) uses a capsule design copied from the Neumann KM-84 small diaphragm mic. There's some debate around how accurate a copy it is, but the SP-1 is a very nice-sounding small diaphragm mic hiding in a LDC-style body. It has been, and is a fine target for modification to the headbasket, circuit and capsule.

thanks Michael,
what is the benefit if any of having a small diaphragm mic in a larger LDC body? with the Km84 being a small pencil type condensor used for the obvious aplications, overheads, acoustics etc., would the sp1 once modded have any advantage over a pencil type with its larger body?

[Michael_Joly]

Originally Posted by Bobalou

thanks Michael,
what is the benefit if any of having a small diaphragm mic in a larger LDC body? with the Km84 being a small pencil type condensor used for the obvious aplications, overheads, acoustics etc., would the sp1 once modded have any advantage over a pencil type with its larger body?

Its a mixed bag.

One of the benefits of a "pencil mic" is the capsule diaphragm can be placed very close to the front of the mic. This eliminates coloration from sound reflections of the type that occur in a large diaphragm headbasket between the diaphragm and grille.

Also, if the front edge of a pencil mic is radiiused or chamfered, the mic will have very little edge diffraction coloration. This is the crux of my recent "Ultimate MXL 603 mod" - I move the front edge of the mic closer to the diaphragm and radiius the edge to mimic the KM-84 / 184 physical design.

The downside of the pencil mic form involves the back side of the capsule. In a pencil mic, the back side of a cardioid capsule is operating in a small chamber with vents. The chamber and vents create a complex environment of acoustic resistance, reflection and refraction that imparts a signature to the off-axis response and to a lesser degree, the on-axis response (the Neumann KM-84 and KM-184 use the same capsule, but the '184 has smaller body vents thus producing that mic's high frequency rise).

So, to the question of a small diaphragm cardioid capsule operating in a large headbasket... My quick take is this - compared to the same capsule installed in a pencil mic, the off-axis frequency response is smoother and the rear-rejection deeper. There is a small amount of coloration that comes from the internal reflections found in a large headbasket plus some edge refraction coloration. Thus a small diaphragm capsule in a large headbasket sounds like a small diaphragm mic with a bit more on-axis color but less off-axis color.

[memphisindie]

Originally Posted by Bobalou

havent seen any discussion in this thread regarding the MCA SP1 as is or even modded? any thoiughts on this one?

MXL SP1 Condenser Studio Microphone With Clip*-* Large Diaphragm Condenser Mics*-* Studio Mics*-* Microphones*-* Pro Audio Accessories*-* Accessories*-* PSSL.com

I have a heavily "upgraded" and lightly modified MCA SP1 and it sounds smoother than almost anything else. Makes an awesome room mic, it's the first one I've actually been happy to use. It added right in without screwing everything up. Beautiful. I had it across the room where it should have sounded like CRAP and it didn't, no EQ, full spectrum.

Originally Posted by dickiefunk

How does the sound of the MXL v67g mod and Oktava MK319 mod compare?

I have A/B'd them, the Oktava has more low end and more lower mids in a musical way, the V67 doesn't have as much low end and is still a brighter mic without the highs sounding so "brittley" anymore (brutally + brittle = brittley).

[Michael_Joly]

Memph -

This conversation is taking place in the context of "MXL mics - Which models are good?" I've detailed quite a bit of my work on MXL mics here and my Oktava work is easy enough to reference. To avoid confusion, may I request that you describe what "heavily upgraded" and "lightly modified" means regarding your SP-1 mic and then again, what you did to your V67 and 319? Because you are describing the results of your work on these mics - not mine ; Thanks.

[evermuse]

The only XML mics I have are a pair of stock V69ME's. I haven't even heard any others but I can say that It sounds great to me in the right places. I've been very suprised with them. It's thickened up some thin voices for me. plus in one instance it helped to get just the sound I was looking for out of a tuba. Sometimes It's the right mic to throw out as an additional guitar cab mic, once you find that sweet spot.

Just my 2 cents I had to throw in, as it was dogged earlier in the thread.

[Oldone]

Heard this mic at AES and was absolutely amazed at the sound. It was the best I have heard from MXL including the V77.

MXL V89

[memphisindie]

Originally Posted by Michael_Joly

Memph -

This conversation is taking place in the context of "MXL mics - Which models are good?" I've detailed quite a bit of my work on MXL mics here and my Oktava work is easy enough to reference. To avoid confusion, may I request that you describe what "heavily upgraded" and "lightly modified" means regarding your SP-1 and then again, what you did to your V67 and 319? Because you are describing the results of your work on these mics - not mine.

"Heavily upgraded and lightly modified" pertains to the SP1 and it means that I had to depopulate the board, changed all the caps and many resistors and wires.
Yes, Mic Joly! You are correct!
I am not describing what you have done to any mics.
I am not really describing what I did, I'm going to call it proprietary information too.
Let's just say that when it comes to upgrading mics,
YOU ARE THE UNDISPUTED KING
and I am just a simple hack. I admit it.
I work on dead mics.
However, suffice it to say, that I did my usual.
I started with the lowest voltage portion of the existing circuit, changed the caps to caps with much better specs, tighter tolerance, better material makeup, lower ESR, dissipation, and absorption, sometimes more capacitance, and always as the voltage requirements went up bigger caps, usually doubling the capacitance and upping the voltage where possible while tightening the tolerances considerably on the resistors where possible to drain off dc, keep the bias voltage as steady as possible yet giving it enough capacitance to handle surges during transients using materials that recover fast without the dielectric absorbing and not giving up the voltage. I also changed the capsule and transformer wire to better than 99.99% pure copper higher gauge, since that's what you have to use to conduct electricity. I also bypassed/parallelled a lot of the bigger electros with whatever I thought would sound better where I put them with higher values and different materials than regularly suggested values after many listening tests.
I know we used to correspond back when I first started out doing this, and I remember you suggesting a certain material for the first cap in the audio path off the diaphragm, and after some testing with many different materials, I like your suggestion for a few mics. I have used it in conjunction with other materials and gained benefit from both or three, depending on what was needed.
I also did it to an Maudio Nova, MCA SP1, MXL V67G, Okt 319's and 012's, and I'm working on the powersupply of an MK2500 and the mic itself now.
I did "essentially" but not literally the same thing to every mic I listed that I worked on, then I tested how they sound, how long they take to power up, and all of them are quieter as far as noise (which was tricky on the SP1) and represent much better and sound much more stable, punchy, and thick yet accurate on top. They sound solid state but more expensive, they definitely record MUCH BETTER which I only know because I use them to record.
I test them with a focusrite preamp and the "not stock" soundcraft pres on my recording board. They translate very very well.
I stand by my comments on my comparison. I have six 319's to compare to and I compared the SP1 to it's nearest equivalent, the 012, and they were somewhat similar, MCA smoother but only a little and the 012 thicker yet tight in the mids.
No knocking you a bit, Mic Joly.
If your mics are better than mine, which I'd bet money that they are, you got some superbadass mics!
You turned me on to doing this, Mic, so, you have no one to blame but yourself! Ha ha.

Before you go away thinking I have a pile of messed up dead mics hanging around, I have never thrown one out and I do not have a single dead mic. Any that I've ever worked on are in regular rotation and I've worked on some vintage 414's and they are working too.

[jowillie]

Regarding the mods to the SP-1.... Yes, BIG difference!

Looks like the MXL 440 could be the same mic. I would love to have a Jolymod to test with these.

VO Mic Test

[memphisindie]

Mike,
Ya know, when I think about it, I really did try to Frankenstein crazy upgrade the 319's, I really like their sound.
The MXL's don't sound much like them.
The SP1 is very smooth as you have posted in fact its distinctly smooth, a defining characteristic, with extended frequency response, makes it great for distance mic-ing, however, the 012 has such a nice midrange, it's good for close mic-ing or particularly focused mic-ing. I noticed that all the upgraded mics have more "reach" to them, forgiving off axis, huge sweet spots, and you can pull them far back and still not get too much ambience. Just a recording POV. I don't work on anyones mics unless they ask, the 414's aren't mine. Another engineer heard some other mics I fixed and brought them in. They were dead too.

[Michael_Joly]

Design Goal: Transform Chinese sound to classic, midrange-rich "Neumann-esque" voicing

Based on its published frequency response curve, and the generally positive user comments about the MXL V67g, I set out on a journey to bring the V67g from its Chinese realm into the land of OktavaMod Sound. While I had high hopes, I had no idea just how "Neuman-esque" the V67 would turn out to be once modified. The OktavaMod MXL V67g has all the balanced characteristics that define my LDC mic goals - powerful extended bass with musically-useful proximity effect, authoritive lower midrange without congestion, detail-rich midrange with deep reach and resolution and a clear, present top end free from low-cost mic harshness and sibilance.

A note about the tests –

All sound files presented here are pairs. I chose to pair the modified 67g with an OktavaMod MK-319 Floating Dome PE mic because this mic gets high marks for delivering a "Neumann K47-ish" sound and folks have been asking how the V67g compares to an OktavaMod '319. The two mics were positioned vertically head-to-head, diaphragms aligned and pointed at the source. Each source performance was recorded in one take, simultaneously to two tracks. The distance from each mic to the Breedlove acoustic guitar was 24”; to the Udu drum – 18”; to the jingle bells - 24" and spoken voice – 6”. In all cases the mics were distant enough from the source to receive identical sound. Original recording levels were a conservative -20dB. For critical listening all samples presented here are 32 bit floating point 96k .wav files normalized to -6dB.

Spoken Voice –

The first standardized test I use is my speaking voice reciting the phrase “She sells sea shells by the seashore”. This sibilance-inducing tongue twister is used as part of my in-coming and out-going mic modification bench tests and provides a stable reference for all my work. You may be as surprised as I was to hear the close timbre-balance between these two mics. In addition, both mics have a tight "S" presentation, with excellent differentiation of "S" and "Sh" sounds due to their very low sibilance.

SOUND SAMPLE: OktavaMod MXL V67g - “She sells sea shells by the seashore”
SOUND SAMPLE: OktavaMod MK-319 Floating Dome PE - “She sells sea shells by the seashore”

Jingle Bells -

This is a real torture test for large diaphragm condenser mics. Key jingles or small bells should be recorded with a clear tinkling quality and not exhibit any harsh intermodulation distortion products that sound like low-to-mid frequency bumps, thumps or clunks. Remember you're listening for intermod distortion which are sum and difference artifact signals created from the existence of two slightly different source material frequencies - they appear as distortion products that occur at frequencies lower than the source material. Harmonic distortion, as its name implies generates artifacts at frequencies higher than the original source material. This test revealed the greatest difference between these two mics - the MK-319 Floating Dome produces lower intermodulation distortion in these tests. I have a hunch the higher level of IM in the MXL V67g is a capsule tuning issue. But as I would not use a large diaphragm mic to record sources such as bells I believe the slightly higher level of IM in the V67g is not a deal breaker considering its other stand-out qualities.

SOUND SAMPLE: OktavaMod MXL V67g - Jingle bells
SOUND SAMPLE: OktavaMod MK-319 Floating Dome PE - Jingle bells

Udu Drum -

One of my favorite test sources is the clay Udu drum. This big resonant pot produces lovely, deep bass notes as the neck is stopped and opened with the palm while also producing sharp clicks as the clay is slapped and tapped with the other hand. Very nice source material to test balance of bass and treble, low frequency headroom and HF transient response. Notice the consistency of bass, treble and transient response with both mics.

SOUND SAMPLE: OktavaMod MXL V67g - Udu drum
SOUND SAMPLE: OktavaMod MK-319 Floating Dome PE - Udu drum

Acoustic Guitar -

Finally, an acoustic guitar test to check overall balance, transient response and harmonic purity on chords. Again, the mics were placed one over the other at a distance of 24” pointed at the neck / body joint. The mic’ing position was chosen in order to present the same source sound to both mics – not necessarily to optimize the sound of the particular instrument used. Of course had this been an actual music recording session the microphone position would have been chosen based on musical context and desired subjective presentation. Nice body and balance from both mics with no high end harshness or clanging.

SOUND SAMPLE: OktavaMod MXL V67g - Breedlove acoustic guitar
SOUND SAMPLE: OktavaMod MK-319 Floating Dome PE - Breedlove acoustic guitar

Summary -

I should mention the MXL V67g is a two-transistor design (FET / Bipolar) while the Oktava MK-319 is an elegant one-FET design. Because of this difference the V67g has a couple of dB higher self-noise which is audible in the midrange on very quiet sources, but it is far quieter than a typical 1/4" electret capsule "measurement" type mic. To its credit, the gain structure of this mic is well balanced once the FET has been re-biased for optimum operating level. Soft "tube-like" clipping occurs in the FET first instead of in the bipolar transistor which would produce hard and harsh-sounding clipping. I ran extensive frequency response, harmonic distortion and phase response tests of the output transformer in the V67g and found it to be entirely satisfactory for use in the MXL V67g circuit - it actually adds hard-to-describe euphonic qualities of "transformer heft" to the mic's voicing.

Until I got deep into the work of transforming this Chinese mic I had no idea it could deliver "heritage" sound. I believe the results are strong enough to add the OktavaMod MXL V67g to a short list of budget mic contenders for the title of "go to" LDC mic.

[memphisindie]

Originally Posted by Michael_Joly

Design Goal: Transform a Chinese mic to classic, midrange-rich "Neumann-esque" voicing

A note about the tests –

All sound files presented here are pairs. An OktavaMod MK-319 Floating Dome PE mic and OktavaMod MXL V67g were positioned one over the other, diaphragms vertically aligned and pointed at the source. Each source performance was recorded in one take, simultaneously to two tracks. The distance from each mic to the Breedlove acoustic guitar was 24”; to the Udu drum – 18”; to the jingle bells - 24" and spoken voice – 6”. In all cases the mics were distant enough from the source to receive identical sound. Original recording levels were a conservative -20dB. For critical listening all samples presented here are 32 bit floating point 96k .wav files normalized to -6dB.

Spoken Voice –

Jingle Bells -

Udu Drum -

Acoustic Guitar -

Until I got deep into the work of transforming this Chinese mic I had no idea it could reveal the sonic heritage hiding in its Neumann K67-copy capsule. I believe the results are strong enough to add the OktavaMod MXL V67g to the short list of budget contenders for the title of "go to" LDC mic.

Wow! That's a great test! Nice Job!

[kidvybes]

Originally Posted by Michael_Joly

Design Goal: Transform Chinese sound to classic, midrange-rich "Neumann-esque" voicing

Based on its published frequency response curve, and the generally positive user comments about the MXL V67g, I set out on a journey to bring the V67g from its Chinese realm into the land of OktavaMod Sound. While I had high hopes, I had no idea just how "Neuman-esque" the V67 would turn out to be once modified. The OktavaMod MXL V67g has all the balanced characteristics that define my LDC mic goals - powerful extended bass with musically-useful proximity effect, authoritive lower midrange without congestion, detail-rich midrange with deep reach and resolution and a clear, present top end free from low-cost mic harshness and sibilance.

Summary -

I should mention the MXL V67g is a two-transistor design (FET / Bipolar) while the Oktava MK-319 is an elegant one-FET design. Because of this difference the V67g has a couple of dB higher self-noise which is audible in the midrange on very quiet sources, but it is far quieter than a typical 1/4" capsule mic like a Naiant or other "measurement" type mic. To its credit, the gain structure of this mic is well balanced once the FET has been re-biased for optimum operating level. Soft "tube-like" clipping occurs in the FET first instead of in the bipolar transistor which would produce hard and harsh-sounding clipping. I ran extensive frequency response, harmonic distortion and phase response tests of the output transformer in the V67g and found it to be entirely satisfactory for use in the MXL V67g circuit - it actually adds hard-to-describe euphonic qualities of "transformer heft" to the mic's voicing.

Until I got deep into the work of transforming this Chinese mic I had no idea it would reveal the sonic heritage hiding in its Neumann K67-copy capsule. I believe the results are strong enough to add the OktavaMod MXL V67g to a short list of budget mic contenders for the title of "go to" LDC mic.

...So Michael...if I understand correctly, you used the original capsule and transformer in this mod...then what would be your fee to do the mod as tested?...and I was wondering if you've ever looked inside an Se 2200A...a few years back I was doing some research on that mic and came across some information that revealed that the V67G, the Joe Meek JM47 and the Se 2200A were all based on the same capsule and circuit design...the differences between the mics were essentially the quality of the components and the Se clearly had much better circuitry, caps (Japanese) and transformer...I ended up in a debate on HR.com with Alan Hyatt making a case for the Se's superior construction to the Joe Meek version:
does anyone use Joemeek Microphones? - Home Recording
...any thoughts?...

[Michael_Joly]

Originally Posted by kidvybes

...So Michael...if I understand correctly, you used the original capsule and transformer in this mod...then what would be your fee to do the mod as tested?...and I was wondering if you've ever looked inside an Se 2200A...a few years back I was doing some research on that mic and came across some information that revealed that the V67G, the Joe Meek J47 and the Se 2200A were all based on the same capsule and circuit design...the differences between the mics were essentially the quality of the components and the Se clearly had much better circuitry, caps (Japanese) and transformer...I ended up in a debate on HR.com with Alan Hyatt making a case for the Se's superior construction to the Joe Meek version...any thoughts?...

Yes, I used the V67g's stock capsule and transformer. I've detailed the modifications and have special introductory pricing at my shop.

I have not held, heard or been inside either the J47 or Se 2200 so I can't comment on any similarities or lack thereoff.

[toxostoma rufum]

Originally Posted by Oldone

Heard this mic at AES and was absolutely amazed at the sound. It was the best I have heard from MXL including the V77.

MXL V89

Could you describe it further? I'm interested in this and the v87. Thanks.

[drvenom]

Talk about Marketing. I want to get the entire new line of MXL mics just because of the way they look. I'll hang them up on my wall to get inspired.

bawingi, when will these mics start shippping and do you know what the street price will be?

[hognogger]

Wonderful, Michael. It looks very comprehensive! I'm sure that's going to help people (like me) who already have a modified 2/319 to work out whether they want a v67 mod.

Very much looking forward to getting home tonight so I can download the samples and have a listen.

Thanks again.