I'm just basing my observations on years of experience buying the wrong mics based on "that mic sounds freakin' awesome" type of comments.
...story of my life...
Quote:
Originally Posted by uncle duncan
Then I discovered frequency response graphs, and it all started making sense.
...are you running your own graphing software to compare mic performance?...if so, which software program do you use?...since many of the mics I'm using these days have been modified/upgraded from stock, the manufacturer's frequency graphs are no longer applicable...
...sorry for hijacking the thread, but had to ask the question...
__________________ reggae souljah
"It was only four tracks on the machine, but I was picking up twenty from the extra terrestrial squad." LEE 'SCRATCH' PERRY(avatar)
as a side note regarding frequency response graphs...
very few mic companies supply individual frequency response plots for a particular mic. Most often these plots are "averaged" or "smoothed" and don't accurately represent any particular mic (especially in the case of low cost, LDC and SDC mics).
All my capsules are individually tested in an anechoic chamber and I supply the individual capsule's response with each mic I modify with my MJE-K47 capsule. Actually, the manufacturing tolerances are so tight (across the operating range: +/- 0.25 dB front-to-back, +/- 0.5 dB capsule-to-capsule) I wouldn't have to supply individual plots. But its a level of detail I like to provide.
...are you running your own graphing software to compare mic performance?...i
No. I'm going by the manufacturer's plots, unless it's one of my Oktavas, which all came with their own individual graphs (in Russian!). A couple of my other mics came with their own graphs: both C414's and the CO 538b. I never did get a graph for my Joly K47h, since mine came from the first batch, but apparently, the one on the website will suffice.
What I get out of the graphs is a way to correlate the general comments regarding the mic's performance to the affect the capsule's design has on the sound being reproduced. If the mic has a reputation as being bright, there's a pretty good bet the graph is going to be showing you a rise in the high end. If a singer sounds harsh and honky on a sm7b, there's a good chance that singer is going to sound harsh and honky on any mic with a rise starting at 1k and a peak at 5k - 6k. Of course there are other variables that contribute to the sound of a mic, but a graph is better than nothing.
I'd love to see individual graphs of some of the high end mics. Neumann in particular publish graphs that look ruler flat, up until the perfectly symmetrical rise starts. I wonder if that's supposed to be their justification for their ridiculously high prices?
__________________
"You're either with a native DAW, or you're with the terrorists." G.W. Busch Lite
Hah, that was my original clip I posted when I was tracking the dry vocals with my modded NT1a for one of my songs.... finished mixing it the other day, so if you want to hear the modded NT1a in a full mix (all vox lead/BVs cut on it through a Great River pre) here it is:
Trying First NT1 Mods: Which one is not like the other
Hi
New to the forum. I have searched quite a bit on the NT1 mods and there are many pages.
I have a general idea of what to do, but my question here is really referring to the two mics I have side by side in the pics.
Both are my original purchases, from at least 10 years ago or so.
Both don't sound alike in the least bit.
The green PCB is newer (higher serial number) than the Blue PCB.
Both seem to have same caps, except that the green PCB has the R11 Cap surface mounted on the bottom of the board and not through the hole as the blue one is. The other difference I can see, is the R1 and R10 resistors are slightly different model numbers. On the blue PCB they are labeled as 1GT or 1GJ and on the green they are labeled as 1GMJ.
Question:
Why does the older or blue pcb sound moe flat with very little sizzle on the top end? Seems to need a bit more gain at the pre as well.
I would like to get these to match more closely in sound.
Any thoughts? (besides the flame war of throw these out)
I've certainly learned a lot by reading this thread. Currently I have a NT1000 which I bought back in 2003? It's the only mic I've owned
and the times I've recorded my own voice with it, has caused me to struggle with sibilance and eq. I have a stealy midrange voice and
I'm starting to think I need a less mid range focussed mic.
Over the years I haven't lashed out and bought every cheap mic hoping to luck on finding one that suits my voice and I can't justify
spending thousands on a mic without major studio gear to go with it.
I don't use any pres or comps, mics go straight into an Apogee Duet and processing is done in Logic. Having worked as a musician (bassist)
and recorded in some of Australia's finest studios over the years I'm not under the illusion I can compare or compete with the outboard gear,
especially when the final delivery would at best be a download or a clip on youtube, so a DAW production is fine.
I would like to get this 'transducer' thing sorted.
A complimentary mic to a stealy midrange voice would be nice
NT1000 mod? Would that be like putting twin sports exhausts on a VW?
or I could buy a pre modded mic if another mic is more suited.
I had my NT1A modded by Michael Joly. It works perfect on almost any vocal source, unless I want something grainy for heavier vocals. But even screaming sounds great through nt1a. No hyped top end that you get in the cheaper mics, just sits nicely and naturally. Don't use it on many other sources, but it was purchased for vocal duties
Chiming in...
How exactly would you describe the acoustical anomalies of the headbasket in a NT1? where would you situate them frequency-wise?
i just recently modded my 1 of 2 original nt1's (not the "a" version): removed the inner mesh and installed a mk47 cap from microphoneparts.com.
while the top end sibilance is now gone, the presence bump is a bit over the top to my liking. between 3 and 4 kHz the peak is a little too audible and i'd love to tame it a bit more. Could this be due to the remaining headbasket's inner reflections or is it just the cap?
Please don't take my question as an offense, but...
A NT1-A plus MJ's mod goes for about 650 USD, right?
Isn't there a mic around that comes for the same total price and works fine right out of the box (i.e. with no mods)?
I wish I had a modded NT1-A, but the fact that the mod costs more than the original mike makes me wonder if a different mike would be the answer...
A mod'd NT-1 has it's own sound. It may be for any given application that there is some other mic that you prefer on a given source but... <shrug> Every mic shines in it's own way. Price is not necessarily a direct indication of how useful a mic may be in a given situation. Talking about a mic (or reading about it) is only slightly more informative than looking at it. Before you can really have a meaningful understanding of any mic you have to use it with a chain familiar to you in an acoustic environment that you understand. And even then you have to appreciate that when you use it on another source (or in a different acoustic environment) you may have a different level of success.
Please don't take my question as an offense, but...
A NT1-A plus MJ's mod goes for about 650 USD, right?
Isn't there a mic around that comes for the same total price and works fine right out of the box (i.e. with no mods)?
I wish I had a modded NT1-A, but the fact that the mod costs more than the original mike makes me wonder if a different mike would be the answer...
I already had 2 NT1's from years earlier so it was a no brainer for me. I wasn't using them anyways. I sold one and kept one. They sound great in a lot of applications. It has won on acoustic guitar many times. Sounds nice on female vox and some male vox too.
Please don't take my question as an offense, but...
A NT1-A plus MJ's mod goes for about 650 USD, right?
Isn't there a mic around that comes for the same total price and works fine right out of the box (i.e. with no mods)?
I wish I had a modded NT1-A, but the fact that the mod costs more than the original mike makes me wonder if a different mike would be the answer...
I have a Joly modded NT1A...I use my SM7B and my Sterling Audio ST77, my SM57 or my Peluso CEMC6's a lot more. All bought for less than the Joly mod.
As stated, it depends on the usage, but if I had it to do over I probably would not mod.
L.
New to the forum. I have searched quite a bit on the NT1 mods and there are many pages.
I have a general idea of what to do, but my question here is really referring to the two mics I have side by side in the pics.
Both are my original purchases, from at least 10 years ago or so.
Both don't sound alike in the least bit.
The green PCB is newer (higher serial number) than the Blue PCB.
Both seem to have same caps, except that the green PCB has the R11 Cap surface mounted on the bottom of the board and not through the hole as the blue one is. The other difference I can see, is the R1 and R10 resistors are slightly different model numbers. On the blue PCB they are labeled as 1GT or 1GJ and on the green they are labeled as 1GMJ.
Question:
Why does the older or blue pcb sound moe flat with very little sizzle on the top end? Seems to need a bit more gain at the pre as well.
I would like to get these to match more closely in sound.
Any thoughts? (besides the flame war of throw these out)
Thanks,
Brian
It's probably capsule differences. The design is the same. Peter switched to surface mount .015 uf rf filter caps on the outputs from the Wima MKP-2 series as the capacitor lead inductance leaked some rf in some countries. You can adjust the top end response with those 2 470 pf roll-off caps. I used 5600 pf on my NT-2's to smooth out those peaky k-87 capsules.
Chiming in...
How exactly would you describe the acoustical anomalies of the headbasket in a NT1? where would you situate them frequency-wise?
i just recently modded my 1 of 2 original nt1's (not the "a" version): removed the inner mesh and installed a mk47 cap from microphoneparts.com.
while the top end sibilance is now gone, the presence bump is a bit over the top to my liking. between 3 and 4 kHz the peak is a little too audible and i'd love to tame it a bit more. Could this be due to the remaining headbasket's inner reflections or is it just the cap?
Examine the frequency plot and you see exactly what you hear. There is a bump at 3~5k on those capsules, the k-47 sound. I prefer the rk-12 capsules, very smooth in the mids, a little sparkle at 10~12k hz. Those are a better choice in many situations.
The real question should be whether a 650 dollars modded mic could be an alternative to a 3300 dollars out-of-the-box mic.
Is it even in the ballpark? If so, its a no-brainer.
Not likely. Is the 650 dollar modded Rode multi-pattern? (We've got to assume the 3300 dollar mic would be multi-pattern.) Other than that, choosing mics is not a price-based consideration, it's a sound-based consideration. I've got a $200 Chinese mic (Recording Tools MC-900, which is a clone of the KEL Song Sparrow) that sometimes sounds better than several of my $1500 mics. It's not the price of the mic that determines its usefulness, it's the voicing. Just the other day I put up the MC-900 for BG vocals next to a Gefell MT71s ($1500). The cheap mic won on that singer in that production, because it has a scooped midrange while the Gefell has more of a mid-focused response. Different singer, different production and the Gefell could have won, or any of a handful of other good LDC's could have won, depending on how the voicing of each mic matches up with the source. Incidentally, the MC-900 is rumored to have the same rk-12 capsule that Jim Williams mentioned in his post. At Microphone-Parts that capsule is a little over $100. The MC-900 mic is a little under $200 - with a nice shock mount. Do the math.
If I had a Rode NT1a, I'd check with JJ Audio to see what options they might have for a capsule swap. These days, it's not necessary to spend $350 to re-voice a mic. You can get a capsule for $100 or less and pay $100 for the labor to swap capsules plus the re-capping (electronic improvements.) There's also the Minute-Nine studios guy who will de-ess the Rode mics for considerably less than a full mod. He has before and after sound samples on his website.
Getting back to the actual voicing of a mic, the K47 sound (4k peak followed by a high end rolloff, or in some cases, flat response with a small peak at 3k and 6k) can be useful in some situations and suck in others. If one leans towards natural sounds, or if one records a lot of bright acoustic instruments in stripped down productions, a flat mic can be perfect. If one leans towards brighter production techniques (pop music) a flat mic could be really annoying in that it's never going to sound like the records you're comparing it to. That said, every studio should have a flat response mic, especially to deal with trashed out John Mayer type voices that lack body and heft. The KEL HM2d is such a mic, and it's only $200. The Rode NT1a mod is $650 (according to the quote above). Again - do the math.
Not likely. Is the 650 dollar modded Rode multi-pattern? (We've got to assume the 3300 dollar mic would be multi-pattern.) Other than that, choosing mics is not a price-based consideration, it's a sound-based consideration.
...
The Rode NT1a mod is $650 (according to the quote above). Again - do the math.
For some people it certainly is a price-based consideration. Not everyone can afford top flight mics and if you can get one (that is comparable in quality to much more expensive models) it must be considered. The comparable mic in this case is a Neumann U87...not sure if its multi-pattern but the Rode isn't. There is a poll on the oktavamod website that has people voting roughly 50/50 on what is the rode and what is the Neumann. Impressive stat in favour of the mod imo. Someone's obviously doing something right there.
The $650 is taking the original purchase price of the NT1a into account.
Sorry for the self promoting interuption, but I have a modded Nt1 in the classifieds right now for anyone interested. It has a wonderful voicing I must add. As a videographer, I just don't get to do enough recording to warrant keeping it. Cheers.
Hi guys.
I've had the NT1A for a couple of years. I bought it after I closed my studio, to try and potentially use on my own recordings, predominantly vocals. This mic was exactly what I was looking for, but lacking a bit of body/weight to its sound. I used it mainly through the Sebatron VMP1000 preamp, and along with some nicely designed frequency switches on the Sebatron, the NT1A was giving me all the things I ever wanted (apart from lacking a bit of that weight to the sound), that I wasn't really getting even with mics that cost many times as much. It's got those husky, gravelly highs which I really like, it's also got nice lows especially through the Sebatron with the "deep" switch on, Its lower mids are also nice but, again, just lacking that little bit of body/weight to the sound. When I mix the vocals itno a denser mix, they need quite a bit of compression and/or EQ to make them hold up/cut through and that's that lack of weight/energy I'm missing with this mic.
Now...is this mod something that will give this mic a bit more of the weight/body/energy I am talking about? I have put this mic for sale a couple of days ago, but am having second thoughts about it. I wanted to get a mic around a $1K range, something like a Bock195 or a tube mic like MA200, but not really sure that it will give me all I need. It might have the weight I want, but the air and the colour that I love about NT1A might not be there. YEs, I know, I will have to try a few mics to determine that, but was just curious if anyone has noticed more body to the NT1a with the mod, or if anyone knows of a $1K mic that would give me all those things I like about the NT1a + that weight/body/energy in the mix...
I would say that my NT1-a is more "neutral" after having been modd'ed. That may come across as having more body. I suppose it depends on the source.
Oh OK...neutral is certainly not something I'm looking for in a Microphone for my voice and style of music I'm recording. So maybe the mod flattens the freq. response as its main "benefit".
Thanks sparqee
I like my NT1a but do find it a little too bright for most vocals and on acoustic guitar it sounds brittle
Doesn't sound that way to me. I like it on acoustic. Use it all the time. Why spend money on trying to make a mic better? Just buy a better mic if that's what you want.
Why spend money on trying to make a mic better? Just buy a better mic if that's what you want.
...for the same reason some people spend money to make a mic preamp better ...of course, cost-to-performance ratio should be considered...but once you've had experience using cost-effectively modded/upgraded mics, you'll better understand...
New Reply 
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
...of course, cost-to-performance ratio should be considered...but once you've had experience using cost-effectively modded/upgraded mics, you'll better understand...
